It's so nice to have competent lawyers answering our questions. Thank you!
1. What possible remedies could the Florida Bar impose on JB due to his total mismanagement of this defense?
2. If CA wins an appeal based upon incompetent counsel would she remain in prison pending a new trial?
TIA!
1. "Possible" remedies would be anything up to disbarment. But that wouldn't happen based on the facts so far. My guess is a letter of censure.
2. Yes. I mean she could
ask to be bonded out but...yes.
I am not sure if this is an appropriate question for this thread, but I really want an atty to answer. If ICA was your client how would you handle the fact that she took the bottom of a sweater and knotted it up almost to look like a tank top? Is this not an area would an atty would advise their client that it is not appropriate?
***note this is not a bash it is a serious question****
I would have untied that stupid knot before the jury walked in.
Sorry not trying to blow up this thread but as usual the DT causes way more questions then answers so here goes.. Could the DT really be trying for a mis trial so that some how it would help them actually put together a defense? I just cant think of any other logical reason there would be this many mistakes violation and horrific questions?
Nah, I think it is a combination of JB's inexperience and belief that he is clever, and the rest of the team's disinterest.
Would judge lean more toward LWOP, even if the jury recommends death, as a way of avoiding the automatic appeals that come with a death sentence?
Some judges might. I understand this one does not.
BBM..... but what good does a censure letter do? He owns/runs/is a partner ?? in his own practice, so not like a boss will suspend him over it. Will his future clients (eg those who have not watched this trial) even know he's got a censure letter? Or care? Can that even really be considered a punishment? I mean a fine hurts in a sort of "ouch! well that bites..." way, like a speeding ticket, but isn't there any way to actually discourage this kind of behavior from attorneys? As M Garagos said - it could as easily be seen as an attorney willing to anger the judge slightly for the benefit of his client, with minimal if any punishment.
I agree that a censure letter won't hurt JB much. But really, his ethics violations, if any, are not at the level that would justify anything like disbarment.
I know that this has been asked before, but I can't remember the answer.
If there is a mistrial, would Casey be required to have a court-appointed attorney, or could she let Baez et al have another go at it?
She could retain Baez as her attorney again, but I bet he'd say no.
Have any of your thoughts on the potential jury findings changed with any of todays news? In particular how would you anticipate that he jury would react should it come to light that JB's "drowning in the pool, found by Grandpa" almost perfectly matches the confirmed actual life story of a fellow inmate of KC's? What would the juries reaction be if they percieve that the defendant not only told lies throughout the case, but from the moment of the opening statements was most likely outright lying to them in such a direct manner? Would that be enough to swing the findings up to 1st or 2nd degree murder?
Also has JB's earlier agressive cross examinations of prosecution witnesses concerning whether or not Caylee drowned opened the door already for the prosecution to bring Ms. Whalens story in?
And what impact does the existence of AW have on the defense team given JB's opening statements? How does it compare with their obligations to not knowingly declare falsehoods before the court?
I don't know...the part of the story that matches is pretty generic. The child drowns, the grandfather finds the child...anything else? I'm not impressed yet.
That said,
IF the SA can rustle up some proof that Casey heard the story, I think the jury would take it as another example of her "tiny nugget of truth in the big lie" MO.
I don't see how JB's cross examination of prosecution witnesses connects with this question, sorry. :waitasec: Probably just tired...
AFAIK there is certainly no evidence or indication that the defense team was aware that Casey might have heard this story from another inmate. Although if she told them about it close to the time period when Casey was in jail with this lady, they must be wondering now...
This video is from yesterday, June 20.
I would be interested in hearing to what degree any of our attorneys agree with the points that were made by Richard Hornsby from 1:45 to 3:01.
Richard Hornsby criticizes Judge Perry
The way I read the Florida rules about qualifications of death penalty counsel, the rules apply only to appointed counsel, not to privately retained counsel. So I disagree, based on that reading. OTOH, the rules are not crystal clear, so RH may be aware of some clarifying interpretation of the rules in Florida.
Since both sides of the legal teams seem to try to impeach witnesses it is obvious they mostly want to discredit witnesses testimony to devalue their opposition's arguments. However, I'm just wondering at what point does a witness have to worry about their own impeachment leading to a charge of perjury. How would this occur?
That almost never happens in real life. People commit perjury every day in every courtroom in America--there would be no way to prosecute them all.
There is lots of buzz in Talking-Head-Land indicating that some of Jose Baez's actions are adding up to a legitimate Ineffective Assistance of Counsel appeal, should ICA be convicted.
Hypothetically, if an appeals court were to grant such an appeal, are there any repercussions for the "ineffective" counsel? Could a conviction be overturned on those grounds and that inept attorney continue his/her practice with no ramifications?
Thanks to all who take valuable time out of what are sure to be busy days to patiently share knowledge, talk us off of walls, break things to us gently, set us straight and offer amazing insight!
Yes, the attorney could continue to practice with no ramifications, although there might be a bar complaint.
I read about a DP conviction with Judge Perry as the judge some years back where the conviction was overturned and new trial given based on a videotaped interview shown to jury of the defendant being accused by police of committing the murder before he been read his rights, which was deemed inflammatory. In Casey's case, she was basically accused by YM on the video from Universal when he told her he didn't believe her, that Caylee was most likely in a trash can, etc....isn't this very similar? The case was Scott Mansfield.
The Scott Mansfield conviction was not overturned. The interrogation tape was found to have been improperly admitted but not important enough to justify reversal. I'm guessing we might get the same ruling on appeal in this case.
Mr Thompson's deposition with the defense is scheduled for tomorrow. IIRC, the attorney taking the depo is permitted to ask away liberally during a deposition. If that is true (and I may be mistaken) what is to prevent the DT from making this a fishing expedition? They are pretty desperate about now. TIA!
Well, there are only so many times you can say, "Did you have this number in July 2008? Are you sure? Are you really sure??" It's like a fishing expedition in a dried-up pond. :crazy:
I really want the timeline/phone logs/pings of ICA's whereabouts entered into evidence. Here is where I am uneducated. If the state has already rested their case does that mean they can no longer enter evidence? Can they only rebutt the Defense's case? I am really surprised the state didn't lay a stronger foundation of Casey's actions on June 16th. Also a lot if things things that I consider important to the case haven't been discussed. There is a thread about things we wished the Prosecution had entered and many felt in that thread that they state hasn't played their whole hand yet. But..can they now after resting? Can someone please explain how the States final presentation goes legally.
The State can "only" rebut the defense's case, yes. But that doesn't mean they can't enter evidence. They can enter any evidence that rebuts the defense's case.
But I really don't understand what the phone pings would prove anyway.
I'm sure this is a stupid question but it's something I was curious about: I read a comment on twitter that JA commited some form of prosocutorial misconduct by stating that Florida has no coyotes; is that correct?
To further add - would that be up to DT to recross and clear it up? If JA was wrong and the DT didn't catch it..does that make it fair game?
If it were a fundamental constitutional error, it would be a problem even if the DT didn't object. But I can't imagine that it is a fundamental constitutional error. If there really are coyotes in the area, I'm sure the DT would be allowed to introduce a quick 1-question witness on that point now that the SA has brought it up.
I am unclear of the FL sentencing rules. Last few days there was chatter of acquittal, Based on some odd, court requested mistrial, dbl jeopardy ? (This was supposedly due to DT antics & backing HHJP into corner on report w/o opinions. I cannot locate my source/lonk. I thought it was Bill S recap video ? I cannot locate it and could be wrong - tmi!)
Is there such a thing as a mistrial leading to an acquittal?
I was also wondering if the charges against ICA are an 'all or nothing' deal.
Meaning, if the DP is reduced to aggravated manslaughter as an example...what happens with sentencing on all of the additional charges? Served consecutively?
Or, if there were a mistrial, what happens to the remaining charges? Would ICA be sentenced for those separately? And, remain in jail awaiting trial on just the murder/DP charge? TIA!
Not acquittal exactly, but if there is a mistrial declared over the objection of the defense, then there would not be a retrial. Is that what you mean? But I don't think there's any likelihood of that happening.
All the charges are being tried now. There are no "remaining" charges. So I'm not sure what you're asking.