2010.07.15 Defense motion to protect phone call of Robin Lunceford

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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Steely Dan said:
The level of proof needed in a death penalty case is so high that I can easily see ineffective counsel being a legitimate reason for another go at the sentencing phase. JMO
Click to expand...

I think AZLawyer has answered that question in the Legal Questions thread a couple of times. She says nothing Baez has or hasn't done has even come close to an ineffective counsel charge. So I think giving an intelligent defense isn't a requirement, just that the lawyers stay awake in court, meet with their client, present some kind of defense etc is all it takes. Lawyers being stupid doesn't get you an appeal apparently.
 
I'm not sure if this was filed by the State or defense.

Murder Docket Update:

07/23/2010 Supplemental Motion for Protective Order Regarding a Telephone Recording of Robin Lunceford
 
nums24 said:
It looks like JB has some more to say:

Murder Docket Update:

07/23/2010 Supplemental Motion for Protective Order Regarding a Telephone Recording of Robin Lunceford
Click to expand...

possibly more to say ... about more recordings?
 
nums24 said:
I'm not sure if this was filed by the State or defense.

Murder Docket Update:

07/23/2010 Supplemental Motion for Protective Order Regarding a Telephone Recording of Robin Lunceford
Click to expand...


I saw that and I am dying to know what (else) it is!!!:dance:
 
It says Supplemental which means it would be from the defense, it is a supplement to the one filed already. It should state Response if it was from the SA. He probably added language about additional tapes or maybe he asked the judge "pretty please dont listen to the tapes."
 
truckengirl said:
It says Supplemental which means it would be from the defense, it is a supplement to the one filed already. It should state Response if it was from the SA. He probably added language about additional tapes or maybe he asked the judge "pretty please dont listen to the tapes."
Click to expand...
Or maybe he saw the first motion for what it is...weak and figured he better take another stab at it.
 
I just remembered JB saying to Judge Strickland : Dont you trust me? Ironic indeed.
 
Golly gee. I thought Baez put out a great effort (for him), for the original motion, and now he's submitted a supplemental. Must be something really embarrassing to Baez on those recorded call(s).
 
OK - So JB wants to have the same rights as LE? He does not cite any law in his motion. What other potential witnesses could have been mentioned? OY!
 
Looks like he thinks the judge will rule against him so he would now like to stall being embarrassed by whatever is on the tape a little longer. :blushing:
 
Looks like JB knows the Judge is not going to seal the recording for the reasons that JB offered in his original Motion to seal it, so now JB is stalling for more time before it gets released?
More time for JB to get his alibi's in place? To make sure Inmate Robin is going to say what JB needs her to say to keep his rear end out of legal trouble???
 
JB says he has "discussed with LDB" ... but he does not say that LDB AGREED to go with him to Lowell to take depositions.

I am anxious to read the State's Response to JB's motion to seal - which LDB said she would file by Monday.
 
Gosh, must be missing a page. Paragraph No. 1 refers to an undersigned secretary and an undersigned cell phone. I can't find those two signatures anywhere! :crazy:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 190 more.
Total: 3,487 (members: 191, guests: 3,296)

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
3,296
Total visitors
3,487
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,588
Messages
18,174,061
Members
232,710
Latest member
Jamesrobert
Back
Top