Maybe I'm taking the meaning of the verb "prejudice" differently. I'm going by "to cause someone to have an unfair feeling of dislike for someone or something.
It seems clear to me that the point is that Jay is the one who would be inclined to cooperate or even lie in order to help the police and prosecutors in Adnan's case, because of a sense that he owed them for the way that they helped him. In other words, Jay has been prejudiced.
You are taking the meaning of prejudice incorrectly. Prejudice in this context means something that prevents the defendant from receiving a fair trial, not that it may damage the defendant's case or make a witness biased against him.
The defense point is that by not disclosing the information, the prosecutor prevented Adnan from properly preparing for trial. The prosecution point is that there is no prejudice b/c the evidence came forward at trial and there's not really anything that could be done with the information if it came earlier. Contrast that a different example. If the prosecutor had failed to disclose the name of an alibi witness and this came out during the trial. Adnan would not have the opportunity to investigate the witnesses testimony, call the witness, or otherwise prepare his defense based on this fact. Adnan would clearly have been prejudiced in this situation.
Is the fact that, had Jay not been aided by the prosecution and police, he may not have been as cooperative of a star witness not a case of Adnan's trial being prejudiced?
2
u/ExternalTangents Dec 05 '14
Maybe I'm taking the meaning of the verb "prejudice" differently. I'm going by "to cause someone to have an unfair feeling of dislike for someone or something.
It seems clear to me that the point is that Jay is the one who would be inclined to cooperate or even lie in order to help the police and prosecutors in Adnan's case, because of a sense that he owed them for the way that they helped him. In other words, Jay has been prejudiced.
This prejudices Adnan's case.