2010.12.22 Prosecutors Call for Sanctions Against the Defense

[Dignity4Victims]

This has been a long time in coming and well-deserved!

Jeff Ashton and Linda Drane Burdick are tenacious about coming to court fully prepared, they speak with eloquence and have complied with all court orders under the direction of Judge Perry.

Why can't the Defense ever seem to do the same? Why does Jose Baez have to continually be "schooled" by Judge Perry at nearly every Hearing? If the Defense can back their claims that Casey Anthony didn't murder Caylee, what are they so afraid of which promoted this Motion for Sanctions? Why isn't Mason, who is the Death Qualified Attorney, doing more to assure smooth sailing right into trial in May of 2011, rather than playing 'hide n' seek' games?

I'd like this thread to serve in part, as a support thread for Mr. Ashton and Ms. Burdick, :clap: ...... as well as an offer of opinions as to what Baez could possibly mean with his continued use of the term, "false claims". He's now going to have to answer to Judge Perry and explain his chosen terminology.

Opinions?

"In a newly filed motion, Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton argues, "the state would contend that the defendant is in deliberate non-compliance with the court's order as to certain of their listed experts and that sanctions to address the non-compliance are necessary."

Ashton notes that the defense has said expert Dr. Henry Lee "will render opinions on…crime scene analysis, collection and preservation as well as recovery."

But he says the defense team's inability to summarize so-called "false claims" by crime scene investigators that Lee will rebut "is disingenuous and just plain laughable."

More at the link:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...ny-defense-sanctions-20101222,0,7135166.story

 

[octobermoon]

Can't wait to hear the opinions of the lawers here! (Thanks all)

 

[sleutherontheside]

While this has been "a long time coming" in our opinion....the timing was not right until now.

Sure, the State Attorney had legal grounds prior to this (recall Judge Perry and Judge Strickland telling them to file for sanctions if they had issues), IMO it would have presented itself as petty and premature had it been done prior to now.

After all the gamesmanship and playing "chicken", NOW there is no time to waste, and JB's "reindeer games" are in fact impacting trial preparation.

Prior to Judge Perry's order to disclose expert witness names AND what they will testify to, JB could have simply argued...nobody told me specifically what to provide the State. Sure, any ethical, educated, professional attorney already knows what is required, but the State had not forced the Judge to "spell it out".

Once the defense received the order and THEN failed to comply, it became an issue of interfering with trial preparation, and violating discovery rules. Yes, yes rules of discovery had been skirted already........but this is now a clear cut, documented case of you are affecting trial prep.

I am not an attorney and perhaps am speaking out of my a$$, but that is my impression.

 

[cyberborg]

Gamesmanship? Brinksmanship?

JB is playing silly games ... trying to. IMO he is both trying to hold out on what little he has as well as insinuate he has a lot more than he does in reality.

JB is clearly out-classed by the SA Prosecution team and is way out of his depth but he feels he can get away with what he does because he has the Defense role in a DP case and is representing ICA ... a notorious child killer.

The SA just need to stick to the rules and play by the rules and they will continue to gain ground and march their case forward to its inevitable conclusion ... as JB is backed further and further into a corner giving ground reluctantly but consistently

JB seems to enjoy this petty confrontation and game play and -- given that he has nothing to lose and is quite desperate ... JB can risk pushing dangerous events to the verge of disaster in order to achieve the most advantageous outcome ... maybe.

Good luck with that JB!

 

[The World According]

I must find the video but I recall Judge Perry saying "I believe in sanctions".
Jeff Ashton .....way to go...spot on!! It was absolutely outrageous and spitting in the face of the judge the filing that Baez and Mason . I think the judge is going to let the defense know they WILL respect the rules, and his rulings are orders not gentle suggestions, in no uncertain terms. It was just so blatant what the defense did, it demands action. There is no alternate inference to draw.

Looking forward to it.

Mr. Ashton is right, the real threat to Casey not getting a fair trial is her lawyers pulling these dumb stunts instead of getting serious. If they miss deadlines and her experts cannot testify....who does that hurt? The defendant. It is a very serious and present problem. If Casey Anthony does not get it, that does not mean it will be lost on Judge Perry.
I do think we are going to see the judge get very concerned over this. There is nothing , absolutely nothing about the defense actions here that serve their client.

You just can't make this stuff up!!!

I remember two years ago in the very beginning of this trial, Mr. Ashton had to point out this huge problem of Casey's own lawyer harming her case. It was the gag order hearing and Mr. Ashton was pointing out that Baez had appeared on Dan Abrams show and admitted his client had lied to police and divulging attorney client talks he had with Casey. As outrageous as that was....it was merely the beginning. This surpasses all of the asenine things that we have seen so far. I literally was shocked reading the childish, nonesense typed up about the experts and what they will say. It was , hands down, the worst we have seen to date. I know the judge is going to let Baez and Cheney know it will not fly.
They better "Bring them some lunch"; because they are gonna be seeing some late nights with the judge. That is my take on this. He has been patient and reasonale, extending deadlines where needed, etc., but this is wholly different, this was purposeful and with utter and complete disrespect to the court.

Mops, anyone?
Check it out...it got hostile. At that time Jonathan Kassan was her lawyer too ( another one in the revolving door ). Even the mild mannered Judge Strickland got loud.

http://www.wftv.com/video/18147900/index.html two minute mark

Baez handed Ashton 150 pages of stuff, at the hearing!!!! Of course he did not have time to read it. Then he objected to Jeff supplying the court with three papers. Oh friends, this one was heated!!! Can you imagine the field day Jeff is going to have with the defense in this coming hearing?
OK...Muzikman...cue up for me...the Gap Band
"You Dropped A Bomb On Me"!!!!

This was from 2008 and it was clear then, Baez was making some very very serious misteps.Some chalked it up to his inexperience. Now, with the learned Cheney by his side, Baez cannot in the words of Jeff Ashton, "Feign ignorance". There is no chance Cheney Mason with over thirty years of trial experience did not know theire recent experts information filing was improper and unacceptable. I just do not believe for a second it wasn't willful deliborate disrespect to the court. MOO

Remember when Mrs. Drane Burdick advised the court that Cheney Mason's office said the court's deadlines were unconstitutional and they would schedule their depos whenever they like. Judge folded his arms and said "I don't think they said that", as if to imply....I know these guys could not have lost their damn minds. It was funny. Look for more of those eyebrow raising looks from the judge over this.

 

[beach]

While this has been "a long time coming" in our opinion....the timing was not right until now.

Sure, the State Attorney had legal grounds prior to this (recall Judge Perry and Judge Strickland telling them to file for sanctions if they had issues), IMO it would have presented itself as petty and premature had it been done prior to now.

After all the gamesmanship and playing "chicken", NOW there is no time to waste, and JB's "reindeer games" are in fact impacting trial preparation.

Prior to Judge Perry's order to disclose expert witness names AND what they will testify to, JB could have simply argued...nobody told me specifically what to provide the State. Sure, any ethical, educated, professional attorney already knows what is required, but the State had not forced the Judge to "spell it out".

Once the defense received the order and THEN failed to comply, it became an issue of interfering with trial preparation, and violating discovery rules. Yes, yes rules of discovery had been skirted already........but this is now a clear cut, documented case of you are affecting trial prep.

I am not an attorney and perhaps am speaking out of my a$$, but that is my impression.

BBM

Great post!

You are correct. Motions for sanctions are a last resort and they are not filed lightly. Everybody involved knows you are damn serious when you file one.

Now I guess I should go read the motion. :angel:

 

[OneLostGrl]

Jeff Ashton and Linda Drane Burdick are professionals and act like it. JoseB is an ineffective con-man with a law degree.. he could ever act like a professional. He's the last person I'd go to if I wanted a good (or even half-way decent) defense.

 

[BChand]

BBM

Great post!

You are correct. Motions for sanctions are a last resort and they are not filed lightly. Everybody involved knows you are damn serious when you file one.

Now I guess I should go read the motion. :angel:

If you find it, let us know! (please)

 

[Intermezzo]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...ny-defense-sanctions-20101222,0,7135166.story

"Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton argues, "the state would contend that the defendant is in deliberate non-compliance with the court's order as to certain of their listed experts and that sanctions to address the non-compliance are necessary."

"The intent of the defense to defy the authority of this court to issue orders of discovery is crystal clear," Ashton wrote.

OOOOHHHH Can't wait to read this Motion...

 

[beach]

If you find it, let us know! (please)

So sorry...I thought the media had already posted it and we had it. :blushing:

I've been offline all day...this was the first thread that caught my attention. Guess it was filed late today?? I will keep checking and link it here if I find it!

 

[Horace Finklestein]

While this has been "a long time coming" in our opinion....the timing was not right until now.

Sure, the State Attorney had legal grounds prior to this (recall Judge Perry and Judge Strickland telling them to file for sanctions if they had issues), IMO it would have presented itself as petty and premature had it been done prior to now.

After all the gamesmanship and playing "chicken", NOW there is no time to waste, and JB's "reindeer games" are in fact impacting trial preparation.

Prior to Judge Perry's order to disclose expert witness names AND what they will testify to, JB could have simply argued...nobody told me specifically what to provide the State. Sure, any ethical, educated, professional attorney already knows what is required, but the State had not forced the Judge to "spell it out".

Once the defense received the order and THEN failed to comply, it became an issue of interfering with trial preparation, and violating discovery rules. Yes, yes rules of discovery had been skirted already........but this is now a clear cut, documented case of you are affecting trial prep.

I am not an attorney and perhaps am speaking out of my a$$, but that is my impression.

I agree. Their timing is impeccable and they waited until the level of absurdity was at a pinnacle. Better they waited till now definitely.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

While this has been "a long time coming" in our opinion....the timing was not right until now.

Sure, the State Attorney had legal grounds prior to this (recall Judge Perry and Judge Strickland telling them to file for sanctions if they had issues), IMO it would have presented itself as petty and premature had it been done prior to now.

After all the gamesmanship and playing "chicken", NOW there is no time to waste, and JB's "reindeer games" are in fact impacting trial preparation.

Prior to Judge Perry's order to disclose expert witness names AND what they will testify to, JB could have simply argued...nobody told me specifically what to provide the State. Sure, any ethical, educated, professional attorney already knows what is required, but the State had not forced the Judge to "spell it out".

Once the defense received the order and THEN failed to comply, it became an issue of interfering with trial preparation, and violating discovery rules. Yes, yes rules of discovery had been skirted already........but this is now a clear cut, documented case of you are affecting trial prep.

I am not an attorney and perhaps am speaking out of my a$$, but that is my impression.

BBM - agree 100%!

It's one thing for Baez to showboat and strut like a peacock playing footsie games with Jeff Ashton, but a far different set of circumstance when you pee-off the presiding Judge and defy a court order for the second time on the very same issue!

 

[BChand]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...ny-defense-sanctions-20101222,0,7135166.story

"Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton argues, "the state would contend that the defendant is in deliberate non-compliance with the court's order as to certain of their listed experts and that sanctions to address the non-compliance are necessary."

"The intent of the defense to defy the authority of this court to issue orders of discovery is crystal clear," Ashton wrote.

OOOOHHHH Can't wait to read this Motion...

I think they say he used the word "laughable" at least twice!

 

[Numbers]

So sorry...I thought the media had already posted it and we had it. :blushing:

I've been offline all day...this was the first thread that caught my attention. Guess it was filed late today?? I will keep checking and link it here if I find it!

May I suggest donning your oven mitts before handling? From the quotes, Ashton seems a tad peevish, and I'll bet that motion is smokin'.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Unbelievable to see the depth and specificity Ashton used to address Baez' motions...and to think Baez thought emailing him to "call and ask" if he had any questions. This is just amazing. Clear my calendar for the day THIS hearing comes around.

 

[Brattigirle]

Can someone explain this to me... pls. What does this mean?

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Unbelievable to see the depth and specificity Ashton used to address Baez' motions...and to think Baez thought emailing him to "call and ask" if he had any questions. This is just amazing. Clear my calendar for the day THIS hearing comes around.

Haha yes, it's going to be a doozie!

 

[Numbers]

Can someone explain this to me... pls. What does this mean?

Ashton is pointing out to Judge Perry that Baez is not playing by the rules of the court. Baez has not turned over information on his experts that Ashton needs (and is entitled to) to be able to complete his trial preparation. By asking for sanctions, Ashton is asking Judge Perry to make Baez pay a penalty of some sort (often a financial penalty).

 

[Brattigirle]

Ashton is pointing out to Judge Perry that Baez is not playing by the rules of the court. Baez has not turned over information on his experts that Ashton needs (and is entitled to) to be able to complete his trial preparation. By asking for sanctions, Ashton is asking Judge Perry to make Baez pay a penalty of some sort (often a financial penalty).

Thank You, as I read further in I found this and it helped me to understand what may come of this.

Ashton noted that Florida rules of criminal procedure allow the court to prevent parties from calling witnesses or introducing certain evidence if they fail to follow discovery rules. He also cites rules stating an attorney can be subject to "contempt proceedings" and costs by violating discovery rules.

Thanx again I am fairly new to all of this court lingo.

 

[sleutherontheside]

I can't help but wonder if JB "secretly" wanted to delay the SA from being able to take effective depositions by the deadline so that they would be forced to ask for more time.

JB strikes me as a "tit for tat" kind of fellow and wouldn't he like to be able to ask for more time for depos after the State gets more time??

Hmmmmmmmmm