Why Did the State List Mark Pusateri & “Ann” as Prospective Witnesses in its Amended Disclosure?

As Susan Simpson noted in this post, the State made its first disclosure in the Adnan Syed case on July 1, 1999. That disclosure contained the names of several prospective witnesses at trial and some witness statements. Thereafter, at various later points in time, the State filed Amended Disclosures that contained additional information. One of these Amended Disclosures was dated September 3, 1999. 

Here’s the portion of the September 3rd Amended Disclosure dealing with new prospective witnesses (addresses redacted):

“T” is Hae’s uncle. He was the person with the connection to the Enehey Group and was interviewed on February 1, 1999. We have the notes from that interview. “T” was not called as a witness.

Young Lee is Hae’s brother. He was called as a witness at both trials.

Lynette Woodley was the principal of Woodlawn High School. She testified at both trials.

Grant Graham assisted Dr. Rodriguez in disinterring Hae’s body in Leakin Park. He testified at Adnan’s second trial. 

Detective O’Shea handled the case while it was under the jurisdiction of Baltimore County. He testified at both trials.

That leaves Mark Pusateri and “Ann.” According to Jay, he was at the Pusateri residence, hanging out with Mark and later Jenn until he left and got the Best Buy Call from Adnan. As far as we can tell, Mark was never interviewed by police. “Ann” was the last call on Adnan’s call log on January 13, 1999 and a student in the final period A.P. Psychology class with Hae and Adnan. She was interviewed by police on March 2, 1999. The notes from that interview, however, were “lost,” and there is no indication that she was subsequently re-interviewed.

Before, I had been aware that both Mark and “Ann” were listed as prospective witnesses for the prosecution at trial. What I hadn’t realized was that they were listed as prospective witnesses in an Amended Disclosure filed 2+ months after the State’s initial disclosure.

So…what prompted the State to list Mark as a prospective witness for the first time in September? If he was always a prospective witness, why wasn’t he part of the initial disclosure, and, if were never interviewed, why was he included in the September disclosure.

And…what prompted the State to list “Ann” as a prospective witness for the first time in September? If the notes from the interview with “Ann” were “lost” and she were never interviewed again, what led the State to list her as a prospective witness in September after not initially listing her in July?

[Edit: Someone just e-mailed me about person #4. “K” is Not Her Real Name Cathy. She was interviewed March 9th, we have the transcription of her interview, and she also testified.].

-CM