Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #2

[Kentjbkent]

The docs IMO are worthless in the scheme of things. They could have brought in any obituary and said...oh that's the dad! I'm confused...he draws up papers...and then they come back with an obit? You would think that if the father was signing away parental rights that it would have to be filed in Family Court. Right, AZ? Are we to assume that these events happened simultaneously? Poor guy. Not that I believe one word of this story...

QUESTION.....Do we know when he supposively drew up these papers???

 

[RR0004]

QUESTION.....Do we know when he supposively drew up these papers???

OMG...there was so much discussion about this early on. I'm not sure if PK dated this info in his depo. Cindy mentioned this also.

 

[AZlawyer]

OMG...there was so much discussion about this early on. I'm not sure if PK dated this info in his depo. Cindy mentioned this also.

I think we're going to have to wait and see the PK deposition.

 

[RR0004]

I think we're going to have to wait and see the PK deposition.

I was just going to post exactly that...it took me about 5 minutes to realize I hadn't seen it...lol. Thanks, AZ.

 

[SunnyinMO]

Can either Kronk or Jesse file suit against JB for defamation of character or anything else? It seems reporting him does no good.

I will correct this.....an attorney once told me a person can sue anyone for just about anything...so I will rephrase the question. What do you think would happen if either filed suit against JB?

 

[AZlawyer]

Can either Kronk or Jesse file suit against JB for defamation of character or anything else? It seems reporting him does no good.

I will correct this.....an attorney once told me a person can sue anyone for just about anything...so I will rephrase the question. What do you think would happen if either filed suit against JB?

They would lose very quickly. Attorneys have nearly complete immunity from defamation suits for statements made in court (or in court documents).

 

[ecs5298]

They would lose very quickly. Attorneys have nearly complete immunity from defamation suits for statements made in court (or in court documents).

How about statements made to the media?

 

[AZlawyer]

How about statements made to the media?

I don't believe the immunity would apply to statements made to the media. However, they would have to be statements of fact, rather than opinion, and would have to be demonstrably false. Can you think of any statements JB/CM made in the media re: Kronk or Jesse that were actually false statements of fact?

E.g., "Kronk is our number 1 suspect" would not be good enough.

 

[kjpaw]

After re-reading the motion for relative of victim to be excluded from sequestration, I have a question. Most of the caselaw cited refers to the potential for the accused being prejudiced and using that for guidance of sequestering the family during the trial...Are you aware of any cases that would support the family being excluded due to prejudice to the state? Also, are you aware of any cases where the family members seeking exclusion from sequestration are family of the accused AND victim? Most of the discussion I've seen on WS so far involves the potential prejudice to the state versus the accused and the cases submitted in the motion don't mention how this could impact the ruling. Either way, what is your opinion on how the judge will rule?

 

[ZsaZsa]

There are plenty of opportunities for "sequestered" witnesses to learn the testimony of other witnesses, at least in the courts where I practice. It is just handled on the honor system. But with the disclosure and discovery rules the way they are now (no "trial by ambush," most witnesses deposed before trial) the rule of exclusion of witnesses is not as important as it used to be.

Which begs the question- why would HHJP order that the A's be sequestered if it's such a casual arrangement? They will find a way around that pronto...

 

[AZlawyer]

After re-reading the motion for relative of victim to be excluded from sequestration, I have a question. Most of the caselaw cited refers to the potential for the accused being prejudiced and using that for guidance of sequestering the family during the trial...Are you aware of any cases that would support the family being excluded due to prejudice to the state? Also, are you aware of any cases where the family members seeking exclusion from sequestration are family of the accused AND victim? Most of the discussion I've seen on WS so far involves the potential prejudice to the state versus the accused and the cases submitted in the motion don't mention how this could impact the ruling. Either way, what is your opinion on how the judge will rule?

AFAIK there are no special rights for family members of the accused. The only special rights are for family members of the victim. In this case, of course, the As are both, but they are asking to be allowed to stay for the whole trial because they are family members of the victim. I've never seen a request like this one before, but I'm sure it must happen all the time, as lots of criminal cases involve family members on both sides.

No one cares if the State is "prejudiced" because the State doesn't have any constitutional rights lol. So there will not be any "balancing" of prejudice to Casey vs. prejudice to the State. Also, the cases talking about prejudice against the accused are saying that it is generally HARMFUL to the accused to have the victim's family in court, whereas here the accused (presumably) supports the family's request to remain in the courtroom, so those cases will not be too helpful to HHJP. IMO HHJP can consider, however, the potential for prejudice to the administration of justice in this case--i.e., the potential for disruption, perjury, inappropriate influence on the jury, etc.

IMO he will exclude the As from trial, because they are acting more like family members of the accused than family members of the victim, they cannot follow the rules of courtroom decorum, they cannot keep their stories straight, and they are important witnesses.

Which begs the question- why would HHJP order that the A's be sequestered if it's such a casual arrangement? They will find a way around that pronto...

True, but he might as well give it a shot. Then when Cindy gets on the stand and says "like Lee said when you asked him that yesterday..." HHJP can hold her in contempt. In my dreams, at least.

 

[BChand]

I would love to hear a competent attorney's opinion (and I certainly include AZ Lawyer and Katprint in that group) of what is going on in these depositions.

Is there a "method to their madness" with the shenanigans going on with Mason and Baez? Are they purposely trying to "get to" Mr. Ashton and rattle him? If so, what good does that do them come trial?

Or are they just incompetent and rude?

 

[AZlawyer]

I would love to hear a competent attorney's opinion (and I certainly include AZ Lawyer and Katprint in that group) of what is going on in these depositions.

Is there a "method to their madness" with the shenanigans going on with Mason and Baez? Are they purposely trying to "get to" Mr. Ashton and rattle him? If so, what good does that do them come trial?

Or are they just incompetent and rude?

Many attorneys seem to think that behaving like an a$$ in a deposition is all part of representing one's client. I would say that about 25% of the depositions in my cases involve exchanges like the one recently released by the media in this case. As a former preschool teacher my initial impulse is to say "GO TO TIME OUT!" but somehow I restrain myself.

I have never understood how this behavior is supposed to benefit the client of the attorney who initiates the conflict. It could be an attempt to "rattle" the other attorney, but most trial attorneys are not too easily rattled.

 

[lauriej]

..is travel paid, for out of city/state witnesses to come to orlando to testify?

 

[Dells]

The trial is now only a 7+ weeks away. Can you foresee anything (barring Casey firing her defense team or other major catastrophic circumstances such as major health issues for one of the attorneys) that would make Judge Perry delay this trial? I mean, does the defense still have time to pull something off and get this trial delayed, or in your professional opinion do you really think that the trial and jury selection will begin May 9th?

 

[Katprint]

Many attorneys seem to think that behaving like an a$$ in a deposition is all part of representing one's client. I would say that about 25% of the depositions in my cases involve exchanges like the one recently released by the media in this case. As a former preschool teacher my initial impulse is to say "GO TO TIME OUT!" but somehow I restrain myself.

I have previously shared my personal view that some clients seem to select attorneys who share personality characteristics, kind of like some dog owners physically resemble their dogs. I think Casey LOVES seeing/hearing about her attorneys behaving rudely and belligerently, trying to manipulate the system, because that is how she has always gotten what she wanted because her targets simply gave up rather than endlessly arguing with her unreasonableness.

I have never understood how this behavior is supposed to benefit the client of the attorney who initiates the conflict. It could be an attempt to "rattle" the other attorney, but most trial attorneys are not too easily rattled.

I agree. In fact, I think rude, obnoxious behavior mostly just pisses off competent attorneys who do not respond in kind but instead redouble their efforts and put in some extra overtime on that particular case. I prefer my adversaries to be upset about some other case and work extra hard on that other case, and not work too much on their case against my client.

Katprint
Always only my own opinions

 

[chakti]

Comes now a state expert saying the spot where Caylee was found was only flooded for 10 days in Aug.

But we have TM and group saying it was deep enough to sink a ATV.

Which weighs heavier. 1 persons guess or a bunch of people that saw it ????

 

[Kentjbkent]

So this morning's news announces the untimely death of a OCSD deputy who is listed on the State's witness list. The article states he was already deposed by the defense...(he apparently was one of the first to interview Casey and also interviewed Brian B the "shovel guy")..

How will this play out at trial time?

 

[salvarenga]

This is the headline from the news thread:

Clerk of Courts: Casey Anthony trial could be "canceled or suspended"
Orange County Clerk of Courts Lydia Gardner says threatened cuts to her budget could put Casey Anthony trial in jeopardy.

What in the heck does this mean legally speaking? How can they cancel or suspend a trial for a murder charge? Does cancel mean she's free to go? Does suspend mean that it could weigh on her right to a fair and speedy trial?

 

[LaLaw2000]

We have come this far in having a trial date and the preparations are in the process of being made.

Do you feel the trial could really be delayed because of budget, AZ? I will be so very upset if it is.