Defense claims judge had inappropriate convo with blogger?

[sleutherontheside]

Thoughts on the signatures MM?

 

[beach]

But if she signed more than one signature page because the document was not yet completed would that not be a problem for her team? Like signing a blank check. JMO

By 'completed', do you mean because the supporting docs were not attached to the copy she signed?

I can pretty much guarantee you Casey probably never saw the supporting docs (eg. DM's blogs). I highly doubt they were attached to either copy of the motion that CM presented to her. It would be nice to believe that all clients wanted to review what they were signing, but alas, more often than not, that is not the case. KC has blind faith in her 'boys'. And, no, that would not be a big problem legally speaking, IMO.

 

[CentralFLMama]

Wasnt Judge Strickland the one who said the truth and Miss Anthony are strangers? If so, then its obvious what his personal thoughts on the case are, and its been so since he said that. its the jury who has to be impartial at the beginning.

That said, I dont think it was a great idea of him to contact Dave. He may not have done anything wrong, but why give them any ammunition?

 

[LambChop]

Let me see if I can clear this up:

First: CFN 13 has the whole motion, they just broke it up into 2 parts. The Memo of Law is a separate file. Maybe to keep the download size smaller. It's on their site, right below the main motion.

Second: I can see the defense having Casey sign 2-3 copies. One for Baez's files, one for Cheney's files, one for the Clerk to file.


Obviously, CFN 13 was given a COPY of either Baez's or Cheney's copy. Early, before the Clerk and/or other media outlets. So they would have the "scoop."

Based on Adam doing a Baez puff piece a few months ago, I would guess that Baez gave Adam a copy, early.

Could one page be for one part of motion and the other page signed after she looked at the attachment? Or is their only one signature page throughout the whole document? I think there is only suppose to be one signature page. JMO

 

[AZlawyer]

If you look closely at CM's signature on both motions, the tops are in different places on each form. Now my question is, is it illegal to do this - have two copies of the motion, one for the court and one for the media.

No legal problem with having 2 originals--but why would they do this?? :waitasec:

--respectfull snipped

I've been asking that since wayyyy back on this thread, sometime Friday night, I believe. Has anyone viewed the visitor logs between 4/12-4/16?

I know there has been disagreement in whether CM or JB could have signed for Casey per a POA. It is my understanding that on THAT particular document that Cheney Mason notarized, he was swearing to the authenticity of CASEY ANTHONY'S signature. I don't believe that any POA Baez possesses would suffice.

I hope one of the attorneys will chime in to help clear this up, because I am not 100% positive in this case, but pretty sure.

Regarding POA. Even with a POA...you must list next to the signature that you are signing as a POA. There is a "specific" POA and a "blanket" POA. A specific POA authorizes you to sign a specific document for a person that can not be present for some reason. A blanket POA would cover people that can not sign for themselves or for business purposes.

However, I am interested in whether or not an attorney can legally sign a motion on behalf of the defendant as POA when she must acknowledge and attest to her position set forth in the document. Otherwise.......JB could say anything he wanted to and cover it with a POA. KWIM???

BBM

Exactly. the "specific" one is called a limited POA. There are many different types of POA used for various purposes.

in re. the bolded portion, that is exactly what I want to get to the heart of, too. I think that Cheney Mason was swearing to the authenticity of Casey's personal signature. (as opposed to Baez's authority to sign for her, if that makes any sense.)

It would NOT NOT NOT have been OK for Baez or any POA to sign an affidavit for Casey, or for a notary to notarize "her" signature if she didn't actually sign it.

But it does look like her "new" signature. So the question again is, why did she sign 2 copies? :waitasec:

But if she signed more than one signature page because the document was not yet completed would that not be a problem for her team? Like signing a blank check. JMO

They simply didn't attach the exhibits supporting the motion in the copy they gave to the media. In a hurry, ya know?

And, actually, Casey didn't legally have to have those supporting docs made available for her review before she signed, imo. She trusts her 'boys' so I guess she just signed on the dotted line like a good girl should.

It would be OK to have your client sign before you attached the exhibits described in the motion, but not OK to have your client sign before the motion was completed.

The only possible reason I can think of for having Casey sign this document twice is if the page she signed on had to be changed in some minor way before filing--maybe a citation was corrected or an exhibit number changed??

 

[Muzikman]

Thoughts on the signatures MM?

Just posted. Cheney had Casey sign 2 or three copies - one for his files, one for Baez's files, one for the Clerk.

The signatures themselves aren't forged.

 

[Macushla]

quick thought before I go back and start reading where I left off

Might it not be a clever idea for someone to screenshot the channel 13 version of the motion with the different signature? I don't know how to screenshot or I would do it. A LOT of people read here and I would hate that particular copy of the motion to go 'poof' - know what I mean?

 

[tlcya]

But doesn't the motion specifically state that SHE does not believe JS can preside over a fair trial?

How is she to make the distinction on whether or not he is biased if she doesn't have all the attachments?

Because her counsel doesn't feel she can get one and they are her defacto "experts". She cannot make that distinction but relies upon her counsel to direct and protect her according to what is most benificial to her case.

devils advocate. Please ws'ers do not jump on me as if I am part or parcel to this stupid motion as I am most definately not, however I T A with the post by marspiter.

 

[sleutherontheside]

I guess writing well is important. Lol but is it a requirment by law? Many have complained about the poorly written motions in this case. I am just curious. Is it required by law? If the point gets across, does the Judge acknowledge it? Of course he does. If he cant understand it, he will send it back and ask for clarification. People should be able to represent themselves even without a lawyer or good writing skills. IMO

I'll comment on that question. I don't think there is a law anywhere that criminalizes the use of poor grammar. That said.......

It is considered best practice to use appropriate grammar and writing style when submitting anything for consideration. Here is an example of what I am referring to in this opinion. There is actual software for this. So....in a nutshell......it is important but not legally required.

http://www.llrx.com/features/persuadingjudegesinwriting.htm

 

[sleutherontheside]

quick thought before I go back and start reading where I left off

Might it not be a clever idea for someone to screenshot the channel 13 version of the motion with the different signature? I don't know how to screenshot or I would do it. A LOT of people read here and I would hate that particular copy of the motion to go 'poof' - know what I mean?

We have them both posted a few pages back.

 

[Muzikman]

No legal problem with having 2 originals--but why would they do this?? :waitasec:







It would NOT NOT NOT have been OK for Baez or any POA to sign an affidavit for Casey, or for a notary to notarize "her" signature if she didn't actually sign it.

But it does look like her "new" signature. So the question again is, why did she sign 2 copies? :waitasec:





It would be OK to have your client sign before you attached the exhibits described in the motion, but not OK to have your client sign before the motion was completed.

The only possible reason I can think of for having Casey sign this document twice is if the page she signed on had to be changed in some minor way before filing--maybe a citation was corrected or an exhibit number changed??

How about my guess, AZ? An original for each of the attorney's files, and maybe one for the Clerk?

Just because this is such a "major" motion? In their eyes, anyway... :sick:

 

[LambChop]

Because her counsel doesn't feel she can get one and they are her defacto "experts". She cannot make that distinction but relies upon her counsel to direct and protect her according to what is most benificial to her case.

devils advocate. Please ws'ers do not jump on me as if I am part or parcel to this stupid motion as I am most definately not, however I T A with the post by marspiter.

You're right. It's why she paid JB those big buckerooo. LOL JMO

 

[magnolia]

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

The statement, the blog, MD, have little to do with Judge Stickland's ability to remain impartial,IMO. It is all about applying the Law. Will you kindly reference an instance when Judge Stickland has failed to apply the Law?

 

[AZlawyer]

I guess writing well is important. Lol but is it a requirment by law? Many have complained about the poorly written motions in this case. I am just curious. Is it required by law? If the point gets across, does the Judge acknowledge it? Of course he does. If he cant understand it, he will send it back and ask for clarification. People should be able to represent themselves even without a lawyer or good writing skills. IMO

It is only legally required if you want to win your motions. Judges do not generally "ask for clarification." If you can't write clearly enough to convince the judge, you will lose.

 

[tlcya]

You're right. It's why she paid JB those big buckerooo. LOL JMO

you mean why Florida taxpayers pay JB the big bucks dontcha?

 

[AZlawyer]

How about my guess, AZ? An original for each of the attorney's files, and maybe one for the Clerk?

Just because this is such a "major" motion? In their eyes, anyway... :sick:

I just don't see the point in having multiple originals. Multiple copies, sure.

 

[beach]

It would NOT NOT NOT have been OK for Baez or any POA to sign an affidavit for Casey, or for a notary to notarize "her" signature if she didn't actually sign it.

But it does look like her "new" signature. So the question again is, why did she sign 2 copies? :waitasec:

........


It would be OK to have your client sign before you attached the exhibits described in the motion, but not OK to have your client sign before the motion was completed.

The only possible reason I can think of for having Casey sign this document twice is if the page she signed on had to be changed in some minor way before filing--maybe a citation was corrected or an exhibit number changed??

--respectfully snipped

THANK YOU for clearing that up!!! I thought that was the case, just happy to know for sure!

 

[Marina2]

More and more I believe the defense filed this motion in hopes it will be denied. There's really no reason for JS to be disqualified and they know it. The only benefit I see for the defense is if JS denies the motion and stays on. This would give KC an excellent chance of having her conviction overturned on appeal. As written and taken as fact, I think a reasonable person would feel the judge is partial to the prosecution. It's likely an appeals court would feel this way, too.

Imo, the defense has nothing and anticipates a conviction.. They aren't trying to defend her. They're working on her appeal.

 

[marspiter]

How about my guess, AZ? An original for each of the attorney's files, and maybe one for the Clerk?

Just because this is such a "major" motion? In their eyes, anyway... :sick:

I know from my paper work that I often times have 5 signed "original" copies. One for Raleigh, one for the states regional office, one for my office, one for the County office, and one additional "original" for various purposes. Especially when it deals with budgets, program agreements, provider contracts, and RFP's (requests for proposal).

So having multiple signed originals doesn't seem to out of place to me....then again maybe I missed something in the 40 plus pages of discussion.

 

[beach]

I just don't see the point in having multiple originals. Multiple copies, sure.

Maybe to release one to the media before filing the 'real' one with the clerk? :innocent:


I thought I read where someone noticed that the media copy was not file-stamped. :waitasec: