2009.04.02~ Casey Anthony Defense Team Deposition Of Billy Richardson

[butwhatif?]

The difference is probably one being a woman and noticing something a little more than a man would.

LOL...aint that the truth!

But its the fact that their intentions for taking her to that area is what differs so greatly, along with whether or not medical staff were in attendance at that time that is the main issue at hand.

If the differences were about how many tears she shed, or if she slumped, or just sat in the chair, thats no big deal.
But one says that he was not supposed to let her see the tv in his original statement , and the other says she was instructed to take her there for that very reason.
One says no medical staff present, and the other says they were, but just assessing her from a distance.
Who do we believe?Even the video wont prove if they were assessing her from a distance,since the camera was on her, not them.
I think it should be determined by if notes were recorded on her medical file for the time in question.
Because if they werent assessing her reaction, there will be no notes. No notes means it had nothing to do with medical or mental health staff, thereby making it legal to be released.
JMO
ETA: I havent gotten through all the new depos yet, so these things may have already been adressed in them....so forgive me if i'm off base. Am waiting for tonight when kids are asleep so I can read them without having to stop to play blocks and applaud new ballerina moves by my lil ones.

 

[cecybeans]

Perhaps it was protocol to take an inmate to the medical area IN CASE it became necessary to provide medical treatment. "Assessing" the behavior may have been simply to look for clues that medical intervention might be necessary, such as violent or suicidal reactions that would require medication or restraint.

 

[MAMABEAR]

I think the same thang you do bout that Beans

 

[Theonly1]

Baez was the one that announced that KC received a sedative during his presser outside the jail.

Hmmmm.....did he violate her privacy? Seems to me he did.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

That is exactly the way I recalled it but without digging thru the archives and watching his intolerable interviews I was not going to state it for certain.

If BAEZ announced upon leaving the jail that she got a g-damn sedative then what the hell is he arguing in Court? Of course, the media, the po-po and everyone is going to ask about the sedative and it is going to figure in deposition questions (and in everyone's gossip) if you let them know that circumstance happened.

All these little impromptu press conferences are going to come back and bite him in the butt. Nice to know who opened the door so it can firmly close.

 

[jeannebreault]

What I am getting a big kick out of is the fact that this depo appears to be videoconferenced (as LKB notices that Richardson is writing something but cannot see clearly what it is) and that while Linda Drane Burdick and JB appear to be present, it is LKB who is clearly conducting the interview.

There has been a lot of mention made that LKB was only brought on to refute the forensics in the case. How embarrassing it must be to JB to have to sit in a room with the SA and listen to a videoconference (which are not inexpensive) in which his out-of-town forensic specialist attorney is deposing an officer in the jail regarding a matter involving the simple release of a videotape because clearly he appears to be unable or unwilling to conduct such an interview himself.

Maybe this is not what is actually going on, but if I'm getting a big kick out of it, I can imagine what Kathi B must be thinking. "What law school did YOU attend, Mr. Baez?"

They used Skype, not too expensive.

 

[ThoughtElf]

I haven't gotten to anything good yet, as I am only on page six of the depo, but I just have to note the contrast between LBK & JB.

JB questions whether or not he's been sworn in, and I wonder if LBK rolled her eyes?

I want to see a depo where JB started out with instructions and questions. heh.

 

[TakeNote]

The only thing I want to know is who told the media that Casey requested a sedative (though she addressed the whole room, according to one depo) and RECEIVED the sedative (logically from a doctor). I thought this information was floating around before the depos were released (was it from Baez himself via press conference)?

Not that this possible violation (even if it is one) would justify setting Casey FREE. (Chortle)

http://www.wftv.com/video/18259469/index.html

JB confirms that the jail said KC requested a sedative when asked by the reporter....if he didnt want people to know KC stuff....why confirm it...

 

[TakeNote]

Baez was the one that announced that KC received a sedative during his presser outside the jail.

Hmmmm.....did he violate her privacy? Seems to me he did.

i was looking for the link to that....i know i heard him say it first on an interview with the press....but couldnt find it....lol....i only found him confirming it.....but i want that video.....i know he said it first....

 

[MADJGNLAW]

Perhaps it was protocol to take an inmate to the medical area IN CASE it became necessary to provide medical treatment. "Assessing" the behavior may have been simply to look for clues that medical intervention might be necessary, such as violent or suicidal reactions that would require medication or restraint.

That is what I have been thinking. If Casey seemed ill then the jail staff would take her to the infirmary to asses her condition, I don't see that as a set up "IMO". I see that as them doing there job. If they didn't then Baez would be crying that they treated Casey poorly. She is the so called Victim....how quickly this family has forgotten that the real "Victim" is dead. When will they stand up for Caylee? Such a sad and tragic case, I don't think anyone will ever forget that is why I am having such a hard time understanding the Anthony's. It seemed they love Caylee so much, why are they not seeking justice for Caylee? Sorry, went off topic.

 

[2goldfish]

At first I was thinking that since the jail (and everyone else I guess) has to assume she is innocent as she has not been yet convicted, then it was cruel to force her to watch...as, if she were innocent, this would be devastating...

..but then, she never asked to leave, and after thinking a little more, if it was me, and I was innocent, you couldnt have dragged me from that tv with a team of horses for hoping that the news would eventually say WHOSE remains it was. Remember, they were NOT identified at that time.


and considering that, she seems a little more devastated that the body was found, and seems to know whose, doesnt she, than devastated by the fact that it could be her daughter. cause 10 minutes isnt a long time when you dont have this access and truly dont know where your baby is.

 

[Searchfortruth]

I don't see the big deal in these transcripts that JB and the other atty's alluded to. There was no medical information released that violates HIPPA standards, this is a jail for goodness sake. CI's are placed in inmate's cells all the time and later asked to give testimony on what they hear and say...all good atty's tell their client's that everything that happens in jail can turn up as future testimony in the case. Didn't these defense atty's say that we would be shocked when we find out what went on during this medical clinic visit ? I 'm still waiting...

 

[Theonly1]

While the "set up" could have been considered "cruel" in a subjective sense with a normal prisoner. The facts as revealed in the depo show that Casey WANTED to go to the nurse's station so that she could in fact watch the tv because after she heard from other inmates that something was going down, she turned on her radio to hear the news, and then told the guard on the way there she wanted to see what was going on.

Casey: "Good, because there's something going on and I want to know about it."

 

[amethyst221]

i'm sorry to interrupt but are there any medical staff on this thread?
it's vital that i find someone to attend to my tearing immediately

Well, I only have a law degree, but I might be able to hand you a box of Kleenex. But does your state have a Good Samaritan statute? If not I might need a release, but . . . .

 

[Marina2]

She wasn't denied medical attention while she sat in the waiting room. When I worked in an emergency clinic, the only patients we brought back immediately were those with chest pain and those who were bleeding profusely. At times, those with extreme nausea and vomiting were given a bed right away if one was available. All others waited their turn in a room in which their privacy was not protected under HIPAA laws.
It's standard protocol to continually assess those in the waiting room for conditions that warrant immediate treatment. Assessing KC from afar doesn't constitute medical treatment. It's triage that's extended to all those who come seeking care. I don't see how releasing this video can be said to violate HIPAA protections. Also, Baez didn't violate her HIPAA right to privacy when he said she had a sedative. These laws apply only to medical personnel and insurance companies. It may have been wrong for him to disclose this but it wasn't a HIPAA violation.

 

[Debbie3223]

why is anyone even feeling sorry for casey and this tape??

if it was a man/stranger...

it would be different

looks cannot count in this case

she planned and carried out this evil act

she lost her basic rights

would the A's be backing up a stranger?

 

[ecs5298]

Well, I only have a law degree, but I might be able to hand you a box of Kleenex. But does your state have a Good Samaritan statute? If not I might need a release, but . . . .

I'm sorry but as a medical professional I'd have to report you for dispensing Kleenex without a license.

 

[amethyst221]

I'm sorry but as a medical professional I'd have to report you for dispensing Kleenex without a license.

See? LOL

 

[capps]

I'm sorry but as a medical professional I'd have to report you for dispensing Kleenex without a license.

Or at the very least,charge $10.50 for the box of kleenex.

 

[Chezhire]

But isnt it determined by what the defendant agrees to have released publicly by their atty? So if kc says it cool to tell them i took a sedative, but I dont want anything else discussed...then he hasnt violated her right to privacy, he is just speaking on her behalf.(and happens to make it look like she was very traumatized by the news. stategic? absolutely imo )

Isnt an atty sharing information approved by the defendant a little different to a deliberate set up by prison personel, with two conflicting stories that are 'accidently' released, and attempting to release a video that was orchestrated to assess her reaction and psychological state to the news of a childs remains found?

The wouldnt release the notes that were made by mental health that day, so why should they release the video that the notes are based on?


I'm basing this on my own logic, and need you to help me understand from a legal point of view.

TIA

The point I was making is that an accused cannot complain that her "rights" were violated when it was her own attorney who aired the details about which she complains. Clearly, the video has nothing on it to indicate any medical treatment whatsoever, so it's a non-issue, but even if we were to have heard Casey asking for a sedative - then she couldn't complain about it b/c her own attorney went on national television and broadcasted it first.

 

[jeepgirlva]

I don't see the big deal in these transcripts that JB and the other atty's alluded to. There was no medical information released that violates HIPPA standards, this is a jail for goodness sake. CI's are placed in inmate's cells all the time and later asked to give testimony on what they hear and say...all good atty's tell their client's that everything that happens in jail can turn up as future testimony in the case. Didn't these defense atty's say that we would be shocked when we find out what went on during this medical clinic visit ? I 'm still waiting...

KC has given nothing in the way of information to LE except lies I would consider this whole ordeal as a tool to aid LE in the investigation I think they were trying to see what was going on in her head....but does the end justify the means in this case? I don;t want defense to turn this around in KC favor a plot was set into motion here by the state IMO I don't think they infringed on her medical rights but they did play head games with her for justice ..but fairplay.. she has played head games herself..