Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #1

[Paintr]

Bumping my question cause I am curious to know.

I am bringing my post over from another thread because I really would like to know. Thank you kindly in advance for the help.

The judicial system, like every where else, is hurting for money. There is just never enough to cover all they wish it could. Knowing that the defense will drag this case out with costly motion after motion, tying up the court's time and resources, is it beyond a possibility that the SA's office would settle on reduced charges and therefore a reduced sentence in this case to avoid the cost of a lenghtly, media circus trial?

How many other cases will the SA's office have funds for if their budget is way over extended to convict KC of murder 1? How much do funds, or lack thereof, impact prosecution of cases?

Maybe one of our knowledgeable lawyers could offer an opinion?

 

[nancy botwin]

The defense has already filed a Change of Venue Motion to my recollection, correct?

Will this motion result in a scheduled hearing whereas the SA can argue against it?

It appears to be a given that the defense has contributed to attempting to taint a jury pool since the beginning of this case, and to my knowledge, the SA has never held a press conference, interview, appeared in front of media, etc.

This week, we have seen a clearcut attempt by the defense to manipulate the media and general public on two occasions.

The first would be the Motion to Recluse. It appears the defense clearly "leaked" this impending motion to the media prior to filing it at 4:58 pm on Friday. This is shown by the media interview conducted with MD early Friday morning.

The second would be the set of 4 consecutive motions for reconsideration that were given to a tv media source and that to date have NOT been filed with the court (although some members of the public are now under that assumption based on the posting of the documents of tv station website).

I am interested to see if perhaps there were other incidents in the past where it can be documented that the defense provided "advance" copies of court documents to the media BEFORE filing them with the court (easy to determine....date and time of posting to media website vs. date and time of court filing).

So my QUESTION....

With this documentation, are these relevant arguments for the SA to use against a COV? Could the SA argue that the defense has gone on record many times with unfounded accusations that SA is "leaking" information in order to taint or sway a potential jury pool, wherein it can be shown by documentation that in fact, the defense has used these SAME tactics for the SAME purpose?

Can the SA argue that with the accessibility of the internet throughout the country, once the media reports on an aspect of this case, whether concerning court filings or other information, various news media pick up the story and carry it into their town? Or that a person residing in Palm Beach FL has the same access to news and information about the case as someone in Orlando, due to the era of the internet, which is probably one of the most used forms of media source?

Can you briefly explain the process in which a judge will consider a COV? Any "surprises" to us laypersons such as the one with the recuse motion where allegations are deemed as fact in consideration of granting or denying (that one was a big shocker to me!)

Thanks!!

This could be a surprise, perhaps.
If the Change of Venue Motion is granted, the trial won't necessarily be held in a new county. Florida rules allow jurors to be selected from a different county and brought into the county of original jurisdiction (where the crime occurred). So, hypothetically, jurors could be selected from Dade County and sequestered in Orlando for the duration of the trial vs. moving everything over to Dade County. This would, IMO, be substantially more efficient and cost effective.

 

[butterfly1978]

I'm not asking this to be funny, its a true question I have been wondering for awhile. Can JP recues or fire (seeing that the state is paying for them) JB and put another competent lawyer in his place?
JB is way out of his league here, and the IMO, the reason JB hasn't done anything to move this case along is because he plan flat out don't know what to do. Can JP look over the events of the past 2 years, see that JB isn't doing anything and filing ridiculous motions and force him to leave the case so Casey can't file an appeal based on ignorant lawyers, or does that step on Constitutional rights of being able to chose your own counsel?

 

[AZlawyer]

Bumping my question cause I am curious to know.
Originally Posted by Paintr
I am bringing my post over from another thread because I really would like to know. Thank you kindly in advance for the help.

The judicial system, like every where else, is hurting for money. There is just never enough to cover all they wish it could. Knowing that the defense will drag this case out with costly motion after motion, tying up the court's time and resources, is it beyond a possibility that the SA's office would settle on reduced charges and therefore a reduced sentence in this case to avoid the cost of a lenghtly, media circus trial?

How many other cases will the SA's office have funds for if their budget is way over extended to convict KC of murder 1? How much do funds, or lack thereof, impact prosecution of cases?

Maybe one of our knowledgeable lawyers could offer an opinion?

Money is something that the SA could take into account in determining whether to offer a plea deal.

I'm not asking this to be funny, its a true question I have been wondering for awhile. Can JP recues or fire (seeing that the state is paying for them) JB and put another competent lawyer in his place?
JB is way out of his league here, and the IMO, the reason JB hasn't done anything to move this case along is because he plan flat out don't know what to do. Can JP look over the events of the past 2 years, see that JB isn't doing anything and filing ridiculous motions and force him to leave the case so Casey can't file an appeal based on ignorant lawyers, or does that step on Constitutional rights of being able to chose your own counsel?

My understanding is that the State is paying costs only, not attorneys' fees.

 

[Paintr]

Money is something that the SA could take into account in determining whether to offer a plea deal.



My understanding is that the State is paying costs only, not attorneys' fees.

Thank you kindly, Azlawyer, for the answer to my question and for sharing your knowledge with such patience. :blowkiss:

 

[denjet]

I have a question about discovery that the defense has gotten but that has not been released to the public ... It always bugs me when there are pages or groups of pages missing from the doc dumps ... or when we hear about discovery being turned over to the defense but then it is never made public ... my question is when the defense gets new discovery can they ask to have parts of it sealed until trial? We've seen the defense argue in court to keep some evidence sealed until trial, but what about the stuff they don't argue in court about?

I guess my question is what is the procedure to keep parts of discovery from public disclosure ? and ... does this require a hearing on it or can an agreement be reached between the SA and defense to not release sensitive or critical evidence ?

 

[AZlawyer]

I have a question about discovery that the defense has gotten but that has not been released to the public ... It always bugs me when there are pages or groups of pages missing from the doc dumps ... or when we hear about discovery being turned over to the defense but then it is never made public ... my question is when the defense gets new discovery can they ask to have parts of it sealed until trial? We've seen the defense argue in court to keep some evidence sealed until trial, but what about the stuff they don't argue in court about?

I guess my question is what is the procedure to keep parts of discovery from public disclosure ? and ... does this require a hearing on it or can an agreement be reached between the SA and defense to not release sensitive or critical evidence ?

The defense would have to get a court order. The SA and defense can't just agree not to release something, because the right to see the documents belongs to the "public" (i.e., to whichever media outlets and private citizens request the documents), not to the defense.

I would love to see a list of the missing pages to see if we can track them down. From time to time, the documents obtained by MM and posted on WS are more complete than those released by the media. Therefore, we can't assume that "missing" pages were not released to the media. Sometimes the media might get more pages than they choose to release.

 

[denjet]

The defense would have to get a court order. The SA and defense can't just agree not to release something, because the right to see the documents belongs to the "public" (i.e., to whichever media outlets and private citizens request the documents), not to the defense.

I would love to see a list of the missing pages to see if we can track them down. From time to time, the documents obtained by MM and posted on WS are more complete than those released by the media. Therefore, we can't assume that "missing" pages were not released to the media. Sometimes the media might get more pages than they choose to release.

Thanks, AZ .. I will have to check the docs posted here .. but I get what you're saying ..

 

[legalmania]

I have a question, On Caylees death certificate they have her date of death as found December 11, 2008. How is the prosecutor going to prove that her date of death was June 16, 2008? I know that forensics say she died on the day she disappeared but how can they prove it down to the day?

http://justice4caylee.forumotion.net/evidence-f26/caylee-s-death-certificate-t1479.htm

 

[AZlawyer]

I have a question, On Caylees death certificate they have her date of death as found December 11, 2008. How is the prosecutor going to prove that her date of death was June 16, 2008? I know that forensics say she died on the day she disappeared but how can they prove it down to the day?

http://justice4caylee.forumotion.net/evidence-f26/caylee-s-death-certificate-t1479.htm

There's no need to prove the date of her death, and the forensics don't say she died "on the day she disappeared," just that it must have been more than 4 months before she was found. On the other hand, the forensics showing that there was a dead body in the car, together with the fact that Casey started referencing the terrible smell of something dead in her car around June 25, tend to prove that Caylee died between June 15 and June 25.

 

[Paintr]

Sorry to be a bother but I have another question.

When the SA releases documents and information, who decides what gets released when. I know the defense requests certain things, but what about the rest of the evidence the SA releases?

TIA for your help.

 

[sassy_texasbelle2]

But could this leave a juror with reasonable doubt. Suppose the terrible smell was chloroform? They can't place Casey behind the wheel of the car for an entire month. This is some new evidence that has come to light. I don't know if this has been shown yet.

http://www.momlogic.com/2009/01/casey_anthony_caylee.php

This is not new. This is from Jan. 2009.

 

[legalmania]

This is not new. This is from Jan. 2009.

I read the whole thing and the date continues until April 2010. I will repost the link.

http://www.examiner.com/x-1168-Crim...efit-defense-in-case-of-mom-accused-of-murder

 

[OKaraMia]

Pardon me if this has already been asked an answered

Could Caylee's biological father, once paternity has been proven...shut the anthonys down? give victim impact speech? Sell Caylees image for a saturday morning cartoon ...even?

 

[rhornsby]

I'm still thinking about this one. Someone turn on the Bat Signal--I mean the RH signal--so we can ask a real live criminal defense attorney!

Acceptance of responsibility.

 

[rhornsby]

Pardon me if this has already been asked an answered

Could Caylee's biological father, once paternity has been proven...shut the anthonys down? give victim impact speech? Sell Caylees image for a saturday morning cartoon ...even?

Shut the Anthony's down - no.
Give victim impact speech - yes.
Sell Caylee's image for a saturday morning cartoon - yes.

 

[LambChop]

With a new judge would AL have to attend Friday's hearing?????

 

[shotgun09]

With a new judge would AL have to attend Friday's hearing?????

Good question....kinda like a "meet and greet" ? So LKB as well?

 

[Aedrys]

I have a question that has been brought up on two threads, and I'm wanting to make sure I'm right about it. Casey can defy her lawyers and get on the stand and testify, right? I'm pretty sure I've seen cases where the defendant got on the stand despite their defense telling them not to.

 

[JBean]

reminder this is for verified legal professional answers only. I know many of us know the answers and I have to sit on my fingers all the time. But in order to keep it to the parameters, only verified legal professionals should be answering and chit chat should be very little.

thanks everyone.