Judge denies request to delay trial in BRAVE Cave case
BATON ROUGE — The judge overseeing the BRAVE Cave case against the Baton Rouge Police Department denied the plaintiff's request to delay the start of the trial.
The plaintiff's side, Jeremy Lee, issued a motion on Friday to delay the trial from beginning on Sept. 21 to beginning the next week on Sept. 28.
Jeremy Lee's lawsuit against the officers and the city says that, when he was arrested in 2023, officers kicked, punched and strip-searched him in a warehouse, and that he was hurt so badly that the parish prison wouldn't accept him unless he had treatment first at a hospital.
Lee's representatives said that they were lead counsel in another case in California, with that trial scheduled to commence on Sept. 21 after delays in that case.
"Counsel cannot physically attend and adequately represent clients in two separate jury trials proceeding simultaneously in two different states," the motion said.
Lee's representatives also said that the request was not made "for purposes of delay," saying "nor is it the result of counsel's failure to diligently prepare for trial or a scheduling commitment undertaken after this court set trial for September 21." They argue that they acted promptly, telling the court that they communicated the scheduling conflict when the California trial was delayed.
The defense issued a reply on Sunday, noting that in the past three weeks before the continuance request, the trial had been rescheduled twice.
Trending News
"The multiple changes to the trial setting have required defense counsel to make substantial adjustments to their professional schedules and trial preparation efforts," the defense said. "The record shows multiple enrolled attorneys represent [Lee.] [Lee]'s filing does not explain why any of the other enrolled counsel are available to proceed with the trial as scheduled."
Judge Shelly Dick issued an order saying the request to continue the trial was denied due to it being "untimely" and being made "on the eve of the trial." Dick also said another continuance would delay the trial until 2027.
"A continuance at this stage would result in substantial and unfair prejudice to defendants," Dick said.