Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #2

[AZlawyer]

Can KC be excluded from attending future hearings or even the trial if she does not stop gesturing in the courtroom?

(p.s. - I so appreciate the great questions and answers here!)

No, she has some constitutional rights that shouldn't be stepped on. I suppose if necessary she could be handcuffed.

What is a judge doing during the time between a hearing and his ruling? I know they have other business,LOL,but as far as a particular ruling, what do they typically do to make a decision? Can they review video/audio of the hearing or evidence? Researching case law?or just thinking it over?

In this case, he will review the statements that the defense is asking to exclude and research case law for sure. He might also want to review transcripts of parts of the witnesses' testimony, as the lawyers seemed unable to agree on what had actually happened. I assume he will spend a little time thinking as well.

 

[LolaMoon08]

No, she has some constitutional rights that shouldn't be stepped on. I suppose if necessary she could be handcuffed.

There's a case here in Collier County, Florida and the defendant murdered his wife and FIVE children. They brought him in court completely restrained and had to wheel him in so that he was present at his hearing! If I remember correctly, he was brought in on a stretcher type of device. Wouldn't that be a hoot for our "little Casey Anthony?"

I know this isn't a question, but I thought that it made a good point of how far the court will go to make sure that the defendant in a case can be brought in to court, so as not to step on their Constitutional rights, if they are not acting accordingly.

 

[AZlawyer]

There's a case here in Collier County, Florida and the defendant murdered his wife and FIVE children. They brought him in court completely restrained and had to wheel him in so that he was present at his hearing! If I remember correctly, he was brought in on a stretcher type of device. Wouldn't that be a hoot for our "little Casey Anthony."

Imagine her frushtration. How would she play with her hair or check her fingers to see if she had managed to make any tears? How would she write useless and irrelevant notes for her attorneys?

Back to "legal questions" lol.

 

[MD MOMMY]

Is a judge permitted to consult with other judges on this case? Could HHJP ask advice of his colleagues on how to rule on this issue?

 

[AZlawyer]

Is a judge permitted to consult with other judges on this case? Could HHJP ask advice of his colleagues on how to rule on this issue?

Yes, at least in AZ there is an express provision in the code of judicial conduct permitting such consultations.

 

[chefmom]

Is a judge permitted to consult with other judges on this case? Could HHJP ask advice of his colleagues on how to rule on this issue?

Yes, at least in AZ there is an express provision in the code of judicial conduct permitting such consultations.

And, taking this a step further, would he be able to ask advice from judges who sit on the FL appeals court just to make sure that he is making a decision that can't be overturned on appeal?

 

[Teresa]

Okay, sometimes I feel like the rigths of the accused step on the truth and victim. Does anyone else feel this way? I just feel like screaming sometimes in frusteration! Seriously, Casey's lies are part of the story. If the judge throws them out the whole truth of this case won't be told. I'm sorry, I just sorta lose my mind some days. How can a lawyer handle this?!

 

[RR0004]

Imagine her frushtration. How would she play with her hair or check her fingers to see if she had managed to make any tears? How would she write useless and irrelevant notes for her attorneys?

Back to "legal questions" lol.

...besides...that's kinda Hannibal Lecter-like. Even I would say that might be a tad prejudcial.
I would think her attorneys would advise her to seem somewhat interested in the proceedings...and respectful of the Court, no?

 

[jennyb]

I do hope JP delays his ruling on the sequestration until after the A's have their next little media cameo. The 22nd? I'm sure they would love to have it resolved before they go hog wild on the teebee.

Wonder if they'd go so far as to cancel, waiting to hear what the Judge decides, before they act up and insult law enforcement, the SA, and everyone else fighting for Caylee.

 

[Turnadot]

While thinking over his ruling, will HHJP count the totality of the circumstances and KC agreeing with LE that she's in the conference room at Universal of her own volition to help them find her daughter? Or will KC's actions and words not play a part in HHJP's decision at all?

 

[AZlawyer]

And, taking this a step further, would he be able to ask advice from judges who sit on the FL appeals court just to make sure that he is making a decision that can't be overturned on appeal?

No, and the appellate judges wouldn't be allowed to talk to him about potential appeals either.

Okay, sometimes I feel like the rigths of the accused step on the truth and victim. Does anyone else feel this way? I just feel like screaming sometimes in frusteration! Seriously, Casey's lies are part of the story. If the judge throws them out the whole truth of this case won't be told. I'm sorry, I just sorta lose my mind some days. How can a lawyer handle this?!

Sometimes it seems this way. But keep in mind that (1) LE was in control of this decision--they knew the risk that these statements would be kept out if they chose not to give the Miranda warnings, and (2) there is no motion to keep out "Casey's lies" about what happened--there are too many of them, and some of them are not covered by these motions.

The rules are in place to protect you and me--innocent people who might be caught in a situation in which we "look guilty" for some reason.

...besides...that's kinda Hannibal Lecter-like. Even I would say that might be a tad prejudcial.
I would think her attorneys would advise her to seem somewhat interested in the proceedings...and respectful of the Court, no?

You would think so. :waitasec:

I do hope JP delays his ruling on the sequestration until after the A's have their next little media cameo. The 22nd? I'm sure they would love to have it resolved before they go hog wild on the teebee.

Wonder if they'd go so far as to cancel, waiting to hear what the Judge decides, before they act up and insult law enforcement, the SA, and everyone else fighting for Caylee.

I don't think HHJP will consider their television appearances in making his decision, nor whether or not they are insulting to LE or the SAs.

I think he will, however, take into consideration the fact that they are unable to keep their stories straight when sequestered (showing the need for sequestration) and are unwilling or unable to follow his courtroom rules (providing an additional reason not to have them in the courtroom for the whole trial).

 

[AZlawyer]

While thinking over his ruling, will HHJP count the totality of the circumstances and KC agreeing with LE that she's in the conference room at Universal of her own volition to help them find her daughter? Or will KC's actions and words not play a part in HHJP's decision at all?

Yes, her actions and words are part of the totality of the circumstances. However, many many many statements that have been excluded under Miranda were given freely and voluntarily. A person can be completely cooperative and wanting to help LE and still be "in custody."

 

[Zoe Bogart]

I think Linda made some fabulous arguments re: the Universal statement, and CM did a terrible job, but nevertheless I think HHJP will listen to the whole tape and will keep it out. I agree with Linda that KC likely was not "in custody" walking into the building, but I think she was "in custody" when the door closed and they started asking her why she was lying.

Not to beat a dead horse, but just to clarify:

Why would the closing of the door at Universal imply she was "in custody"? It wasn't the jailhouse, it wasn't locked, they didn't have the key, she brought them to Universal, they went into the room to talk, and when the detective closed the door, he made it clear he was doing so for privacy, not to keep her locked in. She said she understood that and she was willing to assist in finding her daughter.

How can that be construed as "being in custody"?

I don't understand why saying they believed she was lying makes it a factor of "being in custody". From hearing Casey chatting up a storm on that tape, it sounds to me that she was a more than willing participant. Plus there's the huge fact that she led them there. Boldly.

What am I missing, please?

 

[AZlawyer]

Not to beat a dead horse, but just to clarify:

Why would the closing of the door at Universal imply she was "in custody"? It wasn't the jailhouse, it wasn't locked, they didn't have the key, she brought them to Universal, they went into the room to talk, and when the detective closed the door, he made it clear he was doing so for privacy, not to keep her locked in. She said she understood that and she was willing to assist in finding her daughter.

How can that be construed as "being in custody"?

I don't understand why saying they believed she was lying makes it a factor of "being in custody". From hearing Casey chatting up a storm on that tape, it sounds to me that she was a more than willing participant. Plus there's the huge fact that she led them there. Boldly.

What am I missing, please?

The closing of the door doesn't mean she definitely WAS "in custody," it's just one circumstance in the totality of circumstances to consider. The same thing with them confronting her with lies. All the other things you mention are also circumstances that go into the mix for the judge to consider.

My opinion is based on my reading of recent Florida case law, which really seems to emphasize the "confronting with lies" circumstance. But it is not a clear, black-and-white decision. IOW, I will not fall off my chair in shock if HHJP disagrees with me.

 

[LambChop]

So basically HHJP has to make a decision solely based on the facts and what he believes was her state of mind at the time?

 

[jerseygirl48]

.... I will not fall off my chair in shock if HHJP disagrees with me.

But we will!

 

[Zoe Bogart]

The closing of the door doesn't mean she definitely WAS "in custody," it's just one circumstance in the totality of circumstances to consider. The same thing with them confronting her with lies. All the other things you mention are also circumstances that go into the mix for the judge to consider.

My opinion is based on my reading of recent Florida case law, which really seems to emphasize the "confronting with lies" circumstance. But it is not a clear, black-and-white decision. IOW, I will not fall off my chair in shock if HHJP disagrees with me.

Thanks so much. So it's not just the closed door, but more "you're lying"! :waitasec: Or, more likely, a combination of everything going on at the time.

Personally, I hope the judge says it can stay. Some of KC's best work is behind the closed door, although we have to admit, taking LE to Universal at all was a bold move. That little speech, though, gives one of the versions of Zanny the Nanny, or is it two? I'd hate to lose any of them.

 

[pip]

If they go with the accident scenario and she freaked out...will KC have to take the stand?

 

[strach304]

If the judge decides to keep Anthony's statements to investigators, out of evidence because of Sheriff's Office misconduct, the state will likely have to drop four counts against her related to lying to deputies, or it could appeal the decision and further delay the trial.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/27103024/detail.html

AZ, do you know what this means? I can't tell from this article if it's the defense or state that would have to appeal the decision.

 

[SleuthTheTruth]

If HHJP does not let the Universal Interview in, what impact would it have on the SA’s case?


Hypothetical question reference Universal Interview (UI) not being allowed at trial:

It is trial day, YM is on the stand. While being questioned by the DT, the answer from YM makes reference to the Universal Interview. The DT, for whatever reason, does not stop YM and the Universal Interview is out in the open. Can the SA than ask questions about the UI? OR, will HHJP stop YM and school the DT again?