Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #2

[zoey]

Can't jb get in trouble for those letters that he got from ca and gave to her family members???? Isn't that a no-no?????

 

[Aedrys]

Baez apologized in open court today for the contempt motion. Is this a big deal or slap on the wrist? Can they use it against him if he messes up again? I feel like he thinks, yet again, that he's got off easy or got away with something and that just upsets me!

 

[AZlawyer]

Can't jb get in trouble for those letters that he got from ca and gave to her family members???? Isn't that a no-no?????

IMO it is. Apparently the Florida Bar does not care. (HHJP has no jurisdiction to do anything about it.)

Baez apologized in open court today for the contempt motion. Is this a big deal or slap on the wrist? Can they use it against him if he messes up again? I feel like he thinks, yet again, that he's got off easy or got away with something and that just upsets me!

No big deal and not even a slap on the wrist so, yes, JB did get away with it. From his order setting the hearing, though, it was apparent that HHJP was ticked off with JB's "confusion" excuse popping up again, so you can bet that he'll remember this situation when the next one comes down the tracks.

 

[LolaMoon08]

According to the testimony today, do you believe that Cindy Anthony was an "Agent of the State?"


I enjoyed your previous answer so much, I thought it would be fun to ask again, after the testimony today.

 

[Katprint]

Hi Kat, great to see you on this thread, I've read your very valuable and knowledgeable posts for the entire length of this case, "elsewhere".

Based on your post, are you then of the opinion that Casey was not ever "arrested"? That's the way I'm reading your post, but I'd like for you to specifically reflect on the word, "arrested".

Thanks so much!

I do think Casey was briefly "arrested" when the less experienced officer put handcuffs on Casey after Cindy told him that she wanted to press charges against Casey for the bank account/credit card thefts. However, I don't think Casey was still "arrested" - the more applicable term would be "in custody" - when she made the statements about Zanny the Nanny kidnapping Caylee while Casey was at work or when Casey wrote out her police report statement. Certainly Casey was not in custody when she gave the bogus statements to the 9-1-1 operator prior to the police arriving on scene.

With regard to the Universal Studios interview, it could go either way. I wasn't able to hear all of the testimony so there may have been some little nugget that definitively nailed it one way or the other. Judge Perry is going to make a decision and whichever way he decides will likely be upheld on appeal.

Katprint
Always only my own opinions

 

[AZlawyer]

According to the testimony today, do you believe that Cindy Anthony was an "Agent of the State?"


I enjoyed your previous answer so much, I thought it would be fun to ask again, after the testimony today.

No, I think Cindy Anthony was the furthest possible thing from an "agent of the State" that anyone could have been. I think she was actively, intentionally and single-mindedly attempting to THWART the State at every turn. I think she was an "agent of the State" in much the same way that Osama Bin Laden is an agent of the US Government. With "agents" like these, who needs enemies? :waitasec:

 

[Bittiness39]

With JB's questioning re: the Anthony's and others...not "liking" nor "trusting" JB...is he not also obliterating his argument that Casey "can't" (not won't) see her parents because the big bad state records all of her visits. Seems to me like JB in his questioning, to particular issue with whether or not CA/GA/LA liked him...and were trying to circumvent him...and damage his relationship with his client...ICA can't keep her hands off of JB in court, totally ignores her dad and barely acknowledges her mother...

I guess where I am going is: it is clear that JB and his client do not want CA/GA/LA to visit ICA in jail. It is clear that JB viewed the many negative things said about him by her family to be threatening to him...How can he carry on and on that it is the State keeping ICA from her family when he wants to declare the Anthony's agents of the state? What attorney would want those who oppose him and his tactics (who claim they "just want answers" from Casey) near his client? Is he not highlighting that it is JB in conjunction with Casey...keeping GA/CA/LA from ICA and not the Big bad state of Florida?

 

[Sonne]

Does anyone think that JB should yank Casey's chain about snubbing family members in court? It makes her look like she has ice running through her veins. Her behavior gives credence to the theory that she killed Caylee to get back at her parents for considering taking Caylee away from her.

 

[faefrost]

A more general question for our lawerly friends. Now that you have heard all of the testimony, have your feelings or opinions on any of the motions changed? Do you think that any part of the motions will be granted or dismissed?

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

When was ICA read her miranda rights?

I'd hate to see her get off on a technicality!

 

[AZlawyer]

No, I think Cindy Anthony was the furthest possible thing from an "agent of the State" that anyone could have been. I think she was actively, intentionally and single-mindedly attempting to THWART the State at every turn. I think she was an "agent of the State" in much the same way that Osama Bin Laden is an agent of the US Government. With "agents" like these, who needs enemies? :waitasec:

Thanks to faefrost for reminding me that OBL actually WAS an agent of the U.S. back in the day! :floorlaugh: Substitute what I wrote with a more appropriate analogy of your own choice....

With JB's questioning re: the Anthony's and others...not "liking" nor "trusting" JB...is he not also obliterating his argument that Casey "can't" (not won't) see her parents because the big bad state records all of her visits. Seems to me like JB in his questioning, to particular issue with whether or not CA/GA/LA liked him...and were trying to circumvent him...and damage his relationship with his client...ICA can't keep her hands off of JB in court, totally ignores her dad and barely acknowledges her mother...

I guess where I am going is: it is clear that JB and his client do not want CA/GA/LA to visit ICA in jail. It is clear that JB viewed the many negative things said about him by her family to be threatening to him...How can he carry on and on that it is the State keeping ICA from her family when he wants to declare the Anthony's agents of the state? What attorney would want those who oppose him and his tactics (who claim they "just want answers" from Casey) near his client? Is he not highlighting that it is JB in conjunction with Casey...keeping GA/CA/LA from ICA and not the Big bad state of Florida?

Yes, but JB doesn't care at this point about his argument that the State is keeping KC from her family. That ship has sailed. It won't be an issue at trial anyway. So now he's focused on the "agents of the state" theory.

Does anyone think that JB should yank Casey's chain about snubbing family members in court? It makes her look like she has ice running through her veins. Her behavior gives credence to the theory that she killed Caylee to get back at her parents for considering taking Caylee away from her.

It depends. Their strategy for the penalty phase might be to make it look like KC was emotionally and sexually abused by her family. If so, she can't look all smiley at them during the guilt phase. Maybe she's practicing...

A more general question for our lawerly friends. Now that you have heard all of the testimony, have your feelings or opinions on any of the motions changed? Do you think that any part of the motions will be granted or dismissed?

I am somewhat concerned that HHJP might allow the Universal interrogation into evidence. I hope he doesn't, because I think he would be overturned on appeal. But I think if he listens to the whole tape, he will not allow it.

I think the Agents of the State motion will be denied.

I think the State's motions to avoid Frye hearings on the roots and chloroform are well-taken, but HHJP might deny the motions without prejudice to the SA making the same arguments at the Frye hearings themselves. That way, he can rule (after the Frye hearings) that (1) the issues were not subject to a Frye analysis and (2) in any event the evidence is admissible under Frye. A ruling like that would be much harder to overturn on appeal than a ruling saying that the issues are not subject to a Frye analysis, and therefore no Frye hearing was held on those issues.

When was ICA read her miranda rights?

I'd hate to see her get off on a technicality!

After she was arrested and had stopped talking to LE.

 

[ziggy]

With regards to what happened at Universal - if the statement is kept out due to Miranda violation, won't the state be able to put the guy (forget his name) who was head of security at Universal on the stand and get his accounting as to Casey's bluffing -that she was employed there,claiming she had supervisors that didn't exist and went so far as to walk with purpose down a hallway to an office that didn't exixt? All of this would go to state of mind; she was using valuable time when her child was missing to lead the detectives on a wild goose chase and there are witnesses to this from Universal. In other words, her demeanor and actions on that day can be brought in through direct testimony of eye witnesses yes?

 

[rhornsby]

BBM....Really? You have never been to New York City have you?

"I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore."

 

[AZlawyer]

With regards to what happened at Universal - if the statement is kept out due to Miranda violation, won't the state be able to put the guy (forget his name) who was head of security at Universal on the stand and get his accounting as to Casey's bluffing -that she was employed there,claiming she had supervisors that didn't exist and went so far as to walk with purpose down a hallway to an office that didn't exixt? All of this would go to state of mind; she was using valuable time when her child was missing to lead the detectives on a wild goose chase and there are witnesses to this from Universal. In other words, her demeanor and actions on that day can be brought in through direct testimony of eye witnesses yes?

Hopefully HHJP will find that the "in custody interrogation" began when the door closed at the end of the hallway and the officers accused her of lying. But if HHJP finds that Casey was already "in custody" when they arrived at Universal, then her statements and demeanor in response to LE's request for her to show them to her office would be excluded, no matter who was testifying about them.

 

[AZlawyer]

"I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore."

RH--nice to see you. That brand new case you linked on your blog was very interesting (http://www.5dca.org/Opinions/Opin2011/022811/5D10-1299.op.pdf). I think it will make it easier for HHJP to allow into evidence the statements Casey made to Yuri in her bedroom at home (when he just sort of gently asked her if she was sure her story was true), but not the Universal statement (when he and Allen said, look, we've checked out your whole story and we know it's lies from beginning to end, now tell us what happened or things will get worse from here).

 

[Bittiness39]

So through 2 1/2 days of hearings...one thing stands out...ICA's very odd behavior and reactions to things...
1) How is she going to make it through trial without outbursts? How will ICA react when the 911 phone calls are played? How will ICA react when her-exboyfriend(s) (mostly Tony) is on the stand? Her friends? When the State goes into detail about Caylee's remains? The trunk? A timeline of what ICA was doing during those 31 days? I know the Defense has given her legal pads and various colored pens to keep her busy...but surely they have to know she will not be able to control her outbursts? I guess this must play into mitigation...see how odd our client acts = hence, ugly coping after the death/missing of Caylee? Because there have been times, when I sincerely wonder how her odd giggles combined with stoic indifference towards her family will play in front of a jury.

If ICA's statements to LE at Universal do not come into evidence how much of her statements will? Starting with her mother "forcing" her to speak with the 911 operator?

TY AZ Lawyer and Richard H. for trying to answer all of our questions. We have a lot of them...and clearly, we will have a lot more...lol.

 

[gamom]

Question, even if the testimony of KC is thrown out...can't the state call GA, CA, or LA to the stand to VERIFY all of the stuff that KC said as far as Nanny, Universal not really working there, etc? To me that would be all the Jury needed to hear. LA did his own investigation, can't the notes of that investigation (ie he called Universal to try to find these fictional people, etc) be used on the stand?

 

[bunchy]

Just curious here. Will the state be allowed to ask george, cindy and lee why they refused to take a lie detector test?

 

[AZlawyer]

So through 2 1/2 days of hearings...one thing stands out...ICA's very odd behavior and reactions to things...
1) How is she going to make it through trial without outbursts? How will ICA react when the 911 phone calls are played? How will ICA react when her-exboyfriend(s) (mostly Tony) is on the stand? Her friends? When the State goes into detail about Caylee's remains? The trunk? A timeline of what ICA was doing during those 31 days? I know the Defense has given her legal pads and various colored pens to keep her busy...but surely they have to know she will not be able to control her outbursts? I guess this must play into mitigation...see how odd our client acts = hence, ugly coping after the death/missing of Caylee? Because there have been times, when I sincerely wonder how her odd giggles combined with stoic indifference towards her family will play in front of a jury.

If ICA's statements to LE at Universal do not come into evidence how much of her statements will? Starting with her mother "forcing" her to speak with the 911 operator?

TY AZ Lawyer and Richard H. for trying to answer all of our questions. We have a lot of them...and clearly, we will have a lot more...lol.

I have a feeling the judge will have to admonish Casey outside the presence of the jury that the rules about gestures and facial expressions apply to her too. She is not allowed to refuse to testify per the 5th Amendment and then "testify" from her seat through charades!

I can't see any reason that Casey's statements to the 911 operator wouldn't come in. Same thing for her lies to Cindy and Lee before the cops arrived.

Question, even if the testimony of KC is thrown out...can't the state call GA, CA, or LA to the stand to VERIFY all of the stuff that KC said as far as Nanny, Universal not really working there, etc? To me that would be all the Jury needed to hear. LA did his own investigation, can't the notes of that investigation (ie he called Universal to try to find these fictional people, etc) be used on the stand?

Yes!

Just curious here. Will the state be allowed to ask george, cindy and lee why they refused to take a lie detector test?

No. Lie detector tests are notoriously unreliable for the purpose of detecting lies, so it is irrelevant whether or not anyone refused to take one.

 

[LolaMoon08]

Mrs. Bock viewed the crime scene ( the third crime scene, imo, after the Anthony home and Casey's trunk) and the remains of Caylee Anthony without having signed any agreement with the defense, whatsoever.

Is the common?

Also, it seems to me that JB is still crying about not having access to the third crime scene... do you think the defense is going to have to explain to a jury just how crime scene investigation works? That the defense had no right to be there doing their own investigative work in that the remains were unidentifiable? No one knew it was Caylee? Which, imo, it makes Casey look even more guilty and makes her defense seem that they knew this was Caylee because they wanted to be out there so bad.