costalpilot
Active Member
well THIS particular part of her has turned rabid against the dt
making her currently palatable
2011.06.20 Sidebar Thread (Trial Day Twenty-three)
- Thread starter beach
- Start date
New Posts
-
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #190- Latest: girlhasnoname
-
- Status
well THIS particular part of her has turned rabid against the dt
making her currently palatable
costalpilot
Active Member
thanks to STEADFAST for publishing this Baez quote, which, once one reads it, is close to laughable, and isn't only because of his foul intent:
BAEZ: I specifically noticed that Mr Ashton was intentionally omitting -- or may omit, I should say -- to prevent himself from taking these depositions. And I brought it up at a status hearing, and I warned the court that this may be an issue later on because the state is attempting to use this both as a sword and a shield.
We did not intentionally look at this order and say, "We're going to disobey it." Just the mere thought of that disturbs me greatly. And it disturbs me that anyone would either (a) make the accusation or (b) even assume it to be true. And I say that because I have labored on this cause daily, nightly. And it was made clear by the court to me that this court intended on issuing orders and enforcing them if need be. I think it is a severest due-process violation to try and limit our testimony, limit our presentation of case because a prosecuter decides on his own, without assistance or acknowledgement from the court, to omit his professional responsibility and to omit his duty to carry out and utilize those tools which are afforded to him under the rules of discovery and then attempt to use that as some form of sanction. It's not bad enough that he wants to omit these responsibilities in the effort to take a human life; he wants to go after her lawyer, too.
you really can't make something like this up. it reads like a ninth graders weak attempt at court house fiction writing.
BAEZ: I specifically noticed that Mr Ashton was intentionally omitting -- or may omit, I should say -- to prevent himself from taking these depositions. And I brought it up at a status hearing, and I warned the court that this may be an issue later on because the state is attempting to use this both as a sword and a shield.
We did not intentionally look at this order and say, "We're going to disobey it." Just the mere thought of that disturbs me greatly. And it disturbs me that anyone would either (a) make the accusation or (b) even assume it to be true. And I say that because I have labored on this cause daily, nightly. And it was made clear by the court to me that this court intended on issuing orders and enforcing them if need be. I think it is a severest due-process violation to try and limit our testimony, limit our presentation of case because a prosecuter decides on his own, without assistance or acknowledgement from the court, to omit his professional responsibility and to omit his duty to carry out and utilize those tools which are afforded to him under the rules of discovery and then attempt to use that as some form of sanction. It's not bad enough that he wants to omit these responsibilities in the effort to take a human life; he wants to go after her lawyer, too.
you really can't make something like this up. it reads like a ninth graders weak attempt at court house fiction writing.
katydid23
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 67,442
- Reaction score
- 233,910
"...It's not bad enough that he wants to omit these responsibilities in the effort to take a human life; he wants to go after her lawyer, too."
CHECK THIS OUT. Look at the order of importance. The way he has worded this, his being
sanctioned by the court is MORE SERIOUS than Casey facing the Death Penalty.
CHECK THIS OUT. Look at the order of importance. The way he has worded this, his being
sanctioned by the court is MORE SERIOUS than Casey facing the Death Penalty.
- Status