Defense Motion to Seal Penalty Phase Discovery Documents

[tlcya]

snipped from `Beach

I still think this will be denied, especially for the reasons stated. Maybe this is just one of those things "for the record". I predict one of their main appellate arguments will be that the Sunshine Laws prevented Casey from getting a fair trial.

Wouldn't that open a whole can of worms for FL! I think you are right. And this tact, tells me the defense is already planning for a need to apeal. This shows me how very bad they feel their hand is going into trial.

Long live the sunshine laws in the sunshine state.

ETA Its all about establishing a paper trail now in preparation for appeal.

 

[Numbers]

Paragraph 4:

"The necessity for a penalty phase has not yet become an issue. However, the Court has entered an Order requiring penalty phase witnesses to be listed by November 30, 2010. The trial of this cause is set for May 10, 2011."

Day late, more than a few dollars short, AF.

 

[Itsy]

You are right - which begs the question - has this motion been submitted so AF can make another run at them because she feels she WILL be able to get them to talk to her - if this information is sealed that is?

That's what popped into my mind immediately. After all, the only other witnesses for the defense that I've noticed being "stalked or harassed" are C&G - and they asked for it time after time after time, IMO.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I hope Lyons saves his money, and that he will have to use it on an attorney. This witness tampering PI needs to be in jail.

 

[sleutherontheside]

http://www.wesh.com/caseyanthony/25911924/detail.html

Anthony's new penalty phase attorney, Ann Finnell, argues in the motion that intense media scrutiny has a "chilling effect, with some witnesses becoming reluctant to come forward with information for fear of harassment and stalking

SO......are they trying to say that there are people that actually have information that would be helpful to KC but they won't talk????

http://www.wesh.com/download/2009/0129/18597428.pdf

Moreover, if the defendant's deficient application was to be granted, it would cause a chilling effect on future volunteers not only with TES, but also with other charitable organizations as well.

To have their identity and personal information disclosed an available for publication and broadcast across the media and internet throughout the world, would violate their privacy expectations.

Perhaps AZ could weigh in here.....but is this not the same verbiage and argument that was made by TES....with a bit of tweeking to fit KC's position?? Tit for Tat????

 

[beach]

snipped from `Beach

I still think this will be denied, especially for the reasons stated. Maybe this is just one of those things "for the record". I predict one of their main appellate arguments will be that the Sunshine Laws prevented Casey from getting a fair trial.

Wouldn't that open a whole can of worms for FL! I think you are right. And this tact, tells me the defense is already planning for a need to apeal. This shows me how very bad they feel their hand is going into trial.

Long live the sunshine laws in the sunshine state.

ETA Its all about establishing a paper trail now in preparation for appeal.

Yeah, it will be a HUGE can of worms. They will be challenging the FL constitution and/or the FL Supreme Court. Basically, they are going to argue that the FL Sunshine Laws are a violation of her rights under the U.S. Constitution. I don't work in FL and haven't researched the case law, but I have a hunch this isn't the first time they have been challenged. So far they still stand.

I try to look at it this way - the defense is doing their job by covering their bases and insuring the record is clear that they don't like the Sunshine Laws. Another nail in the coffin of the ineffective counsel argument.

 

[The World According]

http://www.wftv.com/video/23518001/index.html
sorry folks in my earlier post I left out Part four.

We need to see the actual document, right now we are just guessing. At least I am.I think that the defense may have done what my high school girlfriends would have called.... got all happy over nothing.
When the judge suggested to the defense that regarding the investigation for the penalty phase that they may want to submit requests for funds to him under seal as to not divulge their trial strategy, they may have misunderstood the scope of what he would seal.
We learned in that hearing that Mason had a poor understanding of what has went on in the case so far. Again. He had no knowledge of the filing by Mark regarding the additional documents that were in possession of TES, many, many months ago, and that those documents have been sitting waiting to be reviewed by the defense. Also, Mason stood up and argued that the defense learned of mom and pop filling out the questionnaire for the FBI agents for the very very first time, only the day before the hearing. . Mrs. Drane-Burdick informed the judge and Mason that indeed Baez knew all about it, even commented on it during the depo!!

Likewise, it could very well be that the defense has NOT informed Mrs. Finnell, which imo seems to be a theme, that this matter has already been argued and ruled on. SO , possibly she may want to expand that idea out further to not have to divuldge documents they plan to use in the penalty phase, or exhibits, possibly even names of witnesses; because, that would effectuate the same thing and one could easily infer the trial strategy. I need to read the actual new document to see what the extent of their request is. If they are asking for anything along the lines of what they did and the judge ruled on in May, I do not see him reversing his own well thought out, researched and specific cases he relied upon sited in his decision. View attachment 12509

I do know one thing, Mrs. Finnell did not seem happy to have to turn around and look at Cheney and Jose like don't have me up here making a fool of myself. So, unless they want the revolving door to click again, they would do well to try to start bringing her up to speed. It is bad enough when Cheney makes it obvious he has a very poor understanding of what has went on in the case.

Yep, spot on! Too funny. I can predict the blunders in advance, this is sad, tired, and pitiful. Mrs. Finnell having a go at it, just as I thought. Hello. Come in Tokyo, you may want to notice the media on this motion.
http://www.wesh.com/pdf/25912035/detail.html

 

[MD MOMMY]

LOL unbelievable. Good job SOTS.

So I have a question. I've seen the Orlando Sentinel represented in court regarding media related motions. How do they know to come to court in response to media motions? I'm sure a representive will be there to hear this motion and speak on behalf of the Sentinel. I'm just wondering because they are never noticed on the motion.

 

[sleutherontheside]

LOL unbelievable. Good job SOTS.

So I have a question. I've seen the Orlando Sentinel represented in court regarding media related motions. How do they know to come to court in response to media motions? I'm sure a representive will be there to hear this motion and speak on behalf of the Sentinel. I'm just wondering because they are never noticed on the motion.

Perhaps they read at WS.

 

[kaRN]

I can't think of a single witness whose name has been released by the state who has complained of stalking and harassment as a result of the media can any of you?
I can name a few openly harassed by the defense or their PI's though. This is a crock IMO. People don't want to help ICA period.
Chock one up for Caylee!!

 

[The World According]

Wont it be funny if it is Cindy wanting to testify against Pop if Casey is found guilty, or vise versa...and for now they want to keep the peace.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

IMHO, Judge Perry covered this in his May 11, 2010 ruling:

2. If a particular witness will face public harassment, the defense may file a specific motion regarding that witness and the Court will consider a restriction on public disclosure of the name and address.

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...pect To Penalty Phase Discovery 5-11-2010.pdf

It would seem that if Ms. Finnell would have been better off filing that the name or names of said witnesses be sealed.

I don't believe Judge Perry will overturn his own decision, although, as others have mentioned, it applied to sealing the penalty discovery from the State and this one seems to indicated it wants it sealed from the public.

Ms. Finnell had an out based on the decision, if she knows about it!

 

[Charleyann]

Maybe it isn't the public they are worried about , but the family! Prehaps they don't want the scrutiny from Cindy and George? ....
Really, would you want to be family and have to face Cindy if she where angry you dared has anythng negative?

The woman is capable of harm . She is scary !!!! IMO...


Charleyann

 

[faefrost]

I can't think of a single witness whose name has been released by the state who has complained of stalking and harassment as a result of the media can any of you?
I can name a few openly harassed by the defense or their PI's though. This is a crock IMO. People don't want to help ICA period.
Chock one up for Caylee!!

I think what Miss Finnel is trying to argue is that "because of all of the intense media scrutiny, the defendants distant family in Ohio does not want to speak with our defense investigators." of course the arguements are spurious at best. There is no clear connection between media coverage and the cousins and such refusing to give statements that will be used as justification for their murdering black sheep of a relative.

Add to this I am suspecting that she may not have read through the prior motions and hearing transcripts far enough to have found that this was argued and denied, or she is not with it enough to realize that it has a higher chance of simply annoying the judge than it does of success, and the judge was starting to lose patience with the defense antics at the last hearing.

 

[chefmom]

Maybe it isn't the public they are worried about , but the family! Prehaps they don't want the scrutiny from Cindy and George? ....
Really, would you want to be family and have to face Cindy if she where angry you dared has anythng negative?

The woman is capable of harm . She is scary !!!! IMO...


Charleyann

Excellent point, Charleyann! Could you imagine if you were a cousin who had witnessed meltdowns by CA when you were a child where CA might have throttled KC. What might CA now do if she thought you were being asked to testify at KC's trial about what you had seen? WOW! What lengths would she go to to stop a relative from disclosing family secrets? You may very well be right. It's probably not the public that a relative would want to avoid. JMO.

 

[LambChop]

If you had only a little knowledge of what defense has done with their witnesses why would ANYONE want to talk to them?

 

[Intermezzo]

IMHO, Judge Perry covered this in his May 11, 2010 ruling:



http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...pect To Penalty Phase Discovery 5-11-2010.pdf

It would seem that if Ms. Finnell would have been better off filing that the name or names of said witnesses be sealed.

I don't believe Judge Perry will overturn his own decision, although, as others have mentioned, it applied to sealing the penalty discovery from the State and this one seems to indicated it wants it sealed from the public.

Ms. Finnell had an out based on the decision, if she knows about it!

You are right CM...Finnell would have been better off, (IF she read the May 11, 2010 Order by Judge Perry) filing the a Motion for that specific witness...just like the Order states..

IMO there is NO specific witness being addressed and the Defense is trying again to with hold all Penalty Phase Discovery from being released.

 

[chefmom]

If you had only a little knowledge of what defense has done with their witnesses why would ANYONE want to talk to them?

Yep! I mean, how many innocents have they thrown under the bus or insinuated could be involved now? :waitasec: And all the while, proclaiming KC to be innocent, yet providing not one iota of proof to back anything coming out of their mouths!

 

[Numbers]

You are right CM...Finnell would have been better off, (IF she read the May 11, 2010 Order by Judge Perry) filing the a Motion for that specific witness...just like the Order states..

IMO there is NO specific witness being addressed and the Defense is trying again to with hold all Penalty Phase Discovery from being released.

$50 says Baez hasn't told her 1/16th of the whole story. Or 1/50th of the truth.

 

[ZsaZsa]

Maybe Ms Finnell, is not aware of the Florida Sunshine Law? The others on the team do not seem to be acquainted with it, or try to overturn it at every opportunity...