As I work at an extremely slow pace on other things—among them, reading Howard Blum’s book and compiling footage from this case already released to the public—the court has filed a scheduling order nearly one hour after a hearing on the subject. While individual dates and deadlines are subject to change, this schedule nevertheless gives us a broad view of how the case will unfold over the upcoming year.
The trial is scheduled to begin on Monday, June 2, 2025, a date that is consistent with the timeline that many case-watchers have suspected all along. Both parties anticipate the trial to last 8–12 weeks, and the court has blocked off time on its schedule until Friday, August 29. These 13 business weeks will include all phases of the trial: voir dire of prospective jurors; eight weeks of the guilt phase, or as Anne Taylor likes to say, the innocence phase; two weeks of mitigation; and then sentencing. (I assume the final sentencing hearing would occur outside of that three-month window.)
I will not include all the deadlines listed in the court’s order, but the hearing dates will give you a sense of the anticipated flow of this process.
Thursday, August 29, 2024: Oral arguments for motion for change of venue.
Thursday, November 7, 2024: Oral arguments for motions to strike the death penalty.
Thursday, February 6, 2025: Oral arguments for motions to suppress evidence and 12(b) motions.
Thursday, March 27, 2025: Oral arguments for motions in limine.
Wednesday, April 2, 2025: Oral arguments for jury questionnaires.
Thursday, April 3, 2025: Final pre-trial conference.
Monday, June 2, 2025: Beginning of trial.
For seemingly the first time, this process now has a center of gravity.
And while Anne Taylor was sure to hedge in her responses in Thursday’s hearing and warn the court that deadlines might need to be extended, her tone indicated an enthusiasm and confidence for the current schedule. In my uncredentialed opinion, I do not anticipate the defense frivolously dragging this out.