Mitigation: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

[cecybeans]

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

Really! And in reference to himself "follow the photographs". For a guy who helped his clearly indigent client pay his own salary by selling pictures of her dead child for well over six figures, he sounded awfully sanctimonious up there the other day ribbing RM for selling photos to the Globe for a measly $4K.

 

[elfie]

I honestly think the DT is trying---True JB is inexperienced....Don't know what CM is doing. But, ICA didn't give them much to work with. Lies about Zany, total Party Princess while Caylee is missing for 31 days. I too would have gone with an accident scenario. I would have left out the BS with GA being there. George would have tried CPR and he would have called 911----no doubt in my mind about that. DT would have been better off with accidental drowning with only ICA being there. But, darn it the big issue is the duct tape. How did the duct tape with the sticker on it get on Caylee. Also, if it was an accident why let it get this far????? This is a first degree murder trial. Reason, ICA didn't want to give up the body location at all. Too much forensic evidence!!! So it's really hard for the DT to figure out any other logical scenarios. The nonexistant nanny and the duct tape have locked the DT into a no-win situation......POOR ICA---not!!!!

So well put!

I also think that Casey's inability to recognize the public's perception (and more than likely the jury's) of her unwillingness to take any responsibility has put the DT between a rock and hard place. Any sense of remorse on her part that would have been afforded by an admission of an accidental drowning scenario while Caylee was solely in her care has evaporated with the DT's accusation(s) of George and the involvement of Roy Kronk.

At this point it's pretty clear that the convoluted machinations of the approach the DT has outlined so far is the Casey sanctioned order of events.
I have to wonder how ardently her team argued with her against it. If the abuse angle was devised early on as the "clincher", whatever else that followed appears to be an after thought. Without a contrite defendant there really isn't any where to go.

With a scenario that Casey had acted alone the duct tape could have been explained to avoid purging. It is beyond comprehension to believe that George, ex LE and openly grieving grandfather, didn't call 911 immediately and then disposed of Caylee in such a callous manner.

They're working with what they've got, and it ain't good.

 

[PaperDoll]

I voted maybe. JB doesn't seem to be making Casey look good, IMO. He maybe trying to divert the guilt towards George, but Casey's behavior has GUILT pointing directly at her and her alone. JB has to do something, and I think he's simply grasping at straws. He even thinks her behavior is bizaare, because he keeps bringing it up. Sorry, bizaare, dysfunctional, incest victim, isn't an excuse for murder. :twocents:

 

[ZsaZsa]

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.

Hmm-don't forget that those 'money hungry media' supplied JB with over $200K (that he only reluctantly admitted to receiving,when forced ) and have featured him on numerous TV shows expounding his own DT point of view,without being challenged very vigorously. I have seen NO hate mongering when he is on that's for sure.He has been interviewed countless times on local and National TV and doesn't seem to object to them paying him for his appearances, or receiving the resultant publicity for his cause.
Don't forget that the A's themselves made at LEAST $20K that we know of from the sale of photos and videos. How many times have they appeared (and been paid for with fees, hotel and luxury travel accommodations)on talk shows.
Apart from NG and some of the local channels, I doubt much of the information released under the Sunshine laws has made it into the Public psyche, but is of more interest to crime forums such as this.. Certainly those Jurors selected do not seem to have been exposed to it, and they only live an hour away by road..
AS you well know, circumstantial evidence convicts people every day... as it should.

 

[Leila]

I voted NO as I don't think the enormous egos of JB and CM would allow them to purposely try for ineffective counsel.

I think JB has clearly demonstrated his inexperience and incompetence at trial procedure for the past three years.

I think CM is beyond being a competent attorney due to his age. He's just not able to handle the work load this case requires anymore.

And on top of all this, the client they're representing has no defense for her actions. A competent attorney would have agreed to a plea bargain within the first two months of this case. I do feel that KC is being stubborn and not listening to the advice of her attorneys.

 

[ZsaZsa]

I voted NO as I don't think the enormous egos of JB and CM would allow them to purposely try for ineffective counsel.

I think JB has clearly demonstrated his inexperience and incompetence at trial procedure for the past three years.

I think CM is beyond being a competent attorney due to his age. He's just not able to handle the work load this case requires anymore.

And on top of all this, the client they're representing has no defense for her actions. A competent attorney would have agreed to a plea bargain within the first two months of this case. I do feel that KC is being stubborn and not listening to the advice of her attorneys.

Plus, I'm sitting here chuckling.... how would we know if they were "trying for an ineffective counsel situation". They are such dumba***s we wouldn't notice.... :floorlaugh: if it was intentional or just business as usual!

 

[Kimster]

Funny this topic came up because I was thinking about this last night. I almost wished I'd asked rhornsby about it on the radio show.

I think JB seems quite frustrated with KC lately. It might be because KC insisted on pleading not guilty and "not responsible" and this was HER defense plan. I was speculating whether or not JB would have to go along with his client's wishes and perhaps at some point thought "fine, I'm tired of her childish behavior. Let her have what she wants".

Just totally MOO.

 

[Sharai]

The DT has put on a brilliant defense and is absolutely going to get ICA cleared of all charges...in "JBWorld".:crazy:

Thanks, I needed the chuckle.

 

[dax]

I voted yes because it simply boggles my mind to watch JB. To think that he is actually that inept goes beyond my imagination. He is a walking example of what not to do when your playing poker or ....? :twocents:
.....I know you all understand what I'm talking about here!

I was having a conversation over the weekend with my daughter-in-law who is an exSA now in private practice here in Florida. She said that it is not unheard of for a defense team to purposely blow a case when they know it is unwinnable.

Just like the delay tactic is used in the hope that witnesses will either forget or make damning mistakes in their testimony, a new trial allows for the same thing. Many years will pass before a new trial would take place.....who knows how many witnesses will not be here, will wind up in trouble and have their credibility tainted.... or how much evidence might be lost or even new technology developed that would benefit the defense. New SAs or even a new Attorney General might insist on a plea...who knows, but purposely losing this case would benefit the defendant...imo

 

[RaniK]

I voted "no" because whenever JB speaks, I literally cringe. He usually makes little sense. IMO, he is just ineffective. < Period !

 

[PaperDoll]

I simply think JB is doing his job, but Casey has made it so difficult.. :crazy: I mean, lies, lies, lies.. How can a defense get past that? How can the defense get past the fact that a GOOD mother did NOT report her daughter missing. How can he get past the fact that Casey was HAPPY, HAPPY, HAPPY while her daughter is missing? It's beyond me :banghead: But, I have to say, it makes for an interesting trial to watch.. :crazy:

 

[Leila]

Funny this topic came up because I was thinking about this last night. I almost wished I'd asked rhornsby about it on the radio show.

I think JB seems quite frustrated with KC lately. It might be because KC insisted on pleading not guilty and "not responsible" and this was HER defense plan. I was speculating whether or not JB would have to go along with his client's wishes and perhaps at some point thought "fine, I'm tired of her childish behavior. Let her have what she wants".

Just totally MOO.

Kimster.................I think KC plays a big role in the defense strategy. I suspect she's resisted any advice about accepting responsibility. Even when it comes to an accidental drowning defense, KC is portrayed as almost an innocent bystander with her father finding the body, ordering her what to do, and disposing of the body himself.

This case has had a revolving door when it comes to defense attorneys - a number have come and gone. I suspect part of the reason is because KC is not being cooperative with the attorneys and they simply get frustrated with the client's resistance at following advice and leave.

 

[Sharai]

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...

Sounds like a much more reasonable scenerio/defense than what JB has presented. However, due to his client's character he probably couldn't pull this off either.

 

[Sharai]

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."

I thought this was satiracal joke, it's not. Amazing, Baez has a number of unhappy clients. Now I understand George expressing his concern about him handling Casey's case.

 

[MissJames]

No.
There are too many competent attorneys on this case.I have no idea why they would go along with this,but they are. I don't think they would purposely torpedo their careers for ICA.
They know ,more than anyone,what the evidence is in this case,They are just trying to keep her from getting the DP, IMO.

There is one other possibility . JB changed course and did the opening argument on the fly ,without ICA or the rest of counsel knowing what he was going to say. He kind of sounded like HE wasn't sure what he was going to say.

 

[Quiche]

I thought this was satiracal joke, it's not. Amazing, Baez has a number of unhappy clients. Now I understand George expressing his concern about him handling Casey's case.

Ah, it may also explain why HHBP keeps repeating that this is not a trial by ambush, there's precedent. Well I'll be...I hope that man gets a fair day in court.
My vote was a "maybe" because I am floored by his mistakes, especially with so much co-council, don't they talk to each other? :waitasec:

 

[Scamperoo]

The DT has put on a brilliant defense and is absolutely going to get ICA cleared of all charges...in "JBWorld".:crazy:

I wonder if IS and other talking heads who are stroking the DT's ego are partially responsible for JB's delusion of competent council.

I remember JB supposedly opining his destruction of George Anthony on cross, when I saw the exact opposite.

As for CM all I can say is how humiliating it must be when the witness laughs at you.

Anyone else notice how Baez lost his smirk and gained a tight little pursed mouth of anger when he speaks to George....I find that more irritating than the smirk.

All in all KC isn't getting what she paid for...$70,000 in debt and staring down the death penalty.

 

[sleutherontheside]

IMO...it is too early in the trial to make any assumptions. That said.....
should a verdict of guilty be returned, I anticipate a few things happening based on what we have seen so far.

KC filing her automatic appeal with another attorney.... One that is already familiar with the case.....I will not name the contender but I think you can make your own assumptions.

An ineffective counsel appeal being supported by JB's inexperience coupled with local attorney talking heads stating as much throughout the pretrial hearings and trial itself.

The $200k + not being used in KC's best interests.

An appeal citing JB's opening statement being more damaging to KC than another more plausible theory.

Lack of follow through from JB's theory to forensic analysis ordered by the DT.

Improper defense presentation.

CM falling not being a more integral part of the cross thus far.

After listening to the radio show from last night.....these thoughts popped into my head. (many of which were inspired by Richard Hornsby's comments.)

 

[sleutherontheside]

An added thought....IMO when JB supposedly quoted GA by saying...."You'll go to jail for child neglect.."

Not only do I NOT believe that GA would have known that a scenario with Caylee drowning due to inattention would have been legally considered neglect vs. abuse.........BUT the voice JB used to represent GA....was overly dramatic and IMO total improvisation. It was personal for JB.

 

[ZsaZsa]

IMO...it is too early in the trial to make any assumptions. That said.....
should a verdict of guilty be returned, I anticipate a few things happening based on what we have seen so far.

KC filing her automatic appeal with another attorney.... One that is already familiar with the case.....I will not name the contender but I think you can make your own assumptions.

An ineffective counsel appeal being supported by JB's inexperience coupled with local attorney talking heads stating as much throughout the pretrial hearings and trial itself.

The $200k + not being used in KC's best interests.

An appeal citing JB's opening statement being more damaging to KC than another more plausible theory.

Lack of follow through from JB's theory to forensic analysis ordered by the DT.

Improper defense presentation.

CM falling not being a more integral part of the cross thus far.

After listening to the radio show from last night.....these thoughts popped into my head. (many of which were inspired by Richard Hornsby's comments.)


An appeal relying on

Maybe the next Atty should join WS so they can get the information right for any further trial..... :innocent: