Defense wants prosecutor Jeff Ashton held in contempt

[rossva]

Facebook? No thanks. I'll wait till he's in a court of law to answer the charges.

If you're really concerned about the truthful answer to this, rather than asking posters here to speak for Jeff Ashton, why not go to his Facebook page and directly ask him yourself?

I won't post his page here, but I'm sure you can easily find it on your own, no? I'll give you a hint though, he's quite adequately answered the truthful legalities of your question on Facebook.

 

[watcher9]

Thanks katydid23 for posting some of the highlights of JA's interview.
It was so interesting to hear his insights on the jury's deliberation and verdict (lack thereof).
I only wish I had seen the first part.

 

[atthelake]

When someone can share with us a FB or rerun or ??? of these both with Vinnie - can they share as I have missed both parts due to holiday schedule. Thanks in advance fellow WS'ers!

Happy Holidays to all!

 

[LambChop]

KC's story to the psychologist does not make sense. And here is why. My grandson fell into the pool and it was 10 minutes (very cold water thank goodness) before my daughter found him. He had gone to the bottom and floated back up to the top but came up exactly where he had fallen in (it was above ground with decking so we know where he went in). He is fine. If Caylee fell in the pool, she could not swim so she would have been right there where GA could have gotten to her without getting into the pool. When they are that small their instinct is to not breath so she would have still had air in her lungs and floated to the top.

I doubt if this got past the doctor because he would know that. So why tell that story?
What did KC do to Caylee that she would come up with that story? She seemed to know that if you hold a small child under the water long enough they will drown and you will only get the top portion of you wet. jmo

 

[Turnadot]

Yes, but like I've said before, I guarantee you he had bosses, adminstrators, and probably even state government telling him to get this trial over with and spend as little money and time as possible. I don't think he had the choices he wanted in this case. The judicial system was having severe money problems, and might even still be having those kinds of problems. I think he had other people breathing down his neck to get this over and done with. I just can't put all the blame on him for what happened. I'm sure he wishes things had gone differently, but money talks the loudest.

He was forced to put up with Baez, quickly get a jury, and make the trial go as fast as he could because of the state judicial system's money problems. I bet he was told there would be no do over, and to get it wrapped up as quickly as possible. Remember the big stink that one woman put up, and said that Casey's trial wasn't even going to happen at one point? I bet he got stuff like that on a daily basis about Casey Anthony and her trial. That overrode justice, and that is the real shame here. Blame the money problems, not HHJP, for how this trial turned out.

In other cases, he's done much better and had much better outcomes. So why was this case so different? Why was his courtroom in such disarray? Why wasn't Baez replaced? Why wasn't a better jury selected? Why did this trial seemed so rushed? The fault for all of that is on one man? That doesn't make sense. What makes sense is the state judicial system's money problems causing all of those problems for HHJP. I actually feel sorry for him because I just know that he wanted things to be so different. He wasn't happy with Baez at all. He was angry and upset more often that not. Does that sound like a judge pleased with the case, his decisions, and how the case went? I'm surprised he didn't have a heart attack at times when he would get so angry at Baez, yet Baez was still allowed to be Casey's lawyer. Money. That is the issue. That is what forced this case to be so bad and forced the bad outcome, not HHJP.

And shoot, put the blame where it really belongs, on the Pinellas 12. Even HHJP was surprised and angered at the verdict. Even he didn't see it coming. And heck, if the bar won't do a darn thing about a lawyer as bad as Baez, I highly doubt they will go after HHJP. He did everything within legal bounds anyway, even if we don't like it.

Excellent post.

RE: the BBM, my only nit with that is HHJP was not forced to eat Baez's crap - he could and should have put his foot firmly down. He never really did.

Also, I think dressing down Ashton in front of the jury was a huge mistake, and HHJP did so more than once, IIRC. I don't think a judge should dress down either side with the jury present and he never did so with Baez, he always had the jury leave, which means the jury never knew Baez got reamed. HHJP would yell at Ashton in front of the jury.

Maybe It's just me, and at the time I wasn't too wound up about it, but the more I've had to ponder, the more I think it f'd with the jury on some level, though for my sanity I've let it go emotionally - the verdict, I mean. But if I were on a jury and I saw saw one of the lawyers getting dressed down by the judge in front of me, especially more than once, I would assume the lawyer is wrong and probably incompetent. I admit it would colour how I viewed the evidence presented from them.

I admit I don't care about any of this post-trial spillover whatsoever. I don't care if Ashton was in the right or in the wrong and the thought of seeing Ashton answer charges, or even Baez for that matter, makes me feel pretty meh. I've moved on for the most part. At the end of the day, A baby was still wrapped in garbage bags and tossed out like trash - accident or no, a baby is still dead and was treated like she was nothing. That bothers me...this slap fest between Ashton and Baez, not so much.

I haven't purchased Ashton's book and I have no plans to do so. It's nothing personal, I just have no desire to emotionally engage in this case anymore. I have missed you guys though, so here I am, posting ITT.

JMHO

 

[Well Done 99]

Excellent post.

RE: the BBM, my only nit with that is HHJP was not forced to eat Baez's crap - he could and should have put his foot firmly down. He never really did.

Also, I think dressing down Ashton in front of the jury was a huge mistake, and HHJP did so more than once, IIRC. I don't think a judge should dress down either side with the jury present and he never did so with Baez, he always had the jury leave, which means the jury never knew Baez got reamed. HHJP would yell at Ashton in front of the jury.

Maybe It's just me, and at the time I wasn't too wound up about it, but the more I've had to ponder, the more I think it f'd with the jury on some level. If I were on a jury and I saw saw one of the lawyers getting dressed down by the judge in front of me, especially more than once, I would assume they lawyer is wrong and probably incompetent. I admit it would colour how I viewed the evidence presented from them.

JMHO

I agree. IMO these slaps on the wrist in front of the jury were wrong (and I'm a supporter of HHJP!).
Wouldn't one think there was enough opportunity to have done so quietly in one of the 271 sidebars?

 

[Turnadot]

I agree. IMO these slaps on the wrist in front of the jury were wrong (and I'm a supporter of HHJP!).
Wouldn't one think there was enough opportunity to have done so quietly in one of the 271 sidebars?

BBM

So true!

 

[otto]

I think it's just fantastic that Ashton's book scooped the jury, the woman that left her dead child to rot in her car, and the defense lawyers. Mason may be complaining about the content in the book because maybe that info was supposed to be the special info that the woman with the dead child could publish or talk about ... but now that cat is out of the bag too.

 

[LolaMoon08]

Facebook? No thanks. I'll wait till he's in a court of law to answer the charges.

Will you be there personally?

 

[rossva]

I could be. Any idea of the date it will be? Last I read was: "At that time, Perry reserved ruling on whether or not Ashton should be held in contempt, the motion said."


http://articles.orlandosentinel.com..._danziger-and-weitz-casey-anthony-depositions

Will you be there personally?

 

[katydid23]

JA is on JVM right now:

JA was angry at Baez because of what he did to Cindy before the trial began. As a way of breaking the news to her that they were going after George, Baez set up a meeting with just Cindy. And he lied to her, telling her that the state was investigating George for being involved in Caylee's death, in Cindy's yard. That was all a big l;ie, but Baez did not want Cindy to be mad at the DT so he concocted that story instead of telling her the brutaltruth: that her own daughter was making false accusations against her dad to cover her own guilty arse.

 

[krimekat]

LOL JVM (NOT an atty) telling Jeff Ashton what she would do differently . . . LOL

Why do these THs talk so much that their guests have no time to talk between commercials. HATE HLN/CNN but I watch

http://www.rentadrone.tv/hln-live-stream-feed/

 

[katydid23]

JA: "We could not get admissable information to prove the validity of the fight between Cindy and casey, for example, because Cindy would not agree to do that. ...
The chloroform thing was an embarrassment to us. And we may have had a few too many witnesses to her lying upfront. "

 

[katydid23]

JA:" I believe in Karma. Karma has the way of balancing the scales."

 

[katydid23]

Jennifer Ford: " It seems like each piece of evidence could be looked at in different ways, and did not point to anything really. "

JA: I don't 'blame' the jurors, they can define reasonable doubt any way they want. Jennifer Ford, for example, wanted ONE piece of evidence that was crystal clear. And that was not this case, it was made up of many pieces of circumstantial evidence, which needed to be looked at all together. "

 

[suzihawk]

JA:" I believe in Karma. Karma has the way of balancing the scales."

Amen, Mr. Ashton. Amen! I pray I get to see this karma in action in my lifetime.

Such a gracious gentleman Mr. Ashton is.

 

[AZlawyer]

If you're really concerned about the truthful answer to this, rather than asking posters here to speak for Jeff Ashton, why not go to his Facebook page and directly ask him yourself?

I won't post his page here, but I'm sure you can easily find it on your own, no? I'll give you a hint though, he's quite adequately answered the truthful legalities of your question on Facebook.

Can you possibly give a better hint? I looked at the "official" JA page and couldn't find anything except a general denial that he did anything wrong.

IIRC Ashton had filed a motion to unseal the expert depos a couple of months before trial, but the discussion on the motion was mostly at sidebar and the motion was never ruled on--so I don't know what HHJP said to him. And I can't find the original sealing order. :banghead:

 

[LolaMoon08]

I could be. Any idea of the date it will be? Last I read was: "At that time, Perry reserved ruling on whether or not Ashton should be held in contempt, the motion said."


http://articles.orlandosentinel.com..._danziger-and-weitz-casey-anthony-depositions

No. I have no idea when the motion will be heard? I would love to know if you'll be there though. I might watch. I love to watch when our fellow members will be in the... gallery? That way, when they come back to post about their experience, I know what they are talking about.

It will be interesting to see what happens with this motion though. Maybe after the New Year?

 

[Just Jayla]

I would really like to know the real motivation behind filing this motion. Is it because of the OS asking for the unsealing of the depos? Is it because it creates yet another hurdle in their appeal on the lying charges? Does it create a problem for one of the civil suits? There is a real issue, at least in their minds, that they are asking for this. I would love to know what it is. The DT always had a self-serving reason for every motion they filed. What is the reason for this? :waitasec:

Yep. I mean, even though KC would have the world believe she is a legal mind, I don't see her being the one to instruct them on this. She's sippin margaritas by DS's pool, waiting for her best friend (read: the UPS guy) to come over so they can go through her scrapbook and make matching paper mache ankle monitors.
No, this is the attys, and I somehow find it hard to believe that they filed this motion because of their commitment to truth, justice and the American way.
I cannot connect this to her appeal.
Can connect this to Zenaida...if Jeff Ashton or the docs are called as a witnesses, because it shows once again that ZG could not have been the kidnapper KC implied that she was in the conversation with Cindy.
Suppose it could be the Sentinel thing, but nailing JA does not nullify the Sentinel's arguments. Once the toothpaste is out, the press has to brush our teeth.
Can connect it to the slow, painful death of their cash heffer
Can connect it to CM's vitriole throughout and after the trial
Noticeably absent is JB's megaphone on this one...cause he's still jaunting around making his own cash. What does he care?
Why bring up the monetary gains JA is enjoying in yet another whiny dis-concise motion? KC has recourse for that, but she will not sue for obvious reasons. This is the defense, once again, using the laws that protect us as a sword. JA has a right to pursue happiness and the Sentinel's duty is to exploit the First Amendment. But KC's right to due process (which she already had) is being used against them-because they are making money, and she is not. Well, her attorneys are not...she's busy splashing hair dye all over DS's marble vanity.

 

[logicalgirl]

Yep. I mean, even though KC would have the world believe she is a legal mind, I don't see her being the one to instruct them on this. She's sippin margaritas by DS's pool, waiting for her best friend (read: the UPS guy) to come over so they can go through her scrapbook and make matching paper mache ankle monitors.
No, this is the attys, and I somehow find it hard to believe that they filed this motion because of their commitment to truth, justice and the American way.
I cannot connect this to her appeal.
Can connect this to Zenaida...if Jeff Ashton or the docs are called as a witnesses, because it shows once again that ZG could not have been the kidnapper KC implied that she was in the conversation with Cindy.
Suppose it could be the Sentinel thing, but nailing JA does not nullify the Sentinel's arguments. Once the toothpaste is out, the press has to brush our teeth.
Can connect it to the slow, painful death of their cash heffer
Can connect it to CM's vitriole throughout and after the trial
Noticeably absent is JB's megaphone on this one...cause he's still jaunting around making his own cash. What does he care?
Why bring up the monetary gains JA is enjoying in yet another whiny dis-concise motion? KC has recourse for that, but she will not sue for obvious reasons. This is the defense, once again, using the laws that protect us as a sword. JA has a right to pursue happiness and the Sentinel's duty is to exploit the First Amendment. But KC's right to due process (which she already had) is being used against them-because they are making money, and she is not. Well, her attorneys are not...she's busy splashing hair dye all over DS's marble vanity.

BBM: ......:silly: ....following a great well thought out post!!:seeya: