In their letter to Judge Subramanian, the defense opposed motions by Mia, Ms. Ventura, and the government seeking to quash compliance with a subpoena directed to Mia, which the Court had previously ordered on May 31, 2025. The defense argued that the objections raised by both Ms. Ventura and the government lacked valid legal grounds and did not justify quashing the subpoena. They contended that Mia’s arguments were also without merit, asserting that the subpoena was properly issued under Rule 17(c) and sought relevant, admissible evidence essential to preparing the defense.

The defense maintained that the subpoena targeted materials directly related to Mia’s credibility and potential biases, which were critical to the cross-examination process. They emphasized that the subpoena did not represent an undue burden or violate any protections afforded to the witness. Instead, they argued that granting the motions to quash would undermine the defendant’s right to a fair trial and to confront witnesses. Accordingly, the defense urged the Court to deny the motions and enforce compliance with the subpoena as originally ordered.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.385.0.pdf

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.