Defense Witness List

[whiteangora]

ITA!!
I'm wondering re the request for any and all videos made by the expert in conection to the case. If granted, does that open the door for the state to use all of Kobi's pro prosecution interviews on NG in their cross examination?
I love this motion. It seems we might get a full accounting of funds after all. In my best case scenario, LB has testified she was paid by an agent of the defense and DC has come clean. They can't release evidence that will prejudice ICA's right to a fair trial but they can expose the corruption that's kept that evidence surpressed.........or do I watch to much CSI type TV?? lol!

I'd love to see a full accounting of funds too, but I'm betting it will be done with JP behind closed doors in camera.

 

[Intermezzo]

State's Motion to Compel Discovery:

http://www.wesh.com/pdf/25878653/detail.html

Well, well, what do we have here?
Is this normal procedure?

 

[nums24]

Does the defense have to produce statements and evidence collected if they do not intend on using it in the trial. I don't think they do. If they don't produce it to the prosecution, they can't use it. This might be a smart way to cut JB's "evidence" off...sort of like "produce it now or lose it."

I don't think they have to disclose what won't be used, but they may have to provide an accounting of what was spent and not being used for trial.

The timing of this could have been better, Happy Turkey Day Defense!

JB has a pre-trial conference on another case tomorrow, that trial starts 12/6/2010. We have all the depositions due before the month end. Deadline to list expert and penalty phase witnesses, and deadline to file all non LE/non-expert witness motions by 11/30/2010. Here's a link to Caylee Case Calendar: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/calendar.php?s=&c=4&week=&month=11&year=2010

 

[Intermezzo]

I think the status hearing may turn into a regular hearing, I hope HHJP would make ICA attend.

I think you're right about something funny going on too, it doesn't make sense how the defense had all these people calling TES volunteers with only 60 hours of PI time left, things that make you go hmmmm.

I just read the Motion..

The SAO wants Discovery under the FRCP for the Defenses Listed Expert Witnesses..
Contracts, Agreements-in any manner or form (hmm), expected Compensation, Communication, Records of Bills (including Travel, meals or entertainment) Notes, Photos or Video taken

Did the SAO learn something during LB's Depo last week?

 

[nums24]

I just read the Motion..

The SAO wants Discovery under the FRCP for the Defenses Listed Expert Witnesses..
Contracts, Agreements-in any manner or form (hmm), expected Compensation, Communication, Records of Bills (including Travel, meals or entertainment) Notes, Photos or Video taken

Very interesting, I would love to know what precipitated this request at this time.

 

[Sun]

Very interesting, I would love to know what precipitated this request at this time.

Me too! I'm guessing that Baez has already stated to JA that he doesn't have to turn anything over, that everything is "work product." JMO though.

 

[Intermezzo]

Very interesting, I would love to know what precipitated this request at this time.

I wonder if it was the depo with LB last week
OR
Jose told Judge Perry during the telephone hearing last week that the Hair samples testing was completed...of course the Defense has not turned any Reciprocal Discovery over to the SAO as of yet.

The SAO knows the Defense has had it's own experts test evidence but has not turned anything over to the State as per the Agreement of Reciprocal Discovery Casey signed in October of 2008.

 

[Jomo]

Maybe he doesn't intend on handing any of it over because it all points to his client.

What he doesn't turn over, now that we know what he has been testing and checking, is going to be just as interesting as what he does turn over!

 

[countzero]

Maybe he doesn't intend on handing any of it over because it all points to his client.

What he doesn't turn over, now that we know what he has been testing and checking, is going to be just as interesting as what he does turn over!

And I for one, along with many others here, would like to know what the tests results were that JB and crew found when they re-examined the evidence under the watchful eye of the sheriffs dept. Let's not forget, this happened exactly at the time period JB was caught cell phone talking with Robyn from her prison. Everyone dropped this ball and went with that piece of media carp.

Oh, and just exactly WHERE is that missing July08 LE interview with CA that was released to JB back in July 10 but not released to JQ public????

 

[countzero]

State's Motion to Compel Discovery:

http://www.wesh.com/pdf/25878653/detail.html

This motion was initiated by Jeff not Linda. Which could indicate Jeff is on to something and it isn't going to be good for ICA and company. He knows it is damaging since he has written in the motion to allow in camera.

 

[Intermezzo]

This motion was initiated by Jeff not Linda. Which could indicate Jeff is on to something and it isn't going to be good for ICA and company. He knows it is damaging since he has written in the motion to allow in camera.

That's what I thought when I saw Jeff Ashton name and siggy at the bottom of the Motion..

Then again it was Jeff Ashton who initiated the Motion concerning how Casey was paying her Defense Team in March of 2009

Here is the link to that Motion

http://www.wesh.com/download/2009/0324/19002170.pdf

Judge Strickland said No conflict over Anthony Defense Team
http://www.wesh.com/r/19008237/detail.html

I can't seem to locate the Thread for that Motion and Hearing so I can link it here to read again...can anyone help out.

 

[nums24]

That's what I thought when I saw Jeff Ashton name and siggy at the bottom of the Motion..

Then again it was Jeff Ashton who initiated the Motion concerning how Casey was paying her Defense Team in March of 2009

Here is the link to that Motion

http://www.wesh.com/download/2009/0324/19002170.pdf

Judge Strickland said No conflict over Anthony Defense Team
http://www.wesh.com/r/19008237/detail.html

I can't seem to locate the Thread for that Motion and Hearing so I can link it here to read again...can anyone help out.

Here are the threads for the hearing:

Motion for how defense is getting paid: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81148&highlight=indigency+hearing

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98116&highlight=indigency+hearing

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98221&highlight=indigency+hearing

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98221&highlight=indigency+hearing

 

[JSR]

Well, well, what do we have here?
Is this normal procedure?

Yup sure is. I haven't read the entire motion yet. But this is typical. Especially if the SA is starting to warm up for the depositions of the defenses' "experts". The experts will be deposed about the amount of compensation they receive and how they received it. All standard operating procedure.

 

[JSR]

I'd love to see a full accounting of funds too, but I'm betting it will be done with JP behind closed doors in camera.

The SA WILL be entitled to how much each expert was paid. Even if JB doesn't like it and stamps his foot like a little child. The SA will get the information. It's information they are entitled to if they are preparing for trial and any potential cross examination of the expert.

 

[Intermezzo]

Here are the threads for the hearing:

Motion for how defense is getting paid: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81148&highlight=indigency+hearing

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98116&highlight=indigency+hearing

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98221&highlight=indigency+hearing

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98221&highlight=indigency+hearing

Merci.

 

[Intermezzo]

Yup sure is. I haven't read the entire motion yet. But this is typical. Especially if the SA is starting to warm up for the depositions of the defenses' "experts". The experts will be deposed about the amount of compensation they receive and how they received it. All standard operating procedure.

The SA WILL be entitled to how much each expert was paid. Even if JB doesn't like it and stamps his foot like a little child. The SA will get the information. It's information they are entitled to if they are preparing for trial and any potential cross examination of the expert.

Wonderful!! Thanks JSR!

 

[Intermezzo]

I don't think this motion is all about money. The JAC is all over the defense like white on rice when it comes down to cutting the defense any checks.

This is about ICAs experts; what they have and don't have. The money is but a minor part. Jeff wouldn't waste a motion on money, its not his connection to the SAO. He's the evidence and forensics guru .... and the defense is far behind in submitting their evidence.

If anything, I believe Jeff is tired of it and is forcing the issue with this motion. It's either put up or shut up time for JB and crew with this motion. Good ol' Henry won't be having happy holidays coming soon. Along with JB and crew.

Oops, JSR responded while I was typing. I get it, thanks.

BBM
Thanks, and yes I agree.

 

[countzero]

BBM
Thanks, and yes I agree.

Oh dear, while I was busy typing JSR posted, so I deleted my post you just replied to .... but I still get the feeling Jeff's motion is about more than the money. Since the JAC already has predetermined fees set, why would Jeff reference to his motion in camera responses if the defense has objections?????

 

[RR0004]

My OH My! What a fascinating change of events!
Something must be up, and it's not JB's IQ.

I would think they'd have to provide JAC with the bill part in order to get paid...or do they just get a lump sum of money and work off that? I'm thinking they always have to submit bills(as we've seen in the doc dumps)...so not sure what kind of finagling they can do with that. As far as the experts are concerned...isn't that a matter of course? If they've gone over their PI hours...couldn't someone just step forward and say they're providing their time pro bono? What am I missing here?

 

[RR0004]

Yup sure is. I haven't read the entire motion yet. But this is typical. Especially if the SA is starting to warm up for the depositions of the defenses' "experts". The experts will be deposed about the amount of compensation they receive and how they received it. All standard operating procedure.

I should have read ahead. Thanks!