2010.07.15 What I saw at the Hearing

[ThinkTank]

Wow, that's the same exact facial expression as Cindy's at the hearing! What does it mean? To me it says "I know what I said is a lie and I know that you know it's a lie, but I'm saying it anyways because I know you will never call me on it."

ThinkTank, do you think you could do a side-by-side of CA & GA making the face?

Seems to me that they are subconsciously saying that they KNOW what they just said makes no sense, but they say it anyway, and it also shows a sense of despair. IMO

 

[Dear Prudence]

Seems to me that they are subconsciously saying that they KNOW what they just said makes no sense, but they say it anyway, and it also shows a sense of despair. IMO

ITA and thanks so much for the comparison!

 

[Amil]

Thanks Amil!!! Was it CM's hearing aid that was setting off the microphones?

I think so.

 

[ynotdivein]

Seems to me that they are subconsciously saying that they KNOW what they just said makes no sense, but they say it anyway, and it also shows a sense of despair. IMO

ITA. "Whaddaya gonna do? It's the best story we got, soooo we're runnin' with it." Maybe not despair in those pouchy cheeks and pursed lips, but at least some small nod toward the gap between what they just said and, well, general sensibilities?

 

[littlemisslegal]

I was totally surprised by his ramblings. Has he been like that before? It almost made JB look good.

one of the reporters asked him what the heck he said-lol. i heard him reply he was talking italiano- he says a few words in Italian dialect and accent. she asked him if he knew french as she did. i was standing near by on break. its an insult to ITALIANS FOR SURE! HES A SMART AS-

 

[Mrs G Norris]

How much faith would you have in your attorney if he admitted in open court that he couldn't hear what was going on because of 'bad acoustics'. Oh, OK, that's cool, no biggie if you can't even hear what's going on... 2 words. Cochlear implant.

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant[/ame]

 

[RR0004]

How much faith would you have in your attorney if he admitted in open court that he couldn't hear what was going on because of 'bad acoustics'. Oh, OK, that's cool, no biggie if you can't even hear what's going on... 2 words. Cochlear implant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant

Slightly OT- but he may not be a candidate. He would have to have a sensory-neural loss (severe-profound).
Sorry...I have a class full of kids with implants. : )

 

[Dear Prudence]

one of the reporters asked him what the heck he said-lol. i heard him reply he was talking italiano- he says a few words in Italian dialect and accent. she asked him if he knew french as she did. i was standing near by on break. its an insult to ITALIANS FOR SURE! HES A SMART AS-

I lost all respect for him during the pressor after the hearing. Please watch at 6:41 in the video, the female reporter from Ch. 6 asks Baez about his request regarding the leg-iron. Baez asks her "I'm certain you've never had leg-irons on your legs before?" She shakes her head no. Then Mason breaks in and says "well, not on except weekends right?" :furious:

The reporter plays it off, just like many of us probably would have done when trying to get our job done. But it ticks me off and I so wish she would have called him out on camera.

http://www.wftv.com/video/24286039/index.html

 

[beach]

I lost all respect for him during the pressor after the hearing. Please watch at 6:41 in the video, the female reporter from Ch. 6 asks Baez about his request regarding the leg-iron. Baez asks her "I'm certain you've never had leg-irons on your legs before?" She shakes her head no. Then Mason breaks in and says "well, not on except weekends right?" :furious:

The reporter plays it off, just like many of us probably would have done when trying to get our job done. But it ticks me off and I so wish she would have called him out on camera.

http://www.wftv.com/video/24286039/index.html

BBM

eta: I am beginning to think they brought CM on to make JB look good. If that was their plan, it's working for 'em.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

New Lillian Glass on George at the hearing; http://drlillianglass.com/body-lang...oes-not-want-to-be-in-court-supporting-casey/

 

[LCoastMom]

no punches - she did look pretty. almost looked as if her blouse was open with no bra. a sweet pink color- sort of like a young teen innocent- i think her image change is so when trial comes and prior we do not think of her as she looked before. her hair will be down to the ankles and she will have a white dress on all lace and dainty. do you think of her with the short sexy hair or her new look? see, it works ! cindy looked worn out as she has every right to be. if she was all dolled up and hair perfect everyone would say she was cold-too hard. she looked like she was exhausted as she was i am sure- that worked too.

ICA could dip herself in Florescent Easter Egg dye and come dressed as Mary Poppins, all I will see is her seething anger because she isn't being heard - the FACT that she was saying nothing worthwhile was completely missed by her family.

I have 3 kids (now adults), all went thru a stage of dressing in ways I would have rather not seen, at one time or another, as did most of their friends - but none (friends included) have had a toddler in their care go missing, stolen from family and friends, or any of the other atrocities we have seen and read about over the last two years. Clothing and hair styles are window dressing, that does nothing to change what is inside.

I know some good kids come from bad homes and some bad kids come from good homes, but more and more I believe - more often than not - As you sow, so shall you reap While G&C did not murder Caylee, neither did they protect her - Caylee is the only one I care about in this mess, because her own family obviously does not.

How was it that ICA knew ahead of time just what buttons to push, to make her family jump to her rescue - rather than slapping her down when she dared to raise her voice to them! ICA was the one who spent 31 days dancing, drinking, sleeping with boys, stealing from family and friends; all while her baby girl was "MISSING" from her home, not sleeping in her bed, not playing with her toys, not being potty trained or cared for...

Sorry for the rant but once again the FACT that ICA is responsible for her baby not having her BDay party in a couple weeks, would have been her 5th! - is being over looked, while the attention is going to ICA. :banghead: :furious: :banghead: :furious:

 

[sleutherontheside]

Seems to me that they are subconsciously saying that they KNOW what they just said makes no sense, but they say it anyway, and it also shows a sense of despair. IMO

Maybe that is their "ZIP IT" face that JB asked them to practice??????? :waitasec::waitasec::waitasec:

 

[LCoastMom]

BBM

eta: I am beginning to think they brought CM on to make JB look good. If that was their plan, it's working for 'em.

BBM - Who'd ever thunk it possible?

 

[Omachka]

ICA could dip herself in Florescent Easter Egg dye and come dressed as Mary Poppins, all I will see is her seething anger because she isn't being heard - the FACT that she was saying nothing worthwhile was completely missed by her family.

I have 3 kids (now adults), all went thru a stage of dressing in ways I would have rather not seen, at one time or another, as did most of their friends - but none (friends included) have had a toddler in their care go missing, stolen from family and friends, or any of the other atrocities we have seen and read about over the last two years. Clothing and hair styles are window dressing, that does nothing to change what is inside.

I know some good kids come from bad homes and some bad kids come from good homes, but more and more I believe - more often than not - As you sow, so shall you reap While G&C did not murder Caylee, neither did they protect her - Caylee is the only one I care about in this mess, because her own family obviously does not.

How was it that ICA knew ahead of time just what buttons to push, to make her family jump to her rescue - rather than slapping her down when she dared to raise her voice to them! ICA was the one who spent 31 days dancing, drinking, sleeping with boys, stealing from family and friends; all while her baby girl was "MISSING" from her home, not sleeping in her bed, not playing with her toys, not being potty trained or cared for...

Sorry for the rant but once again the FACT that ICA is responsible for her baby not having her 5th BDay party in a couple weeks - is being over looked, while the attention is going to ICA. :banghead: :furious: :banghead: :furious:

:clap::bow::clap::bow::clap::bow:

Do not apologize for that. ITA with you and couldn't have said it better than you just did. Thanks for putting us back on track.

 

[Starfish]

Very interesting, Amil. Thanks for sharing. Since Mallory got to hear most of Cindy's testimony, and left before it ended, wonder if she shared any of it with Lee in the hallway before he took the stand? Texting should not be permitted in court, especially amongst attorney's, IMO.

ITA....texting should not be allowed at all! However, being from Detroit (former mayor Kilpatrick) & following this case as well as many others as I'm sure many WSers do too...we know those text messages are not private!!!!!! Wonder if that'll come back to bit em in the azz down the line?!?!?!? All we can do is hope....

 

[elainebenice]

just thought I would chime in on the texting/use of cell phones during court proceedings subject as an attorney and citizen who has been in various courthouses/courtrooms in various capacities.....

The usage of cell phones,pda's, etc and restriction of such usage is going to be determined by the individual courthouses/districts and individual judges. The only across the board rule restricting use of these types of devices is going to be the rule barring the photographing or recording of federal court proceedings, but even this is a subject of intense debate and several different circuits have held differently at various times in the past when presented with this issue. Most of the debate surrounding this issue involves the broadcasting of the proceedings (television/webcast) and the ban on photography in the courtroom, such as taking a picture with your cell phone is going to be universally frowned upon to say the least. I've personally seen the federal courthouse in Birmingham go through numerous versions of policies concerning the use of cell phones in just the last 5 years. These policies really covered a broad spectrum from banning all electronic devices such as cell phones from even crossing the security line at the front door and leaving it with the security guards to retrieve later wasn't an option (meaning you left it in your car or office), to then only banning cell phones with cameras (this was REALLY fun when the security guards tried to figure out if your phone had a camera), to the current policy that places no restrictions on the types of devices you can bring into the courthouse or courtrooms. Each individual judge may be more or less lenient regarding the use of these devices in their individual courtrooms, but in federal court you aren't going to hear a phone ringing and if you do, I guarantee you that sound won't be heard again during that particular trial. There is a much bigger emphasis placed on security in general in federal courthouses than there is in state/local courthouses, so the loosening or tightening of rules/restrictions in fed court at various times can really depend on what types of cases are taking place there at any given time and the threat level in general for a particular federal courthouse or judge.

In state courts you will really see a lot of different policies that are all over the place. Some county courthouses may totally ban these devices from entering the building all together, but most will allow them in the building. The individual judges in these courthouses are going to dictate their own rules for device usage within their own courtrooms (the rules for everything that goes on within their courtroom for that matter). Its not uncommon at all for judges to allow parties to text members of their legal team (or anyone else) while court is in session, especially in civil court, but in criminal court too. Even if a judge was to ban such usage, they couldn't keep members of a legal team from passing hand written notes to each other so they could still communicate with each other if they so desired.

 

[doogiesgirl]

How much faith would you have in your attorney if he admitted in open court that he couldn't hear what was going on because of 'bad acoustics'. Oh, OK, that's cool, no biggie if you can't even hear what's going on... 2 words. Cochlear implant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant

Mrs G -- Those 2 words? Good....really good. But why use 2 if 1 works, right? ......Like "Retirement" -- (and stay there).

:cow:

 

[RainyGirl]

just thought I would chime in on the texting/use of cell phones during court proceedings subject as an attorney and citizen who has been in various courthouses/courtrooms in various capacities.....

The usage of cell phones,pda's, etc and restriction of such usage is going to be determined by the individual courthouses/districts and individual judges. The only across the board rule restricting use of these types of devices is going to be the rule barring the photographing or recording of federal court proceedings, but even this is a subject of intense debate and several different circuits have held differently at various times in the past when presented with this issue. Most of the debate surrounding this issue involves the broadcasting of the proceedings (television/webcast) and the ban on photography in the courtroom, such as taking a picture with your cell phone is going to be universally frowned upon to say the least. I've personally seen the federal courthouse in Birmingham go through numerous versions of policies concerning the use of cell phones in just the last 5 years. These policies really covered a broad spectrum from banning all electronic devices such as cell phones from even crossing the security line at the front door and leaving it with the security guards to retrieve later wasn't an option (meaning you left it in your car or office), to then only banning cell phones with cameras (this was REALLY fun when the security guards tried to figure out if your phone had a camera), to the current policy that places no restrictions on the types of devices you can bring into the courthouse or courtrooms. Each individual judge may be more or less lenient regarding the use of these devices in their individual courtrooms, but in federal court you aren't going to hear a phone ringing and if you do, I guarantee you that sound won't be heard again during that particular trial. There is a much bigger emphasis placed on security in general in federal courthouses than there is in state/local courthouses, so the loosening or tightening of rules/restrictions in fed court at various times can really depend on what types of cases are taking place there at any given time and the threat level in general for a particular federal courthouse or judge.

In state courts you will really see a lot of different policies that are all over the place. Some county courthouses may totally ban these devices from entering the building all together, but most will allow them in the building. The individual judges in these courthouses are going to dictate their own rules for device usage within their own courtrooms (the rules for everything that goes on within their courtroom for that matter). Its not uncommon at all for judges to allow parties to text members of their legal team (or anyone else) while court is in session, especially in civil court, but in criminal court too. Even if a judge was to ban such usage, they couldn't keep members of a legal team from passing hand written notes to each other so they could still communicate with each other if they so desired.

Thanks for the great input and I totally agree!! I'm in WA. state and my experience (as a victim's advocate and freelance reporter--part-time) and my DH's (as a Deputy state prosecutor) is right in line with what you have shared. Federal court--->gigantic no-no on the cellulars and related electronics; State courts (criminal, civil and even Supreme)--->It depends on the judge. Overall, judges do not want any noise to interfere with proceedings (and risk anything being recorded!). My favorite judge is fond of reminding everyone in the gallery that she will have her bailiff "toss you out like yesterday's news" if she hears any cell phone noise/beeps/talking/texting, etc.!!

ETA: Here's my own personal note to Cheney Mason: "YEP, You heard it---my favorite judge is a WOMAN and she ROCKS, IMO! The "good 'ol boys club is history, so get it together and show a little respect where its due!! You're such a frozen caveman lawyer!" ok...rant over...thank you!