**all things zfg lawsuit merged **

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Kentjbkent said:
Wouldn't that depend on which version of his testimony is the truth?

In his interview with OCSO in January, he stated that his contract with Jose began on July 29 and terminated on October 1st. He stated his contract with Casey began September 12th.

Today's testimony he stated that his contract with Jose began July 27 TO PRESENT. He stated his contract with Casey began "sometime in early Sept)
Click to expand...

Soooooooooooooo....... Ol' Dominic lies. Who does *not* lie in the 15-ring circus? <rhetorical, OK?>

Also of interest is that Ms. Tennis <snicker> keeps invoking the Holy Triumvirate of Cindy, George, and Conway. Conway did not present as their attorney until December 11.
 
Kentjbkent said:
But wouldn't this be where these mysterious contracts would come into play? (owed money)
Click to expand...

Kent: I ask the same.....why on earth were they not forced to produce them? Especially in light of the fact that Casey couldn't even nail down dates, etc.. What happens next? Does Casey provide copies to Mitnik and the Judge to ponder, and they all go back to court if (when) their hinkie meters go off?

Wish I woulda been a lawyer!

ETA: If I were Mitnik I would request the original docs so that I could carbon date them, along with the signatures.....
 
Wow the smoke and mirrors used to circumvent justice in this civil trial would make Chris Angel jealous. This hearing has seriously put a bad taste in my mouth. I feel sorry for all those that have been victimized by the Anthony's and their compatriots this case.
 
milliac said:
When she called DC to the stand, my jaw dropped to the floor. It was actually a brilliant move. Very interesting...strategically speaking.

Rather than risking the judge granting the motion for Mitnek to conduct the deposition in his office, she had him questioned in the courtroom. In the deposition, the attorney can voice her objection, but If I remember correctly, they have to answer the question. What she did today allowed the the judge to stop Mitnek's line of questioning that he would have gotten away with in the deposition.
Click to expand...

Judge is trying to protect the criminal trial.

While defendants are entitled to assert that right, there are consequences to the assertion of the Fifth Amendment in a civil action.

The Supreme Court has held that “the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them.” Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 318 (1976). “[A]s Mr. Justice Brandeis declared, speaking for a unanimous court in the Tod case, ‘Silence is often evidence of the most persuasive character.’” Id. at 319 (quoting United States ex rel. Bilokumsky v. Tod, 263 U.S. 149, 153-154 (1923)). “‘Failure to contest an assertion...is considered evidence of acquiescence...if it would have been natural under the circumstances to object to the assertion in question.’” Id. (quoting United States v. Hale, 422 U.S. 171, 176 (1975)).

In ''Baxter'', the state was entitled to an adverse inference against Palmigiano because of the evidence against him and his assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege.
 
tasylshari said:
In April, he complained to the bar that Baez had failed to pay for him for services rendered.
Click to expand...

Snipped. The FIRST class you take in law school is Contracts. The FIRST thing you learn in contracts, and in all of law school, is "A valid contract needs offer, acceptance, and consideration." Consideration is really the "bargain" - each person offers something of value to the other person. In a sale, the consideration is the money from one side, and the object from the other. And both parties agree they think, to them, what they are giving is pretty much equal to what they are getting.

When is JB going to learn you need to PAY THESE PEOPLE if you want your contracts to be valid and legally enforceable!

And I don't mean to burst LPs bubble, but JB giving Leonard $1 wouldn't make the contract valid. That's known as "illusory" consideration. Both parties know its really for free- LP wouldn't honestly value his services to JB at $1. (If anyone's interested, THE famous case about this is a father who wanted to give his daughter a farm - so he drew up a contract and "sold" the deed to her for $1. The court held the contract invalid, saying the land clearly wasn't worth $1 and the judges "knew" he really wanted to give it to her because he loved her. And they held "love and admiration" are not consideration. ... And then we wonder why lawyers/judges get bad raps!)
 
Kentjbkent said:
Wouldn't that depend on which version of his testimony is the truth?

In his interview with OCSO in January, he stated that his contract with Jose began on July 29 and terminated on October 1st. He stated his contract with Casey began September 12th.

Today's testimony he stated that his contract with Jose began July 27 TO PRESENT. He stated his contract with Casey began "sometime in early Sept)
Click to expand...

True!!! I guess like the contract with TP, LP, TM and, RD these legal documents are very fluid -- subject to change. :) Excuse the pun!
 
cyberborg said:
True!!! I guess like the contract with TP, LP, TM and, RD these legal documents are very fluid -- subject to change. :) Excuse the pun!
Click to expand...

AND, (ahem), NOT presented in a court of law in their original state.
 
bogeygal said:
Agree,

We didn't get a real answer from DC today about that.


But IIRC, didn't GA & CA try to investigate themselves? IIRC, they were looking into Caylee sighting's from different states across the country. They said they were also checking out leads for ZFG in and around US and other countries. I remember hearing that on "talk shows", Larry King, etc.

They were still saying at that time was they were looking for a live Caylee.

So where in the timeline did DC/psychic come in? I forget!
Click to expand...
Just saw your question...the psychic was supposedly on the phone with DC while he was searching in November...so she came into the picture before that.
 
Brini said:
It sounds like, instead of attending to the issues, he spent a lot of the hearing venting his ire at the media.
Click to expand...



In an act of quid pro quo, I can't help but hope one of the bolder reporters picks up on it. His "F" ranking really stands out just below Judge Strickland's "A" ranking. He hasn't made any friends with the press either.
 
Zenaida’s lawyers decided not to depose the Anthony's because they can get the information they need from other interviews. And Judge ruled that DC could not be deposed. I think they can get everything they need from interviews conducted by LE. re: The State got DC to admit this:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/5057192/Casey-Anthony-Dominic-Casey-Released-03-20-09
TAPED TRANSCRIPT OF MR. DOMINIC CASEY
INTERVIEW CONDUCTED BY SERGEANT JOHN ALLEN
CASE NUMBER - 08-74777
JANUARY 7, 2009

Page 73
lines 5 - 9 (bolded by me)

BC: Did you tell the Anthony's exactly what Ginnette told
you?
DC: I did not tell them all the details. I did not tell, uh....I
didn't tell all of the details that uhm, Ginnette told me. Uhm, I told them
I was, I went there. I did not find any remains. I did not see anything.
There was nothing there uh, that I observed. Now that's not to say that
there isn't, or wasn't.
 
okiedokietoo said:
Zenaida’s lawyers decided not to depose the Anthony's because they can get the information they need from other interviews. And Judge ruled that DC could not be deposed. I think they can get everything they need from interviews conducted by LE. re: The State got DC to admit this:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/5057192/Casey-Anthony-Dominic-Casey-Released-03-20-09
TAPED TRANSCRIPT OF MR. DOMINIC CASEY
INTERVIEW CONDUCTED BY SERGEANT JOHN ALLEN
CASE NUMBER - 08-74777
JANUARY 7, 2009

Page 73
lines 5 - 9 (bolded by me)

BC: Did you tell the Anthony's exactly what Ginnette told
you?
DC: I did not tell them all the details. I did not tell, uh....I
didn't tell all of the details that uhm, Ginnette told me. Uhm, I told them
I was, I went there. I did not find any remains. I did not see anything.
There was nothing there uh, that I observed. Now that's not to say that
there isn't, or wasn't.
Click to expand...

I'm not up to date on this dominic casey stuff. Is there a consensus that cindy sent him to the site or something? All I read in the depo was the nonsense about a psychic which is just laughable.
 
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79924"]http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79924[/ame]

go to the wftv link in the first post and then on page 9, third paragraph
 
Can someone refresh my memory of exactly what this psychic woman supposively told DC? (as far as location, etc)
 
Kentjbkent said:
Can someone refresh my memory of exactly what this psychic woman supposively told DC? (as far as location, etc)
Click to expand...

Kentjbkent, this is LE's interview with DC. In comparing this with Hoover's LE interview and Depo and then adding the other great info posted in this thread that DC has said. imo definately some big cya stuff going on.

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/18974273/detail.html
 
Mystic said:
Kentjbkent, this is LE's interview with DC. In comparing this with Hoover's LE interview and Depo and then adding the other great info posted in this thread that DC has said. imo definately some big cya stuff going on.

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/18974273/detail.html
Click to expand...


Thanks Mystic!!

I have never fallen for this psychic phone call BS but something struck me in rereading this interview.

If you are to believe this version of his story, this psychic supposively calls him and states she has a vision that Caylee's remains are in this area off Suburban (doesnt name specifically but sure gives very precise details...hoepspring, school, house, etc). Now, since this would be November, it is not a stretch that even the general public knows we are NOT searching for a decomposing body at this point, but the skeletal remains of an almost 3 year old.

So why did DC bring the "digging stick" and why is he poking it in the ground? Because he knows he is looking for a BAG that contains the skeletal remains along with other articles. This interview does NOT state that the psychic had "visions" of Caylee's remains inside some type of bag, etc.

No way DC expected that his digging stick might hit a bone of a toddler. That would be akin to looking for a needle in a haystack......with a digging stick!!

Did LE ever release statement as to verification of phone records that this call between psychic and DC ever really take place? She showed up on NG then disappeared to my knowledge. In fact, wasn't she supposed to get the cell phone records (hers) to provide to NG for a followup appearance but that never happened?
 
I do think that CA is the one who specifically sent DC out to that location to look for some type of bag that contained the remains (see my post above) but I think it may have been LEE who provided the information to CA. Lee was NOT under contract with DC (no privelege) but CA was!

Recall the jail video between LEE and KC and their manner of "backwards talking" where she was basically providing clues ("I feel she is close to home..."

Recall that LEE took it upon himself to play investigator/private eye (getting KC phone records, meeting with friends, etc)

Recall the videos of him accompanying KC on her "day passes" back in early September.

Recall the "high five" on September 8, 2008.

I think during those times while KC was out on bond, LEE was trying to get information from her to substantiate her "nanny claim" so he could "investigate" and prove a SODDI. I DON'T think KC admitted anything to him that would implicate her, but I do think she offered her "backwards clues". I also think LEE assured KC that he would "save" her this time too (high five). I don't think CA and KC had any conversations like this. There was NO way that KC was going to offer CA ANYTHING because in her mind, all this happened BECAUSE of CA!

Based on his version of "investigating", I think Lee figured out that Caylee may be resting at that location, but whatever KC said led him to believe that it wasn't just a dumped body, but a package. Since LEE did not have privelege with DC, I think he discussed it with CA and together (after KC back in jail)they figured that if THEY could find the remains FIRST, it would give the defense time to set up a theory based on what they found to implicate a SODDI. I do not think they would have destroyed, removed or tainted the remains. I also don't think they ever imagined that abundance of the physical evidence (tape, etc) that WAS found with Caylee would be there. I think they just expected to find a bag of bones with possibly Caylee belongings that could be a suggestive link of nanny by defense.

BUT...DC did not find the remains first. LE (Kronk) did. And the evidence linking back to KC is damning.... LEE failed KC. KC is pissed I imagine.

Which brings in his eulogy at Caylee's memorial service. This is the transcript from the NG episode on Feb 10, 2009.

LEE ANTHONY: This family is united, but this family is incomplete. I am incomplete. I`m broken. CMA -- CMA, each day, you continue to teach me about life and about the way it should be lived. Each day, you give me the ability to be strong or to be weak. It`s been so long since I`ve been able to see you or to hug you or to tell you how much you mean to me. CMA, I miss you! I love you. CMA, I am so proud of you! I hope you`re proud of me, too. I need you to know that I will never forget the promise I made to you. I will never forget.

I believe his comments WERE directed to KC (as CMA) and were his regret (hear tone of voice in video), apology (not succeeding), support, and promise that he WOULD find a way to "save" her.
 
I had really thought that DC was going to have to testify and that he was pretty much a scum bag for trying to avoid answering questions. But after seeing the hearing I have some sympathy for him. Here is a Private Investigator that either has a signed agreement or at least believes he has a verbal agreement with the As and JB and KC. If he testifies the As, JB and KC may sue him for breach of contract; By forcing Morgan and Morgan to bring him in front of a judge he takes the decision out of his hands and firmly places it in the hands of a judge. If he is forced to testify, not his fault. Looks like he hung his hat on one of the best lawyers in this group of sharks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 113 more.
Total: 1,345 (members: 114, guests: 1,231)

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
1,231
Total visitors
1,345
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,285
Messages
18,093,906
Members
230,841
Latest member
FastRayne
Back
Top