2011.06.25 Sidebar Thread (Trial Day Twenty-eight)

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
sleutherontheside said:
She didn't. That was a fake motion filed by a jail inmate in another state. It slipped into the docket and was the catalyst for HHJP to bar any motions filed by anyone except counsel on the record.
Click to expand...

Oh, thanks! I just saw the document and was a bit surprised!
 
TotallyObsessed said:
BUT a judge does not have to grant a "motion to withdraw as counsel"....they can make them stick it out to the end. So I don't think it is CM wanting to withdraw.

I think more along the lines of a strategic "motion to have counsel removed" filed by little miss anthony.
Click to expand...

Why would CM want to withdraw at this late date. The trial is almost over.
 
Why do I have the feeling WS is like "Hotel California" for me and a lot of other posters??? :great: :floorlaugh: :great:
 
Do you think it's possible that the other legal matter that prompted an extended recess on Saturday has to do with JB not paying the taxes owed on the money he was holding in trust for ICA? Didn't TM get disbarred for that?
 
BigFatMommyDog said:
First of all THANK YOU!!!!

BBM - I think this is probably the most likely scenario given the ex parte meeting and the seal. It may even go more toward some of the atty's and Discovery - changing or re-gearing testimony to fit recent developments in the trial - perhaps there was some kind of unauthorized communication. That and a untruthful witness who's untruthful testimony was known to the DT could really damage any and all members of the DT in serious and long-term ways. He's probably protecting himself, and may well be protecting the youngsters WS LF and MM :twocents:
Click to expand...

Sorry to ask, but I was unable to tune in to the proceedings yesterday-only knew through twitter that court was adjourned for the day after a lot of "backroom" meetings and that ICA had been in and out of the courtroom. My question is who had the "ex-parte" meeting with the judge? TIA-I'm confused about this particular issue.
 
KathrynL said:
Sorry to ask, but I was unable to tune in to the proceedings yesterday-only knew through twitter that court was adjourned for the day after a lot of "backroom" meetings and that ICA had been in and out of the courtroom. My question is who had the "ex-parte" meeting with the judge? TIA-I'm confused about this particular issue.
Click to expand...

The DT and ICA
 
From MSNBC.

NeJame thinks Casey will take the stand.

"The reality of it is, of course, the defendant in America does not have to take the stand and the burden is entirely, as it should be, on the State. However, when you come in with such a *powerful* statement that you heard in this opening statement; well you know, guttural sounds coming out of Jose Baez about what HE was going to prove and what they were going to show. That doesn't go forgotten by the jury. And so they've almost in some ways by that boisterous opening statement, set themselves up where they've reversed the burden and now they have to come forward.

Now what's interesting is you've heard nothing in their case so far about any inappropriate sexual activity as it relates to sexual battery or matters such as that. You've not heard any of the promises that they've made come out. And what I find particularly telling - absent from the defense witness list - are any health care professionals as far as psychiatrists or otherwise, to, in fact, prove, what, in fact, they alleged. So, how do you do that? There can only be one way they can do that. And that is to put her on the stand. How else do you tell that story?"

Do you think they will put Casey on the stand?

"Well, I think they planned to put her on the stand. In light of the ebbs and flow of this case, who knows anything? This has been my opinion, this has been such a disjointed... uh... defense - I'll just leave it at that. But the reality of it is, clearly they had to anticipate putting her on the stand. Because how else do you prove what they claimed without her telling the story? There's no other way to do it."
 
suzihawk said:
From MSNBC.

NeJame thinks Casey will take the stand.

"The reality of it is, of course, the defendant in America does not have to take the stand and the burden is entirely, as it should be, on the State. However, when you come in with such a *powerful* statement that you heard in this opening statement; well you know, guttural sounds coming out of Jose Baez about what HE was going to prove and what they were going to show. That doesn't go forgotten by the jury. And so they've almost in some ways by that boisterous opening statement, set themselves up where they've reversed the burden and now they have to come forward.

Now what's interesting is you've heard nothing in their case so far about any inappropriate sexual activity as it relates to sexual battery or matters such as that. You've not heard any of the promises that they've made come out. And what I find particularly telling - absent from the defense witness list - are any health care professionals as far as psychiatrists or otherwise, to, in fact, prove, what, in fact, they alleged. So, how do you do that? There can only be one way they can do that. And that is to put her on the stand. How else do you tell that story?

Do you think they will put Casey on the stand?

"Well, I think they planned to put her on the stand. In light of the ebbs and flow of this case, who knows anything? This has been my opinion, this has been such a disjointed... uh... defense - I'll just leave it at that. But the reality of it is, clearly they had to anticipate putting her on the stand. Because how else do you prove what they claimed without her telling the story? There's no other way to do it."
Click to expand...

It's like NeJame and I are sharing a brain!
 
wandering said:
The explanation is in Bill Schaeffer's analysis at WFTV.com. I posted this yesterday. I can't believe you all are still trying to figure it out.
:banghead:
Click to expand...

If a day off was given for both teams to get their s$*% together or whatever...why would the information be sealed? And why would the DT seemingly have been alone with the judge for some period of time? I don't get it...
 
suzihawk said:
From MSNBC.

NeJame thinks Casey will take the stand.

"The reality of it is, of course, the defendant in America does not have to take the stand and the burden is entirely, as it should be, on the State. However, when you come in with such a *powerful* statement that you heard in this opening statement; well you know, guttural sounds coming out of Jose Baez about what HE was going to prove and what they were going to show. That doesn't go forgotten by the jury. And so they've almost in some ways by that boisterous opening statement, set themselves up where they've reversed the burden and now they have to come forward.

Now what's interesting is you've heard nothing in their case so far about any inappropriate sexual activity as it relates to sexual battery or matters such as that. You've not heard any of the promises that they've made come out. And what I find particularly telling - absent from the defense witness list - are any health care professionals as far as psychiatrists or otherwise, to, in fact, prove, what, in fact, they alleged. So, how do you do that? There can only be one way they can do that. And that is to put her on the stand. How else do you tell that story?

Do you think they will put Casey on the stand?

"Well, I think they planned to put her on the stand. In light of the ebbs and flow of this case, who knows anything? This has been my opinion, this has been such a disjointed... uh... defense - I'll just leave it at that. But the reality of it is, clearly they had to anticipate putting her on the stand. Because how else do you prove what they claimed without her telling the story? There's no other way to do it."
Click to expand...


Not looking forward to that (KC taking the stand) having watched her performances during her police questioning and in the court. Not at all looking forward to her verbal tsunami and endless preening & expectation that all she utters should be accepted as the truth, the whole truth and nothing but ...
 
I wish Cindy was asked where Caylee was when she was home on the 17th-- as a matter of fact, I wish the prosecutors would ask that as often as Baez references a chemist. I want to hear more Zanny, it would lend credence to the fact that KC did "something" to Caylee on a regular basis that would equate to aggravated child abuse. jmo
 
I agree with Nejame's analysis except for the part about the DT having planned to put ICA on the stand. First of all, I don't see much evidence to support the DT ever planning much of anything. But that's just my opinion. This has been a last-minute, fly by the seat of your pants defense from the jump, IMO.

Secondly, I think the DT was hoping and praying that Tony Lazzaro was going to provide testimony about the alleged abuse by George and Lee, but the best he could offer in his proffer was a weak story about Lee unsuccessfully "trying" to "feel up" ICA.

I think they then hoped Lee would give up the ghost and cop to abuse by himself or by his father, but that didn't happen when Lee was on the stand. Lee is a wild card, though, in my mind, so he could take the stand again and give Baez what he wants, but it's hard to say. And time is running out now. I don't know if ICA will take the stand, but if she does, it will not be a well-thought out or planned event in my opinion.
 
Well, I hope that what some have reported Geraldo to have said about Jose telling him it was no big deal and court will carry on Monday as if nothing had happened is not true...can't imagine not knowing what this was all about, after 48 hours of head-scratching, speculating, guessing and throwing stuff at the wall...
 
John Zaffis is on a show on the syfy channel that I watch. His resemblance to Bill sheaffer is amazing, in my opinion. Hope I have done this correctly and you can see it.

twins.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 149 more.
Total: 2,945 (members: 150, guests: 2,795)

Online statistics

Members online
150
Guests online
2,795
Total visitors
2,945
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,617
Messages
18,159,526
Members
231,787
Latest member
SapphireGem
Back
Top