Defense attorney breaks down Sidney Moorer hearing - WMBFNews.com, Myrtle Beach/Florence SC, Weather

Defense attorney breaks down Sidney Moorer hearing

Sidney Moorer, facing a judge Monday morning. Sidney Moorer, facing a judge Monday morning.
Defense Attorney, William Monckton, going over documents in the case. Defense Attorney, William Monckton, going over documents in the case.
A file of documents WMBF news has obtained in the case against Sidney Moorer. A file of documents WMBF news has obtained in the case against Sidney Moorer.

MYRTLE BEACH, SC (WMBF) – Defense Attorney William Monckton went over almost every document WMBF News has obtained in the case against Sidney Moorer in the disappearance of Heather Elvis, and he too watched Monday’s hearing unfold.

“Today’s hearing was to… a motion by the defense to quash the indictment. Basically dismiss the case,” Monckton said.

While this did not happen, what did come to light was the context around the indictment.

“The indictment, as it was written, was what I call a notice indictment. It wasn't specific as to what statements, but Judge Dennis got the state to verify or ratify the statements that they were going to use in trial and it narrowed it down to those two instances,” Monckton explained.

Those statements were instances where Sidney Moorer talked to police.

“…the dash cam, he's sitting there talking to officers in front of a patrol car, and I think the statement, the statement he made at the station, he drove up there voluntarily to meet with them,” Monckton said.

“Now it will be up to the judge to decide whether or not those statements should have been Mirandized," Monckton continued. "If they weren't Mirandized and the judge suppresses those statements, then the case for the obstruction charge would be over,” he explained.

However, Monckton says there’s another direction this case could go too. “If he lets those statements in, then it would be up to the judge if it goes to a jury. Then a jury would decide whether those were false statements, material and hindered the investigation,” he said.

While the trial is scheduled for August 28, Monckton went on to say simply lying to police, especially if police may have already known the answer, may not mean these statements could qualify as obstruction of justice.

“Well, I know the state would like to win this conviction. If Mr. Moorer will testify in the subsequent trial then they would be able to cross-examine him on this conviction. I believe that is why the state is pursuing it the way they are,” he added.

While Monckton can't predict what exactly will unfold from here, he does know with a case like this one being so circumstantial, it takes time.

“Unfortunately, when you get a case like that, and there are just banker boxes of information, you have to decide what's relevant and what's not,” he said.

Related Story:

Copyright 2017 WMBF News. All rights reserved.

Powered by Frankly