Legal Questions for our Verified Lawyers #4

[grammieto5]

This thread is for the Caylee Anthony case. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "claims of abuse," but I understand there was an autopsy done on Trayvon so there should be a lot of evidence of the condition of his body.

Oh ok, I understand, thank you. And thank you for your answer

 

[BigMomma]

Don't know if this has already been asked or answered, but...

If there are any future judgements/liens against OCA and she marries either during or after the fact, are those judgements/liens still active or do the debts become null? Would her future husband(if any) be liable for those as well? tia.

 

[AZlawyer]

Don't know if this has already been asked or answered, but...

If there are any future judgements/liens against OCA and she marries either during or after the fact, are those judgements/liens still active or do the debts become null? Would her future husband(if any) be liable for those as well? tia.

OK, I'm not a Florida lawyer obviously, and this is an area of law that varies from state to state. But certainly the debts wouldn't just disappear, and I would make an educated guess that the husband would not be liable for anything based on her premarital actions.

 

[nssherlock]

I wonder if one of our wonderful lawyers would give me your take on this statement: "you are mistaken if you think justice in the trial system is to assure justice for the victim - trial justice is to assure that the accused gets a fair trial"

This line is from a recent Harrys Law episode.....it jarred me. TIA

 

[AZlawyer]

I wonder if one of our wonderful lawyers would give me your take on this statement: "you are mistaken if you think justice in the trial system is to assure justice for the victim - trial justice is to assure that the accused gets a fair trial"

This line is from a recent Harrys Law episode.....it jarred me. TIA

I suppose that's true. At least in the US, the accused's right to a fair trial is guaranteed by the US Constitution, while any rights guaranteed to the victim come from, at most, state statutes. Thus the rights of the accused must always take precedence.

 

[gramcracker]

I suppose that's true. At least in the US, the accused's right to a fair trial is guaranteed by the US Constitution, while any rights guaranteed to the victim come from, at most, state statutes. Thus the rights of the accused must always take precedence.

bummer

 

[FLmom777]

Zenaida went through an extremely lengthy deposition by fca's attorneys. They have now filed ten more questions they want answered. Can they be granted this, since they already did their depo?

 

[AZlawyer]

Zenaida went through an extremely lengthy deposition by fca's attorneys. They have now filed ten more questions they want answered. Can they be granted this, since they already did their depo?

I'm not sure--what do you mean by filing questions they want answered? Is it a motion to reopen the deposition, which would require a good reason and a court order? Or just interrogatories (written questions), which are routine and, at least in Arizona, are not even "filed" at all--just mailed to the other party?

 

[dizzychick]

Would someone please tell me why Cindy Anthony could get up on that stand and lie like Casey get rebutted-impeached and then walk like it was not a problem and now profit from her perjury and nothing happnes to her? Why have this law if they dont inforce it? and does this set a precident for future perjurors? Cindy got away with it why cant I??

 

[FLmom777]

I'm not sure--what do you mean by filing questions they want answered? Is it a motion to reopen the deposition, which would require a good reason and a court order? Or just interrogatories (written questions), which are routine and, at least in Arizona, are not even "filed" at all--just mailed to the other party?

On the current news thread, page 19, there is an article from the Orlando Sentinel that says the attorneys filed a request. I'm not sure what that means.

At the clerk of courts search site, there is a notice of interrogatories. I think that refers to the new questions her attorneys want answered.

 

[AZlawyer]

Would someone please tell me why Cindy Anthony could get up on that stand and lie like Casey get rebutted-impeached and then walk like it was not a problem and now profit from her perjury and nothing happnes to her? Why have this law if they dont inforce it? and does this set a precident for future perjurors? Cindy got away with it why cant I??

It would absolutely clog up the court system if everyone who lied on the stand were prosecuted for perjury. I can't remember a single trial I've handled in which at least one person didn't commit perjury.

Famous people and people who are too clever to be caught for the really serious crimes that everyone knows they've committed are generally the only ones prosecuted for perjury.

On the current news thread, page 19, there is an article from the Orlando Sentinel that says the attorneys filed a request. I'm not sure what that means.

At the clerk of courts search site, there is a notice of interrogatories. I think that refers to the new questions her attorneys want answered.

If it's interrogatories, then they don't even need the court's permission. It has nothing to do with the deposition at all. You can do both.

 

[nssherlock]

I suppose that's true. At least in the US, the accused's right to a fair trial is guaranteed by the US Constitution, while any rights guaranteed to the victim come from, at most, state statutes. Thus the rights of the accused must always take precedence.

Thanks AZ. While your answer makes sense to me, the larger question leaves me perplexed. Ahh well, certainly not the only thing that has me banging my head.:banghead:

 

[Jomo]

If FCA moved to Costa Rica and didn't show up to testify in January, what would happen?

Can she be forced to stay in the United States until after the defamation trial and other legal proceedings are done?

Do you think that she is considering Costa Rica for reasons of avoiding any legal actions against her?

(p.s. Thanks again for all of your helpful insights)

 

[AZlawyer]

If FCA moved to Costa Rica and didn't show up to testify in January, what would happen?

Can she be forced to stay in the United States until after the defamation trial and other legal proceedings are done?

Do you think that she is considering Costa Rica for reasons of avoiding any legal actions against her?

(p.s. Thanks again for all of your helpful insights)

She could be held in contempt of court. Which doesn't mean much if you're in Costa Rica.

She isn't under arrest (dang it), so she's free to move about the country (and whatever other countries take felons)--unless she's not done with her probation yet. I haven't kept track.

But seriously, I think the Costa Rica thing is just tabloid blabber.

 

[AZlawyer]

Question by AZlawyer:
So, AZlawyer, what do you think of Cheney Mason's appellate brief on the lying convictions?
http://www.cfnews13.com/content/dam/news/static/cfnews13/Casey%20Anthony/Casey-Anthony-appeal-0611.pdf

I'm so glad you asked.

It includes exactly the issues I thought would be raised, all of which are good issues that are reasonable to argue on appeal.

The writing and organization leaves something to be desired, however, especially given the length of time his office had to prepare this document (almost a year!).

 

[Talina]

So what happens now? Does the state respond to the brief that Mason filed?

 

[AZlawyer]

So what happens now? Does the state respond to the brief that Mason filed?

Yes. The state has 20 days to respond. In theory, anyway. In this court, it seems like extensions are handed out like candy.

 

[5stars]

What is the day CMA will be off probation to be free to roam about?

 

[AZlawyer]

What is the day CMA will be off probation to be free to roam about?

I'm not sure. She was ordered to serve one year of probation, but since there was some confusion back in July 2011 about whether she'd already served it in jail, I don't think the clock actually started until sometime in August 2011.

 

[wonders]

I'm not sure. She was ordered to serve one year of probation, but since there was some confusion back in July 2011 about whether she'd already served it in jail, I don't think the clock actually started until sometime in August 2011.

I could be wrong but I think it's the 17th of July that she's cut free to scam and murder her way through life again. My Opinion Only!