Pardon me, that order must be mistaken

The language seems deceptively clear.

On this day the above numbered and entitled cause was called for pretrial hearing. The defendant, defendant's attorney and the Assistant District Attorney representing the State appeared. The Court hereby orders that the State produce and permit the inspection of, or the copying and/or photographing of the following items: 

13. All written statements made by any party or witness to the alleged offense which might in any manner be material to either the guilt or innocence of the Defendant or the punishment, subsequent to the witness testifying.

That would appear to mean that the defense is entitled to any and all written statements from a witness once that witness has given testimony under direct examination. Furthermore, it would appear that the order refers to anyone called to the stand by the prosecution.

Oh, but that would be wrong.

For, you see, that provision apparently is meant to be read:

All written statements made by any party or witness to the alleged offense which might in any manner be material to either the guilt of innocence of the Defendant or the punishment, subsequent to the witness testifying, if, and only if, the Defendant makes a specific request for the written statements of a specific witness.

I mean, we can't possibly expect the prosecutor to hand over all written statements without the defense attorney having to jump through a plethora of procedural hoops, can we? And God knows we can't have a judge that gives the impression that he is serious about a defendant being entitled to due process. How on earth is that going to play at election time?

If the court isn't going to enforce its own discovery order, who is?

Standard discovery order - 56th