2010.12.21 Stream of Motions - General Discussion

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Oh, you said it so much better than I did! I meant that too Amil, I'm just don't seem to remember my manners. Yes, I also love and appreciate what you do.

I knew that's what you meant, logicalgirl, and wasn't saying it just for you ~ but for all of us! I love your enthusiasm!

 

[LolaMoon08]

What time is the hearing supposed to start on January 3rd? 1:30pm? I know we had the original 6 motions. We now have the "heart-shaped sticker" motion and it looks like we're getting a motion to suppress "videos" of some kind. I just want to know if there is any way that all of these motions will be heard on January 3rd?

Not to mention Jeff Ashton's motion for sanctions against the defense!

Can you imagine getting to hear eight motions and Jeff's motion for sanctions in one sitting? Judge Perry wouldn't spoil us that much... or would he?

 

[Star12]

About that video - I'm thinking it may be the Blockbuster video.

 

[LolaMoon08]

Would "Video Footage" be considered singular or plural? Only because it seems to me that it could be either one?

I guess what I am asking is if the defense can file a single motion to suppress "video footage", but individually name the video's that they would like to suppress. Or would they have to file a seperate motions for each video individually?

This is the list of "video footage" that I think the defense would like to have suppressed.

- Video footage of any of Casey Anthony's jail visitations.
- Video footage of Casey Anthony, in that room, right after she was indicted on First Degree Murder Charges.
- Video footage of Dominic Casey searching the woods off of Suburban Drive.
- Video footage of Casey Anthony's reaction to the remains of a "child" being found in the woods off of Suburban Drive.
- Video footage of all of George Anthony's LE/FBI interviews.
- Video footage of all of Cindy Anthony's LE/FBI interviews.
- Video footage of all of Lee Anthony's LE/FBI interviews.
- Video footage from Target.
- Video footage from Bank of America.
- Video footage of Blockbuster.
- Video footage of all of Cindy Anthony's interviews with the media
- Video footage of all of George Anthony's interviews with the media.

Am I missing anything?

 

[logicalgirl]

What time is the hearing supposed to start on January 3rd? 1:30pm? I know we had the original 6 motions. We now have the "heart-shaped sticker" motion and it looks like we're getting a motion to suppress "videos" of some kind. I just want to know if there is any way that all of these motions will be heard on January 3rd?

Not to mention Jeff Ashton's motion for sanctions against the defense!

Can you imagine getting to hear eight motions and Jeff's motion for sanctions in one sitting? Judge Perry wouldn't spoil us that much... or would he?

Whoa! Six motions to exclude, now another one about videos plus Jeff Ashton's motion for sanctions - all done on Monday? Starting at 1:30?

This should be a fine example of how HHJP will keep a very tight rein on keeping the process moving quickly along, or else they will be there until midnight. So that is approx. three hours, with eight "subjects" with less than half an hour spent on each motion - more like twenty minutes on each one - whew! There will be no room for Baez's "er-um-frankly Judge" type of unorganized rambling he usually does.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Is it the one of ICA receiving the news that Caylee's remains had been found ?

I agree but at that point Caylee's remains were not ID'd (most knew it was her before a positive ID) but consciousness of guilt shines through. Same with the defense wanting to be at the crime scene at Suburban. Never, ever have I heard or read about a perp or their attorney being present while CSI collects evidence...all goes to consciousness of guilt and ICA has plenty...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[faefrost]

Would "Video Footage" be considered singular or plural? Only because it seems to me that it could be either one?

I guess what I am asking is if the defense can file a single motion to suppress "video footage", but individually name the video's that they would like to suppress. Or would they have to file a seperate motions for each video individually?

This is the list of "video footage" that I think the defense would like to have suppressed.

- Video footage of any of Casey Anthony's jail visitations.
- Video footage of Casey Anthony, in that room, right after she was indicted on First Degree Murder Charges.
- Video footage of Dominic Casey searching the woods off of Suburban Drive.
- Video footage of Casey Anthony's reaction to the remains of a "child" being found in the woods off of Suburban Drive.
- Video footage of all of George Anthony's LE/FBI interviews.
- Video footage of all of Cindy Anthony's LE/FBI interviews.
- Video footage of all of Lee Anthony's LE/FBI interviews.
- Video footage from Target.
- Video footage from Bank of America.
- Video footage of Blockbuster.
- Video footage of all of Cindy Anthony's interviews with the media
- Video footage of all of George Anthony's interviews with the media.

Am I missing anything?

I'm betting it is some of the jailhouse video. Particularly the reaction to the find on Suburban Drive. I can't picture any of the rest being anything that would even be argued over allowing. Maybe the FBI interviews, simply because the witnesses are available for questioning at trial. But even then the videos would not be precluded from being used as rebuttal. The BOA, Target and Blockbuster videos have already been used as evidence before the court, haven't they? They were evidence in the check fraud and theft charges. I can't see any reason they would be kicked now. So it's got to be those jail videos. Her conversations with Cindy and her reaction to the find.

 

[Numbers]

Would "Video Footage" be considered singular or plural? Only because it seems to me that it could be either one?

I guess what I am asking is if the defense can file a single motion to suppress "video footage", but individually name the video's that they would like to suppress. Or would they have to file a seperate motions for each video individually?

This is the list of "video footage" that I think the defense would like to have suppressed.

- Video footage of any of Casey Anthony's jail visitations.
- Video footage of Casey Anthony, in that room, right after she was indicted on First Degree Murder Charges.
- Video footage of Dominic Casey searching the woods off of Suburban Drive.
- Video footage of Casey Anthony's reaction to the remains of a "child" being found in the woods off of Suburban Drive.
- Video footage of all of George Anthony's LE/FBI interviews.
- Video footage of all of Cindy Anthony's LE/FBI interviews.
- Video footage of all of Lee Anthony's LE/FBI interviews.
- Video footage from Target.
- Video footage from Bank of America.
- Video footage of Blockbuster.
- Video footage of all of Cindy Anthony's interviews with the media
- Video footage of all of George Anthony's interviews with the media.

Am I missing anything?

BBM

They have verified transcripts of these interviews, so the SAO wouldn't need these videos.

Would you include the videos from the civil depositions? <snort> Same thing there, though - transcripts exist. Although Cindy Unleashed and Rubber-Faced George might be interesting for the jurors to see.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...tion and Hearing Deadlines and Trial Date.pdf


On Page 2, Letter B....all non forensic/scientific evidentary motions shall be filed no later than November 30, 2010 and heard no later than December 31, 2010....

same page, #6...Non forensic/scientific legal motions requiring no testimony before the court shall be filed an heard no later than December 31, 2010

Doesn't this slew of motions go against the above order?

Justice for Caylee

 

[faefrost]

BBM

They have verified transcripts of these interviews, so the SAO wouldn't need these videos.

Would you include the videos from the civil depositions? <snort> Same thing there, though - transcripts exist. Although Cindy Unleashed and Rubber-Faced George might be interesting for the jurors to see.

But that's already covered under the rules governing such testimony. You can only enter transcripts or video interviews into evidence if the witness is no longer available to testify, or if the transcript or video is being used to challenge what the witness is now saying on the stand. The live confrontable witness takes priority. But the tapes may be used to prevent them from changing their story. I can't see any situation where those tapes or statements would be outright blocked from use? the same thing with the interviews that CA and GA made to the press.

 

[Numbers]

But that's already covered under the rules governing such testimony. You can only enter transcripts or video interviews into evidence if the witness is no longer available to testify, or if the transcript or video is being used to challenge what the witness is now saying on the stand. The live confrontable witness takes priority. But the tapes may be used to prevent them from changing their story. I can't see any situation where those tapes or statements would be outright blocked from use? the same thing with the interviews that CA and GA made to the press.

I have learned something new today. Thank you.

I did not think these would be excluded. So that leaves DCasey's tape and the tape of Casey after the discovery of Caylee's remains that Baez could be objecting to? Everything else is fair game (subject to your above explanation)?

Bet it's the tape of Casey.

 

[denjet]

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...tion and Hearing Deadlines and Trial Date.pdf


On Page 2, Letter B....all non forensic/scientific evidentary motions shall be filed no later than November 30, 2010 and heard no later than December 31, 2010....

same page, #6...Non forensic/scientific legal motions requiring no testimony before the court shall be filed an heard no later than December 31, 2010

Doesn't this slew of motions go against the above order?

Justice for Caylee

This is confusing the heck out of me too .... reading the order, the only motions that can still be filed and heard (no later than Feb 28th) are forensic/scientific ...
Perhaps the table knife and "phantom" heart shaped sticker ones fall under the forensics category, but videos, KC's sex life and lying and stealing, IMO, DON'T ...
If so, isn't Jose past the deadline for even having these heard? Same as for the Kronk one?
Just to put in my :twocents: ... I vote that the video is the most damning one, the one of KC when she hears the news ...

Also, IIRC, the State doesn't not HAVE to respond to the defense's motions if they are prepared to argue them in court or something like that ... I thought this was laid out because of Jose trying to dictate the state's response within 30 days and the defense's response to their response within 10 days ... in other words ... Jose's stalling and dragging out motions ...
Does anyone remember the particulars on this?

 

[logicalgirl]

This is confusing the heck out of me too .... reading the order, the only motions that can still be filed and heard (no later than Feb 28th) are forensic/scientific ...
Perhaps the table knife and "phantom" heart shaped sticker ones fall under the forensics category, but videos, KC's sex life and lying and stealing, IMO, DON'T ...
If so, isn't Jose past the deadline for even having these heard? Same as for the Kronk one?
Just to put in my :twocents: ... I vote that the video is the most damning one, the one of KC when she hears the news ...

Also, IIRC, the State doesn't not HAVE to respond to the defense's motions if they are prepared to argue them in court or something like that ... I thought this was laid out because of Jose trying to dictate the state's response within 30 days and the defense's response to their response within 10 days ... in other words ... Jose's stalling and dragging out motions ...
Does anyone remember the particulars on this?

And me also. I am following along reading orders and reading what you brainy legal minds are saying (and thanks so much for it by the way) and I lose it along the way here because I don't understand why there are deadlines for motions when Baez seems to be ignoring them and just sliding under or climbing over what I thought was a pretty clear set of guidelines, along with a few of HHJP's "Bear in mind, Mr. Baez".

It seems to me Mr. Baez is taking "death is different" way too far, and seemingly getting away with it.

 

[LancelotLink]

And me also. I am following along reading orders and reading what you brainy legal minds are saying (and thanks so much for it by the way) and I lose it along the way here because I don't understand why there are deadlines for motions when Baez seems to be ignoring them and just sliding under or climbing over what I thought was a pretty clear set of guidelines, along with a few of HHJP's "Bear in mind, Mr. Baez".

It seems to me Mr. Baez is taking "death is different" way too far, and seemingly getting away with it.

There's that chip on his shoulder again, growing larger. He delights in taking phrases from others and using them as a tit for tat.

 

[denjet]

And me also. I am following along reading orders and reading what you brainy legal minds are saying (and thanks so much for it by the way) and I lose it along the way here because I don't understand why there are deadlines for motions when Baez seems to be ignoring them and just sliding under or climbing over what I thought was a pretty clear set of guidelines, along with a few of HHJP's "Bear in mind, Mr. Baez".

It seems to me Mr. Baez is taking "death is different" way too far, and seemingly getting away with it.

I couldn't agree more ... there was enough of this happening with Jose and then Finnell came on board and is doing the same thing! ... when is the state going to get the penalty witnesses so they can do their depositions ? Shouldn't we have seen a filing of the list by now or an order granting her motion to suppress ? I'm hoping some of this gets cleared up Monday as I'm sure many other people are too ... It would be nice for Judge Perry to start the year off with some fireworks!

 

[logicalgirl]

I can tell you one thing for sure!!! I may not know why Baez is sliding these motions in, and I don't know for sure how HHJP is going to react, and I don't know which motions will be denied/passed, but I do know this one thing -

This will be the best hearing yet!!:great::great::rocker:

 

[sumbunny]

12/29/2010 Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion in Limine to
Suppress Video Footage

12/29/2010 Motion In Limine to Suppress Video Footage

Does anyone know what video evidence this motion is about? TIA

Might be the Jail house footage of Casey having a tantrum at her mother.

(clench fists)

Oh and the big smile when she asks her father "why is she crying?"

ooooh or the shopping spree at Walmart, where she is happily spending all of the money she stole!

 

[LancelotLink]

Might be the Jail house footage of Casey having a tantrum at her mother.

(clench fists)

Oh and the big smile when she asks her father "why is she crying?"

ooooh or the shopping spree at Walmart, where she is happily spending all of the money she stole!

Good thought!!
I was thinking it may be the DC/ Hoover video.

 

[AZlawyer]

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...tion and Hearing Deadlines and Trial Date.pdf


On Page 2, Letter B....all non forensic/scientific evidentary motions shall be filed no later than November 30, 2010 and heard no later than December 31, 2010....

same page, #6...Non forensic/scientific legal motions requiring no testimony before the court shall be filed an heard no later than December 31, 2010

Doesn't this slew of motions go against the above order?

Justice for Caylee

I assume JB is taking the position that his recent motions don't require any testimony (i.e., no witnesses will have to take the stand to prove the allegations made in his motions, because the facts are agreed or a matter of record).

 

[Leila]

I'm surprised they didn't also ask for the car to be thrown out since it was not on KC's possession at the time and how about the fact that she waited 31 days to call. they should also ask for that to be thrown out since that's the most damming evidence against her Geez!

Considering the list of evidence JB wants excluded, it might be better if he just made one motion requesting that anything that would incriminate his client be thrown out.