2009.05.07 - new motion by State to Determine Counsel

[ClockWatcher]

Verite.....here is the latest from Angel Who Cares, our WS resident News Queen, on the subject in question:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3792774&postcount=1951"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Media Links - *** NO DISCUSSIONS! ***[/ame]

No one knows who it is yet, but by golly in 48 hours, we should have the low down and the skinny on Baez's new top dog.

 

[mitzi]

Begging your indulgence, but who is the "new DP qualified lawyer" you
reference in this post?

Thanx.

Not trixi, but we don't know who it is yet. Only that he/she will be revealed on the hearing on 5/28. :blowkiss:

 

[MADJGNLAW]

I wonder if he is trying to delay the court date.
And keep on looking for a qualified attorney that is willing to dance to his song.
OR
Does the state step in and place a qualified DP attorney in his lap?
Assuming the court date is near and his preparation time is up.

Do not be surprise if you see the Game Delay on the horizon.

I find it strange that the new attorney is going to be introduced the same day as the hearing for the release of the video. I have been wondering if this will cause that hearing to be delayed as well as the criminal trial. I also wonder if maybe the reason Baez has not filed who this new attorney is with the courts, is because the judge will have to appoint one for Casey (Could she be claiming she is out of funds? Does Baez know he is going to be dis-barred and that is why he can't just hire Casey's new replacement? Or could it be that Casey no longer wants Baez to represent her and she has to tell the judge? But wouldn't that be another motion heard by the judge as well? This is so confunsing....:waitasec:

 

[believe09]

(fingers drumming) Waiting....waiting....

 

[Moe]

Anyone else think JB won't have a death penalty attorney on board by tomorrow? I just can't see him listening to anyone else regarding this case.

 

[steadychick]

Anyone else think JB won't have a death penalty attorney on board by tomorrow? I just can't see him listening to anyone else regarding this case.

Seems very strange to me that JB announced weeks ago that the new DP attorney would be announced at tomorrow's hearing. Why????? Why not just put his/her name out there weeks ago? There's got to be a reason besides creating more drama. I think that is what many of us are struggling with here, causing us to read more into it. Well, if JB did delay just for the drama, I guess he succeeded!

 

[amethyst221]

Seems very strange to me that JB announced weeks ago that the new DP attorney would be announced at tomorrow's hearing. Why????? Why not just put his/her name out there weeks ago? There's got to be a reason besides creating more drama. I think that is what many of us are struggling with here, causing us to read more into it. Well, if JB did delay just for the drama, I guess he succeeded!

There could be a reason other than drama, but who knows with this bunch? If they could announce that someone was retained weeks ago, then they should have made the mandatory filing and certification. Maybe the person had to complete the needed hours of continuing legal education in death penalty defense required by the Florida rules. Maybe the person has issues like Macaluso has. Maybe they can't work out the finances easily. Just speculating. It's just as likely that they are just delaying because they can, and think it will bother the SA's.

I checked the Macaluso docket, just out of curiosity, and see that he has more proceedings about his acceptance into the alternative program in early June. Has he been involved in the depositions lately? I remain puzzled by his initial position that suggested he had an absolute defense to the charges by the bar, yet he has sought this route to getting lesser punishment. But whatever. Nothing surprises in this case.

 

[zoey]

But what if their isn't a dp atty??? that they can get???? what happens there???? Is it common for this many delays in "introducing" a new atty???????:waitasec:

 

[songline]

I find it strange that the new attorney is going to be introduced the same day as the hearing for the release of the video. I have been wondering if this will cause that hearing to be delayed as well as the criminal trial. I also wonder if maybe the reason Baez has not filed who this new attorney is with the courts, is because the judge will have to appoint one for Casey (Could she be claiming she is out of funds? Does Baez know he is going to be dis-barred and that is why he can't just hire Casey's new replacement? Or could it be that Casey no longer wants Baez to represent her and she has to tell the judge? But wouldn't that be another motion heard by the judge as well? This is so confunsing....:waitasec:

Thank you great point - :blowkiss:
don't know.

 

[Seebra]

I checked the Macaluso docket, just out of curiosity, and see that he has more proceedings about his acceptance into the alternative program in early June. Has he been involved in the depositions lately? I remain puzzled by his initial position that suggested he had an absolute defense to the charges by the bar, yet he has sought this route to getting lesser punishment. But whatever. Nothing surprises in this case.

Do you have a link about the docket? I am really intrigued and would love to read it myself!

 

[believe09]

If there is not a DP qualified atty, I suppose the judge can appoint one. That would be a kick, huh? Casey has a, umm, dream team, and then a public defender calling the shots. In fact, that would be awesome theater.

 

[kageykaren]

Am I off base in thinking that tomorrows court proceedings may turn into a cluster muck? Will all the people JB is requesting records on have their personal attorney's present the same day he springs the elusive DP attorney. This may be more of a show than I expected tomorrow.

 

[TigerTiger]

Just wondering - does anyone know for sure if tomorrow's hearing where this new DP atty is supposed to be introduced to us all by JB -- is it going to be televised?

Hate to say it, but if it is - I wanna see it.

And I'm wondering if having it be televised makes a diff in wheter or not there is a debut of the new DP attorney or not by JB.

 

[kageykaren]

Just wondering - does anyone know for sure if tomorrow's hearing where this new DP atty is supposed to be introduced to us all by JB -- is it going to be televised?

Hate to say it, but if it is - I wanna see it.

And I'm wondering if having it be televised makes a diff in wheter or not there is a debut of the new DP attorney or not by JB.

Nothing wrong with that! I'll be glued to the tube as well. It can only go two ways. JB will present him or her like royalty to be knighted or hill file another motion to keep cameras out. With all the grandstanding JB is giving this new counsel, you gotta expect JB will strut and show like a puffed out peacock. Lol! <3

 

[believe09]

Casey is due in court tomorrow-I do not know how they will keep the cameras out.

 

[s1rebecca]

Wonder if BC back is better?

 

[Hell's Belle]

Do you have a link about the docket? I am really intrigued and would love to read it myself!

Try using this link: http://apps.statebarcourt.ca.gov/dockets/dockets.aspx to enter Mr. Macaluso's name. He changed counsel of record on 4/9/2009 to a David C. Carr. The Court entered an Order re R's [Respondent's] Evaluation for ADP on 4/29/2009. Doesn't say "granting" or "denying" request for admission. On 5/14/2009 there was a stipulation (of the Bar and Mr. Macaluso) to extend the discovery cut-off date. Hm. Wonder if there may be some dispute as to whether Mr. Macaluso's evaluation provides sufficient evidence for his admission to ADP, or there has been some other difficulty in completing the evaluation.

 

[amethyst221]

Try using this link: http://apps.statebarcourt.ca.gov/dockets/dockets.aspx to enter Mr. Macaluso's name. He changed counsel of record on 4/9/2009 to a David C. Carr. The Court entered an Order re R's [Respondent's] Evaluation for ADP on 4/29/2009. Doesn't say "granting" or "denying" request for admission. On 5/14/2009 there was a stipulation (of the Bar and Mr. Macaluso) to extend the discovery cut-off date. Hm. Wonder if there may be some dispute as to whether Mr. Macaluso's evaluation provides sufficient evidence for his admission to ADP, or there has been some other difficulty in completing the evaluation.

I was wondering the same thing. I did see that his new counsel is a specialist in these kinds of lawyer discipline issues. He used to actually be a prosecutor for the Bar. If there is no legal excuse for these charges, I imagine the punishment could be pretty serious. It follows that the conditions or stipulations of fact a person would have to agree to in order to get alternative discipline (and to continue practicing in the interim) could be pretty onerous. Wonder if they'll get it resolved.

 

[Verité]

I knew this had to be coming soon.

Time for Jose to bust out the phone book again...

Nahh, I think JB wants Court-appointed DP counsel, so he can still run the
show (behind the scenes, ya' know, have to get the other guy/gal up to snuff,
after all, and do all the fill-in through the filter of his own biased lens).

If the above doesn't happen & JB really takes a second-seat, I'll be glad!

 

[amethyst221]

Am I off base in thinking that tomorrows court proceedings may turn into a cluster muck? Will all the people JB is requesting records on have their personal attorney's present the same day he springs the elusive DP attorney. This may be more of a show than I expected tomorrow.

It could get interesting and it should be a busy hearing, if nothing else. I really hope that the witnesses whose records have been sought have good lawyers representing them, especially AH. I don't want any of them getting walked over by JB and company. Once the new lawyer has made his or her debut, maybe he'll jump right in and handle everything.