JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – A judge was expected to rule Thursday on whether the State Attorney’s Office should be disqualified from prosecuting the couple accused of conspiring to kill 33-year-old Jared Bridegan in 2022.
But the defense teams for Shanna Gardner and her estranged husband, Mario Fernandez, filed more motions and asked to examine the lead prosecutor, delaying Judge London Kite’s decision.
Gardner and Fernandez will be back in court on May 13.
Gardner and Fernandez are accused of hiring Henry Tenon to kill Bridegan. Tenon has admitted to shooting Bridegan after ambushing him by leaving a tire in the road on Bridegan’s route home.
RELATED: Murder-for-hire plot included practice run along Jared Bridegan’s normal route home: prosecutors
Gardner and Fernandez both face charges of first-degree murder with a weapon, conspiracy to commit first-degree murder, solicitation to commit a capital felony and child abuse (because Bridegan’s then-2-year-old daughter was present during the murder). Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for both.
Gardner’s lawyers have filed a motion to dismiss the indictment against her and both defense teams want State Attorney Melissa Nelson’s office removed from the case over accusations that their clients’ constitutional rights were violated after privileged communications, including emails and text messages, were incorrectly shared with the prosecution.
The State Attorney’s Office has admitted that it did intercept the communications through a search warrant, but the prosecutors say they never read them, so it was not a violation of attorney-client privilege.
Prosecutors said they were alerted to the protected communications by a taint team, which included the Secret Service, but the defense argues an ATF agent accessed the communications before the taint team alerted prosecutors. And because the ATF is among the government team prosecuting Gardner, her attorneys say that’s a violation of her rights.
Defense attorneys say if the request to remove the prosecutors is denied, at the very least, the State Attorney’s Office should be sanctioned and the communications thrown out.
Until the disqualification issue is resolved, the case is on hold.
