2009.05.28 Motions Hearing

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Once it's out there, it's part of the public record Yes? No?
 
Oh---please make JB sit down and shut up. This is embarrassing.
 
Once again JB is asking the judge to just "trust him" in regards to keeping people's information private....Doesn't he understand that the court is not there to "trust him," but to process his formal requests and apply law?
 
  • Judge "tell me why you want it, not what they did wrong."
  • JB - not fair! We shouldn't have to tell why... i.e. RK shouldn't have reason to object. We don't have to tell why we want this
  • Judge - "who are you interested in finding out about?"
  • JB - RK's lawyer would be willing to compromise if defense signed non-disclosure & records sealed
  • off on a tangent that THEY won't turn it over to the media... :rolleyes:
  • Judge is fine if they all reach accommodations
  • Judge is there to make decision
  • JB - if this is a privacy issue "I can assure you that I will keep them private as I have in other instances when I was accused of leaking.)
  • Linda D - notes there are responsibilities they need to observe legally
 
Can someone catch me up? I just got on!

Thanks!
 
Baez is wasting the court's time, he's all over the place.
He throws out the stupidist statements, poor Judge Strickland is
even getting confused and giddy.
 
we're seeing history in the making, in glorious high def.
a. lyon is what kc will look like, after spending 30 years
in a fla. prison for murder. :woohoo:
 
If JB said they were suspects is there now an opening for "slander" charges against JB?? If anyone said KC was the "murderer" during this case what would he do?? I really am wondering? Or....because it was said in the courtroom does it become a non-issue.
 
Hearing4.jpg


Oh my ..
 
Jose, once again not drafting a motion correctly :rolleyes:
 
Jose is not liking what the judge is telling him, resubmit the proper motions!

Jose does not want to (bawawwaw)
 
JB wants it all but doesn't want to work for it once again.
 
Gonna throw my cup thru this screen if JB says---> "If you will" one more time.
 
Is that brown haired chick the new DP lawyer?
 
If JB said they were suspects is there now an opening for "slander" charges against JB?? If anyone said KC was the "murderer" during this case what would he do?? I really am wondering? Or....because it was said in the courtroom does it become a non-issue.

I dunno. The other lawyers didn't object, which I found strange. Unless they couldn't in this hearing.

I think JB is paving the road ahead re JG and AH. Grrrrrrr
 
  • Judge speaks to Grund's lawyer
  • "you understand why your client's records are material"
  • JG's lawyer citing more case law
  • Strickland "you want JB to redo motion citing materiality?"
  • JG lawyer "yes, wants materiality & specificity"
  • JB interrupts - Strickland hushes him, "As someone who needs to follow the law" (was that a nice lil' dig from the judge? I think so.)
  • JB rattling on about level of materiality
  • Strickland notes many aren't here to object (RM, A's, etc.)
  • Strickland does think amended motions to each Kronk, RG and AH
  • Judge - need to amend dates to June 08 - possibly to now.
  • JB - arguing "state is not arguing this child died by accident"
  • JB 'there is relevant info prior to date of disappearance'
 
Camera on George, he and Cndy must be so proud of their daughter who is willing to throw any one of her friends under the bus, for a crime they dd not commit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
67
Guests online
1,625
Total visitors
1,692

Forum statistics

Threads
606,265
Messages
18,201,323
Members
233,793
Latest member
Cowboy89
Back
Top