2010.12.22 Prosecutors Call for Sanctions Against the Defense

[QB.]

QB, I couldn't swear to it, but I am pretty sure it will be heard at the same motions hearing. Ashton filed it on the Wed., 12/22. Many courts, clerks, etc are "dark" (ghost crew at work) that close to Christmas and I don't think Judge Perry set a new hearing time. He seems to like to take care of business asap and since he had already set a motions hearing for the defense's motions in limine, I think he will hear JA's motion for santions at the same time.

There is a status hearing set for Jan. 14th. I seriously doubt that HHJP will try to fit in another motions hearing before then.


*attn nums* - btw, I moved the status hearing set for Mon. Jan 10th to Fri. Jan. 14th. While you were unavailable, HHJP needed to reset it because of a conflict on his schedule.

That is my guess too.
Week from today, should be a doozy.

 

[Snaz]

Has the court set a time on Jan 3rd to hear the state's motion on sanctions?

Yes, 1:30 p.m. Eastern

 

[logicalgirl]

QB, I couldn't swear to it, but I am pretty sure it will be heard at the same motions hearing. Ashton filed it on the Wed., 12/22. Many courts, clerks, etc are "dark" (ghost crew at work) that close to Christmas and I don't think Judge Perry set a new hearing time. He seems to like to take care of business asap and since he had already set a motions hearing for the defense's motions in limine, I think he will hear JA's motion for santions at the same time.

There is a status hearing set for Jan. 14th. I seriously doubt that HHJP will try to fit in another motions hearing before then.


*attn nums* - btw, I moved the status hearing set for Mon. Jan 10th to Fri. Jan. 14th. While you were unavailable, HHJP needed to reset it because of a conflict on his schedule.

If he does just hear the six motions and then as usual says "Is there anything else?" - for the first time it will not be Baez jumping up and saying" well er um yes, judge, there is!"

He will just "zip it".

 

[Aedrys]

If he does just hear the six motions and then as usual says "Is there anything else?" - for the first time it will not be Baez jumping up and saying" well er um yes, judge, there is!"

He will just "zip it".

ITA. I'm thinking it will be Ashton that replies, "Yes, your honor, there is something else", and JB will start sweating bullets knowing full well what Ashton wants to address.

 

[LolaMoon08]

I would die of laughter if Judge Perry asks Baez "is there anything else?" and Baez replies "No, your honor. Happy New Year." Jose grabs his briefcase, ready to leave when JP says "Okay, I have this motion filed by Jeff Aston on (insert date) in my hands." LOL

I do think it is going to be held on January 3rd. I even think JB might be on his best behavior while they hear the first six (?) motions. I think his pen will be a-clickin' though.

 

[logicalgirl]

ITA. I'm thinking it will be Ashton that replies, "Yes, your honor, there is something else", and JB will start sweating bullets knowing full well what Ashton wants to address.

LOL you forgot this at the end of your comment! :floorlaugh:

 

[JSR]

If it's not heard on the 3rd, it will be very soon. Honorable Perry doesn't mess around. He keeps a clean docket, not many things are left hanging. I love Judges like that. I had one Judge that when we filed our motion in October set a hearing FOR DECEMBER! And it was a Dispositive motion so we were disappointed that there was such a lag in a hearing time.

 

[JSR]

Frankly, I'm a little concerned over this motion. And for a surprising reason. JA indicated he wants to ensure that Casey receives a fair trial (and I agree with him). Regardless of a person's guilt or innocence every American is entitled to a fair trial. And we should all be endlessly grateful for that. I'm concerned JB and company are going to fail to meet a discovery deadline and that by law an expert will not be allowed to testify. Which will ensure an automatic appeal for Casey should she be found guilty and an appeals Court Judge feels the expert could have helped Casey's defense. This is a really serious matter.

Despite all the JA wrote in his motion the singular thing that worries me and caught my attention the most is that line referencing Casey's right to a fair trial.

It's also important to note that every American has a right to a fair trial but they're also completely entitled to hire a complete moron to defend them. Casey has the right to keep JB as one of her attorneys I would just feel much better if some of her other attorneys of record took a more active and lead role in her case.

I'm concerned for Casey, and not because I think she's innocent. It's because I want her to be found guilty fair and square and not waste endless amounts of more taxpayer money on appeals due to her poor judgment skills. It was her lack of poor judgment that landed her on trial for murder in the first place and I think it's high time she begin to pay the consequences for her lack of judgment (not to mention morals), but just not on the FL taxpayers dime.

 

[drip~drop]

I hope that they get dragged into court this week.

Don't give Baez any more time to do his song and dance act.

I agree with some of you others, that Judge Perry has been much to lenient in alot of things concerning Baez. I know that he is giving more leeway than others would recieve, IMO, because he is doing his upmost to keep things on track, on time, and, to avoid excuses for appeals in the future.
The excuse that "death is differant", is getting old.
You bet it is differant.
Just ask Caylee ~ oh, that's right, we can't.

Whatever the reasons are that Baez is acting the way he does, and, doing the things that he does; it's time to put a screaming halt to it, now.
It's time to get down to business, put the color coded charts away, and wise up, instead of wise cracking all the time at the court and the people of Florida's expense.
Oh, and yes, the tv cameras also.

Enough with the grand-standing.

I so want to see this resolved this week, so that next week when these new motions are heard, they all are on the same page.
No excuses, no pen clicking or smirks.

IMO Judge Perry has to give some leeway because of who he is dealing with and I don't mean ica.:crazy::waitasec::innocent:
:cow:

 

[beach]

Frankly, I'm a little concerned over this motion. And for a surprising reason. JA indicated he wants to ensure that Casey receives a fair trial (and I agree with him). Regardless of a person's guilt or innocence every American is entitled to a fair trial. And we should all be endlessly grateful for that. I'm concerned JB and company are going to fail to meet a discovery deadline and that by law an expert will not be allowed to testify. Which will ensure an automatic appeal for Casey should she be found guilty and an appeals Court Judge feels the expert could have helped Casey's defense. This is a really serious matter.

Despite all the JA wrote in his motion the singular thing that worries me and caught my attention the most is that line referencing Casey's right to a fair trial.

It's also important to note that every American has a right to a fair trial but they're also completely entitled to hire a complete moron to defend them. Casey has the right to keep JB as one of her attorneys I would just feel much better if some of her other attorneys of record took a more active and lead role in her case.

I'm concerned for Casey, and not because I think she's innocent. It's because I want her to be found guilty fair and square and not waste endless amounts of more taxpayer money on appeals due to her poor judgment skills. It was her lack of poor judgment that landed her on trial for murder in the first place and I think it's high time she begin to pay the consequences for her lack of judgment (not to mention morals), but just not on the FL taxpayers dime.

BBM

I've given this a LOT of thought and I know where you are coming from. I've had the same concerns. However, I don't think HHJP is gonna strike any defense experts because of the attorneys' shenanigans. Further, I think JB & co. know that and are basically daring HHJP to do that because it would be a decent appellate issue. I believe Judge Perry is gonna hit them in their wallets, discouraging more of the same.

I'm not well schooled in the Florida RCP or discovery rules. I'm a little confused when you say "by law an expert will not be allowed to testify".

 

[LolaMoon08]

Frankly, I'm a little concerned over this motion. And for a surprising reason. JA indicated he wants to ensure that Casey receives a fair trial (and I agree with him). Regardless of a person's guilt or innocence every American is entitled to a fair trial. And we should all be endlessly grateful for that. I'm concerned JB and company are going to fail to meet a discovery deadline and that by law an expert will not be allowed to testify. Which will ensure an automatic appeal for Casey should she be found guilty and an appeals Court Judge feels the expert could have helped Casey's defense. This is a really serious matter.

Despite all the JA wrote in his motion the singular thing that worries me and caught my attention the most is that line referencing Casey's right to a fair trial.

It's also important to note that every American has a right to a fair trial but they're also completely entitled to hire a complete moron to defend them. Casey has the right to keep JB as one of her attorneys I would just feel much better if some of her other attorneys of record took a more active and lead role in her case.

I'm concerned for Casey, and not because I think she's innocent. It's because I want her to be found guilty fair and square and not waste endless amounts of more taxpayer money on appeals due to her poor judgment skills. It was her lack of poor judgment that landed her on trial for murder in the first place and I think it's high time she begin to pay the consequences for her lack of judgment (not to mention morals), but just not on the FL taxpayers dime.

This is why I think Casey needs to be there when this motion is addressed. She needs to be faced with what could happen if her defense continues playing these games. I am concerned about this also. I agree that she is guilty as sin, but the girl does have a right to a fair trial. I find it disgusting that her defense is putting her in this situation at all... expecially when they have had over two years to get everything they need in order. Revolving attorney's or not, when the newer attorneys came on board, they knew what they were getting into. They knew this was going to trial in May 2011... they need to put in the work.

My main problem is that Casey has been cut off from the outside world. Jose has obviously been filling her head with the idea of a mistrial.... which is evident in Casey's jailhouse letters. The girl seems to have no clue as to what she is really facing because it seems to me, that she has been getting sugar-coated information. That is one thing that she doesn't need. No matter how much of a liar she is, as a woman facing the death penalty, she deserves to know the truth about what is going on with her trial.

I think it is very important for Judge Perry to make it very clear that the games that the defense is playing can very well mean the difference between life or death for Casey. I am 100% in agreement with Judge Perry when he says that "death is different." We're talking about somebody's life here (even if it is someone as horrific as Casey).

 

[JSR]

BBM

I've given this a LOT of thought and I know where you are coming from. I've had the same concerns. However, I don't think HHJP is gonna strike any defense experts because of the attorneys' shenanigans. Further, I think JB & co. know that and are basically daring HHJP to do that because it would be a decent appellate issue. I believe Judge Perry is gonna hit them in their wallets, discouraging more of the same.

I'm not well schooled in the Florida RCP or discovery rules. I'm a little confused when you say "by law an expert will not be allowed to testify".

Because not only does Florida Rules of Criminal Procedures prohibit introduction of a witness OR evidence if not disclosed to the other side in a timely manner (Rule 3.220(n)(1)) it's generally not allowed in any jurisdiction. Each jurisdiction has different deadlines for this disclosure. At some point if JB and company want to continue to play this game of trial by ambush the Honorable Perry isn't going to allow the evidence or the expert to testify. But I have to agree with you I doubt Honorable Perry would do that. But you have to know that JB and Company are playing a DANGEROUS game of chicken. And it's putting someones life on the line.

 

[beach]

Because not only does Florida Rules of Criminal Procedures prohibit introduction of a witness OR evidence if not disclosed to the other side in a timely manner (Rule 3.220(n)(1)) it's generally not allowed in any jurisdiction. Each jurisdiction has different deadlines for this disclosure. At some point if JB and company want to continue to play this game of trial by ambush the Honorable Perry isn't going to allow the evidence or the expert to testify. But I have to agree with you I doubt Honorable Perry would do that. But you have to know that JB and Company are playing a DANGEROUS game of chicken. And it's putting someones life on the line.

BBM

ITA! We're on the same page. I'm familiar with Rule 3.220 I thought maybe there was something else akin to FL I was unaware of.

And heck yeah that is a very dangerous game of chicken they are playing with their client's life hanging in the balance. I understand that some people don't think HHJP is gonna really do anything re. sanctions, but I do, for the very reasons you stated. I think he is gonna hit them hard in their wallets to get their attention. The defense isn't just thumbing their nose at Ashton, they are basically flipping off Judge Perry, too. I think he is really pissed with them and don't believe he is gonna take anymore. He can't really afford to allow it to go on.

Let's face it - the defense experts don't have anything to help the defense. If they did, Baez would be throwing out the (non)reports like confetti at a New Year's Day parade. He would LOVE to have "reasonable doubt" plastered on billboards all over central FL.

I have done very little appellate work, so what I wonder is - how would it affect an appeal if something happened and an expert was not allowed to testify BUT his testimony would have done nothing to change the outcome anyway? IOW, if Dr. Spitz was forbidden (...assume he has been paid ), but all he would've been able to do was offer hypotheticals if he had testified because he had nothing else and could not refute Dr. G's findings, would that be a grounds to grant an appeal?

 

[drip~drop]

If he does just hear the six motions and then as usual says "Is there anything else?" - for the first time it will not be Baez jumping up and saying" well er um yes, judge, there is!"

He will just "zip it".

And somebody will need to come scrape me up off the floor.:innocent:

 

[JSR]

BBM

ITA! We're on the same page. I'm familiar with Rule 3.220 I thought maybe there was something else akin to FL I was unaware of.

And heck yeah that is a very dangerous game of chicken they are playing with their client's life hanging in the balance. I understand that some people don't think HHJP is gonna really do anything re. sanctions, but I do, for the very reasons you stated. I think he is gonna hit them hard in their wallets to get their attention. The defense isn't just thumbing their nose at Ashton, they are basically flipping off Judge Perry, too. I think he is really pissed with them and don't believe he is gonna take anymore. He can't really afford to allow it to go on.

Let's face it - the defense experts don't have anything to help the defense. If they did, Baez would be throwing out the (non)reports like confetti at a New Year's Day parade. He would LOVE to have "reasonable doubt" plastered on billboards all over central FL.

I have done very little appellate work, so what I wonder is - how would it affect an appeal if something happened and an expert was not allowed to testify BUT his testimony would have done nothing to change the outcome anyway? IOW, if Dr. Spitz was forbidden (...assume he has been paid ), but all he would've been able to do was offer hypotheticals if he had testified because he had nothing else and could not refute Dr. G's findings, would that be a grounds to grant an appeal?

That Beach is the million dollar question. It's all about how an appellate attorney could spin an argument. And if an Appeals Court Judge would buy that an omission of a particular expert, testimony or evidence prejudiced Casey and could have changed the outcome or at least change the dynamics of Casey's defense. The point is you don't even want these issues to even be available for a possible appeal.

If you recall in Peterson's trial the judge refused to allow his defense to bring in that boat to the trial and he housed it anyway down the street from the Courthouse (in some lot if I recall). What the hell that man was thinking is beyond me. In any event it backfired on him in a HUGE way instead of it reminding the public of the size of the boat (I also think he hoped the jury would see it as they came to the Courthouse) it ended up becoming a memorial. People called up local flower shops to have flowers delivered. That I'm sure will be an appellate issue. It all depends on how Scott's appellate attys spin that episode and historically the 9th Circuit has been crazy liberal so we'll have to see. Either way Scott Peterson will never leave jail, if he will remain on death row is up to debate but out here it's one in the same. California never executes.

Point is that it matters how the argument is stated and how liberal the appeals court that's hearing the argument is.

Added: Of course precedented law also helps. LOL. If other defendants have won on similar issues that also helps Casey. But someone like Honorable Perry would know to avoid any widely known legal flubs made by other local judges.

 

[JSR]

Interesting. http://www.ninthcircuit.org/judges/chief_judge/

Honorable Perry began his legal career in TEXAS!!!! haaaaa haaa. Yeah, it's going to be interesting to see what Honorable Perry does.

 

[JSR]

Hey Beach,

Is it ok if we get a thread to dump finds on Honorable Perry? It might give us an insight to how he rules. But I don't want to dump it in here and have it get all mixed in and lost.

 

[beach]

Interesting. http://www.ninthcircuit.org/judges/chief_judge/

Honorable Perry began his legal career in TEXAS!!!! haaaaa haaa. Yeah, it's going to be interesting to see what Honorable Perry does.

Yeah and got his bachelors and masters degrees at Tuskegee Univ. about 30 miles from me down here in the deep south. Unlike Cali, we don't have any problems carrying the DP down here. lol

 

[beach]

Hey Beach,

Is it ok if we get a thread to dump finds on Honorable Perry? It might give us an insight to how he rules. But I don't want to dump it in here and have it get all mixed in and lost.

Sure. When you open a thread at the bottom of the page it will give you a list of similar/like threads. Just make sure that one doesn't already exist and we aren't duplicating and all is good.

 

[nums24]

Sure. When you open a thread at the bottom of the page it will give you a list of similar/like threads. Just make sure that one doesn't already exist and we aren't duplicating and all is good.

I bumped the only open Judge Perry thread:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115873"]What is Your Opinion of Judge Perry Now? - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]



ETA - Here is the other thread related to HHJP:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102148&highlight=perry