San Francisco Chronicle, February 20, 2009 by Chip Johnson
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/19/BAB1161CGB.DTL

“I would expect the defense to think very carefully about a motion for a change of venue and it wouldn’t be all that surprising a move,” said Chuck Weisselberg, a law professor at the Boalt Hall School of Law at UC Berkeley.

cbs5.com, Oct. 26, 2008 by The Chauncey Bailey Project
http://cbs5.com/local/chauncey.bailey.evidence.2.849310.html

Charles Weisselberg said what is significant is that with Longmire arranging for Bey IV to come to the police station, [Detective] Arotzarena lost control of the case…. Because Bey IV came in with Longmire to surrender, Arotzarena “no longer had control of when (he) was going to arrest or have first contact with … Bey IV.” Arotzarena “was very specific in stating that he had never asked for Bey IV to come down to the police department,” Weisselberg said.

San Jose Mercury News, March 6, by Fredric N. Tulsky
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_5168880?IADID&nclick_check=1

Experts also said it is the prosecutor’s duty to reveal evidence regardless of whether the defense already knows it exists or whether they think a judge will admit it. Not only might their assessment be wrong, said Charles D. Weisselberg … but if nothing else the evidence could provide leads for defense attorneys to investigate.