I believe Casey is entitled to a defense, and my comments go specifically to the manner in which JB is preparing and presenting same to date.
If you go through some of my posts on this thread, my main criticisms of JB are that he has filed motions asking for:
(1) things to which the defense is clearly entitled to, such as production of certain exculpatory materials and information regarding the charges contained in the bill of information that has been filed, to which the judge himself had to remind JB he had to "do your own legwork," and that JB had to first ASK prosecution for these materials.
I'd love to see the opposition brief filed by the state on this, as I have a suspicious feeling JB didn't even send over what I'd deem tailored/drafted discovery requests. If JB sent any at all, he probably sent a general blanket request and assumed (incorrectly) that he'd get what is sometimes referred to by criminal attorneys as "open file" discovery, which occurs a lot of times in criminal, though not capital, cases, wherein all attorneys involved simply agree that, to save time and resources (eg, avoiding going through all of the usual drafting of tailored, written discovery requests for information and things and/or entry upon land for testing, etc., responding in kind to said written discovery requests, potential motions on same, etc.,) that they'll simply share what they have in their files.
I think this is why JB keeps complaining that his client is already facing murder charges - he's been used to getting things from the prosecution without having to go through all of the proper procedural steps for getting same and now that he's having to actually put the code of procedure to use, he doesn't know quite where to start. Cases are won or lost in the discovery process. To me, this is what sets apart seasoned counsel from the rest of the herd.
and (2) my other criticism of JB is that he's waited so long to ask for things to which the defense isn't clearly entitled to, either at all and/or at this juncture in the proceedings against Casey. Asking to test the samples of DNA, etc., either right after the state indicting/arresting Casey or immediately following his being retained would have been the appropriate time to files these kinds of what I like to call "protective" motions. If the defense thinks they're entitled to this relief prior to any indictment/bill of information being filed for murder, then why not file this IMMEDIATELY following Casey's initial arrests for child neglect/fraud? Had they done so, and had the judge happened to agree, they'd have been on the same footing from the get-go. Instead, we have JB waiting until now, right before there's to be a GJ convened next week, meaning much, if not all, of such evidence has been tested and processed and there was either enough to go around in the beginning, when it was collected, or there wasn't. Too little, too late, IMHO.
