Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #1

[AZlawyer]

Defense is now complaining that they didn't get what they wanted from the SA....will the SA have to continue to give them all that they want? Didn't they give enough? Doesn't the defense have to do anything????:waitasec::banghead:
thanks....

The judge said to LIST the factors. That was done. If the judge wants to ensure there is no appeal issue, he could now order the state to EXPLAIN how the factors apply, and they would have to do it. However, I don't believe there is any serious legal basis for the defense to insist on such information. I'm looking forward to reviewing the new motion to see what legal authority is cited.

The state is, of course, required to do much much more than the defense in a criminal case, and especially in a death penalty case. This is because the defendant has due process rights that must be protected.

 

[logicalgirl]

The judge said to LIST the factors. That was done. If the judge wants to ensure there is no appeal issue, he could now order the state to EXPLAIN how the factors apply, and they would have to do it. However, I don't believe there is any serious legal basis for the defense to insist on such information. I'm looking forward to reviewing the new motion to see what legal authority is cited.

The state is, of course, required to do much much more than the defense in a criminal case, and especially in a death penalty case. This is because the defendant has due process rights that must be protected.

I only have penalty phase information AZ from the Florida
College of Advanced Judicial Studies - Conducting the Penalty Phase of a Capital Case, so wonder if this applies?
6.4.2 Disclosure of Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances
"A defendant has no constitutional right to a statement of particulars listing the aggravating circumstances the State will rely upon during the penalty phase trial. However, some states require some sort of pretrial disclosure."

Florida is not one of the states used as an example.

 

[AZlawyer]

I only have penalty phase information AZ from the Florida
College of Advanced Judicial Studies - Conducting the Penalty Phase of a Capital Case, so wonder if this applies?
6.4.2 Disclosure of Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances
"A defendant has no constitutional right to a statement of particulars listing the aggravating circumstances the State will rely upon during the penalty phase trial. However, some states require some sort of pretrial disclosure."

Florida is not one of the states used as an example.

The judge already ordered the list of aggravating circumstances to be produced, and it was produced. So whether or not the defense was really entitled to it is kind of a moot point.

Now the defense wants an explanation of the list, I guess. (Again, I'd like to see the motion to understand exactly what they want and why.) IMO that's work product. The defense has the list, the defense has the evidence, now they can do the hard work of figuring out how the evidence supports or fails to support the items on the list. But, again, the judge might order the state to provide an explanation just to avoid any appeal issues--not because the state is absolutely required to do so.

 

[logicalgirl]

The judge already ordered the list of aggravating circumstances to be produced, and it was produced. So whether or not the defense was really entitled to it is kind of a moot point.

Now the defense wants an explanation of the list, I guess. (Again, I'd like to see the motion to understand exactly what they want and why.) IMO that's work product. The defense has the list, the defense has the evidence, now they can do the hard work of figuring out how the evidence supports or fails to support the items on the list. But, again, the judge might order the state to provide an explanation just to avoid any appeal issues--not because the state is absolutely required to do so.

Yes, I only gave you a short quote but see I should have flushed it out. Yes, I understood it to say the State obviously was ordered to give them a list and did so. The question wasn't about the need to give them a list of aggravating factors, but that they didn't need to give them the particulars, that is not to have to expand on the why's of those factors. That was the reason for starting the question with "the defendant has no constitutional right....

I try to brief when I ask you a question but obviously from your answers, the questions are too brief. Will make an effort to be clearer with my questions.

 

[eaglemom]

First thank you so much for your patience!

In the Forensic Discovery DOcument filed today http://www.wftv.com/pdf/23621537/detail.html

the defense seems to go on and on about how they want to know all sorts of information about the decompositional database developed by Dr. Vass and the testing done (which is answered in the report they have already been provided). Which would be understandable if they hadn't already received the report which has a LIST of all the detected compounds from the sample from KC's trunk and the control samples and if they are in the decompositional database.

http://www.wftv.com/download/2008/1024/17794795.pdf

It seems to me it would be up to the defense to either do a test on their own - I realize they were denied in the budget hearing when they asked to purchase 2 Pontiacs - or hire an expert to review the results from the reports (they did get the money for experts). I really don't understand what the information they are asking for is going to get them?

Is it preparation for a Frye hearing? Saying/proving it is proprietary (the decompositional database) so it can't be used in court?

or is this simply more laziness and wanting someone else to provide something they should be taking care of on their own?

or are they truly entitled to this information and Oakridge is being 'hardheaded'?

I am sorry, I truly do not have a legal mind so I know my questions are simplistic, but this bothers me.

Thanks again

 

[AZlawyer]

First thank you so much for your patience!

In the Forensic Discovery DOcument filed today http://www.wftv.com/pdf/23621537/detail.html

the defense seems to go on and on about how they want to know all sorts of information about the decompositional database developed by Dr. Vass and the testing done (which is answered in the report they have already been provided). Which would be understandable if they hadn't already received the report which has a LIST of all the detected compounds from the sample from KC's trunk and the control samples and if they are in the decompositional database.

http://www.wftv.com/download/2008/1024/17794795.pdf

It seems to me it would be up to the defense to either do a test on their own - I realize they were denied in the budget hearing when they asked to purchase 2 Pontiacs - or hire an expert to review the results from the reports (they did get the money for experts). I really don't understand what the information they are asking for is going to get them?

Is it preparation for a Frye hearing? Saying/proving it is proprietary (the decompositional database) so it can't be used in court?

or is this simply more laziness and wanting someone else to provide something they should be taking care of on their own?

or are they truly entitled to this information and Oakridge is being 'hardheaded'?

I am sorry, I truly do not have a legal mind so I know my questions are simplistic, but this bothers me.

Thanks again

Your questions are perfectly fine. Basically, the defense is listing every tiny little thing they can think of, in hopes of either (1) getting lots of information that they can review with a fine-toothed comb and maybe confuse the jury with at trial, or (2) not getting everything they ask for, in which case those requests go into the "appeal pot". :woohoo:

However, if I were Jeff A and my expert witness was refusing to provide something because it was "proprietary," I would be twisting the witness's arm until the witness changed his mind. The SA can always ask for a protective order to keep this proprietary stuff out of the public eye, but why create an appeal issue over it??

 

[JWG]

Your questions are perfectly fine. Basically, the defense is listing every tiny little thing they can think of, in hopes of either (1) getting lots of information that they can review with a fine-toothed comb and maybe confuse the jury with at trial, or (2) not getting everything they ask for, in which case those requests go into the "appeal pot". :woohoo:

However, if I were Jeff A and my expert witness was refusing to provide something because it was "proprietary," I would be twisting the witness's arm until the witness changed his mind. The SA can always ask for a protective order to keep this proprietary stuff out of the public eye, but why create an appeal issue over it??

Just to be clear, Oak Ridge is saying that the complete list would considered proprietary of the organization that funded it, and cannot be released without their approval. Who funded it is not indicated, but Oak Ridge seems to be saying they do not have the authority to approve the release.

 

[AZlawyer]

Just to be clear, Oak Ridge is saying that the complete list would considered proprietary of the organization that funded it, and cannot be released without their approval. Who funded it is not indicated, but Oak Ridge seems to be saying they do not have the authority to approve the release.

Thanks for that clarification. Then JA should find out who funded it and twist THEIR arms to agree to a protective order and release the info to the defense.

 

[mountaintime]

Would that perhaps be the FBI?

And if it is...can JB obtain the information from them...?

 

[KeyboardCat]

Hypothetical question here, I hope thats allowed. Please forgive me if its not ; ;

I know a little bit about plea deals. (Thank you Jack McCoy <3) I've heard a few people say that Casey Anthony will wait until the jury is out, (if she feels she will be convicted) and try to garner a plea deal. My understanding is that a deal would have to be offered by the state, and if they chose not to agree, it doesn't matter how badly she wants a plea deal. She wouldn't be able to get one. I hope that is correct.

Now to my actual question:

What if George, Cindy, and/or Lee Anthony were to come to the prosecution's table and say, "We will tell you the whole truth about everything, about what we knew and when. We will tell you we know she did this, and here is why." Would they be able to do that in exchange for the state withdraw the possibility of the death penalty? Could an agreement like that be made?

 

[AZlawyer]

Hypothetical question here, I hope thats allowed. Please forgive me if its not ; ;

I know a little bit about plea deals. (Thank you Jack McCoy <3) I've heard a few people say that Casey Anthony will wait until the jury is out, (if she feels she will be convicted) and try to garner a plea deal. My understanding is that a deal would have to be offered by the state, and if they chose not to agree, it doesn't matter how badly she wants a plea deal. She wouldn't be able to get one. I hope that is correct.

Now to my actual question:

What if George, Cindy, and/or Lee Anthony were to come to the prosecution's table and say, "We will tell you the whole truth about everything, about what we knew and when. We will tell you we know she did this, and here is why." Would they be able to do that in exchange for the state withdraw the possibility of the death penalty? Could an agreement like that be made?

No, because George, Cindy and Lee are already obligated to tell the whole truth about everything they knew.

 

[LambChop]

This is really a silly, silly question but I have to ask. It may have already been asked BUT, if in the civil case JR had to step down for any reason could JS take over because he is now handling civil cases????

 

[AZlawyer]

This is really a silly, silly question but I have to ask. It may have already been asked BUT, if in the civil case JR had to step down for any reason could JS take over because he is now handling civil cases????

Hmmm. I suppose he could, but if I were the presiding judge I would make sure someone else was assigned just to avoid the drama.

 

[Aedrys]

I have a question. If CA, GA, and LA are called to testify at trial, will they each testify without the other two in the room? Like if GA were to testify, would CA and LA not be allowed to hear his testimony? Or GA and LA not hear CA's testimony, or GA and CA not hear LA's testimony? I ask because I feel like if CA is right there to stare daggers into GA and LA as they testify, we may never hear the truth from either of them.

 

[AZlawyer]

I have a question. If CA, GA, and LA are called to testify at trial, will they each testify without the other two in the room? Like if GA were to testify, would CA and LA not be allowed to hear his testimony? Or GA and LA not hear CA's testimony, or GA and CA not hear LA's testimony? I ask because I feel like if CA is right there to stare daggers into GA and LA as they testify, we may never hear the truth from either of them.

They would not be allowed to be in the room while the others were testifying, unless the judge decides they are there as the "victim's" family. :waitasec: But hopefully not. The risk of perjury is too high with this family lol.

 

[Sooner Fan#1]

For the lawyers, can ICA plead to the bench even as late as now and forgo a jury Trial If so, do you think she could get Lwop? I am truly worried this will never go to trial. Thanking you in advance,

 

[AZlawyer]

For the lawyers, can ICA plead to the bench even as late as now and forgo a jury Trial If so, do you think she could get Lwop? I am truly worried this will never go to trial. Thanking you in advance,

She could still change her plea to guilty. But I believe the sentencing phase would still move forward with a jury, so her chances of getting LWOP vs. death will be about the same.

 

[Patriciao]

Is it possible to get Casey's cell phone records for the past 2 years? I have Verizon and monthly get a list of every number that called me or I called. I would think that would prove tons. Certainly there would be numbers there for ZG if she existed.

 

[AZlawyer]

Is it possible to get Casey's cell phone records for the past 2 years? I have Verizon and monthly get a list of every number that called me or I called. I would think that would prove tons. Certainly there would be numbers there for ZG if she existed.

It might be possible, but it looks like LE just asked for June 1- July 15, 2008.

 

[Leila]

A question for one of our attorneys.......................

First a little background. In December 2005 my nephew was murdered by his then 19-year-old step-son in the state of Texas. The murder weapon was a baseball bat and the stepson was arrested at the scene of the crime - the family home. Shortly after his arrest he confessed to the crime.

Since the step-son had already confessed, there was no trial, but in August 2007 there was a week long sentencing hearing. There was testimony from from the defendant's family arguing for leniency, and my nephew's mother, brother, sister, and his son and two daughters from a prior marriage arguing for the maximum sentence (this wasn't a death penalty case).

Just before the case was to go to the jury, who would determine his sentence, the defendant's attorney told the court they wanted to plea bargain the sentence. The defense attorney and prosecution attorney conferred, and negotiated a sentence that everyone agreed on. As it turned out, the jury was polled and they all were leaning toward the sentence that was finally agreed on.

My question is: If Casey is convicted, can the defense ask to plea bargain the sentence during the penalty phase?