Dunwoody Prep Shooting: Initial Pretrial Hearing Changes Little About Trial

The prosecution’s case against Hemy Neuman moved forward mostly unscathed Tuesday, after the first of two pre-trial hearings in the case.

The hearings are meant to allow both sides to negotiate elements of the case, trial and evidence.

During the hearing Tuesday, the defense brought several motions asking that the case be thrown out on technical issues, as well as motions that would shape the trial procedures.

DeKalb County Superior Court Judge Gregory Adams denied most of the motions filed by Neuman’s defense team.

Neuman is accused of gunning down Russell ‘Rusty’ Sneiderman on the morning of Nov. 18, seconds after Sneiderman dropped off his 2-year-old son at a Dunwoody preschool. Neuman was arrested for the crime in January.

Only one motion to suppress evidence was brought up Tuesday, but was quickly withdrawn without discussion.

The defense team , who identified Neuman in a photo lineup, be suppressed.

DeSilva was interviewed by police on Feb. 22 and identified a Neuman among several suspect photographs, saying he'd sold a handgun to Neuman prior to Nov. 18.

The defense had argued that the procedures used in DeSilva identifying Neuman through the photograph were “unduly suggestive” and “designed to focus upon this defendant.” Neuman’s attorneys said the evidence is therefore tainted and should be suppressed.

Tuesday, the defense withdrew the motion without explanation.

Douglas Peters, one of Neuman’s attorney’s Two motions he argued asked that the case be dismissed because of technical issues with the indictment against Neuman.

In one motion, Peters argued that District Attorney Robert James’ name appears on the indictment, which could confuse the jury.

“By that being on the indictment in the case, we believe the jury might think that there’s some special attention that has been directed to this case,” he said. “The indictment was returned by a grand jury, not the district attorney himself.”

In another motion, Peters asked that the case be dismissed because there were numbers other than the case number included in the indictment (a Dunwoody Police Department file number and an internal District Attorney number), which he thought may confuse the jury, who he said might wonder if there are other cases attached to this one.

Both motions were denied.

Peters asked that for each witness the state calls, that psychiatric, psychological, drug, alcohol, criminal arrest and conviction histories be disclosed for that witness.

“We have no legal basis to get this information,” said prosecutor Don Geary. “The court would be asking us to violate a criminal statute.”

Judge Adams denied the motion.

Peters asked that the words “Malice Murder” and “Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Crime” – which are the two counts against Neuman – not be said during trial.

“These are very prejudicial terms, your honor,” Peters said.

In another motion, he asked that the word ‘victim’ not be used during the trial on the same grounds.

Both motions were denied.

The defense and prosecution agreed that a jury pool of about 250 would likely be needed for the case. The teams will be submitting an agreed-upon jury questionnaire jointly to Judge Adams on Sept. 1.

Another pretrial hearing is set for next Monday. In that hearing, the defense will focus in on the evidence of the case.  

The two motions that will be dealt with next week are a motion to suppress Neuman’s statements and a motion to suppress evidence that includes the following:

 • a search of Neuman’s office space at General Electric

• a search of a 2009 Honda Odyssey parked at a Buckhead apartment

• four computers, a search warrant of Neuman’s East Cobb home

• a search of a bag at Neuman’s office

• a seizure of Neuman’s hand prints

• a search of Neuman’s iPad and iPhone

• email records

• Neuman’s cell phone call detail and tower records.