Updated: Tue., Nov.

2, 2010, 5:36 PM

Prosecutor witness says Jim

Leyritz did not run a red light
moments before accident
By THOMAS FRANCIS
Last Updated: 5:36 PM, November 2, 2010
Posted: 1:03 PM, November 2, 2010
FT. LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- A prosecution witness in the case
against former slugger Jim Leyritz gave mixed signals this after-
noon, testifying that the ex-Yankee did not run a red light before
crashing his car.
Although Bruce Barger, who was in the passenger seat alongside
Leyritz at the time of the crash, said the ballplayer had been dis-
tracted, he did testify that the light was yellow as they entered the
interaction
"No question in my mind," he said during cross-examination. "It
was yellow."
The stunning testimony came after the DUI manslaughter case
against Leyritz got briefly thrown off track after an asleep-at-the-
switch prosecutor didn't object to questions about how much the
ex-Yank's victim was drinking before she died.
"I'm telling you, this is problematic," fumed Judge Marc Gold at
prosecutor Stefanie Newman this morning after excusing jurors for
lunch and saying he needed to consider how to handle the foul-up.
After lunch, Gold allowed the trial to resume, instead of declaring a
mistrial.
Gold in a pre-trial ruling had barred toxicology evidence that
Leyritz's victim Fredia Ann Veitch had a blood-alcohol level of .18
when the former Bronx Bomber plowed his Ford Expedition into her
Mitsubishi Montero on Dec. 29, 2007, killing her.
Gold had said Veitch's level of drunkeness -- which coincidentally
was the same level as that of Leyritz's -- was irrelevant to the ques-
tion of whether Leyritz had run a red light or tried to beat a yellow
light right before the crash.
But during testimony this morning by a friend of Veitch's named
Kevin Lane, Leyritz's lawyer David Bogenschutz repeatedly asked
Lane about the amount of alcohol the 30-year-old victim drank in
the hours leading up to the crash.
Lane told Bogenschutz that he saw Veitch knock back between
four and five drinks, including shots of the tequila Patron, and that
she was out of his eyesight at a bar for another 45 minutes, when
she might have consumed more drinks.
Newman, the prosecutor, never objected to that line of questioning,
allowing jurors to infer that Veitch may have been drunk before the
accident.
And after Bogenshutz finished questioning Lane about Veitch's
drinking, Newman stood up and asked him questions along the
same line.
Specifically, Newman asked Lane to describe how Veitch was be-
having at the bar, Fat Cat's.
The judge, Gold, quickly interrupted, telling Lane not to answer,
and excusing the jury from the courtroom.
Gold, clearly angry, then asked the prosecutor, "Do you consider
her condition relevant?"
"He [Bogenschutz] asked 15 to 20 questions about what drinks she
had, unobjected," Gold said. "And now you're asking about her
condition."
"My ruling is that her condition was not relevant as to whether the
defendant ran the red light," Gold said.
A flustered Newman replied, "Judge, I'll withdraw the question."
But Gold wasn't having any of that, shooting back: "They heard the
question."
"I'm telling you, this is problematic, given my previous rulings,"
Gold said, before adding that he would consider the problem over
lunch.
But afterward, Gold allowed the trial to continue.
NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc.
NYPOST.COM , NYPOSTONLINE.COM , and NEWYORKPOST.COM are trademarks of NYP
Holdings, Inc.
Copyright 2010 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy | Terms of Use