Defense claims judge had inappropriate convo with blogger?

[logicalgirl]

Late to the party.....

But if I understand correctly, there has been NO confirmation or statement from anyone else BESIDES MD as to the comments that JS supposedly spoke to him after the hearing, correct?

At this point, we have ONLY MD's statement that JS called him a great blogger...but has he said whether or not JS specifically referred to his blogs about Caylee case???

A quick peek at MD site (who I have ignored until this point) shows that he was blogging about general subjects such as diabetes, marinade (real) tips, and the list goes on and on...

Is it POSSIBLE that JS may have followed his blog in the past in reference to one of these areas but NOT the Caylee case (don't think MD had yet created many of these CA blogs at that point anyway?)

Could JS just be a "fan" of a "Marinading" Dave....????

But MD was enjoying what he perceived to be his "moment in the media" by insinuating that JS was a "fan" based on his Caylee commentary? Didn't Marinade Dave himself state on his blog shortly after this incident that he was hoping this attention to his blog would catch the eye of a media source and maybe, just maybe it would result in a paying job??? That's what I recall and when I quit reading anything there....

Kentjbkent!!!!! Bowing low!!!!:blowkiss::blowkiss::blowkiss:

I have been off site since Friday because I was so upset many of our beloved WS posters took motion as the worst possible news without our usual in depth discussion and check and double check.

I immediately remembered about the diabetes, but held back on posting thinking I would get pooh-poohed off the board. So thank you for bringing it up!! I think it is a strong possibility this was the case. I so had my fingers crossed I would see something like this and we hadn't completely thrown in the towel over our rainbow man, JS.

Also, I've read every single post and of course the news, videos, and may I congratulate all you clever people for your very rousing posts during the long long winding trail to tonight.

I feel so much better and I didn't get a TO or banned either!

 

[beach]

I'm glad you reposted that explanation over here, too. (from the Verified Atty. thread)

I am still reeling. I keep thinking there is something I am not understanding because it seems too absurd that one crafty (is craftily a word?) drafted motion could have the power to tie a judges hands like that.

 

[LambChop]

Has anyone thought about maybe the judge would like to remove himself from this case? He keeps rockin harder and harder at every hearing. I know if it were me I'd want to reach over that bench and just slap JB upside the head to wipe that silly grin off your face. I wouldn't, but at times I'd like to. JMO

 

[cuppy199]

Apparently, it looks like it doesn't matter what anyone believes. :crazy:

Yea it looks like before this case is over I will be bouncing off the walls in my padded room:crazy:

 

[denjet]

Bold mine.

But God forbid you post something unflattering about MD...ZAP! Gone!

EXACTLY !! He prides himself on keeping out the riff raff, troublemakers and instigators, yet lets this loon come on with his tired idiotic posts ... WTH? He won't post anything of mine because although I'm polite, I don't agree with him. He keeps his own groupies and any newcomers who flatter him close to his heart ... and then prides himself on his journalism and reporting the truth, fair and balanced yet converses with this McIntyre guy and Joy Wray ??? Credible blogger? I think not!

Not only do I find him biased towards the Anthonys and the defense, I think he's been trying for a while to be a part of their inner circle and would do just about ANYTHING to make that happen !!

He's in trouble now because he can't pass up an opportunity to stick his nose in where it doesn't belong and because of his grandiose visions of stardom in the professional journalist arena ... Stick to marinade dave ...

As always JMHO
(sorry for the rant)

 

[beach]

Has anyone thought about maybe the judge would like to remove himself from this case? He keeps rockin harder and harder at every hearing. I know if it were me I'd want to reach over that bench and just slap JB upside the head to wipe that silly grin off your face. I wouldn't, but at times I'd like to. JMO

yeah, I've considered it. heck, I've considered that he might have already drafted his 'thank you' note. lol


I don't want to believe that he wants off and I really don't think he does. His patience has been tried, though.

 

[Marina2]

Imagine for a moment that JS doesn't recuse himself. The trial continues, KC is convicted and she files an appeal based on the fact that the judge should have recused himself. An appeals court will read the original motion.
All allegations will be taken as fact and they will rule that a reasonable person would feel the judge was biased. The conviction will be overturned and a new trial will be ordered. I don't think JS will risk this happening. I don't think anyone wants to see this happen.

Hopefully, he can deny the motion because it's been six months since the legally sufficient allegations occurred. As AZlawyer stated, the phone call to the hospital shouldn't be legally sufficient to make a reasonable person feel biased against. That is the only allegation made within the time frame allowed to file the motion.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

This portion of the rule is quoted by both AZlawyer in her post #352 and in the motion itself:

"(e) Time. A motion to disqualify shall be filed within a reasonable time not to exceed 10 days after discovery of the facts constituting the grounds for the motion and shall be promptly presented to the court for an immediate ruling. . ."

I would like to know exactly what (and when) is "discovery of the facts." Is it when anyone in the defense team first heard or read about the chat or is it, as they claim in their motion, when the interview confirms the facts?

After all, it did happen way back in Oct of last year. But didn't do any fact checking until last Sunday. What if they had knowledge that it occurred early on but didn't look into it until months later? At what exact time does that 10-day clock start ticking?

Bumping to see if Nancy B can shed some light in this dark area. Please.

 

[notthatsmart]

...and is that why you're suspicious? You haven't seen an "impartial" judge? Oh, please spend some time in a big city courtroom.

Oh please, can you site a high profile case where something like this was said? I think not. IMO

 

[LancelotLink]

What will this do to those 10 days?
http://www.wftv.com/news/23190216/detail.html
Casey Defense Team May Have To Re-File Motion

Posted: 9:33 pm EDT April 18, 2010
Snip
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- Eyewitness News has discovered there could be a problem with the motion Casey Anthony's defense team just filed to remove Judge Strickland from her case.

If you look closely at the bottom of the motion, you can see Anthony's newest lawyer, J. Cheney Mason, notarized it himself.

But an inspection of the notary seal shows Mason's certification as a notary expired in November 2009.
Snip

 

[logicalgirl]

I'm not questioning RH's success ratio in predictions - but I'm going to go back and check the timing of his video. If this motion came out on Friday afternoon and someone stuck a motion under RH's nose and said comment on this right now so we can hit the 6PM news - RH may not have had time to search out all the happenings around this motion to deduce what is truth and what is gross exaggeration. It may have been just a sound bite that said give up your prediction IF this is true.

I have crossed a few words with RH, however although I may not appreciate the passion with which he discusses several ah-hem issues, I think his legal analysis's are usually spot on.

 

[beach]

What will this do to those 10 days?
http://www.wftv.com/news/23190216/detail.html
Casey Defense Team May Have To Re-File Motion

Posted: 9:33 pm EDT April 18, 2010
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- Eyewitness News has discovered there could be a problem with the motion Casey Anthony's defense team just filed to remove Judge Strickland from her case.

If you look closely at the bottom of the motion, you can see Anthony's newest lawyer, J. Cheney Mason, notarized it himself.

But an inspection of the notary seal shows Mason's certification as a notary expired in November 2009.

They really should to come to WS for their scoops. Ws'ers had pegged within 3 hours of the release of that motion.

 

[nancy botwin]

Bumping to see if Nancy B can shed some light in this dark area. Please.

I think the 10 days began to toll after the facts were discovered in the defense interview with MD. I think the motion meets the 10 day requirement.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

What will this do to those 10 days?
http://www.wftv.com/news/23190216/detail.html
Casey Defense Team May Have To Re-File Motion

Posted: 9:33 pm EDT April 18, 2010
Snip
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- Eyewitness News has discovered there could be a problem with the motion Casey Anthony's defense team just filed to remove Judge Strickland from her case.

If you look closely at the bottom of the motion, you can see Anthony's newest lawyer, J. Cheney Mason, notarized it himself.

But an inspection of the notary seal shows Mason's certification as a notary expired in November 2009.
Snip

Hi, LL; I've been missing you. This was sleuthed out earlier in the thread and discovered that JCM does have a current notary license (although he used an outdated stamp). It is still not clear if it is legal to notarize the same document to which you were a signatory, though.

 

[notthatsmart]

Well then...they can't be crying about a tainted jury pool...now can they?

That statement makes no sense to me.

 

[Wishbone]

Marinade Dave words....

I had a really hard time believing any of this when it happened, and have an even harder time believing it now.

Back in October 2009, JS actions in court, rulings in motions, and personal conduct in this case has been above board, even in light of all the defense shenanigans.

Now in APril of 2010, I have even more hearings, rulings, etc to base this same impression of JS.

I find it unfathomable to even consider that JS would be very precise, patient and careful in protecting the rights of KC on SEVERAL occasions but willing to throw it away during one emamored moment in the presence of Marinade Dave?

Starting to sound like a tawdry sex novel!

I like to look at this case as a saga that is lolling in its own immensity. The defense is reaching out with its tentacles into every area possible except a believable defense for their client. With this latest motion the defense has sullied the honorable Judge. They have cast doubt yet again and that is something one doesn’t bounce back from easily. This devious ploy has been used many times on many people throughout case and it will likely work this time. They may get JS replaced but I doubt they will get away with it again. Let us hope the next Judge will be their worst nightmare…….

 

[miss plum]

I question how influential MD is as a blogger if the defense weren't aware of his bombshell for six months.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I think the 10 days began to toll after the facts were discovered in the defense interview with MD. I think the motion meets the 10 day requirement.

Thank you, nancy. But what a disappointment.

 

[logicalgirl]

Do you suppose Marinade Dave would ever have the stones to confess maybe he just did exaggerate just a teensy bit here regarding the conversation and stretched the truth quite a bit over there?

Is it possible that because MD was in the Casey courtroom, he just jumped to the conclusion that JS was talking about his Caylee blog? So he rushed back to get his blog updated and his whole recall was getting puffier and puffier cause he was going to be a star? And say a couple of days later he thought over the conversation, listened to that tiny voice that said "whoops', then shrugged and thought oh well, what harm could it do anyone and now more people love me?

If it happened that way, would MD be man enough to belly up and set the story straight?

Odds - 10 - 1 against?

 

[Dignity4Victims]

Marinade Dave words....

I had a really hard time believing any of this when it happened, and have an even harder time believing it now.

Back in October 2009, JS actions in court, rulings in motions, and personal conduct in this case has been above board, even in light of all the defense shenanigans.

Now in APril of 2010, I have even more hearings, rulings, etc to base this same impression of JS.

I find it unfathomable to even consider that JS would be very precise, patient and careful in protecting the rights of KC on SEVERAL occasions but willing to throw it away during one emamored moment in the presence of Marinade Dave?

Starting to sound like a tawdry sex novel!

:laugh: Tears are absolutely rollinggggggg!