2011.06.25 Sidebar Thread (Trial Day Twenty-eight)

[carole]

Wonder if LA was tested re: paternity or if it's just more fantasy

Yes, Lee and George were both tested, neither is Caylee's father. It's somewhere in one of the document dumps.

 

[Liz]

On America's News HQ, on Fox News, they are supposed to discuss the latest with Judge Alex and their panel of 'legal experts'. Not sure exactly when, but sometime during the hour.

 

[katydid23]

You're correct. It was definitely Caylee. No link.

No. Someone posted that pic of Caylee in another thread. She had a bandanna on but a different dress, different print. And she was younger and smaller.

 

[GiantPickle]

The only thing I can offer to this conversation is HHJP said we would be back in session at 830 instead of his usual 9am. That seemed like we will have a morning showdown.

 

[Liz]

Okay Fox News is covering it NOW.

 

[Pondering Mind]

No. Someone posted that pic of Caylee in another thread. She had a bandanna on but a different dress, different print. And she was younger and smaller.

I believe that it is her..just not sure that she was the one that was opening or closing that door. Can't tell you how many doors I've *started* to open or drinks I've started to open..candy..toys, etc for my grandchildren..only to let them feel like they did..

 

[ZsaZsa]

Then why would the SA be left out of so much of the time in the judges chambers?

Maybe the good Judge just gave JB a serious azz kicking in private then said You know what it's Saturday and I've dealt with this same BS 5 days in a row and we are out of here.... that's what I'd do anyway! :floorlaugh:

When he came out he said something to the effect 'some things never change' so I really suspect that's what it was.
Plus the usual utter chaos behind the scenes of the defense team.

 

[passionflower]

ICA confess? then what would actions be?
I do not think ICA ever will tell any truth...........
just putting a comment out there.
Would that be mostly between DT, ICA and HHJBP???

 

[LadyL]

Why did CA tell a police officer of KC stealing her credit card for in the first place? I thought CA originally called 911 and said different things just to get them to the house before she finally called and said Caylee was missing. So, why did CA tell the police officer that KC stole her credit card once he got there if she only said that just to get him there? Did I miss something?

maybe to try & force her hand - KC's not telling where Caylee is and Cindy's had it with her lies but she's not exactly thinking clearly either ... she's probably hysterical & the situation is beyond her control and she just needs help, fast & hopes that if they arrest KC, she'll blurt out where Caylee is

 

[Pondering Mind]

Livestream from HLN..

http://www.live-news-stream.com/hln-live-stream-feed/

 

[mysticrose]

No wonder I could not find the trial thread, JB manage to shut court down again ? Those poor juror's must be fuming.....

 

[Lacyanna]

For all those who were looking for this one-

HILARIOUS!!

 

[flipflop53]

Sorry if this has been posted already...at 9.12 of court proceeding, it looks as if JB and CM are in a disagreement about something.

http://www.wftv.com/video/28355927/index.html

 

[JusticeSeeker1960]

I would be surprised if she was. I was not completely pleased with LDB's cross. I felt she omitted things. Someone stated that they could just recall CA during rebuttal but that is not the way to impeach someone's testimony or to point out how incredible that testimony is. She should have done that on cross. The fact that she didn't either means she was unprepared or she felt what she did was enough. (I did not, but it's not my case and so far they have done an amazing job).

In cross, you can ask leading questions that allow you to control the message you want the jury to have. That is not the case in a direct examination, which would be what would happen if the state called CA during rebuttal. They would not be able to ask her leading questions. That gives CA much more control over her answers and the message. So, IMO, it is a mistake to wait for rebuttal and the state would not do so unless they realized they screwed up during cross or unless they received new info.

Instead, they would present other evidence/testimony, to show that CA was not being truthful.

But, it is a delicate balance because she was a witness for the state and they don't want to make it seem like she is a total liar or the jury might discount ALL of her testimony, including all of the stuff about how casey lied.

I wasn't either! But, I feel she has to really balance out her actions when concerning CA, not only because she was one of the prosecutions biggest witnesses but also "the greiving grandma" & if the jury feels like she's "beating up on granny", that could sway them possibly...ya never know how a jury will react.

 

[Pondering Mind]

No wonder I could not find the trial thread, JB manage to shut court down again ? Those poor juror's must be fuming.....

jurors never made it in if you can believe that..

 

[ZsaZsa]

I could not get to the remote fast enough earlier to turn LKB off, and heard her say "It's not a plea deal, have a look at jail records, did JB spend 3 hrs in her cell with her last night- if not then there's no plea- they came ready for trial this morning and something else has happened".
For a change I actually agreed with her.:innocent:

 

[SyraKelly]

Will the DT claim that Rodriguez did not disclose to them that he is prohibited from testifying by the DOD and are asking for a mistrial because they need his testimony to provide a fair defense for their client? Would this call for a Brady Motion? As JB claimed loudly yesterday..."That's just it judge, we still don't know." Meaning the DT supposedly does not have confirmed knowledge as to whether Rodriguez can or cannot testify. (imo, they know he can't but are playing dumb to try to wrangle a mistrial opportunity)

A Brady motion would be something the SA did not disclose to the DT and are entitled to,that would be in favor of ICA, and can be used to impeach SA witness and because the SA did not disclose it..ICA is being deprived a fair trail
I hope that answers your question.

 

[IRule254]

Maybe this is where ICA got the idea of making Caylee sleep with chloroform so she could party and not have babysitter issues or explain to Cindy her comings and goings.

IMO, I think CA did make the chloroform searches and I think she was doing so because CAYLEE was acting excessively sleepy, not the dogs. I think she suspected something.

 

[RR0004]

Had to bit of work/work and then back to reading 15 pages to try to catch up and actually fell asleep at my desk with my hand on the mouse - not that your comments aren't scintillating but I have now twice nodded off - once in the middle of this post - so after 4.5 hours sleep last night again - I think I will have a nap and come back in an hour to find out what you have sleuthed and read about what actually happened in there this morning. I mean I watched what happened, but I expect the real reason for it all when i get back peeps!

My head is spinning...you would think someone in the press would have an inkling. I'm wondering if it doesn't perhaps have something to do with JP. You don't think the DT would dare attempt to have another judge recused, do you?

 

[faefrost]

Will the DT claim that Rodriguez did not disclose to them that he is prohibited from testifying by the DOD and are asking for a mistrial because they need his testimony to provide a fair defense for their client? Would this call for a Brady Motion? As JB claimed loudly yesterday..."That's just it judge, we still don't know." Meaning the DT supposedly does not have confirmed knowledge as to whether Rodriguez can or cannot testify. (imo, they know he can't but are playing dumb to try to wrangle a mistrial opportunity) Would Brady here apply to Rodriguez being a DOD employee who did not disclose that he cannot legally testify to the DT?)

But he can "legally" testify. The DT can subpoena him. They can force him to the stand. It will however cost Dr. Rodriguez his Defense Department day job. All JA did was pass along a phone call from the Department of Defense. The decision and the option to release the witness from testifying was the DT's.