Defense claims judge had inappropriate convo with blogger?

[magic-cat]

News 13 reminds us in their coverage of Marinade's response to all of this that they were the very first ones to have the story about the motion. I am sure that Baez and company provided them with a copy and Marinade got his day in the sun, via a PRE-motion interview all about his relationship with Judge Strickland. Talk about a set-up...this is certainly beginning to resemble one greatly.

 

[Macushla]

And how many revolutions per second have the mods heads been spinning since this thread opened?

You are all simply amazing:bowdown: I don't know how you do it and retain even a shred of sanity!

 

[ZsaZsa]

Does anyone know when/where this will be addressed?

 

[magic-cat]

Does anyone know when/where this will be addressed?

I think the motion says it must be addressed immediately but someone said the judge has 30 days on it. So...:waitasec:

 

[sleutherontheside]

When you sign as POA...you sign your name as POA for the person. You do NOT sign their name. Wonder if the doc provided CH13 was before KC actually signed it and they didn't want it to be obvious that they had handed it in before???? Off to do some closer looking at a few things like say.....position of notary stamp.

 

[Muzikman]

News 13 reminds us in their coverage of Marinade's response to all of this that they were the very first ones to have the story about the motion. I am sure that Baez and company provided them with a copy and Marinade got his day in the sun, via a PRE-motion interview all about his relationship with Judge Strickland. Talk about a set-up...this is certainly beginning to resemble one greatly.

You are spot-on, MC.

 

[magic-cat]

It seems as though he(Marinade) has NOW restored the article. It was GONE and now it's back again? Hmmm....Can someone else go to his blog and see if you see the same or if the page is still just the short response he had on earlier and NO soft shoe shuffler on the bottom half of the page...Perhaps he decided it made him look even worse to have deleted it so he put it back? Confused is an understatement!

 

[zoey]

Hmmmm.....

Channel 13 interviews MD hours BEFORE the motion is filed (and Dave was BLINDSIDED???)

Anyone else notice that the copy of the motion that Channel 13 is displaying on their site does NOT have the court stamp on it.......

http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFiles/Stories/Local/0416 Motion To Disqualify Judge.pdf


which I would assume means they received a copy BEFORE it was filed late Friday afternoon......

WHICH I would assume means that Team Baez/Cheney released this to certain media BEFORE they went to the courthouse??

Do we feel manipulated yet? Is our attention deflected??? NOPE....

isn't that how jb files all things? first media (because we are only going to try things in the court of law not the court of public opinion....???):furious: this isn't the first time he has done this.....I'm just so glad that it's always the other guys fault.....

 

[notthatsmart]

You're missing the point of WHEN he made the statement that CA and the truth are strangers. That's crucial. He made the statement when he was RENDERING A VERDICT on the bail issue. Judges are NOT neutral when they make decisions, nor should they be. They have to give reasons for their decisions, and he was giving reasons as to why her bail was being set so high. The end. To take his statement out of the legally appropriate context is to be very disengenuous, IMO. When you say you want judges to be responsible and impartial, taking JS's comments IN THE APPROPRIATE CONTEXT, he has been just that.

I think some believe its only me that has brought up this statement issue. It is actually in this motion. So, I am not the only one that has been disapointed by this statement. I do not feel I have taken anything out of context. And here I am again defending myself for something that is well known. The Judge was wrong to make that statement. IMO the end

 

[sleutherontheside]

OMG.........trying to upload thumnails but Mason's sig isn't even the same!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hold tight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[LambChop]

I was just going by the motion at hand. The Judge reporting Jb to the bar for something Dc said. Those are the only facts I have. I am not aware of other reasons given to report him to the bar. I wonder if that is normal for a Judge to report a defense lawyer to the bar in a situation where he is on the same case.

It is my opinion that many in the majority are basing their opinion of the Judge being fair on what the Judge has not done. For instance, not holding Jb in contempt for not being prepared for a hearing. Jb brought back the material in camera and the Judge was satisfied. There are also some that claim Jb should be in trouble for the way he types up motions. I know of nothing in the constitution of the U.S. that requires you to have good writing skills. The Judge can be as angry as he wants, but he is still bound to look at Kc right to a fair trial. I don't want Kc to be convicted because the Judge is mad at Jb, lets get it right. I hope the Lawyers do weigh in about the patience issue. If a Judge loses his patience, how is that fair to KC?

I believe it is the judges duty to pass complaints on to the bar, which he did with DC. It was not the JS's complaint. JS is fair because of the way he treats KC not for the fact that he lets JB off easy. JB's problem is not poor writing skills, it's his lack of properly preparing his motions in content not in sentence construction.

In the fraud trial JS was very fair. He insisted they remove her chains for court (KC gave him kudos for that in her letter), made sure she attended court so she can see both sides of her case as it will be presented. When speaking to her he is very respectful and fair. But he's not her "Momma", he's the judge. "Be careful what you wish for because you just might get it." I believe KC is entitled to a fair trial. I believe KC is entitled to have her attorney file proper motions in court that did not waste her money. Can't believe that KC's $200,000/plus could not buy a composite artist to draw up a picture of our infamous "Zani". In the end KC will be judged by a jury of her peers so this is much ado about nothing. JMO

 

[Muzikman]

I posted the first two signatures on Friday, but after reviewing the Channel 13 posted motion you linked to I noticed this.

The 1st is KC signature on the back of AH check. The 2nd signature was from WFTV and the 3rd is from the motion posted on Channel 13.

GREAT catch, Sparky!

While I consider the first one irrelevant - Casey changed her signature after spending time with her buddy Baez, doing the chameleon dance and copying him - the second two are VERY interesting.

Cheney's sig by his notary stamp is also different on the WFTV / CFN13 motions, although the bottom sigs of Baez and Cheney are the same.

More proof that there were at least two copies of this motion signed by Casey, and a different one was given to CF News 13 BEFORE it was filed with the clerk.

As I said before, this looks like a MEDIA PLOY by the defense - and one that may backfire on them, big-time.

 

[LambChop]

OMG.........trying to upload thumnails but Mason's sig isn't even the same!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hold tight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is that the notary signature??????? He can't have someone else (paralegal) sign for him on a notary so is the signature you are comparing it with someone who signed for him?????

 

[sleutherontheside]

The CH 13 copy is the one that appears to have been provided them before it was even filed.

The WFTV copy is stamped as being received the the Court.

Note the differences in not only KC's sig....but Mason's as well.....

 

[tlcya]

There was nothing wrong with the judge's statement re Casey's lack of aquaintance with the truth. A judge must rule impartially but a judge is also expected to RULE and have opinions regarding the case.

 

[Muzikman]

I think some believe its only me that has brought up this statement issue. It is actually in this motion. So, I am not the only one that has been disapointed by this statement. I do not feel I have taken anything out of context. And here I am again defending myself for something that is well known. The Judge was wrong to make that statement. IMO the end

Soju is completely correct - the Judge's comments were absolutely appropriate when handing down his bond ruling.

 

[logicalgirl]

Nothing new there, LOL, I'm usually impressed with my fellow sleuthers.

Nonetheless, I'm three hours behind most of you, so while I've been sleeping you've come up with some very interesting information.

If I wasn't so annoyed at what MD has done, I'd actually find his behavior since his interview actually very funny.

He is running around blogging and erasing, blogging and erasing, so obviously focused on himself rather than the damage he's done - sort of like - "there, do I look better yet?" "Eek - I look worse" " Now lemmie try this" " Better?" "Ackkk - I still look like an idiot". All the while wailing and pleading that this isn't his fault he was misunderstood and why am I definitely thinking all this drop and roll stuff is indicating to me he really did stretch his story about his chat with JS and is doing everything he can to avoid taking responsibility and admitting it! Reminds me of a rat in a maze - frantic and just can't find the exit.

Er......with a "oh goodie expectant smile" is there any champagne in the house?

 

[zoey]

Soju is completely correct - the Judge's comments were absolutely appropriate when handing down his bond ruling.

also when that statement was made everyone was still on the search for a baby girl and her mom wasn't helping---only giving "mistruths" ----

 

[strawberry]

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

I think you mean "cite" MOO

 

[LambChop]

I think some believe its only me that has brought up this statement issue. It is actually in this motion. So, I am not the only one that has been disapointed by this statement. I do not feel I have taken anything out of context. And here I am again defending myself for something that is well known. The Judge was wrong to make that statement. IMO the end

If the legal community felt it was wrong it would have been addressed 2 1/2 years ago. Unless JB is unfamiliar with court proceedings he should have filed a motion to have the judge removed after the judge made the statement. Too little, too late. Maybe if more people attended these hearings they would realize what JS said to KC was mild. She was not arrested for stealing nail polish. JS was referring to her lying to LE who were trying to find her child. I don't even think the charges included DP charges at that time.

jmo