logicalgirl
Peace Hawk
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 16,024
- Reaction score
- 2
While I appreciate all the hard work done to post the above on this page, none of it really answers my question.
We are missing something here because we seem to be insisting that one process is and should happen and yet we see another process happening and we don't seem to have the information to understand why it is happening.
My question was - was the indigent agreement limited to the JAC decision not to pay Baez fees during the trial because they believed Baez had already received "enough" money through the various sales of pictures, stories etc. that he sold on behalf of FCA - so they, the JAC, would not issue any public or taxpayer funds to him?
We know that was the JAC's position. They would pay reasonable expenses to investigators, costs for transcription copies etc., but would not pay any fees to Baez for the trial.
But did that indigent agreement mean that he was forbidden from continuing to sell photos etc as her agent (meaning the money he made was her money) so he could continue to have an income?
Either it was limited to ONLY no payments from the JAC and it didn't include all other sources OR it meant no money for Baez from the JAC and any other sources at all.
That seems to be the question and because of the claim Baez has made to the BK court, I'm not positive we know the answer to it. IMO:moo:
We are missing something here because we seem to be insisting that one process is and should happen and yet we see another process happening and we don't seem to have the information to understand why it is happening.
My question was - was the indigent agreement limited to the JAC decision not to pay Baez fees during the trial because they believed Baez had already received "enough" money through the various sales of pictures, stories etc. that he sold on behalf of FCA - so they, the JAC, would not issue any public or taxpayer funds to him?
We know that was the JAC's position. They would pay reasonable expenses to investigators, costs for transcription copies etc., but would not pay any fees to Baez for the trial.
But did that indigent agreement mean that he was forbidden from continuing to sell photos etc as her agent (meaning the money he made was her money) so he could continue to have an income?
Either it was limited to ONLY no payments from the JAC and it didn't include all other sources OR it meant no money for Baez from the JAC and any other sources at all.
That seems to be the question and because of the claim Baez has made to the BK court, I'm not positive we know the answer to it. IMO:moo: