2010.03.19 Indigent Status Granted

[JSV]

Ya'll....this is really making me sick! SICK I tell you! This is a girl who murdered her precious toddler, SOLD pictures of her precious toddler for boo-koos amount of money, whose parents were flown all over the country for interviews (and expensive dinners picked up by major networks, whose parents went on a vacation cruise, etc... and now we the tax payers are footing the bill for Casey's defense. This just doesn't seem right!!! I'm so mad right now thinking about it that I can find the words to express myself accurately!

I agree with you 100% .Makes me want to move out of Florida .Wish I lived close to the Al. or Ga. state line so I could shop there .Yes I am mad as h*ll . End of rant for now before I get banned .

 

[elementary]

When you think of how it played out...it went exactly as planned...down to JS's righteous indignation about the public's right to know. JB and the defense show up with NOTHING...brought about by a motion that was "thin" (lying by omission if you ask me). No information sent out there for the public to really see...at least nothing substantial. JS allows for the defense to "fax" him the info...and once again...the public doesn't get to see. But, we see the performance...and know that that's all that it was...just a performance. This is really turning my stomach. That info was never going to be made public!! IMHO

I keep hoping that JS wasn't just going through the motions or didn't care enough to get it right. But all evidence at this point suggests otherwise. Who is running the court????

 

[Aedrys]

Okay, I want to make sure I understand our legal system. Was the only issue JS had to rule or could rule on was if Casey was indigent or not? Wouldn't an investigation into the financial dealings have to be done by the JAC? If so, who's to say that isn't going to happen?

I think in our anger we're trying to give too much power to JS. He has done what he needs to do if I am right. We just need to be more patient. And JS probably only had time to file his response late this afternoon. Who's to say we might not see something next week?

I want to believe in our justice system. The defense is not just going to get away with mishandling and misappropriating funds. I think it is up to the JAC to go after them now if they are not already packing up and thanking Mason for taking over.

It's tough, I know, but we need to keep the faith a little longer. This is aggravating as hell, but I believe things can only get better from here on out. And if I'm wrong, I'm going to move to Canada.

 

[Just Jayla]

When you think of how it played out...it went exactly as planned...down to JS's righteous indignation about the public's right to know. JB and the defense show up with NOTHING...brought about by a motion that was "thin" (lying by omission if you ask me). No information sent out there for the public to really see...at least nothing substantial. JS allows for the defense to "fax" him the info...and once again...the public doesn't get to see. But, we see the performance...and know that that's all that it was...just a performance. This is really turning my stomach. That info was never going to be made public!! IMHO

Very frustrating situation, I agree. Here's how I am going to roll with this punch-KC is in her honeymoon phase right now-She is basking in the glow of her inherent rights, using every single right available, and she must feel very empowered to know that Judge S. has to abide some of her whims, perhaps he has to a fault.
But KC herself acknowledged that her power carries a great deal of responsibility-or as I would translate, a very heavy burden. See, I know the truth prevails, and I now how painfully swift justice will be if she continues to lie about the murder. That is the greatest amount of solace I can offer 'cause we are going to see lots of smirks, lots of yucky legal maneuvers as this progresses, not to mention appeals.
On this ruling in particular, I will turn it around and say that maybe the state did not impress upon the judge the necessity of the public being privy to this. They allowed JB and CM to challenge the public's role at least twice that I heard, and while they did address the issue at hand-where's the missing $163,500-They did not pull out any political aces. For example-"Your Honor, as the public defender just advised, the state is short on funds and taxpayers are stretched to the limit-We need an accounting of every penny to be disclosed to the public."

 

[darnudes]

Isn't part of the problem here that she is facing the death penalty?

If that was not on the table then this trial would not cost half as much. If you support the death penalty and the State's decision to charge her with this as opposed to LWOP then this is the ramification. A very, very expensive trial and appeal process.

In my opinion anger should be directed at the State of Florida.

Ethics aside for a moment either way it is a tough call - Tax payers fund the cost of a death penalty trial or they fund the cost of the prisoner (if found guilty) for the rest of their life in a prison. There are some very interesting articles about the medical costs of looking after prisoners of advanced age. They get some of the best healthcare available in America and it costs a bomb.

It's a real conundrum with the tax payer footing the bill in any scenario.

 

[Just Jayla]

Isn't part of the problem here that she is facing the death penalty?

If that was not on the table then this trial would not cost half as much. If you support the death penalty and the State's decision to charge her with this as opposed to LWOP then this is the ramification. A very, very expensive trial and appeal process.

In my opinion anger should be directed at the State of Florida.

Ethics aside for a moment either way it is a tough call - Tax payers fund the cost of a death penalty trial or they fund the cost of the prisoner (if found guilty) for the rest of their life in a prison. There are some very interesting articles about the medical costs of looking after prisoners of advanced age. They get some of the best healthcare available in America and it costs a bomb.

It's a real conundrum with the tax payer footing the bill in any scenario.

I am not disputing the need for KC to have public funds for a DP trial-I am wondering where $163,500.00 went.
That aside, the State's Attorney is an advocate for the people and the laws of the people. As elected officials, it is the law and public opinion that dictate whether they seek the death penalty-it is not something to assign blame to, unless you wanna blame the people of Florida themselves.

ETA-Fortunately, John Morgan will want to know where that additional money went, in due time.

 

[darnudes]

Richard has a new blog up on this

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2010/03/this-made-me-laugh-oh-the-irony/#comments

 

[panthera]

Florida tax payers, spend your money wisely and convict her! Leave no room for appeals and the rest of us who don't live in Florida, but love little Caylee so much, will be ever so grateful.

These are my thoughts too. Be grateful that the judge did grant the motion now instead of it becoming an appellate issue and that court maybe overturning the verdict, or saying she could have a retrial. At least the judge is being cautious and possibly saving the taxpayers money in the future. MOO

 

[panthera]

I'd like to reassure everyone that is upset about this ruling.......that from a legal standpoint....this is a good thing. It is not "letting JB win"...it is providing a defense for a defendant in need of defending.

Personal feelings aside........in the long run....this is a good thing.

I feel the same way. From what I understand, every penny will now have to be accounted for and this isn't an unlimited expense account for her defense. I also think there could be a little monetary problem as the new trial date is close to the end of the next fiscal year. MOO

 

[Oakley]

Isn't there a difference between satisfied with all disclosure and approving all disclosures?

If her lawyers say she is broke, then she probably is. I guess my question is does that have anything to do with who spent the money and how? Think I'll play a little wait and see here....

Maybe JS has something to add to granting the indigent status.

Yup. JS didn't seem happy at all during with Baez during the hearing.

 

[darnudes]

I am not disputing the need for KC to have public funds for a DP trial-I am wondering where $163,500.00 went.
That aside, the State's Attorney is an advocate for the people and the laws of the people. As elected officials, it is the law and public opinion that dictate whether they seek the death penalty-it is not something to assign blame to, unless you wanna blame the people of Florida themselves.

ETA-Fortunately, John Morgan will want to know where that additional money went, in due time.

Well, then, there you have your answer - it lies at the feet of the people of Florida.

As I said if anyone is going to support the death penalty they then can't complain about the cost of a death penalty trial unless they would be comfortable with only poor people not being able to mount a defense.

Which leads us back to the fact that the poor tax payer is going to fund it in any case.

I completely agree re missing monies- I think we would all like to see the accounting.

 

[TrialAddict]

ABC oh all this time I thought ABC stood for Anthony's Bull Crap

 

[elementary]

Richard has a new blog up on this

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2010/03/this-made-me-laugh-oh-the-irony/#comments

In which basically he implies that it's all done. Everyone is moving on and any investigation might happen after the verdict if the perp deems it a big deal.

No comment.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

I fully expected this and understand the necessity. What bothers me, though, is JB & Crew blatantly thumbing their nose at the public and the judicial system. They played a game and played it well yesterday. It was obvious by their "The past is the past and it's nobody's business" attitude they had no intention to bring that paperwork to the hearing as requested and it's disappointing JS didn't call them out on it. I'm hoping that since the ruling came somewhat late on a Friday, we will still get to see those docs. For kc to be declared indigent, it should be a rule that the public gets to see where every penny is going and has gone.

Does anyone know what the "pros" are regarding the indigent status? Pros for us, that is. I know in the end this is a good thing, but except for not being able to appeal for this reason, is there any other good that can come from this?

Also, can anything happen to JB since he stated in court that kc brokered the deal with ABC when it was actually him? IIRC, he testified awhile back that no money had been profited and no deals were in the works (in regards to the conflict of interest issue).

 

[sleutherontheside]

I fully expected this and understand the necessity. What bothers me, though, is JB & Crew blatantly thumbing their nose at the public and the judicial system. They played a game and played it well yesterday. It was obvious by their "The past is the past and it's nobody's business" attitude they had no intention to bring that paperwork to the hearing as requested and it's disappointing JS didn't call them out on it. I'm hoping that since the ruling came somewhat late on a Friday, we will still get to see those docs. For kc to be declared indigent, it should be a rule that the public gets to see where every penny is going and has gone.

Does anyone know what the "pros" are regarding the indigent status? Pros for us, that is. I know in the end this is a good thing, but except for not being able to appeal for this reason, is there any other good that can come from this?

Also, can anything happen to JB since he stated in court that kc brokered the deal with ABC when it was actually him? IIRC, he testified awhile back that no money had been profited and no deals were in the works (in regards to the conflict of interest issue).

The pros to list just a few....
The inability to use "inability to pay for due process costs" as grounds for an appeal.
The requirement by the State of FL. to account for all moneys paid from this point forward (with the exception of attorney fees).
The increased scrutiny over KC's financial status and the reduced chance that more media deals will be negotiated.

When JB testified that there were no media deals in the works......likely he was telling the truth (though not the whole truth) because the media deal was brokered in 2008 and the hearing on her funding was in March 2009.

Just because KC was found indigent for costs does not mean that there will not be further investigation into JB's role in the ABC deal.

 

[elementary]

Isn't part of the problem here that she is facing the death penalty?

If that was not on the table then this trial would not cost half as much. If you support the death penalty and the State's decision to charge her with this as opposed to LWOP then this is the ramification. A very, very expensive trial and appeal process.

In my opinion anger should be directed at the State of Florida.

Ethics aside for a moment either way it is a tough call - Tax payers fund the cost of a death penalty trial or they fund the cost of the prisoner (if found guilty) for the rest of their life in a prison. There are some very interesting articles about the medical costs of looking after prisoners of advanced age. They get some of the best healthcare available in America and it costs a bomb.

It's a real conundrum with the tax payer footing the bill in any scenario.

I don't think you can ever place ethics aside. Meanwhile there is the reality is that there is a death penalty and that the costs are a given, not a drama.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Well, this answers one of my questions:

Richard Hornsby says:
March 19, 2010 at 3:56 pm
The question on whether Baez “Brokered the deal” boils down to whether brokering that deal created a conflict of interest between him and Casey.

If he Brokered the deal that benefited him over Casey, or that placed Casey in an unfair bargaining position – there is an ethical dilemma that is created.

Also, the fact he was not candid with the court when he (1) filed the Affidavit of Attorney’s Fees with the Motion for Indigency and (2) when he was answering questions in court. In both instances, it appears he was trying to protect either himself or ABC, by not fully disclosing Casey Anthony’s financial picture.

And it would not escape the bar that while Casey Anthony is technically the one who swore to the Attorney’s Fee Affidavits; it was Jose Baez who “counseled” her on whether they were sufficient – he knew better.

I don't see how there's any doubt that JB brokering a deal for $200k benefited him and is certainly a conflict of interest. As we discussed way back when, he could very well be dragging this on for profit. We've all felt he doesn't have his clients best interest in mind and now knowing he shoveled in all this money . . . . well, DUH!

After reading Mr. Hornsby's response, it seems to me JB should be in a whole heap of trouble!

 

[YellowSubmarine]

The increased scrutiny over KC's financial status and the reduced chance that more media deals will be negotiated.

Just because KC was found indigent for costs does not mean that there will not be further investigation into JB's role in the ABC deal.

~ Respectfully snipped ~

Thanks, that is what I was hoping to hear!

 

[Gma Kat]

I am not disputing the need for KC to have public funds for a DP trial-I am wondering where $163,500.00 went.
That aside, the State's Attorney is an advocate for the people and the laws of the people. As elected officials, it is the law and public opinion that dictate whether they seek the death penalty-it is not something to assign blame to, unless you wanna blame the people of Florida themselves.

ETA-Fortunately, John Morgan will want to know where that additional money went, in due time.

BBM: YES! I can't believe this issue isn't being pressed further.:banghead:

 

[notthatsmart]

Psst...I don't think she reads here anymore.....

Psssst....Maybe one of the other inmates reads here and they can pass her a note.