Kemp motion to modify bail denied by judge
Motions filed for new trial or vacate verdict
MIFFLINTOWN — A motion to modify bail, filed by Nevin Zimmerman on behalf of Bradley Kemp, 46, was denied Wednesday by President Judge Kathy Morrow.
Kemp’s bail was revoked in August, at the request of Juniata County District Attorney Cory Snook, after Kemp was found guilty of four criminal counts, including indecent sexual assault of child and corruption of minors. Snook argued that Kemp was a danger to the community and public and noted that Kemp had also threatened suicide.
“I believe he’s certainly a risk to the community and himself,” Morrow said, prior to denying the motion.
Zimmerman had also filed motions requesting Kemp either receive a new trial or that his verdict be vacated, maintaining that the weight of the evidence presented at trial was insufficient for a guilty verdict, and requested that Morrow vacate the order for the Sexually Violent Predator Assessment, according to court documents. The motions for a new trial or vacated verdict were continued to allow Zimmerman time to review the trial transcripts and the motion to vacate the SVP assessment was continued pending the Sexual Offender Assessment Board recommendation.
Zimmerman maintained that 225 Pa. Code Rules 606 and 607 support the new trial and vacated verdict motions being filed post-sentence. According to www.pacode.com, Rule 606 states that “a juror may not testify as a witness before the other jurors at the trial. If a juror is called to testify, the court must give a party an opportunity to object outside the jury’s presence” and that “during an inquiry into the validity of a verdict…a juror may not testify about any statement made or incident that occurred during the jury’s deliberations; the effect of anything on that juror’s or another juror’s vote; or any juror’s mental processes concerning the verdict. The court may not receive a juror’s affidavit or evidence of a juror’s statement on these matters.”
Rule 607 states “any party, including the party that called the witness, may attack the witness’s credibility” and “the credibility of a witness may be impeached by any evidence relevant to that issue, except as otherwise provided by statute or these rules.”