Casey files for-Indigency; Defense reveals how much it's been paid!

[sleutherontheside]

But IF Casey was paid the $250,000, and IF Baez did in fact mishandle those funds in defending the murder case, AND Judge Strickland knows it, couldn't he just replace him? I know that JS has been concerned from the very beginning that Baez's actions would provide grounds for an appeal. Under the circumstances, how can he afford to allow Baez to stay on the case?

It wasn't so much that JS was concerned but that the SA filed a motion regarding the defense funds. IMO...they did so to protect the efforts of all parties and eliminate an appeal based on KC having been duped. It is in the best interest of all parties to get it right the first time. They wanted to ensure there was no conflict of interest between KC's funding and JB's representation.

As we are not privy to the in camera disclosure of funding...we can only assume that JS ruled appropriately. A Judge must allow both sides latitude. While JS has ruled against a fair number of defense motions, he has also ruled in favor of them.

JS is well known in Orange County, FL as being fair. This opinion is based upon reviews from his peers. I think that he was an ideal choice in this case, and rest comfortably knowing that his actions will serve justice.

Remember......a Judge is an impartial third party enforcing the rules.

 

[LFlorida]

That is exactly what I am saying, Judge Strickland and the JAC attorneys will essentially have to take the Affidavit of Attorney's Fees at Face Value - they will not be able to cross-examine Casey or Baez on every exact detail of what was paid, by whom, and for what.

And what is worse, if ABC did pay Casey $250K, the fact that some much money has been spent and, in reality, very little has been accomplished, raises some serious ethical questions about whether Baez was handling the money in Casey's best interests.

A very good case discussing the problems with this type of arrangement is found in Footnote 4 of this case Alessi v. State, 969 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)

This footnote?

" As we did in Cole, however, we once again note that attorneys have an ethical obligation under Rule 4-1.7 of the Rules of Professional Conduct to avoid representing any client under circumstances that would compromise the lawyer's exercise of independent professional judgment. That rule expressly provides that a lawyer "shall not represent a client if the lawyer's exercise of independent professional judgment in the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer's . . . own interest," without client consent after consultation. The types of fee arrangements employed in this case, and in Cole, are so susceptible to claims of conflict and questions regarding the ethics of the attorney's strategic decisions at odds with his or her own financial interests that an attorney should probably expect an ethics inquiry by the Florida Bar with respect to any case for which this type of fee arrangement is used. In fact, this type of fee arrangement is so obviously prone to allegations of ethical lapse that the supreme court may want to consider barring it altogether in criminal cases."

Bear with me as I try to work this out in my head...

Alessi's atty had a fixed $$$ amount for the defense. ($135k.) This part of Alessi's appeal argues that because of the fixed $$$ amount, atty Johnson did not hire the necessary experts.

This decision states that quoting a fixed fee to defendant should not be done. So.....

OK - I lost myself here. Somebody help.

 

[sleutherontheside]

This footnote?

" As we did in Cole, however, we once again note that attorneys have an ethical obligation under Rule 4-1.7 of the Rules of Professional Conduct to avoid representing any client under circumstances that would compromise the lawyer's exercise of independent professional judgment. That rule expressly provides that a lawyer "shall not represent a client if the lawyer's exercise of independent professional judgment in the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer's . . . own interest," without client consent after consultation. The types of fee arrangements employed in this case, and in Cole, are so susceptible to claims of conflict and questions regarding the ethics of the attorney's strategic decisions at odds with his or her own financial interests that an attorney should probably expect an ethics inquiry by the Florida Bar with respect to any case for which this type of fee arrangement is used. In fact, this type of fee arrangement is so obviously prone to allegations of ethical lapse that the supreme court may want to consider barring it altogether in criminal cases."

Bear with me as I try to work this out in my head...

Alessi's atty had a fixed $$$ amount for the defense. ($135k.) This part of Alessi's appeal argues that because of the fixed $$$ amount, atty Johnson did not hire the necessary experts.

This decision states that quoting a fixed fee to defendant should not be done. So.....

OK - I lost myself here. Somebody help.

BBM.....Because it could be argued later that the predetermined fee limited adequate representation or limited the ability to best represent the client????? So the only option left is to quote billing rates and offer an estimate of fees required to appropriately defend a capital client, require a signed agreement to those terms and outline the possible results of a cash poor defense?????
Just my thoughts.

 

[steadychick]

If Casey is declared indigent, how will this effect her legal representation in the civil suit? Can she ask for a public defender for a civil suit?

 

[beach]

From a purely objective standpoint......if JB keeps up these antics.......I think he'll be quite disappointed in his book revenue. I think people would pay far more to see him featured in a dunking booth on the Vegas Strip for 3 months.

I laugh profusely everytime I think about him counting on revenue from a future book deal. That man can't even write a decent motion!!! LMAO! :floorlaugh:
Really though...even with a decent ghost writer, who would WANT to read what he thinks??? He is a bumbling idiot, imo.

 

[Gma Kat]

If Casey is declared indigent, how will this effect her legal representation in the civil suit? Can she ask for a public defender for a civil suit?

I could be wrong about FL, but in Cali PD is only for criminal cases....KC would need to find a civil atty willing to work for free, or pro bono. In my past experience (when I worked for a criminal atty who was a court appointed defense atty, same thing as public defender except you are a private atty agreeing to accept basically peanuts to defend an indigent defendant) anyhow.....in my past experience we threw in the civil defense whenever we defended a client for a criminal case. This case is unique however in that the ZFG civil case has causes of action that are not related to the murder charges against KC, which makes the civil case not directly connected, but connected enough to pose a problem......IMO.....would love to hear Rhornsby's opinion or AZLawyer, etc.,....

 

[sleutherontheside]

I could be wrong about FL, but in Cali PD is only for criminal cases....KC would need to find a civil atty willing to work for free, or pro bono. In my past experience (when I worked for a criminal atty who was a court appointed defense atty, same thing as public defender except you are a private atty agreeing to accept basically peanuts to defend an indigent defendant) anyhow.....in my past experience we threw in the civil defense whenever we defended a client for a criminal case. This case is unique however in that the ZFG civil case has causes of action that are not related to the murder charges against KC, which makes the civil case not directly connected, but connected enough to pose a problem......IMO.....would love to hear Rhornsby's opinion or AZLawyer, etc.,....

IIRC...her representation in the civil suit is Jonathan Kasen not Jose Baez. I'll find a link. Anyone else remember this???

 

[The World According]

IIRC...her representation in the civil suit is Jonathan Kasen not Jose Baez. I'll find a link. Anyone else remember this???

Here you go friend: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hbl183MblVg[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtlISVGqDvw[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0_ixnZYlzs[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVxJ1V2ebX4[/ame]

 

[sleutherontheside]

TWA....................as always....you never disappoint!!!!!!!

 

[technicalconfusion]

He's shady and a shifty guy, he's got to remember God doesn't like ugly and Karma comes aknocking. This may just backfire big time on him. His cockiness is outrageous, seems he too has a sense of entitlement and fits in fine with the rest of that family.

Karma's been banging loudly for quite a while now. Most of the crew surrounding this case hasn't had this dawn on them yet, except for one.

It's going to keep banging and banging and banging....

When this case is over JB will have the media lining up for an interview about this case. Talk about making big bucks! That interview will rake in big bucks for JB, and most likely land him some sort of gig on a TV program like Geraldo.

I don't think so. I could be wrong. I believe he's dug his grave and he's standing on the edge of it. The prudent thing to do would be to go quietly away, maybe he would have a chance of saving himself.

To be on TV, you do need to put a couple of sentences together, at least a little coherently. I've not seen him do that yet.

 

[LeLe1953]

Well Well Well. I am not a FL taxpayer but will be glad to do my part to help fund her defense, poor thing. Just as soon as start to *advertiser censored* pennies, they will go straight into a collection cup for her.

 

[magic-cat]

Thirty days is the magical number.

Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.505(f)(3) states: "The appearance of an attorney for a party in a proceeding shall terminate automatically, without order of court, upon the termination of a proceeding, whether by final order of dismissal, by final adjudication, or otherwise, and following the expiration of any of any applicable time for appeal, where no appeal is taken."

Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b)(3) states: In a criminal case, "the defendant shall file the notice of appeal with the clerk at any time between rendition of a final judgment and 30 days following rendition of a written order imposing sentence."

Thus the time for filing an appeal has passed, meaning the check fraud case is not being appealed (she had no grounds to appeal anyway), and by rule, Baez and Co. are no longer attorneys of record in that case.

Thus they technically are not required by JAC rules to list what they got paid for the Check Fraud case. So we will have to see the Affidavit filed in the case to see if any mention of the Check Fraud case is made.

Hi again Mr. Hornsby. Does the fact that some of the charges in the check fraud case had adjudication withheld make a difference?, Some of those are not FINAL right? Will THAT have any effect on the disclosure, considering some of that case is NOT finalized, at least that's the way I understand it...:waitasec:

 

[SallyLu]

And the Award(s) go to World, Sleuther, Technical Confusion and LeLe 1953.

Thankyou - take a bow!

 

[Katprint]

IIRC...her representation in the civil suit is Jonathan Kasen not Jose Baez. I'll find a link. Anyone else remember this???

I believe Casey's defense in the civil suit is being paid for by Cindy and George's homeowners' insurance carrier. Theoretically, the causes of action which might be based on unintentional negligence/negligent misrepresentation as opposed to malicious slander/intentional wrongful conduct might be covered by the homeowners' insurance policy. Thus the homeowners' insurance has a duty to defend its insured (since Casey was a legal occupant of the Anthony residence) in the civil lawsuit even if it ultimately has no duty to pay the claim/judgment.

Katprint
10+ years defending insurance claims
Always only my own opinions

 

[The World According]

Hello and welcome!!!

In your experience wouldn't the lawyer at the very , very least have attended the depositions? [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0_ixnZYlzs[/ame]
One of our members , Chezerie explained to us some time back the distinct difference between negligence and defamation, "Most states recognize that a public policy against insuring for losses resulting from intentional or criminal acts is justified by the fact that such acts would be encouraged, or at least not dissuaded, if insurance were available to shift the financial burden of the loss from the wrongdoer to the insurer, ergo the reason such exclusions and/or definitions of "accidental," as homeowner's insurance typically covers accidents and an intentional tort is not usually deemed an accident, are legal."


In this clip Mr. Mitnick states they are indeed suing for defamation, not merely negligence.[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_AUGlqibDQ[/ame]

 

[lauriej]

Originally Posted by magic-cat [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4891235#post4891235"]

[/ame]
So let me get this straight.
Over $100,000.00 has been paid to the defense...and yet
They have conducted NO to very few depositions?
NO experts have examined any of the evidence with the exception of that one trip by Dr. Lee to look at the car?
For Andrea Lyons few and rather pathetic appearances she merited over $20,000.00?
And exactly what DID Baez do with close to $90,000.00?

Was ALL of that money spent playing these pathetic and non-productive GAMES they have played and NONE of it actually went to DEFENDING her? Are they kidding?

The top of my head is about to come off!

..if baez has been paid $90,000.00 since july 2008-----that's about 4500.00 per month, for himself, as well as staff, overhead etc, not an extravagant amount for a law firm on the whole.
..he also HAS done a number of depos------tony, hoover, annie,the security guards when kc hyperventilated in jail dec 11/08...---( check out thehinkymeter.com "maura" has an extensive list of depos done by JB).

..20 grand for lyon? again, not a lot , considering what she charges,how long she's been around and flying in and out from illinois.( and now claims to be pro bono----i assume that's her fee-----flights to and from may be different?)

..whether she claims indigent or not-----for her defense------the state of florida was ALWAYS going to be on the hook for her prosecution---( it cost california in excess of 4 MILLION to put scott peterson on death row).

..the question is---------this $ 111,000.00 , paid to baez and lyon thus far-------WHERE did that come from ? do they have to prove where it came from ? ( remember jose rushing judgeS into chambers back when because he didn't want to talk about it in open court?) ------and------is there FUTURE money ( book, movie, etc $$$'s ???) coming.

..according to bill schaeffer--wftv---if so-----it will be used to pay back the state of florida , for the indigent status bills.

..i don't think baez et al care at this point if THEIR hourly fees are paid----they are asking for the 'indigent client' stuff------depos, experts, etc----THEY have been "paid in spades" already--------in publicity.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

That is exactly what I am saying, Judge Strickland and the JAC attorneys will essentially have to take the Affidavit of Attorney's Fees at Face Value - they will not be able to cross-examine Casey or Baez on every exact detail of what was paid, by whom, and for what.

And what is worse, if ABC did pay Casey $250K, the fact that some much money has been spent and, in reality, very little has been accomplished, raises some serious ethical questions about whether Baez was handling the money in Casey's best interests.

A very good case discussing the problems with this type of arrangement is found in Footnote 4 of this case Alessi v. State, 969 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)

Thank you, Mr. Hornsby...wasn't this stated in the in camera meeting at the onset of the murder trial. The SA's raised this question, they went off camera for about 5 minutes and Judge Strickland thought the information given him by Inmate Anthony and Jose Baez didn't show a conflict??? I'm once again confused but feel if Baez has mismanged his clients money (he hasn't put a dent in the defense, IMO) they can bring him up at the Florida bar level for an investigation??? Ethics has been crossed many times by this ( I call him) rogue attorney, IMO....

[4] As we did in Cole, however, we once again note that attorneys have an ethical obligation under Rule 4-1.7 of the Rules of Professional Conduct to avoid representing any client under circumstances that would compromise the lawyer's exercise of independent professional judgment. That rule expressly provides that a lawyer "shall not represent a client if the lawyer's exercise of independent professional judgment in the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer's . . . own interest," without client consent after consultation. The types of fee arrangements employed in this case, and in Cole, are so susceptible to claims of conflict and questions regarding the ethics of the attorney's strategic decisions at odds with his or her own financial interests that an attorney should probably expect an ethics inquiry by the Florida Bar with respect to any case for which this type of fee arrangement is used. In fact, this type of fee arrangement is so obviously prone to allegations of ethical lapse that the supreme court may want to consider barring it altogether in criminal cases.

 

[LambChop]

Why did it take so long for JB to get HLee down to Florida to look at the trunk of the car? Clearly when HL did not return after lunch HL had given JB the bad news and JB knew at that time that KC was in deep trouble. By November KC had gotten her money for the pictures and what would have happened to that money if she had asked to change her plead for a lesser sentence and just go before the judge? What would have been the insentive for KC's team to do what was REALLY best for her and ended it right then and there? Most of the evidence is out there. We have seen it and this particular forum has hashed it all out, some giving KC the benefit of the doubt and it is overwhelmingly against Ms. Anthony. So why did defense keep up this charade. Once the remains were found it was pretty much over for her. Why keep the pretense up that someone else did it and the defense looks foolish trying to name the new potential suspect of the week. The defense is putting her life on the line when it's KC who should tell the truth and ask the judge to show her mercy. While AL claims juror's are the killers, why are they not giving their client the advice she needs. They know it is over or they would have started those depos a year ago and not wasted all this time. If KC refuses to listen then the results of the trial would be on her shoulders and the weight of the responsibility is hers and hers alone. JMO

 

[Jomo]

Why did it take so long for JB to get HLee down to Florida to look at the trunk of the car? Clearly when HL did not return after lunch HL had given JB the bad news and JB knew at that time that KC was in deep trouble. By November KC had gotten her money for the pictures and what would have happened to that money if she had asked to change her plead for a lesser sentence and just go before the judge? What would have been the insentive for KC's team to do what was REALLY best for her and ended it right then and there? Most of the evidence is out there. We have seen it and this particular forum has hashed it all out, some giving KC the benefit of the doubt and it is overwhelmingly against Ms. Anthony. So why did defense keep up this charade. Once the remains were found it was pretty much over for her. Why keep the pretense up that someone else did it and the defense looks foolish trying to name the new potential suspect of the week. The defense is putting her life on the line when it's KC who should tell the truth and ask the judge to show her mercy. While AL claims juror's are the killers, why are they not giving their client the advice she needs. They know it is over or they would have started those depos a year ago and not wasted all this time. If KC refuses to listen then the results of the trial would be on her shoulders and the weight of the responsibility is hers and hers alone. JMO

It is very easy to get frustrated with the way this case is being handled and the pace at which it is dragging along.

I agree with several of your points.

(Just a little note, you should check out the busted myths thread to shed some light on the Henri Lee facts [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4889291&postcount=38"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Myth Busters and Facts *LIST ONLY* NO DISCUSSION NO DISCUSSION[/ame]).

 

[zoey]

How can they ask for money for the defense experts when earlier they were all pro-bono??? Does that mean they now need to find someone/anyone who could come up with something?:waitasec: