Florida Bar Allegedly Prepares Case against Baez

[Numbers]

Couldn't disagree more. The public are the ones who are supposed to be served/protected by the judicial system. We pay for it, we have a say. If someone in something as important as a murder trial is seen/caught lying, being dishonest, then it is our duty to report it and make it known. As long as people aren't lying then it is part of our duty to ourselves. Baez is a representative of the government - and you think procedure is more important than seeking to question and hold people accountable? Come on now...

I have no problem with a member of the public reporting the misbehavior of any public figure.

I do have a problem with a member of the public inserting themselves into a case. (See: Buchanan, Laura, and Wray, Joy)

 

[faefrost]

Wow, they are not protecting the public very well by doing that. An Attorney can go through his career collecting legitimate complaints and they wll all fall off his record after one year!

The Bar is not a public organization and have little to no responsibilities to the public. They fall within that same nebulous area of "private special interest group" not unlike the AMA, the ADA, and other professional certifying groups.

 

[Macushla]

snip

As for the Florida Bar? The very board whose responsibility is to hold the attorneys practicing in the state of Florida to a standard of professionalism that includes a particular degree of ethics has allowed a practicing attorney in their state to make a mockery of the Florida judicial system in practically have every aspect of this case. Trust them? No thank you. IMO, after the manner they have handled several bar complaints against Mr. Baez, they lost the trust and respect I had.

snip

Novice Seeker

JB is not the first lawyer that has taken courtroom antics to high levels. At this stage it is up to HHJP to take action for what JB has been up to, his behavior has not reached a level that would require intervention by the FL BAR - at least so far.

Have you ever heard someone in LE say something along the lines of 'we know this person is guilty, but we just can't prove it?" It happens more than people realize. In order to convict someone, the evidence must be there that proves guilt. The prosecution can't depend on 'gut feelings', or they said - we said' in order to take a case to trial. They must have clear evidence of wrong doing. Evidence that is strong enough to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that this person did this crime.

It is the same with the FL Bar. They must have clear evidence of wrong doing. Evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that JB did the things he is accused of doing. Take the latest complaint: If it is about misrepresentation, as a number of us assume it is - what is the evidence? BC says he did. He talks about the letter that was sent by C&A to NeJame, and shows letters from JB asking him to look at TES files and contact LB. Where is the evidence that shows that BC's claim that JB misrepresented things in court. As far as I can see, there is none, just BC's testimony. IF JB testifies that BC told him the things he claimed in court, you have a he said - he said situation. There is the possibility that the Bar may not be able to substantiate the complaint.

The can't say the complaint is valid because someone says JB is a bad buy, no matter how much we all may believe he is a bad guy. There has to be proof of misconduct, and I am not sure I have seen or read anything that, to me, proves CLEAR evidence of guilt.

This is, of course, simply my opinion.

 

[ThinkTank]

Wow, they are not protecting the public very well by doing that. An Attorney can go through his career collecting legitimate complaints and they wll all fall off his record after one year!

If the Bar finds that an attorney has broken "Bar rules" and the Bar takes any action against the attorney that would stay on the attorney's record and could be reviewed by any person contemplating hiring that attorney.
Only the complaints where the Bar found no probable cause to bring any action against the lawyer, and closed the case, get purged from the file after one year.

 

[Omachka]

JB is not the first lawyer that has taken courtroom antics to high levels. At this stage it is up to HHJP to take action for what JB has been up to, his behavior has not reached a level that would require intervention by the FL BAR - at least so far.

Have you ever heard someone in LE say something along the lines of 'we know this person is guilty, but we just can't prove it?" It happens more than people realize. In order to convict someone, the evidence must be there that proves guilt. The prosecution can't depend on 'gut feelings', or they said - we said' in order to take a case to trial. They must have clear evidence of wrong doing. Evidence that is strong enough to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that this person did this crime.

It is the same with the FL Bar. They must have clear evidence of wrong doing. Evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that JB did the things he is accused of doing. Take the latest complaint: If it is about misrepresentation, as a number of us assume it is - what is the evidence? BC says he did. He talks about the letter that was sent by C&A to NeJame, and shows letters from JB asking him to look at TES files and contact LB. Where is the evidence that shows that BC's claim that JB misrepresented things in court. As far as I can see, there is none, just BC's testimony. IF JB testifies that BC told him the things he claimed in court, you have a he said - he said situation. There is the possibility that the Bar may not be able to substantiate the complaint.

The can't say the complaint is valid because someone says JB is a bad buy, no matter how much we all may believe he is a bad guy. There has to be proof of misconduct, and I am not sure I have seen or read anything that, to me, proves CLEAR evidence of guilt.

This is, of course, simply my opinion.

Respectfully quoted and bolded by me. I'm not sure that "beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard that the Bar needs to go by. If they have a lawyer making a misrepresentation in open court as to a document that another lawyer doesn't really have and the other lawyer making a statement under oath that he doesn't have it (if that's what this is about) that seems like pretty compelling evidence to me. JMO

 

[ThinkTank]

In order for The Florida Bar to discipline an attorney there must be clear and convincing evidence.

Bar counsel must analyze the complaint and the supporting evidence from the standpoint of whether or not, as a prosecutorial agency, the case stands a reasonable chance of being won if litigated.

One of the considerations Bar Counsel must weigh in deciding whether to close a file or proceed further to seek disciplinary measures is the weight of the available evidence.

If the Bar seeks to discipline the lawyer, it is required by Supreme Court ruling to show, by "clear and convincing" evidence that there has been a violation of one or more of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar.

Clear and convincing evidence has been defined as "evidence so clear, direct and weighty and convincing as to enable [the factfinder] to come to a clear conviction, without hesitancy, of the truth of the precise facts in issue." This burden of proof is heavier than the burden of proof required in an ordinary civil trial.

 

[Macushla]

Respectfully quoted and bolded by me. I'm not sure that "beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard that the Bar needs to go by. If they have a lawyer making a misrepresentation in open court as to a document that another lawyer doesn't really have and the other lawyer making a statement under oath that he doesn't have it (if that's what this is about) that seems like pretty compelling evidence to me. JMO

I politely and respectfully disagree I would think the FL Bar would be the one entity where 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt' is sancrosanct. Is that not the whole premis of being a trial attorney. "Your Honor, just because Mr. Doe said under oath that Mr. Smith kicked his dog it does not make it true." In fact, I believe it is taught in defense cross examination 101 that you accuse every prosecution witness of lying! OK, probably not taught like that.

I think the Bar would hold themselves to the same standards that courts hold themselves to.

 

[Intermezzo]

I hope this self serving *beep* looses his right to practice law.

I bet Cindy & George will blame JB for the downfall of Casey.

IMO Cindy will blame the Media( but only the ones she decides are witchy poo), LE, the SAO...and bloggers.
IMO they will blame Baez IF Casey changes her mind and turns on him then IMO Cindy will follow suit..until or IF that happens then Cindy will praise Baez.
:twocents:

 

[Novice Seeker]

Couldn't disagree more. The public are the ones who are supposed to be served/protected by the judicial system. We pay for it, we have a say. If someone in something as important as a murder trial is seen/caught lying, being dishonest, then it is our duty to report it and make it known. As long as people aren't lying then it is part of our duty to ourselves. Baez is a representative of the government - and you think procedure is more important than seeking to question and hold people accountable? Come on now...

Thank You!!! And you expressed it much better than mine.


Novice Seeker

 

[jennyb]

IMO Cindy will blame the Media( but only the ones she decides are witchy poo), LE, the SAO...and bloggers.
IMO they will blame Baez IF Casey changes her mind and turns on him then IMO Cindy will follow suit..until or IF that happens then Cindy will praise Baez.
:twocents:

I'm thinking Cindy will never go after Baez. He has too much dirt on her. She's not his client either so there's no attorney/client privilege to worry about (I don't think... hmmm).

Anyway, I think he could find a way to DESTROY her if she crosses him.

So many players are up to their necks in bad-doings they're basically all holding each other hostage at this point.

 

[Novice Seeker]

The Bar is not a public organization and have little to no responsibilities to the public. They fall within that same nebulous area of "private special interest group" not unlike the AMA, the ADA, and other professional certifying groups.

I disagree. The Bar does have an obligation to the public. It's their responsibility to regulate attorneys practicing law within their state. Part of this responsibility is to assure that the attorneys remain current and up to date on current legal cases. This organization has a Professional Responsibilty to assure the standard of practice is maintained by the professionals who represent this organization.

Otherwise our right to effective counsel is mute.


Novice Seeker

 

[sleutherontheside]

I think it is important to clarify my post for understanding. I respect those opinions that disagree with my perspective, and think it is important to be clear about my point.

I am disgusted by the maneuvers and gamesmanship displayed by this defense team. It is appalling to watch innocent parties paraded as pawns in their effort to save their client. Sadly though...this is VERY common.

I am also disgusted by the "concerned citizens" who inject themselves into the case in order to attain their 15 minutes of fame or as an attempt to parlay that into a future deal.

This is a murder case and as much as I enjoy discussing and sleuthing, I do not enjoy watching folks team up to "report concerns" (or in some cases just plain old tattle) to the agencies that work so hard with limited resources.

Every call to LE, to the SAO, to the attorneys takes time away from the task at hand... prosecuting and defending in this case. As a Fl. taxpayer I most certainly take issue with the financial burden this case places on our State. What I am more concerned with however, is the workload of our LE and SA being bogged down with complaints that are already public record. While the Florida Bar governs it own members, the JAC is charged with the responsibility of processing and dispursing funds for indigent client representation statewide. Recently a JAC employee spoke to my spouse in a social situation. He joked around and said "Hey what about that Jose Baez?". Their response was...something along the lines of we have plenty of them. They did not insult him nor did they really have an opinion In other words...he does NOT stand out. (btw...this person does not have any involvement with approving funds so I am clear)

THe point is....we see JB...we don't see all the many others like him. He is not special. He is not the only one.

Do I for one minute think that the JAC and the Fl. Bar are unaware of the actions of Mr. Baez? Nope! He is most certainly on their radar. They know. We all know.

I concur with the opinion that procedure does not "trump" responsibility. That said, Mr. Baez is an attorney in private practice. He is NOT representative of any government agency. As appalling as he is, there are 50 more like him who are worse.

Take a look at the list of attorneys that have been disbarred recently.

I have both LE AND attoneys of varying degrees in my family. I see both sides. I have said it before.

My comment about allowing the system to work is based upon comments I see on other forums and in news and some here as well. When I see people so disgusted by this defense team talk about joining together to get Baez disbarred..I cringe just a bit.

I never approved of the mob mentality outside of the Anthony home and I don't agree with a mob mentality regarding Baez.

Folks are entitled to file complaints as they choose...I just don't agree with it becoming a group effort. I would hope not to see that here.

Judge Perry is a VERY wise man. These State's Attorney's are educated, experienced, and professional. The system while flawed, is as good as the participants. Caylee is in good hands. The rest of them...are on their own.

Thank you for all the great opinions and thoughts. THis is a wonderful place to discuss and comment.

 

[jennyb]

I think it is important to clarify my post for understanding. I respect those opinions that disagree with my perspective, and think it is important to be clear about my point.

I am disgusted by the maneuvers and gamesmanship displayed by this defense team. It is appalling to watch innocent parties paraded as pawns in their effort to save their client. Sadly though...this is VERY common.

I am also disgusted by the "concerned citizens" who inject themselves into the case in order to attain their 15 minutes of fame or as an attempt to parlay that into a future deal.

This is a murder case and as much as I enjoy discussing and sleuthing, I do not enjoy watching folks team up to "report concerns" (or in some cases just plain old tattle) to the agencies that work so hard with limited resources.

Every call to LE, to the SAO, to the attorneys takes time away from the task at hand... prosecuting and defending in this case. As a Fl. taxpayer I most certainly take issue with the financial burden this case places on our State. What I am more concerned with however, is the workload of our LE and SA being bogged down with complaints that are already public record.

Do I for one minute think that the JAC and the Fl. Bar are unaware of the actions of Mr. Baez? Nope! He is most certainly on their radar. They know. We all know.

I concur with the opinion that procedure does not "trump" responsibility. That said, Mr. Baez is an attorney in private practice. He is NOT representative of any government agency. As appalling as he is, there are 50 more like him who are worse.

Take a look at the list of attorneys that have been disbarred recently.

I have both LE AND attoneys of varying degrees in my family. I see both sides. I have said it before.

My comment about allowing the system to work is based upon comments I see on other forums and in news and some here as well. When I see people so disgusted by this defense team talk about joining together to get Baez disbarred..I cringe just a bit.

I never approved of the mob mentality outside of the Anthony home and I don't agree with a mob mentality regarding Baez.

Folks are entitled to file complaints as they choose...I just don't agree with it becoming a group effort.

Judge Perry is a VERY wise man. These State's Attorney's are educated, experienced, and professional. The system while flawed is as good as the participants. Caylee is in good hands. The rest of them...are on their own.

Thank you for all the great opinions and thoughts. THis is a wonderful place to discuss and comment.

I understand what you're saying about a "mob mentality". I have a sense though that this latest complaint to the Bar is NOT from an outside observer, a concerned citizen.

I have no proof of course, and it's all conjecture, but I do think the complaint was made by a direct player in this case. Just a feeling.

 

[LambChop]

I'm thinking Cindy will never go after Baez. He has too much dirt on her. She's not his client either so there's no attorney/client privilege to worry about (I don't think... hmmm).

Anyway, I think he could find a way to DESTROY her if she crosses him.

So many players are up to their necks in bad-doings they're basically all holding each other hostage at this point.

I think CA has destroyed herself by her actions. Time will tell. She, too, has told so many mistruths who would ever believe her. jmo

 

[ThinkTank]

I, personally, have not seen any type of mob mentality out to get JB, on this forum.
What happens on other forums, I am not aware of.
I have not seen any members of WS teaming up to report concerns, or reporting concerns in any type of reckless fashion. Only when there are serious concerns, is it recommended to pass along the information to proper authorities, which I completely agree with. LDB even said in the last Hearing that people send her emails and information, and she did not say it with a feeling of irritation about it. She said it as if she appreciates the information and expects to continue receiving this type of communication from the public.

I am not aware of anyone on this forum making frivolous calls or reports to the State Attorneys or LE or attorneys, regarding issues that have already been released in Discovery. From my perspective, the members here are intelligent and reasonable people and would not do anything to waste the time of authorities or resources or interfere with justice for Caylee.

If there is a problem with any of this type of behavior on this forum, I am unaware of it. If a serious concern is reported to any agencies, I trust that the person who reported it had genuine concerns that they felt needed to be addressed and believe that the concerns would have a negative affect on the case in some way. The real nutcrackers are found out rather quickly and dealt with by the authorities. I am not aware of a problem with large amounts of frivolous reports being made.

While the FL Bar may be aware of what JB is doing, the FL Bar will not automatically take action on their own, apart from an official complaint/inquiry being filed on specific issues. If there is no evidence to support the complaint, it is promptly dismissed and the case is closed. If any person sees an attorney doing something that is against the law, and/or unethical I believe they have every right to access the proper channels to address the problem, as long as they have supporting evidence.
All just my own opinions .....

 

[Novice Seeker]

I politely and respectfully disagree I would think the FL Bar would be the one entity where 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt' is sancrosanct. Is that not the whole premis of being a trial attorney. "Your Honor, just because Mr. Doe said under oath that Mr. Smith kicked his dog it does not make it true." In fact, I believe it is taught in defense cross examination 101 that you accuse every prosecution witness of lying! OK, probably not taught like that.

I think the Bar would hold themselves to the same standards that courts hold themselves to.

IMO, this is comparing apples to oranges. If the attorney accuses Mr. Smith of committing perjury than the attorney must show or prove that Mr. Smith lied. I hope law school doesn't teach attorneys to destroy an innocent bystanders life so that their client could be found innocent.

As to the complaints against JB, the evidence has included documents, sworn statements by more than just on person and media videos that provide evidence that JB did in fact do what he has been accused of. Despite this vast amount of information the Bar had available they take the word of JB. For what ulterior motive would a Judge have in filing a complaint against an attorney, in this case JB? The Judge is held to an even higher standard for the role they play in making sure the trial is fair and the defendents rights are not impeded.

Again in the complaint made by Judge Strickland the Bar determines there is no basis for this complaint and finds for JB. The only thing JB provides against this complaint is his word. And the Bar determines that JB's credibility is more convincing than Judge Strickland and dismisses the complaint. And we're expected to respect and trust this system who has made decisions that have been so absurd, IMO? No thank you.


Novice Seeker

 

[jennyb]

I, personally, have not seen any type of mob mentality out to get JB, on this forum.
What happens on other forums, I am not aware of.
I have not seen any members of WS teaming up to report concerns, or reporting concerns in any type of reckless fashion. Only when there are serious concerns, is it recommended to pass along the information to proper authorities, which I completely agree with. LDB even said in the last Hearing that people send her emails and information, and she did not say it with a feeling of irritation about it. She said it as if she appreciates the information and expects to continue receiving this type of communication from the public.

I am not aware of anyone on this forum making frivolous calls or reports to the State Attorneys or LE or attorneys, regarding issues that have already been released in Discovery. From my perspective, the members here are intelligent and reasonable people and would not do anything to waste the time of authorities or resources or interfere with justice for Caylee.

If there is a problem with any of this type of behavior on this forum, I am unaware of it. If a serious concern is reported to any agencies, I trust that the person who reported it had genuine concerns that they felt needed to be addressed and believe that the concerns would have a negative affect on the case in some way. The real nutcrackers are found out rather quickly and dealt with by the authorities. I am not aware of a problem with large amounts of frivolous reports being made.

While the FL Bar may be aware of what JB is doing, the FL Bar will not automatically take action on their own, apart from an official complaint/inquiry being filed on specific issues. If there is no evidence to support the complaint, it is promptly dismissed and the case is closed. If any person sees an attorney doing something that is against the law, and/or unethical I believe they have every right to access the proper channels to address the problem, as long as they have supporting evidence.
All just my own opinions .....

Think Tank, I AGREE. I have seen no mob mentality here at all. Or any push to report anything to the Bar. I meant to be clearer in my comment and I'm glad you made a strong statement in this regard. Thanks.

 

[jennyb]

IMO, this is comparing apples to oranges. If the attorney accuses Mr. Smith of committing perjury than the attorney must show or prove that Mr. Smith lied. I hope law school doesn't teach attorneys to destroy an innocent bystanders life so that their client could be found innocent.

As to the complaints against JB, the evidence has included documents, sworn statements by more than just on person and media videos that provide evidence that JB did in fact do what he has been accused of. Despite this vast amount of information the Bar had available they take the word of JB. For what ulterior motive would a Judge have in filing a complaint against an attorney, in this case JB? The Judge is held to an even higher standard for the role they play in making sure the trial is fair and the defendents rights are not impeded.

Again in the complaint made by Judge Strickland the Bar determines there is no basis for this complaint and finds for JB. The only thing JB provides against this complaint is his word. And the Bar determines that JB's credibility is more convincing than Judge Strickland and dismisses the complaint. And we're expected to respect and trust this system who has made decisions that have been so absurd, IMO? No thank you.


Novice Seeker

I think the thing here is this. Judge Strickland was obligated to report Dom Casey's statement so he was, in essence, passing it along. Not necessarily making a complaint of misdeeds on his own. If I understand it correctly. He had a DUTY to register the claim with the Bar.

So it turned into a he said (DC) vs he said (Baez) and I guess the Bar couldn't do that much with it. It's not like a sitting Judge's word wouldn't be significant against an attorney, or investigated. It just wasn't an issue.

Btw, I think the FL Bar Association is a complete joke. But in this case it really wasn't about Strickland.

 

[jennyb]

I think CA has destroyed herself by her actions. Time will tell. She, too, has told so many mistruths who would ever believe her. jmo

Yes, but in my opinion you can take everything we know (which is a lot) about her lying and conniving and obstruction and quadruple it with what we DON'T know that Baez does. IMO they've been thick as thieves for a long time and what we know is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[LambChop]

Yes, but in my opinion you can take everything we know (which is a lot) about her lying and conniving and obstruction and quadruple it with what we DON'T know that Baez does. IMO they've been thick as thieves for a long time and what we know is just the tip of the iceberg.

So essentially when the trial is over, it might not be over. There could be more coming down the pike. If it is deserved, I hope we see it right away. jmo