Discuss..Description of PI video by legal analyst

[nursebeeme]

bmw, I actually don't think he is that smart either. However, while defending an obvious liar he sure has put up a staunch front. It makes me wonder about his motives and his means in how he has and had in the recent past been attempting to defend this obviously guilty woman.

Could he be playing the dork card? Just a thought

 

[jusdafacts]

Geraldo has just announced that he has obtained a copy of Hoover's videotape .... will be airing tonight on Geraldo at Large 10pm EST

 

[Black Magic Woman]

Geraldo has just announced that he has obtained a copy of Hoover's videotape .... will be airing tonight on Geraldo at Large 10pm EST

Oh God, can I make it through another Geraldo without committing suicide? The man has been drivin me crazy since this case started.

 

[DotsEyes]

Jusdafacts- thanks for the head's up.

As for Jose doing anything to help "hide" or "move" the body - utter nonsense. He just started practicing law, he has decades in front of him to continue his practice and to make millions of dollars. Law school is no walk in the park, it is grueling, intense and requires complete and total dedication. The Bar Exam cannot be explained but as an example of how grueling and tortuous it is, I know attorneys who have practiced for 30 and 40 years and still have not forgotten their Bar Exam experience. Point being, becomming an attorney is a very hard won privilege and I just do not believe that anyone would disregard his own newly achieved status and commit a crime to help a client. Sorry.

Sure there are unethical attorneys who have larceny in their hearts, but not many and they get routed out rather quickly.

She is just one client, there are thousands more to come. Practicing law is not a sprint, it is a marathon.

It is such a pity that the legal profession has such bad PR. But then no one ever hears about the thousands of great lawyers in their States who never step outside the Rules and vigorously represent their clients. So everyone thinks that all lawyers are like the ones who get into trouble. Kinda like cops who get painted with a broad brush due to the actions of one or two in an incident that gets coverage in a State thousands of miles away.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Most attorneys wouldn't. This was a theory well worth considering. But the main problem with this theory is that if JB had arranged it he would have made sure that the PI's were still on his payroll so he could continue to extend attorney/client privelege and keep them from talking to LE. Since JB immediately jumped up and tried to claim that privelege, but couldn't I am assuming that the PI's weren't doing it for him.

Perhaps JB had no idea that either one of them would ever tell any secrets. IMO, I think DC was still basically working for JB, but because they wanted to pay him out of donations, it was said he was working for G & C so that people wouldn't complain about their donations going towards her defence.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Most attorneys wouldn't. This was a theory well worth considering. But the main problem with this theory is that if JB had arranged it he would have made sure that the PI's were still on his payroll so he could continue to extend attorney/client privelege and keep them from talking to LE. Since JB immediately jumped up and tried to claim that privelege, but couldn't I am assuming that the PI's weren't doing it for him.

I think you've got that wrong! JB/Casey can still claim privilege. What JB asked for was a special master to oversee the questioning of DC to ensure priviliged communications weren't disclosed. The SA told the Court it was too late to appoint one, LE had already gone ahead and questioned DC. Then, IIRC, JB sought and obtained an order allowing judicial review of the interview before it is to be supplied to the SA. Unless Casey waives her right to that privilege (expressly or impliedly) she can still claim it. If DC has disclosed privileged info and had an agreement with JB/Casey not to disclose it, then KC could try to sue him, but she'd have to admit the info came from her to prove it.

 

[Lovejac]

Oh God, can I make it through another Geraldo without committing suicide? The man has been drivin me crazy since this case started.

I will be silently suffering with you as well, Black Magic! Geraldo gets on my last nerve

 

[LancelotLink]

I hope he shows the whole video and not just selected snippets.

 

[SuziQ]

I think you've got that wrong! JB/Casey can still claim privilege. What JB asked for was a special master to oversee the questioning of DC to ensure priviliged communications weren't disclosed. The SA told the Court it was too late to appoint one, LE had already gone ahead and questioned DC. Then, IIRC, JB sought and obtained an order allowing judicial review of the interview before it is to be supplied to the SA. Unless Casey waives her right to that privilege (expressly or impliedly) she can still claim it. If DC has disclosed privileged info and had an agreement with JB/Casey not to disclose it, then KC could try to sue him, but she'd have to admit the info came from her to prove it.

They are all kinda screwed then. You can't accomplish one thing without admiting to the other thing which would be worse than letting the chips fall where they may.

 

[SuziQ]

Perhaps JB had no idea that either one of them would ever tell any secrets. IMO, I think DC was still basically working for JB, but because they wanted to pay him out of donations, it was said he was working for G & C so that people wouldn't complain about their donations going towards her defence.

So what happens if DC says the A's were paying for me, but I was there because Baez directed me there. Is there still atty client priviledge?

I think DC will try as long as he can to say he was doing this on his own, but he better come up with something better than the Kio story and have a good explanation for the rock configuration. The latter is going to be tough, IMO.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Jusdafacts- thanks for the head's up.

As for Jose doing anything to help "hide" or "move" the body - utter nonsense. He just started practicing law, he has decades in front of him to continue his practice and to make millions of dollars. Law school is no walk in the park, it is grueling, intense and requires complete and total dedication. The Bar Exam cannot be explained but as an example of how grueling and tortuous it is, I know attorneys who have practiced for 30 and 40 years and still have not forgotten their Bar Exam experience. Point being, becomming an attorney is a very hard won privilege and I just do not believe that anyone would disregard his own newly achieved status and commit a crime to help a client. Sorry.

Sure there are unethical attorneys who have larceny in their hearts, but not many and they get routed out rather quickly.

She is just one client, there are thousands more to come. Practicing law is not a sprint, it is a marathon.

It is such a pity that the legal profession has such bad PR. But then no one ever hears about the thousands of great lawyers in their States who never step outside the Rules and vigorously represent their clients. So everyone thinks that all lawyers are like the ones who get into trouble. Kinda like cops who get painted with a broad brush due to the actions of one or two in an incident that gets coverage in a State thousands of miles away.

Such an important point...there are many very good and honest lawyers out there, but not all of them sadly. You would probably be surprised how many young lawyers get themselves in serious trouble...where I come from, one such young guy, shortly after getting his ticket, became involved in a very large ecstasy importation (I think he's doing at least 10 years at the moment)...in fact, I even replaced someone in Court once that had been arrested the night before for prostitution (she had become a junkie while practising), another convicted of drug manufacturer, another convicted of fraud and I could go on and on! Heck, where I live, a Supreme Court Judge had a little accident in his car on the way home one night, he visits a friend who convinces him he needs to go to hospital, at hospital they suspect he's been driving drunk and blood test him, the blood samples and the Judge go missing at the hospital...he of course denies taking them, but they had him on video going back to his Chambers with the vials in a plastic bag! He isn't a judge anymore, but he's still practising. That doesn't mean JB did do that, but it sure is possible.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

So what happens if DC says the A's were paying for me, but I was there because Baez directed me there. Is there still atty client priviledge?
I think DC will try as long as he can to say he was doing this on his own, but he better come up with something better than the Kio story and have a good explanation for the rock configuration. The latter is going to be tough, IMO.

I suppose in that situation the question would be "who was the client"....it is the client, not necessarily the person paying for the services, that can claim the privilege. G & C can pay him to work for Casey, in which case she is the client, but if he expressly wasn't working for Casey and was working for the As or independently when he did it, then there is no privilege to cover it. I think that's how it would work where I am, which is a long way from Fla., but I've never heard of, or had to deal with anyone disclosing confidential info from my office before, at least that I knew about!

ETA...it may be much more complicated than what I have stated...and would love to hear from a Fla. attorney who has the answers! I know that where I am, if I write a doctor a letter asking for an opinion, and he provides that opinion and I rely on it in court, the prosecutor may be able to get the letter that I wrote the doctor requesting his opinion, and the information he recieved and based his opinion on, into evidence. Also, unless a PI was employed by my office, I'm not certain all my communications with said PI would necessarily be privileged. I only use tried and tested experts and PIs and have never seen anything like this arise before.

 

[impatientredhead]

So what happens if DC says the A's were paying for me, but I was there because Baez directed me there. Is there still atty client priviledge?

I think DC will try as long as he can to say he was doing this on his own, but he better come up with something better than the Kio story and have a good explanation for the rock configuration. The latter is going to be tough, IMO.

DC is covered under privilege only for communications made to him during his employment as JB's agent. It is also only the communications made by Casey that are covered under privilege, the facts themselves are not privileged.

ie... he cannot be asked did Casey tell you where the body was while you were working for the defense. He can be questioned about the tape, the search, what they appear to be looking for such as black bags, etc...

If he got the info while working for G/C it is not privileged and he can be asked about the source of the tip.

 

[SuziQ]

Thanks guys. I think this aspect with DC being questioned is going to require a better solution than what the court ordered the other day.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Thanks guys. I think this aspect with DC being questioned is going to require a better solution than what the court ordered the other day.

I think what the court ordered might be the best solution in the circumstances...that is, before the prosecutor get to hear the tape, the court would determine any issues which may arise re privilege and cut that from the interview if necessary. But if the whispers in the courtroom were the Ps, then they had obviously already been briefed by someone about what the PIs had said. So, if there was anything that should have been covered by privilege, it's too late to take it back from the police now, but it doesn't mean that it would necessarily be admissible in court

 

[LaLaw2000]

Jusdafacts- thanks for the head's up.

As for Jose doing anything to help "hide" or "move" the body - utter nonsense. He just started practicing law, he has decades in front of him to continue his practice and to make millions of dollars. Law school is no walk in the park, it is grueling, intense and requires complete and total dedication. The Bar Exam cannot be explained but as an example of how grueling and tortuous it is, I know attorneys who have practiced for 30 and 40 years and still have not forgotten their Bar Exam experience. Point being, becomming an attorney is a very hard won privilege and I just do not believe that anyone would disregard his own newly achieved status and commit a crime to help a client. Sorry.

Sure there are unethical attorneys who have larceny in their hearts, but not many and they get routed out rather quickly.

She is just one client, there are thousands more to come. Practicing law is not a sprint, it is a marathon.

It is such a pity that the legal profession has such bad PR. But then no one ever hears about the thousands of great lawyers in their States who never step outside the Rules and vigorously represent their clients. So everyone thinks that all lawyers are like the ones who get into trouble. Kinda like cops who get painted with a broad brush due to the actions of one or two in an incident that gets coverage in a State thousands of miles away.

:clap::clap::clap:

You are so right, DotsEyes! My neighbor is a retired Family Law attorney, and I have dinner twice a month with a great friend from out of town who is a very good lawyer. I can count among my friends a D.A and an Assistant D.A. All of these people are wonderful and very good at their chosen profession.

I also VERY much agree with your analogy about cops for personal reasons! For the most part deputies and police officers are genuine people who care. There are always a few 'dirty' ones who get exposed one way or another.

 

[MADJGNLAW]

From what was said earlier on, Dominic Casey was no where near the crime scene. But if you listen to the unedited audio you will hear the analyst mention what I have stated below.

The Legal Analyst slipped three times, one to point out "the point of reference/landmark", "the 3 stones or rocks"... and said Dominic Casey was picking up items at the "crime scene" the audio got cut off briefly. Mr.Casey was at the crime scene. The analyst keeps insisting that he could of interrupted the crime scene. Now, I wonder if his finger prints were on any of the items found Dec 11. His point of reference that the analyst keeps pointing out, who informed Dominic where to look and what to look for 3 rocks/stones?

3 rocks or stones were the point of interest in the soil. He was on his cell phone the first day at the crime scene. He picked up a blanket and then tossed it then again found the point of reference the 3 stones, the second day again he went back to the point of interest the 3 stones...so who ever told him that the remains were out there told him to look for 3 stones or rocks and this I find will be very important to SA office..there was a landmark to where the remains were placed.

Mr.Casey's makes numerous calls on each search, the FBI will be able to determine who he was talking to on those days and who may of told him of the landmark/point of reference , 3 certain stones/rocks at the crime scene. I see a lot of other's that are going to start coming forward regarding this information.

SHEAFFER UNEDITED: Legal Analyst Describes Video

http://www.wftv.com/news/18449626/detail.html

 

[Black Magic Woman]

From what was said earlier on, Dominic Casey was no where near the crime scene. But if you listen to the unedited audio you will hear the analyst mention what I have stated below.

The Legal Analyst slipped three times, one to point out "the point of reference/landmark", "the 3 stones or rocks"... and said Dominic Casey was picking up items at the "crime scene" the audio got cut off briefly. Mr.Casey was at the crime scene. The analyst keeps insisting that he could of interrupted the crime scene. Now, I wonder if his finger prints were on any of the items found Dec 11. His point of reference that the analyst keeps pointing out, who informed Dominic where to look and what to look for 3 rocks/stones?

3 rocks or stones were the point of interest in the soil. He was on his cell phone the first day at the crime scene. He picked up a blanket and then tossed it then again found the point of reference the 3 stones, the second day again he went back to the point of interest the 3 stones...so who ever told him that the remains were out there told him to look for 3 stones or rocks and this I find will be very important to SA office..there was a landmark to where the remains were placed.

Mr.Casey's makes numerous calls on each search, the FBI will be able to determine who he was talking to on those days and who may of told him of the landmark/point of reference , 3 certain stones/rocks at the crime scene. I see a lot of other's that are going to start coming forward regarding this information.

SHEAFFER UNEDITED: Legal Analyst Describes Video

http://www.wftv.com/news/18449626/detail.html

Yes, as we've been discussing the entire thread, the focus on the landmark of stones or rocks indicates that he had info from the person who depositied the boby there. As does the fact that he was digging and probing where black bags were buried..
As I keep saying, when all the facts are out this PI business could possibily be the biggest break in this case.
however I believe that when the analyst referred to "the crime scene" he mis-spoke. I believe that the PI was very close to the crime scene but not at the actual scene. It is widely reported that the whole area of woods is covered with debris and trash and I think they were digging at the WRONG area with rocks. That's the reason watching Geraldo was so frustrating to me. Sometimes very intelligent well educated people can be so dense! L.Padilla and Mr. Hoover (who have both seen the video) said that the PI's were CLOSE to the crime scene not AT the crime scene.

 

[enjay]

bmw, I actually don't think he is that smart either. However, while defending an obvious liar he sure has put up a staunch front. It makes me wonder about his motives and his means in how he has and had in the recent past been attempting to defend this obviously guilty woman.

Could he be playing the dork card? Just a thought

I've asked myself that question several times lately. I think it's possible, maybe even probable. :waitasec:

 

[Storm]

She couldn't even report her daughter missing!
If someone took her, if there was an accident, I think
a call would have been made immediately.
Especially with Casey who loves attention.

My Bold

SS!
Has this theory been discussed here? I think this is my first time to read it. Wow, anything can happen in this case. Still if Casey Anthony did not harm this child - makes you wonder (in her mind) what is so terrible with saying what really happened? What would she be completely unable to tell as she faced prison without parole or worse. I know it is common thought that she has nothing to tell because she is guilty. Maybe. But it is puzzling. Ratz.