JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – Judge London Kite rejected objections from Kirsten Bridegan’s attorney Thursday and ordered Bridegan to turn over her cellphone to the court at 9 a.m. Friday so it can be reviewed and specific information can be turned over to Shanna Gardner’s defense team.
Gardner is one of three defendants charged in the February 2022 ambush killing of Kirsten Bridegan’s late husband, Jared. Gardner’s now-estranged husband, Mario Fernandez, is also accused in the murder-for-hire case and is currently on trial.
Recommended Videos
(Click here for ongoing coverage of Fernandez’s trial.)
Kite’s order followed a heated dispute over a motion from Gardner’s defense team seeking private messages and other material from Kirsten Bridegan’s phone and social media accounts. They say the material could have evidentiary value in Gardner’s defense.
Bridegan’s attorneys argued the request was an overly broad “fishing expedition” and an improper attempt to examine the phone of the widow of a murder victim.
They said a reliable forensic extraction would require imaging the entire phone, potentially exposing private information unrelated to the case.
Her attorneys also argued that Bridegan is entitled to heightened protection under Florida’s victims’ rights law, commonly known as Marsy’s Law. They said the law protects her from harassment, intimidation and disclosure of information that could reveal confidential details or be used to locate or harass her or her family.
The attorneys asked Kite to reconsider an earlier order requiring Bridegan to provide phone data.
Alternatively, they asked to learn the specific reasons the defense considers the requested information material so they could properly challenge the intrusion into Bridegan’s privacy. Kite overruled their objection, saying Bridegan has no right to know defense strategy.
Kite previously reviewed a sealed submission from Gardner’s attorneys and determined that some of the requested information had evidentiary value. Her order limits the scope of the material that may be shared and requires the court to review the communications first. Only substantive information is to be provided to the defense.
The parties also disagreed over the vendor who would conduct the forensic examination. Bridegan’s attorneys objected to the first defense-selected vendor, arguing that the vendor appeared to be part of Gardner’s legal team and had made misleading statements about its independence.
Bridegan’s attorneys tried to say that a proper extraction would require imaging the entire phone before searching for specific information. But Kite has already said in court that she believes imaging the entire phone is a violation of Bridegan’s legal rights, which is why she narrowed the scope of what could be retrieved from her accounts.
Gardner’s attorneys on Thursday offered a different third-party vendor option to the court, not connected to the defense team, that they said will be able to extract only the more narrowed information the court has allowed.
Gardner is slated to begin jury selection for her September trial after the Fernandez trial has ended.