2011.06.20 Sidebar Thread (Trial Day Twenty-three)

[kant]

Hi TxLady2!!

Feel better soon!

Kisses!

:blowkiss: :blowkiss:




.

 

[Celt1997]

Why would the names of the jurors cause a mistrial? I don't want their names released because I think that should be their own choice once this trial is over, but if it doesn't directly effect this trial I don't see how it could cause a mistrial? They are all sequestered and away from all media reports about this case.

I believe a juror's name being in the media can be immediate grounds for a mistrial. There have been cases in the past where a juror was named during deliberations as being the "holdout" juror, and they, subsequently received threatening letters. It was because of these letters that a mistrial was granted, especially since, in some cases, they were the only ones "hanging" the jury.

Since this is during the trial, I'm guessing that the "named" juror could just be dismissed, but I don't know.

 

[MsFacetious]

They are making a bigger deal of this then it really is.

So he doesnt know them ,he goes to court and says that. It is over then.

Instead he gets a lawyer? yeah okay.

A guy who was convicted of kidnapping, who is still on parole, should simply "go to court" in a potential kidnapping case, without a lawyer?

That would be insane.

He had a defense investigator show up on his doorstep in a potential kidnapping case.

Translation: The defense wouldn't be here if they weren't going to try and pin this kidnapping on me.

He didn't call a lawyer, he called the cops on the defense investigator.

He called a lawyer because he didn't know how to get rid of the defense.

The media has been showing his picture and name... saying that he is associated with the Anthony family. Speculating about if he may have been hired to kidnap Caylee, hired to dispose of the body, consulted for advice.. etc.


I am guessing he didn't want to have to take time off work whenever the defense felt like it, in order to appear in court. Or, several days... if he went in and then wasn't called, or court got delayed.

Given the other things the defense has done... this certainly appears to be a knowingly sleazy move. All they had to do was find out when he got his phone number or look up who had the number in 2008. They didn't do that. Now that they know, we haven't heard anyone say they decided not to use him.

I would be concerned too if I was him. This defense team has no qualms about taking down the defendants entire family... why would ruining the life of a convicted felon bother them?

 

[magnolia]

I am certain I have read something of her's - and I have to think it was a depo

She was deposed via Skype. I remember reading the transcript.

 

[PMLsmom]

Only on pg. 13 of this thread,but...anyone think JB went to the pokey for the night?

 

[mitzi]

http://twitpic.com/5ed1u6

OS reporter @tonycolarossi and @KBelichWFTV tries to get comment from attorney Jose Baez after court cancelled.

Right...I had his name spelled wrong, but this reporter with some grey in his hair, (was behind Jose when he was at the podium), is not Attorney, Mr. Jay, but IS Anthony Colarossi.

Thanks for the pic.

 

[Wishbone]

She was deposed via Skype. I remember reading the transcript.

If she is here, I wonder who paid for her to come to this country from Lapland or wherever it is........

 

[katydid23]

Her body was so tiny it didn't need to be made smaller to fit in a bag. I'm coming around to thinking let these idiots talk all they want. As long as they keep making stupid statements like Dr. Baden just did, they are only helping prove the Defense has no case.

Dr. Baden is clueless, and also is working for his wife, and the DT.

Over the weekend he said that Dr. G should have opened the skull because ' 'there could be fractures only seen on the interior of the cranium. '

REALLY? Because both of the autopsy reports described the skull as having 'eggshell' like width dimensions. Is it really possible that there would be a skull fracture that could be visible only on one side of a skull as wafer thin as an eggshell? I highly doubt it.

 

[Jackson44]

I may have missed this being said by someone else, if so sorry. I think this morning JP went back to dismiss the jury for the day and as before he took the court reporter. I think JP probably asked the lawyers if they wanted him to bring them out and do it in open court, but they declined so he did it himself. I would think he would want to let them know why they weren't having court for the day.

 

[Etilema]

Interesting that you mention that Caylee would have had friends...just last week, upon viewing all the photos I could find of Caylee, I saw nary a single picture of her with any other children. That, in an of itself, is heart breaking.

Just all those imaginary friends like Annabelle and Zachary. :-(

 

[Maat99]

This is just a GUESS.....

But saw a youtube video of legal commentary this morning and the reporter asked him about the unexpected comment by HHJP in court about having just dealt with an issue "concerning Rules of Sequestration"....
The legal commentor (can't recall who) said since it involved Rules of Seq., it probably did NOT involve an actual juror but most likely a witness....

I am now wondering if the "issue" involved "someone" possibly revealing a juror's name...and HHJP nipped it in the bud by this court order???

BBM. Here is the definition of Rule of Sequestration:

"The rule of sequestration is an order by the court where witnessess who will be testifying in a trial regarding his/her own knowledge of the facts in the case shall stay outside of the courtroom and shall not speak with eachother so that their testimony cannot be influenced by the testimony of prior witnesses. "

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

If she is here, I wonder who paid for her to come to this country from Lapland or wherever it is........

She's a US based person - I think the Eikenbooms are from the Netherlands

 

[TxLady2]

if I were a juror on this case, I would do this, also. The reason I would is because I find the State's case compelling. I find it matter-of-fact, with little augmentation beyond those facts.

I would consider how Mr Baez and Mr Mason have chosen to present the witnesses testimonies, and weigh that against the precision with which each of them described what they do and how they do it.

I'd take notes, because something Mr Baez, et al is saying doesn't make sense. If there's a drowning, something's not registering right and I want to follow his trail.

ALL defense lawyers do anything they can in order to get their client off. Most of them don't even want to know whether their client is guilty or not, but this is not that much different than any other trial, except that Baez is clearly not equipped to handle such a high-profile case and he should have bowed out a long time ago. However, I would imagine there have been just as many inexperienced and totally clueless lawyers taking on murder cases before, he certainly is not the only one, nor will he be the last.
As for the taking notes, I have no idea, but one reason could be so that they can compare the inconsistencies between the facts as the state has laid them out with Baez's witness statements and testimony, once they get into deliberation.
I do have a question, though, and no offense intended at all. If most of us here are dead set on Casey being convicted, why are we complaining about Baez? It takes a GOOD lawyer to get a person acquitted, and clearly, he is not that. So why not just sit back and enjoy the sideshow because he is putting nails in her coffin every time he steps up to speak.

 

[sorrell skye]

I don't find not seeing pictures of Caylee with other children strange. She wasn't even 3 years old yet and not in preschool or daycare. She didn't have any first cousins and I don't know if she had any young distant cousins.

What I find extremely disturbing is the fact that ICA carted her daughter around from strange man's apartment to strange man's apartment and had her sweet toddler sleeping in strange men's beds on a regular basis.

I think the possibility of Caylee not having playmates her age is one of the least disturbing aspects of the whole case.

JMO

bbm

ITA.

When I heard that Caylee slept in the same bed with KC & RM, I went WTH??!! Not okay not okay not okay!

If nothing else, it illustrates (to me, at least) that KC was oblivious concerning her daughter's well-being, and it illustrates KC's immaturity and inability to make appropriate choices when faced with priorities.

A man one has known for only a few short weeks is still a stranger, IMO. A child DOES NOT belong in the same bed with one's sex partner fling. I don't care which side of the bed the child is sleeping on. Not okay!

 

[TxLady2]

Hope you are feeling well soon. JB got up in court this morning and said there was a problem with depositions (not all done), then he blamed the state, then he said his next witness was 'on the way' then he said he had to 'pick them up' then the court gave a dressing down - worth watching - then court was in recess till 10 30 AM, then JB had NO witnesses for the day so the Judge recessed for the entire day.

Lawyers in court at 8 30 AM tomorrow morning for court at 9AM - be sure to watch JB with the Judge this am.

Sure I missed things other posters will fill in. :banghead:

Thanks so much. So I didn't miss anything. Some more of Jose's B.S., I presume. Wow. I'm so underwhelmed.

 

[BritsKate]

I think it is good to hear both sides. You never know how each individual juror will interpret the testimony and evidence. That is the whole point of a trial, to hear both sides. In this case, it is very likely that the defendant is guilty, but there have been cases of innocent people sent to prison and even executed. This is after their "fair trial". I am sure the prosecution presented evidence in those trials also, but the jury got it wrong, or maybe assumed they were guilty and did not weigh the evidence. I would like to say have come a long way since the Salem Witch trials but I am starting to believe not much progress has been made. Even Casey has the right to her day in court and an impartial jury. No one knows what really happened, we can all speculate, even the prosecution is speculating. No, I am not pro-Casey but I think we have to give the defense their chance and not bash every single move they make. As we can see, the jury does not hear both sides of the story, only what each side wants them to hear. It is actually a staged production. Just like JP says every evening "this concludes our presentation for today"..sounds more like entertainment than a serious trial.

Respectfully, I am not on the jury and do not have to remain objective. I think Casey is guilty of first degree murder and I believe the evidence supports that. However...I do most certainly want Casey Anthony to have a fair trial. I want there to be no doubt for the court of appeals.

In my world a fair trial includes a competent, experienced attorney who is looking out for their client's best interest. Had Jose Baez ever considered Miss Anthony's best interests there would likely not be a defence to criticise. If Jose Baez had his client's interest at the forefront of his mind we would be seeing more from his much experienced co-counsel. Had Jose Baez ever held Miss Anthony's welfare above his quest for fame he would never have entertained the notion of the media circuit, he would not have gone on a fishing expedition for TES searchers, he would not have sought to crucify innocent people in defence of his client or brokered a deal to pay himself handsomely.

Critiques of his lack of respect, experience, intellect, and humanity are more than well earned in my opinion.

 

[Mohabi]

ALL defense lawyers do anything they can in order to get their client off. Most of them don't even want to know whether their client is guilty or not, but this is not that much different than any other trial, except that Baez is clearly not equipped to handle such a high-profile case and he should have bowed out a long time ago. However, I would imagine there have been just as many inexperienced and totally clueless lawyers taking on murder cases before, he certainly is not the only one, nor will he be the last.
As for the taking notes, I have no idea, but one reason could be so that they can compare the inconsistencies between the facts as the state has laid them out with Baez's witness statements and testimony, once they get into deliberation.
I do have a question, though, and no offense intended at all. If most of us here are dead set on Casey being convicted, why are we complaining about Baez? It takes a GOOD lawyer to get a person acquitted, and clearly, he is not that. So why not just sit back and enjoy the sideshow because he is putting nails in her coffin every time he steps up to speak.

Because we are afraid that JB is intentionally pushing HHJP against the wall in order to force him to exclude a witness' testimony and thereby opening the door for a mistrial.

 

[KMouse]

Several TH's also noted that the man had not been in trouble since that time. I hope that he is not ruined by this unethical notoriety.

At the very least his background is now on national TV.
That would do some ruining I would think.

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

ALL defense lawyers do anything they can in order to get their client off. Most of them don't even want to know whether their client is guilty or not, but this is not that much different than any other trial, except that Baez is clearly not equipped to handle such a high-profile case and he should have bowed out a long time ago. However, I would imagine there have been just as many inexperienced and totally clueless lawyers taking on murder cases before, he certainly is not the only one, nor will he be the last.
As for the taking notes, I have no idea, but one reason could be so that they can compare the inconsistencies between the facts as the state has laid them out with Baez's witness statements and testimony, once they get into deliberation.
I do have a question, though, and no offense intended at all. If most of us here are dead set on Casey being convicted, why are we complaining about Baez? It takes a GOOD lawyer to get a person acquitted, and clearly, he is not that. So why not just sit back and enjoy the sideshow because he is putting nails in her coffin every time he steps up to speak.

I hear you and respect - What I think we've all developed from three years of the JBs schtick is a healthy sense of paranoia (and let's face it, we're blowing off some steam.)

What concerns me is not that he's not mounting a vigorous defense, but rather that he is trying to subvert the rules of law in order to gain a mistrial, and/or have statutorily invalid evidence entered into the record. He's kind of got a little hostage situation going on here.

 

[TxLady2]

I hope I'm not making light of a serious situation, but could I have just a little bit of that "woozy" you have? Sure would appreciate it after Saturday and this morning!

Sure. Let me put you in touch with the anesthesiologist and the doctor who did the procedure. It's not really all that much fun though.