Defense claims judge had inappropriate convo with blogger?

[Reagan]

Ah, I got here late again. I only read a few pages of this thread, but did read the entire motion.

I definitely agree with the poster who said better watch out what you wish for. I for one think the defense is lucky to have Judge S. He has been extremely patient and tolerant of their BS for the sake of future appellate arguments.

I have heard many good things concerning Judge S, his impartiality and integrity. Many of these compliments actually came from local defense attorneys in FL.

I don't see much issue with the Judge reading blogs before the actual trial (Don't we still have another year?). During the trial is a different story and I couldn't see Judge S ordering a jury to stay away from newspapers and internet, only to turn around and do just that.


P.S For some reason I keep thinking this is the second time the defense has asked Judge S to step off the case, but I don't recall any motions ever being filed for the first time. Did I dream this? Am I psychic? Plum crazy?

P.S.S Funny how the defense finally got the State to pay for the resources they so "desperately" needed to provide ms. felon with an adequate (ha!) defense, and here they are chasing down small time bloggers that wont have any impact whatsoever on KC's fate. God forbid the defense actually does their job. Like depositions, testing... etc.

 

[strawberry]

Ah, I got here late again. I only read a few pages of this thread, but did read the entire motion.

I definitely agree with the poster who said better watch out what you wish for. I for one think the defense is lucky to have Judge S. He has been extremely patient and tolerant of their BS for the sake of future appellate arguments.

I have heard many good things concerning Judge S, his impartiality and integrity. Many of these compliments actually came from local defense attorneys in FL.

I don't see much issue with the Judge reading blogs before the actual trial (Don't we still have another year?). During the trial is a different story and I couldn't see Judge S ordering a jury to stay away from newspapers and internet, only to turn around and do just that.


P.S For some reason I keep thinking this is the second time the defense has asked Judge S to step off the case, but I don't recall any motions ever being filed for the first time. Did I dream this? Am I psychic? Plum crazy?

P.S.S Funny how the defense finally got the State to pay for the resources they so "desperately" needed to provide ms. felon with an adequate (ha!) defense, and here they are chasing down small time bloggers that wont have any impact whatsoever on KC's fate. God forbid the defense actually does their job. Like depositions, testing... etc.

Someone else had mentioned this, and I had forgotten, that they had tried to replace the SA (Ashton I think).

PS Isn't there a hearing on 4/19? At least there is a thread titled 2010.04.19 Capital Defense Budget Hearing....What will happen with that?

 

[LambChop]

Reagan: I do not know how to link to "The Hinky Meter" but there is a good article on there today regarding the Judge which was written last year. He truly is one of the most respected judges with a reputation for judging fairly, one of the best judged by "Defense Attorneys". So how does JB think he is helping his client by asking the judge to step down? Looks like another attempt to shoot himself in the foot and maybe JB will actually hit his target this time. JMO

 

[Dignity4Victims]

Wow....maybe the good citizens of Orlando should start demanding to see that video now.

The Sentinel has put up a poll to vote your opinion on Judge Strickland.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-poll-anthony-0417,0,6471220,post.poll

 

[flourish]

Reagan: I do not know how to link to "The Hinky Meter" but there is a good article on there today regarding the Judge which was written last year. He truly is one of the most respected judges with a reputation for judging fairly, one of the best judged by "Defense Attorneys". So how does JB think he is helping his client by asking the judge to step down? Looks like another attempt to shoot himself in the foot and maybe JB will actually hit his target this time. JMO

Here ya go:

http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2010/04/17/judge-stricklands-background/

 

[Aedrys]

I've been thinking about this, and it's such a sociopathic thing to do - get mad when you don't get your way, so you find anything, no matter how small, and blow it up a hundred times to make the other person look bad. I remember how mad she was at the last hearing, and I bet she complained right away to her lawyers about how mean Judge Strickland was to her, and wanted to get back at him.

I feel so bad for Judge Strickland because he's been NOTHING but fair to Casey, at times overly fair IMO. I mean, he gave her a freaking SLAP ON THE WRIST for stealing 400 bucks from AH. And this is how she says her thanks because he's not leaning to do the same in her murder case? What a spiteful b**** she is!

Again, she reminds my of my sociopathic roommate. One time we got into a heated discussion, and I went to move forward as I was saying something to her. Then I tripped, and since I was so close to her, I nearly fell onto her. I was able to grab the doorway to keep myself from knocking her down. The next thing I know, we have a policeman in our apartment because she reported me for threatening her and attempting to assault her! I didn't get charged, just warned, but still, that very much made me NOT want to be her roommate or friend anymore. I had no intention of actually hurting her, and she turned it around on me as if I had that intention just to teach me a lesson about going against her in any form!

Getting back to Casey, if she didn't concoct this scheme and it came from her lawyers, then they are as sociopathic as she is. What Baez, are you THAT worried that Judge Strickland won't give you a blank check for defense funds you're trying to get rid of him? Yes, attack the ONE person that has bent over backwards and forwards to be fair to your defense, that is just freaking BRILLIANT. What is Judge Strickland supposed to do, be cloistered in a monastery for the length of this charade, I mean pretrial and trial (if it ever freaking gets to trial)?

And they want to say he's too buddy buddy with the media? HELLO! Have you forgotten about Geraldo, Baez? What about your favorite station that always leaks information for you? What about the fact that all you've done in the case is spend the MAJORITY OF TIME WITH YOUR FACE IN THE MEDIA? Oh wait, that's okay. Because being fair means being ON CASEY'S SIDE. I forgot, silly me! It's all those mean people who think Casey should suffer for murdering her child, not walk out of jail with an RV ministry and Irish babies that aren't being fair.

I will be so mad if Judge Strickland has to step down because once again, a sociopath is getting their way and using the freaking law to do it, to boot. Just the thought of it makes me want to SCREAM!

 

[nursebeeme]

sorry if this was already posted:

http://www.cfnews13.com/News/Local/2010/4/16/blogger_in_question_talks_with_news_13.html

One day after a court hearing in October 2009, his writing was recognized by Judge Stan Strickland.

Knechel said was about to leave the court, when a bailiff stopped him.

“[He said,] ‘The judge wants to meet with you,’ and I said, ‘No, I don’t think so,’ and sure enough, he just wanted to say hello, and that he reads my blog,” Knechel told News 13.

A few days after that, Knechel blogged about it. He said Strickland told him, “Needless to say, I do go on the Internet and read about this case. I must say that you have the best website regarding this case. You investigate, and you are very fair to everyone.”

Later in the conversation, Strickland said “No, you are very good as a writer, and you stick to the facts. You are very fair, and I’m impressed.”

Casey Anthony’s lawyers, however, said the conversation is grounds for the Strickland to remove himself from the case.

In his opinion, Knechel said what the judge reads or watches on TV doesn’t make a difference.

“I don’t think he would formulate an opinion based on what somebody writes on a newspaper, on a blog, on a forum, on any sort of media outlet,” he said.

News 13 asked Knechel about his relationship with Strickland, who has said there’s nothing there.

“I wouldn’t say that we’re friends,” Knechel said.

 

[debbie0604]

A visit to this page.....http://notaries.dos.state.fl.us/index.html does not show CM as holding a current notary license.

Perhaps it is an error????? But this is worth further inquiry. It's not like it expired within the last 30-45 days. Hmmmmmm

Further note.... it is improper for notaries to notarize their own documents. See page 14.


http://www.nationalnotary.org/UserImages/Notary_Code.pdf

 

[LambChop]

So how many more people does KC think she'll be able to fit under the bus. Hope she saved room for JB?

 

[ZsaZsa]

Further note.... it is improper for notaries to notarize their own documents. See page 14.


http://www.nationalnotary.org/UserImages/Notary_Code.pdf

Do they mean his own personal docs or those of his own clients? I am a bit confused. Why would he not be able to notarize docs of clients of his own legal practise?

 

[ZsaZsa]

So how many more people does KC think she'll be able to fit under the bus. Hope she saved room for JB?

If JB thwarts her watch out for malicious accusations from her... I expect her to say the reason he wanted the video off was to pursue an unethical relationship with her. Wouldn't put it past her.

 

[Aedrys]

If JB thwarts her watch out for malicious accusations from her... I expect her to say the reason he wanted the video off was to pursue an unethical relationship with her. Wouldn't put it past her.

Exactly. ITA. This case is starting to remind me of the movie "The Dark Knight". In the very beginning, you remember that bank robbery? And they kept killing each other one by one because the Joker told them to? And he ends up getting away all alone, driving that bus right out of the bank. I think Casey thinks that's going to be her someday. Only people left to shoot are her own dang lawyers at this point.

 

[doogiesgirl]

Court Hearing 16 Oct 2009

JS asks to speak to MD

Mark 4.34

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKWIO_luem4&feature=related

I did watch the proceeding (three times now), and JS asked the bailiff to call MD up before the proceeding was even finished. It is on the tape and was heard over the microphone. As a matter of fact he seemed to find it more important to speak to MD then to finish up what he was doing at that time. IMO

I dont disagree about the internet. I was simply stating that I think the judge should know better then to allow the appearance of impropriety. The motion was well written and based in fact and precedent in my opinion.

I have nothing against JS, I just feel it was a little over the line, especially given the media interest in this case(which apparently he is well read up on).

Above BBM

Not sure what video you are watching three times but the one I am posting now clearly shows the bailiffs emptying the courtroom AFTER court was finished. He describes MD and asks for him to not be let out, that he (JSS) wants to speak with him, so what? Don't know what court you go to where they empty the courtroom b/f the proceedings are finished.

MOO

 

[debbie0604]

Do they mean his own personal docs or those of his own clients? I am a bit confused. Why would he not be able to notarize docs of clients of his own legal practise?

I used to be a notary and I could not notarize a business document of my own that I drafted up that had my own signature on it.

This document appears to be co-drafted and signed by him and notarized by him as well. He should have had a paralegal notarize it. If the document didn't have his signature on it, it would be okay (except his notary is expired). I think I'm right on this.... if I'm not - someone with more legal understanding - please correct me. Thanks.

 

[RR0004]

How about if Judge Strickland makes a deal with Baez: "I'll go if you go". (!!)

 

[heartfortruth]

How about if Judge Strickland makes a deal with Baez: "I'll go if you go". (!!)

yeah, and I think if JS goes I GO!!!! I have just about had all I can take watching these "officers of the court"! ....and I think you know who all I mean.

JS was in the process of restoring some of my "faith" in our judicial system and I think it would be a very , very sad day if he left this case.

This is the most depressing thing that has happened in this case in a long time!
JMO :twocents:

 

[AZlawyer]

I haven't seen this mentioned yet sooo.......with the date completely wrong on the stamp (notary) and with it clearly not being Casey's signature how is this motion even legit? Could this be a motion that the defense knew would not be allowed as it is completely wrong and they filed it only to get it out there in the media as they did with Kronk's ex wives statements? I truly do not see how this motion will even be heard in court. The SA will bring up the things wrong with the motion (expired stamp date, not Casey's signature) and the motion will be denied. I honestly don't see what all of the fuss is about and it seems to me that it is simply once again the defense trying to try the case in the public court instead of the actual court.

Can AZLawyer or someone else talk about those two aspects of the motion and if the motion is even worth the paper it is printed on? Please and thank you!

I don't think the notary/signature thing is any big deal. First of all, I'm sure that's Casey's signature. She's just a nutcase and has changed the way her signature looks. She probably practices it 10 hours a day. CM would not risk his reputation to notarize a false signature. Second, CM does have a current notary license; he just picked up the wrong stamp (should have thrown away the old one). It's a technical deficiency but so easy to fix that I doubt anyone would care.

RSBM. As a matter of faaact, MD is friendly with JW. Yikes! My question is, if JS gets replaced, will the State also get a chance to redo any motions they lost? Such as the video of KC the day Caylee was found??:waitasec:

I had posted a similar question about the Judge's prior decisions .. Oct '09 is when the alleged inappropriate conversation with MD occurred so I wouldn't think it would not affect any motions he ruled on prior to that ...

I was hoping AZlawyer could answer that ... it's premature at this point I suppose to be discussing the ramifications of the judge stepping down, but I was wondering too ...

AZlawyer's post 352, above, had this in it:

"(h) Prior Rulings. Prior factual or legal rulings by a disqualified judge may be reconsidered and vacated or amended by a successor judge based upon a motion for reconsideration, which must be filed within 20 days of the order of disqualification, unless good cause is shown for a delay in moving for reconsideration or other grounds for reconsideration exist."

I'm very poor on deciphering legal jargon but it sounds like all prior rulings could be reconsidered. Or am I reading too much into that?

I think it would be interpreted to mean all prior rulings against the party alleging that the judge was biased against them.

I used to be a notary and I could not notarize a business document of my own that I drafted up that had my own signature on it.

This document appears to be co-drafted and signed by him and notarized by him as well. He should have had a paralegal notarize it. If the document didn't have his signature on it, it would be okay (except his notary is expired). I think I'm right on this.... if I'm not - someone with more legal understanding - please correct me. Thanks.

I notarize my client's documents all the time (documents I drafted). I don't see anything wrong with it. Obviously, he couldn't notarize his own signature, but he isn't--he's notarizing Casey's signature.

 

[Angel4u2Whisper2]

There is no evidence to suggest JS is a biased judge. Therefore he's not going to change his ruling style in relation to this filing. People can complain all they want, but for the bark to have bite, they have to offer proof. Fair rulings that are consistent are not proof of anything except a consistently fair judge.

Oh I agree. I am just trying to figure out why they might think this is a good idea. :waitasec:

 

[LC446]

Yes, but he would need a written, signed and notarized power of attorney to do so.

Maybe he does have one as he was the representative brokering the deals for the pictures and videos...interesting.

 

[beach]

The Sentinel has put up a poll to vote your opinion on Judge Strickland.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-poll-anthony-0417,0,6471220,post.poll

I know full well this is no scientific poll but the results are are hilariously one-sided.

As of 7:00pm est

Yes. The judge has shown he is not impartial. (43 responses) = 6%

No. The judge has not done anything wrong. (548 responses) = 80%

Not sure. I would like to learn more about the issue. (92 responses) = 13%

Oh well, WTH cares what the FL taxpayers think anyway? Just pay for it and shush. :innocent: