Digital Evidence To Be Admitted In Rose Rape Trial

With the days ticking away to an October 23^rd trial date, lawyers in the John Rose case were in court Tuesday arguing a pre-trial motion. Rose’s lawyer Jeff Burns motion to suppress digital evidence obtained during a search of Rose’s home was denied by Circuit Judge Vince Foley. Beadle County Deputy States Attorney Jeff Banks called a single witness to testify during the hearing. Division of Criminal Investigation Special Agent Brett Spencer told the Court he was asked to assist in the early portions of the investigation of Rose, which, according to Spencer, began as a report of inappropriate sexual contact. An interview of Rose’s alleged victim by Child’s Voice in Sioux Falls revealed the possible presence of photographs and possible evidence on electronic media. Under cross examination, Spencer admitted that while Rose was questioned by police, he did not have a search warrant to search Rose’s home but was in the process of getting one signed by a judge. Another law enforcement official had gotten the warrant approved by a judge while Rose was being held in “investigative detention”. After Spencer’s testimony, Foley ruled law enforcement acted within legal bounds and met the precedence in the matter set in case “State vs Tillman”. Spencer also gave testimony regarding a phone call he listened to between DCI Assistant Director of Field Operations Dan Satterlee and Rose, During the call Rose complained about the way Spencer dealt with him. Spencer testified he heard a recording of the call and believes Rose made partial confessions to the alleged crimes during it. Foley told Burns and Banks he had no idea the call existed. Burns told Foley he included the phone call in his motion, though not specifically. Foley set a new motions hearing on the phone call for October 8^th. Rose is facing 32 charges ranging from multiple counts of rape, sexual contact with a child under 16 and aggravated incest.