Mitigation: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

[Broderick]

I went back and listened to JB's opening statements again because I couldn't believe it the first time. It was hard to listen to it again the second time, it's so bizarre. The statement that GA supposedly said to KC "look what you did, you'll go to jail for child neglect for the rest of your life." :waitasec: The first time I heard that I thought... "HUH?" I had to back it up and listen to that again. Made no sense.

IMO, there were alot of inconsistencies, illogical statements, and well... just plain "mis-truths" in his opening statements. My question is...did CM help him prepare it? IMO, I think KC helped him prepare it. :floorlaugh:

I voted no. I think she's actively involved in her defense case. JMO

Good catch, and the really sad thing is that will go right over a juror's head. I said in another thread his defense is strange because it is like he is already in the penalty phase.

 

[SurfieTX]

I went back and listened to JB's opening statements again because I couldn't believe it the first time. It was hard to listen to it again the second time, it's so bizarre. The statement that GA supposedly said to KC "look what you did, you'll go to jail for child neglect for the rest of your life." :waitasec: The first time I heard that I thought... "HUH?" I had to back it up and listen to that again. Made no sense.

IMO, there were alot of inconsistencies, illogical statements, and well... just plain "mis-truths" in his opening statements. My question is...did CM help him prepare it? IMO, I think KC helped him prepare it. :floorlaugh:

I voted no. I think she's actively involved in her defense case. JMO

BBM: I think that was JB's way of trying to minimize the impact of the text messages between KC and TL - something to the effect of "When they find her, guess who will be blamed and who will go to jail for the rest of my life?"

Aside: Notice that she says "when they find her," not "when we find her," or even "When I find her."

 

[LaLaw2000]

Is the DT purposely trying for ineffective defense? I vote NO because at this point they have no clue as to how ineffective they really are, IMO. Even if they did know it, they would never admit it because all of them have such huge egos!

JMO

 

[Aedrys]

I am sorry, but it is really hard to defend 31 days. Casey carried on a huge charade and her lies and lies built on top of lies are really something that not even the best lawyer could overcome. When Cindy gave her testimony re: each of those 31 days, that pretty much sealed her fate. Casey is and isn't just another child killer. She is in the respect that she shows no remorse. She isn't for the fact she was able to carry this on for SO LONG because her parents were in such deep denial and didn't want to believe their child killed her baby.
I don't know what we expect from JB. I think he is doing the best with what he has. Which is jack squat.
What I would like to know, is instead of picking JB apart (which I have done along with many others) is give some sort of intelligent, constructive ideas on what he could/should do. I mean, what the heck CAN HE DO other than blame someone else and throw spaghetti at the wall?
I mean, it is SO OBVIOUS that ICA is guilty. What is he supposed to do? He is a defense lawyer. If she has admitted her child drowned, he has to do something to try to get her off of Murder 1.
Let's come up with some real tangible means for him to defend her. Because right now, all I am reading is that he is inept, he is out of his league, he is this, he is that. While I agree with all of that, I don't really think there is much he can do with a client like Miss Casey.

He could have gone with an accidental drowning and not blame anyone else. That's what he could have done. Instead, he wove a fantastical and unbelievable story involving George and Kronk. I mean, read over his OS again. He literally couldn't do any better than that garbage? Yes, he could have. There are better ways he could have done his opening statement by going with a more simplistic and believable approach. I've seen a lot of people at least believe it might have been an accidental drowning. He could have said that Caylee accidently drowned on George's watch, that George tried to save her but couldn't, and that Casey came and that George panicked when he couldn't save Caylee, so he tried to frame Casey. Why go so far beyond that and make the whole story unbelieveable with George covering it up and not even trying to call 911 or save Caylee (with no explanation as to where he put Caylee's body or how it got into the back of Casey's car, just an insinuation that George probably put it there) and Kronk keeping the body for money purposes (with no explanation at all about how he got the body in the first place). I'm sure he could have come up with a better story even if he was trying to go with an acquittal. Yes, he has nothing to work with, but my twelve year old stepdaughter could come up with a better OS than he did.

And the way he questions the witnesses is just appalling. He is asking questions about torture and if the witnesse were there when Caylee died. Again, he could do better than this. Several times I've asked myself, why doesn't he question them about this (like why not ask how long they knew Casey, or how could they know she was a liar or any decent questions), or why doesn't he try to discredit them? He hasn't done any groundwork on any of these witnesses, asked no decent defense questions, instead resorting to shock and awe questions that only make him look like an idiot, and honestly, his question are helping the prosecution more than Casey's defense! Why is CM not helping him to do better? Or any of the other lawyers? He has more than enough help, yet he's acting like a horse's butt in the courtroom. That is not a decent defense attorney, that is an egotistical inexperienced one floundering for some kind of footing while constantly tripping over his own feet.

I agree that with Casey, Baez doesn't have much to work with. But if he was a decent defense lawyer, he would not have had such a shoddy OS and would question these witnesses a lot better. I have seen other defense lawyers in action, and while I usually don't care for defense lawyers, they at least have way better OS's and question witnesses way better than Baez. I can respect a defense attorney that does their job decently even if I don't agree with them. Baez is an embarrassment to defense lawyers everywhere, and I cannot respect him and what he is doing at all.

But Casey likes him and is okay with with his work. Or, she is driving this whole defense, and plans to use it to claim ineffective counsel later on unbeknownst to her defense team. I don't think Baez is purposely going with ineffective counsel. He's probably thinking he's doing the best he can, sadly enough. He even told HHJP that he was defending Casey to the best of his ability in one hearing, and HHJP agreed with him (why, I will never know unless HHJP wanted to get that on record so there couldn't be an appeal in ineffective counsel later on). The only person in my mind looking for an ineffective counsel appeal is Casey, not Baez. He's just inept and probably telling himself he's going along with what Casey wants, or is a star in his own mind.

 

[debbie0604]

Good catch, and the really sad thing is that will go right over a juror's head. I said in another thread his defense is strange because it is like he is already in the penalty phase.

That's what I thought too, he was speaking as if in the penalty phase, but treating it as if she 'neglected' her child (of which she isn't charged).:waitasec: I was confused. I know some of the jurors are taking notes. I read on some twitter accounts somewhere that some of the jurors were really listening to Baez. I was wondering if it was because his statemens were so bizarre? JMO

 

[debbie0604]

BBM: I think that was JB's way of trying to minimize the impact of the text messages between KC and TL - something to the effect of "When they find her, guess who will be blamed and who will go to jail for the rest of my life?"

Aside: Notice that she says "when they find her," not "when we find her," or even "When I find her."

Thank you... I didn't think of that. Hmm....JB said to 'follow the duct tape'. He also should have said 'follow the text messages'. JMO

 

[DairyGirl]

I have joked about this for a long time. It really seems that way but really, I think he IS that incompetent. I honestly don't know how he kept a straight face when he was giving his opening statement. I kept expecting him to stop, laugh, and say "Forget that story. Here is what really happened."

 

[DairyGirl]

What could they or should they be doing better? I don't see that they have much to work with imo.

Ima

Well, one would think the truth would be good but in this case the truth may be even worse then any of us could have imagined.
Barring that I think he may have gotten farther if he had presented the accidental drowning without the added cast of characters. I think most people want to believe it was an accident that snowballed out of control, as GA said. I think a good attorney could have come up with a better explanation for the duct tape and other things then JB did. Trying to make his client look as pure as the driven snow with absolutely no culpability whatsoever looks greedy to me. He doesn't just want her convicted of child neglect or accidental manslaughter, he wants her totally acquitted, which is completely unrealistic.

 

[cluciano63]

I would like to think that deep down, Jose knows she is guilty and wants her to be locked away forever and that he considers his only job to be getting LWOP instead of DP. He must know her pretty well by now. He has to know she is dangerous. Like many defense attorneys who do DP cases, he will consider it a "win" if she gets LWOP, perhaps...

 

[panthera]

What could they or should they be doing better? I don't see that they have much to work with imo.

Ima

Exactly. They don't have very much at all to work with, and if Casey has given them a story she swears is the truth, they have to go with it. I don't believe they are deliberately trying to be ineffective, however, it is very possible they realize their best effort may be to save Casey from the DP.

MOO

 

[allycat1208]

I believe that it is very hard to represent KC because of all her lying to everyone and even her attorneys. If she kept changing her story, JB had to change his to to reflect his client. The alleged sexual abuse by GA and Ga's making her cover up for Caylee's death are now supposedly what Casey told JB. JB just has to try to make it look believable as he can. Of course it does not seem plausible though. The allegations regarding Roy Kronk I don't understand at all, because Casey would not have told Baez anything about RK. This must be pure speculation on Baez's part which seems to have little relevancy to figuring out if Casey murdered her daughter or not. I think Baez wants to get his client off but has little to work with.

 

[maur33]

I think JB was quite smitten with the victim as he perceived her. She has a hold over men in many instances, albeit many have turned around. Not that I say anything went beyond the line, except for him getting admonished by hugging her too much in the jail.

I guess we'll see about that after the trial, because if she gets convicted of murder 1 and the DP KC will show Jose just what the anthony's have been afraid of their whole lives. She will unleash on him a series of allegations that will rival those she has leveled at the anthony's, something they have always been afraid of and why they treated her they way they did. I can hear the anthony's now saying, "what will KC do if we confront her, what will KC do if we don't find a zanny or anyone else for that matter to pin this on, what will KC do if I don't support her lies", and on and on and on.

Well, the anthony's have their answer they now know just what KC will do and I suspect Mr. Baez will soon find out his fate as well.

I am sure the DT has pondered this at length by now, and if they haven't they better get ready because it's coming.

 

[GetSmart]

I don't know what we expect from JB. I think he is doing the best with what he has. Which is jack squat.
What I would like to know, is instead of picking JB apart (which I have done along with many others) is give some sort of intelligent, constructive ideas on what he could/should do. I mean, what the heck CAN HE DO other than blame someone else and throw spaghetti at the wall?
I mean, it is SO OBVIOUS that ICA is guilty. What is he supposed to do? He is a defense lawyer. If she has admitted her child drowned, he has to do something to try to get her off of Murder 1.
Let's come up with some real tangible means for him to defend her. Because right now, all I am reading is that he is inept, he is out of his league, he is this, he is that. While I agree with all of that, I don't really think there is much he can do with a client like Miss Casey.

Surely You Jest
I think I understand your drift .. but I am so afraid someone just might answer your post with ideas .. so that makes me want to scream OH HECK NO >> No ideas for JB to help her from this poster.
I hope that ship sinks fast and furious..

 

[websurfer]

What's that saying about a a chicken?
Running in circles?

 

[GetSmart]

I voted NO because of this case ..
Inmate blames Casey Anthony's lawyer, Jose Baez, for conviction in child's death
By Stephen Hudak | Sentinel Staff Writer
March 28, 2009
TAVARES - A Lake County man, serving a 15-year prison sentence in the death of a toddler, wants his manslaughter and child-abuse convictions overturned, citing judicial and prosecutorial misconduct and the "defectiveness" of his defense lawyer, Jose Baez.

Baez is better known these days as Casey Anthony's lawyer. But last spring and summer he was busy defending Nilton Diaz.

Diaz, 31, says he did not kill or harm 2-year-old Noeris Vazquez, granddaughter of legendary Puerto Rican prizefighter Wilfredo Vazquez.

Diaz says he lost his freedom because of Baez's trial performance, strategy and failure to disclose evidence to prosecutors, a tactical decision that prevented jurors from viewing a defense video.

The video, created by a biomechanical expert, would have shown the jury how the toddler's skull fracture could have been an accident, according to new court filings.

In documents filed this week seeking a new trial and other post-conviction relief, Diaz said, " ... Mr. Baez wanted to surprise the prosecution, and the surprise blew up in the defense's face."

 

[Mohabi]

I really don't think JB is intentially being inept. He is just very inexperienced, took on too much, has a big ego, and thinks he can handle it. Strickland and Perry asked ICA if she was happy with her counsel several times and she said "yes". I think she kept him on because he fell for her lies. You have to remember that many defense attornies will never ask the client if they are innocent or guilty. They will ask the defendent what happened and go from there. In the end, especially in a case like this, all the defense can go on is what the defendant has told them. Then try to debunk the state's evidence.

JB really shouldn't have dragged others into OS. He should have kept it simple. Painted a picture of a loving mother that made the mistake of answering the phone while Caylee was in the tub and she drown. ICA went into panic mode, the shock took over, the lies started (starting with calling CA to babysit) and it just got out of control. Explain that she had a very low self esteem, became terrified of disappointing her parents. Which could explain why she has lied so long about being pregnant, having a job and stole so she would have some income. He could have said that after Caylee was born, ICA loved her so much she couldn't bare going back to work and be away from her so she lied about having a job. The duct tape? After Caylee passed. ICA gently wrapped her up in her favorite Pooh blanket. Put her in her favorite sand box (play house, whatever). Until she figured out what to do. She waited a day or two, thought a kidnapping would be her best story so she put duct tape on that poor little girl. It broke her heart to do that so she added to sticker with love. She then put her in the truck, drove her down the road and tried to bury her where ICA had buried all her beloved pets in the past. Was it the right thing to do, no. Would she take it back if she could, yes. Is this a case of premeditated murder, no. ICA loved her daughter with all her heart, she just made a series of horrible mistakes. Why did it take so long for her to admit this? She was too ashamed to admit her mistakes. He should also have said something to the effect that psychologists will be testifying to the fragile mental state, PTS, etc of poor ICA (many "experts" can be bought, find a few to testify).

Unfortunatly (or fortunatly however you want to look at it) JB thought it better to put blame on everyone else. GA found Caylee, gave the body to Kronk (? that one baffles me), ICA was afraid of GA because of abuse, etc, etc. He should have focused on one person and one person only ICA...Would this help her get off scott free? Probably not. Would this help her avoid 1st degree murder? More then likely.

Sorry, this ended up being much longer then I expected...

You would have made an excellent defense attorney!!

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

I do not think the DT is trying for an ineffective defense.

I think the DT, is trying very hard to overcome a mountain of circumstantial evidence, an unsympathic client, 3 years of hate mongering by the money hungry media, the anonymity of the internet that allows hate filled comments with no responsibility attached (read some of the comments in the Orlando newspapers blogs they are scary evil hating comments), and a Sunshine Law that seems to just fan the fires of the burning hatred towards KC.

The DT could not have just had an opening statement that Caylee drowned in an unfortunate accident. If they would have stopped right there, many would have said, she is lying again trying to save herself, and that doesn't explain the 31 days or not calling 911.

If KC gets on the stand, no one will believe anything she says. Her credibility is 0. She lies. She has lied for years.

Yet, after JB's opening statements, the talking heads were saying this trial has been turned upside down. Most likely money hungry media speak for watch this, its controversial, don't quit watching we need our advertisers to pay us more money.

No, I think HHJP will do everything in his power to not let this case be retried later do to inneffective defense, and I think the DT is doing the best they can with the hand they have been dealt.

The trial has only just begun, and I think the DT will have some moments that will surprise many of the followers of this case.

As always everything in my post is my opinion only.

 

[tankgirl]

No. I think that this is the best they can do under the circumstances.. it's hard to shine a t*rd (dunno if I can type the whole "T word" here? heh...)

That said and hoping not too OT, the DT might want to find another way to communicate during witness testimony besides whispering behind their hands. I know it's necessary for them to continually work on their strategy but it looks shady. imo.

 

[karenmamo]

Well, one would think the truth would be good but in this case the truth may be even worse then any of us could have imagined.
Barring that I think he may have gotten farther if he had presented the accidental drowning without the added cast of characters. I think most people want to believe it was an accident that snowballed out of control, as GA said. I think a good attorney could have come up with a better explanation for the duct tape and other things then JB did. Trying to make his client look as pure as the driven snow with absolutely no culpability whatsoever looks greedy to me. He doesn't just want her convicted of child neglect or accidental manslaughter, he wants her totally acquitted, which is completely unrealistic.

Re: an accident that snowballed out of control, as GA said.
I do not doubt that George told his gf this, but think it is just something he said without believing it really.
Anyone else thought about this?
Sorry this is OT.

 

[SyraKelly]

Baez could care less about Casey and it shows in the shoddy defense, the zero grooming and coaching, and the dismissive way he's handled her, her family and the law itself over the years. His motivation is in making the most out of this high profile case and a desire to maximize the drama for ongoing profit once this is done. I think he's pretty over being a lawyer altogether and it kinda shows.

Poor representation for sure, but think that's because putting on a good defense is not what he's about. And Mason? Who knows....

I agree-I thought after his opening statement-JB you just ruined your whole career.and its sad,because he has a wife and child on the way who need his support and the money he will get after for all the interviews may not last long,unless someone is going to pay him a mill or so for his story..