Attorney Files Motion To Block Testing

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Throw a guradian ad litem in their before-hand and they get cut off alot sooner. Sorry for the broken record on that, but alright already..
 
Amity said:
Tracy1,

Since the beginning of this thing my family, friends and a few others have told me I had an obsession about wanting to know the identity of Caylee's Bio Father.

To me it's not an obsession...it's a link, something, somehow, to a lot of what's going on.
Not sure how exactly, I just know in my gut there is something there where the Bio Father is concerned.
Way too much secrecy, way too many conflicting stories about BioDad dead, bioDad in the service, bioDad....well, you get my point. Something's amiss.
Click to expand...

Amity...the paternity has had me pretty hung up since the very beginning. From the get-go, most WS'ers did not think it mattered. Well, many of them thought it was just related to kc's lies. But it has always bothered me. I am so hoping that is part of the testing. Seems like it could be.
 
EvaInCA said:
I was thinking the same thing. Isn't the forensic testing of the samples and the evidence pertaining to a charge or charges that haven't been filed?

So in a sense, Baez wants to stop any further testing for independant testing, or for whatever reason (this is from the wesh.com site):

Anthony was arrested on charges of child neglect the following day. Anthony has since been released on $500,000 bond and is under home confinement.

Anthony’s defense attorney, Jose Baez, filed a motion requesting that the state’s forensic evidence be preserved.
The motion asks a judge to, "Halt the handling and analysis of any and all forensic evidence relative to the above referenced case."

So the above referenced case is the child neglect?
Click to expand...

They discussed this on NG tonight. JB is trying to force the hand of LE to a speedy trial, and the LE can take their sweet time until Nov to build a case. This was his chess piece and a bad move, all attorneys agreed. By this move he is acknowleding that murder is in the cards for KC. He is trying his hand at pressing for LE to move, even though they are certainly allowed to keep piling evidence for a murder case. Of course, I'm not attorney but this is what I gathered from the attorneys on NG.
 
okok said:
Like I said LE does not have a case...she is going to be charged with child neglect and be free and rich...and famous...I bet we see here on TV as a guest sometimes..
Click to expand...

Sure...on "Lock-up"! LOL!
 
Maybe JosE is saying that, if a body is found, he doesn't want any testing on it? Clever. lol
 
Still lost on this issue. Basically... Can a defense attorney just waltz into the middle of any old investigation that LE is doing, and start filing motions, even when that defense attorney's client is not a party in that case yet (i.e. no charges have been filed)???

To put it another way: If I know the police are conducting an investigation of some kind, and I think they might suspect me of the crime, can I just send my attorney down to the courthouse to start filing motions and making demands on the investigation?
 
IBegg2Differ said:
Still lost on this issue. Basically... Can a defense attorney just waltz into the middle of any old investigation that LE is doing, and start filing motions, even when that defense attorney's client is not a party in that case yet (i.e. no charges have been filed)???

To put it another way: If I know the police are conducting an investigation of some kind, and I think they might suspect me of the crime, can I just send my attorney down to the courthouse to start filing motions and making demands on the investigation?
Click to expand...

I don't know actually but from what I know they will laugh at this motion.
If you ask me Jose is making her client look guiltier and guiltier by day.

First wanting an immunity deal, then questioning the cadaver dogs, and now questioning forensics
 
I would just love to here at some time in that hearing either the judge or prosecuter say "No way jose!" Sorry I couldn't resist!
 
Awesome find Boogie! So glad you began this thread.

I'd like to hear from our WS legal eagles if this seems to be an excessive defense motion request?

I can see that defense might rightfully have some input as to accepted testing methods, but to have someone from the defense team view each test? C'mon now. He'd have to have a different expert observe each different type of test (more donation $ down the tubes.)

And then one wonders if those same observers would be the same ones to testify for the defense at trial.

And, pardon me, but WTH is 'fair way of determining which evidence can be tested... '

Isn't that part of our legal process? LE does the testing, prosecutors submit it as evidence FOR trial, and THEN the judge rules on admissibility? Am I missing something? How come defense wants to determine in advance what can be tested? HUH?

He is sooooo trying to get the hair thrown out. Probably more, but he is going after the hair, for sure.

Makes me so angry, but if the legal folk around here could explain, that would be appreciated.

Time for a drink, I think.
 
boogiebear said:
FROM THE SEPT. 11 EDITION OF THE ORLANDO SENTINEL:

Casey Anthony's attorney filed papers requesting that the state stop testing and handling forensic evidence until the court rules on how the testing will proceed.

Authorities collected hair, dirt and stain samples from the back of Anthony's car, which was towed from an Amscot check-cashing business June 30. Air samples taken from the trunk showed it once contained a decomposing body. Anthony reported her daughter, Caylee Marie, missing in mid-July -- more than a month after relatives say they last saw the girl.

In the three-page motion filed Tuesday, Jose Baez wrote how forensic testing can be "destructive" to the samples, which also can be mishandled. He is asking the court for a fair way of determining which evidence can be tested, how and where. He also would like someone from his defense team to observe the testing. Baez wrote that forensic evidence that can be confirmed or challenged will affect his client's right to a fair trial.

Meanwhile, Anthony remains at home on bond. She is charged with child neglect, filing a false statement with law enforcement and check fraud.
________
Now my question, can a lawyer file a request that the FBI stop testing material that is part of a missing child case? There has been no murder charges, and the evidence is all connected with finding a 3 year old girl hopefully alive.
How irresponsible to demand no more testing is done, when that testing could lead to what you and your client mantain that Caylee is alive and well, and you only want to find her? It seems to me that demanding such an action is admitting that there is evidence damaging to your client postion in a murder trial, and only postponing the testing of evidence, putting poor Caylee in more danger.
Click to expand...

In my opinion the timing is OFF on that motion. Cart before the horse...
 
Nancy Grace had this on last night and said no way would Baez win this request. However, I do have a question about it. Does LE have to stop testing til the judge makes a ruling? Or can they continue til the judge rules? All the talking heads on Nancy Grace said this request would be shot down in a flash... Baez has no right to ask this. However, if Casey is brought up on murder charges LE is suppose to either save a portion for the defense or allow the defense to sit in on the testing with their experts if there is not enough samples. This shows Baez's inexperience. He should have asked that his experts sit in if there was not enough sample. Or that some sample was saved for him. Not that testing be stopped.
 
boogiebear said:
FROM THE SEPT. 11 EDITION OF THE ORLANDO SENTINEL:

Casey Anthony's attorney filed papers requesting that the state stop testing and handling forensic evidence until the court rules on how the testing will proceed.

Authorities collected hair, dirt and stain samples from the back of Anthony's car, which was towed from an Amscot check-cashing business June 30. Air samples taken from the trunk showed it once contained a decomposing body. Anthony reported her daughter, Caylee Marie, missing in mid-July -- more than a month after relatives say they last saw the girl.

In the three-page motion filed Tuesday, Jose Baez wrote how forensic testing can be "destructive" to the samples, which also can be mishandled. He is asking the court for a fair way of determining which evidence can be tested, how and where. He also would like someone from his defense team to observe the testing. Baez wrote that forensic evidence that can be confirmed or challenged will affect his client's right to a fair trial.

Meanwhile, Anthony remains at home on bond. She is charged with child neglect, filing a false statement with law enforcement and check fraud.
________
Now my question, can a lawyer file a request that the FBI stop testing material that is part of a missing child case? There has been no murder charges, and the evidence is all connected with finding a 3 year old girl hopefully alive.
How irresponsible to demand no more testing is done, when that testing could lead to what you and your client mantain that Caylee is alive and well, and you only want to find her? It seems to me that demanding such an action is admitting that there is evidence damaging to your client postion in a murder trial, and only postponing the testing of evidence, putting poor Caylee in more danger.
Click to expand...

I am not a legal beagle, but my brother is and he said Baez "jumped the gun" on this one and it will not "hold water" in court. He said because they have not charged her with homicide and this is not considered evidence in the case which is now before the court, that it will be thrown out. He said that Baez has "no standing" to ask for anything on that evidence at this point.

He also said this was a STUPID move on his part because it is saying that she is involved in a homicide rather than just a neglect case.
 
kathyn2 said:
Nancy Grace had this on last night and said no way would Baez win this request. However, I do have a question about it. Does LE have to stop testing til the judge makes a ruling? Or can they continue til the judge rules? All the talking heads on Nancy Grace said this request would be shot down in a flash... Baez has no right to ask this. However, if Casey is brought up on murder charges LE is suppose to either save a portion for the defense or allow the defense to sit in on the testing with their experts if there is not enough samples. This shows Baez's inexperience. He should have asked that his experts sit in if there was not enough sample. Or that some sample was saved for him. Not that testing be stopped.
Click to expand...

They always save additional samples for the defense to have tested.
 
This is actually quite common now in high profile cases. he can ask for this, and the judge can grant it, but not to the point that it will delay any testing. The defense will have to pay big bucks for there own independent people to watch and re-test any evidence. In the oj case, there was one item (can't remember which) that was so small only one more test could be done, so the defense and prosecution had to agree to what type of test it could be
 
TY all very much for the input. I thought this was a bit odd, and your explanations are helping to understand better.
 
This is actually a relatively common practice. But it is common in MURDER trials not when facing NEGLECT. The defense usually files a motion like this when they can't be sure of the credibility of the testing facility or when the tests that are being done are on a small sample and the defense worries that there will not be enough left for their experts to go over it.
Beaz will lose this motion, but I think he expects that as it sets him up perfectly for the motion to suppress the forensic evidence that I am sure he will file shortly before trial.
 
Wow, you all have been busy. Thanks.
I thought this request was premature, and just made JB look like they are expecting a murder charge any moment. Since there has not been a murder charge, how can JB make such a request when no one at this point knows who would be charged with murder? If it happens to become a murder case, according to JB, would not Zanny the Nanny, not be the main suspect? Is he her lawyer now?
This request would be normal and expected if someone had been charged in something but at the moment they are suppose to be searching for a missing 3 year old. Still it is standard operating procedure for evidence to be preserved, and availible to the defense in any trial, or you have an a immediate dismissal due to the defense not having full access to all evidence (full disclosure, I think it is called), thus the client cannot have a fair trial, or chance to defend him/herself fully against such evidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 62 more.
Total: 2,353 (members: 63, guests: 2,290)

Online statistics

Members online
63
Guests online
2,290
Total visitors
2,353
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,788
Messages
18,163,151
Members
231,861
Latest member
Eliver
Back
Top