Mitigation: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

[beach]

Yes, my good buddy, but I do not know of one. They have basically all opined that it is a freak show.

View attachment 10070 Mr. Hornsby's quotes from this case, from his q and a thread.

Here is one "Call any Criminal Lawyer in Orlando and pretend you are looking for a lawyer, mention my name. 75% will tell you I am an A$$; zero percent will tell you I am dishonest or I don't know what I am saying."


Here is another "
Question, why do you think Baez did not seek a plea deal?
RH:” Ego.”

9-27-09
On will there be a COV
RH: “I have reviewed most of the discovery.

I believe that they they will pick a jury in another county and then try the case here in Orange County and sequester the jury during the trial.

The reason being is that there are over 275 listed witnesses for the state, all the physical evidence is here, etc.

So from a financial standpoint, what would be cheaper? Put 12 people up in a hotel for two months; or put hundreds of people up in a hotel in some other county for two months.

You can't.”

I know what Sots is getting at...and I would agree, except CM publically opined even worse before he came on board. However, RH has been the legal analyst for WESH for a while now. It is done all the time, though. Mark Geragos opined about Scott Peterson's guilt on LKL for weeks (if not months) before he took his case.

Frankly, the thought of Richard Hornsby joining this defense team is bittersweet for me. On the one hand, I would like to see it because I KNOW that he knows the facts & evidence of this case better than either JB or CM. I have read his blogs and posts here to know that much. And, I really do want KC to have a vigorous defense. I agree with what he thinks is the best defense strategy. However, I can never see RH playing second fiddle to JB for longer than about 30 minutes. lol Now if JB were to resign and RH were to replace him, I would be very concerned. Obviously, I have never seen him argue in a courtroom, but I imagine he could be pretty persuasive. And I know darn well he would do his homework. Love him or not, RH has a true passion for criminal defense work.

 

[LambChop]

My guess is all the other attorneys feel JB should try to work out a plea deal for KC, while JB wants to walk her right down to the end of that hallway. It's what KC is use to doing...... jmo

 

[Kentjbkent]

He already has one client suing him for ineffective counsel...
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/keyword/nilton
It's becoming a habit :innocent:

I thought Mr. Diaz appeal for ineffective counsel was already denied? Think there is a thread somewhere in this forum....:waitasec:

 

[Kentjbkent]

If Mr. Baez does the depositions on a wing and a prayer, rather that find out if the deponent has made any sworn statements in the case so far....is that ineffective? Would he have had other questions if he had just read the supplemental report?
. It concerns me that Cheney and Jose say things that are not at all correct, that do not even come close to the facts that are already released by the state in discovery. What in the world?
The defense knew in January of 2009, a year and a half ago about the LE interviewing Debbie P. It is in the supplemental report.This is not even funny anymore. Perhaps he can get Cindy to be a paralegal and do her homework and pull things from the discovery like she did in her civil deposition. Remember that when she was quoting from page eight , line nine of the narrative?
http://www.wftv.com/news/18530380/detail.html
I am shocked that he gets by with making these claims. Why don't we just call it what it is? IMO he lied to the judge, or he did not prepare for the depo, either would be unacceptable, imo. . If he would have read the detectives supplemental report, even if he had not ever seen a copy of the actual transcript, he had every right to request it from the state. I trust it would have been over the fax and on his desk within the hour. What the heck does he do to prepare for the depositions, nothing? Scroll to the bottom of the document and look at Yuri's signature and the date, December 2008, then we, the public had it in January, 2009!!! This is outrageous!!!!
Much preparation goes on before one sits down to depose someone and checking to see what statements they are on record saying to LE would be number one on the list, right? This is just lunacy.

This is just as bad as claiming that Joe Jordan's name was held back from the defense by TES or LE , when Joe Jordan's name was right there, at the top of the page ,mind you, in the documents of the 32 relevant searchers that Mark had hand- delivered to Jose!!!! He wastes the court's time and he wastes the county's money by not knowing what he is doing, or in the words of Mr. Nejame, "Sloppiness or laziness".

What I am asking is, since his allegations in his motions are baseless and get proven wrong in very short order, the rest of his argument falls on deaf ears and , imo, it affects the judge's rulings for his client, is that ineffective?
Problem with no LE statemtent- could be solved by one quick phone call to the prosecutor's office
Problem with the name of Mr. Jordan being cut off - could be solved by one phone call to Mark's office

So rather than two short phone calls, he files frivolous motions in very bad faith and calls for all out hearings on them. I don't get him at all. He is wasting his time too.

I wish Richard Hornsby would replace him. He knows what he is doing.[/QUOTE]


BIG problem here though....

Richard Hornsby stated on this very forum that in order to accept an offer to join the defense team (like that's gonna happen), they would have to SHOW HIM THE MONEY!

Problem is......MONEY IS GONE! ALL GO BYE BYE! :banghead:

 

[The World According]

I don't think Jose would ever step aside, and Casey would never ask him to. I am sure she thinks she is in love with him or that he is the only one in the whole world who has stood by here. She sees the other lawyers come and go, Jose is the one constant. I was just saying I wish Richard would take over out of sheer frustration. I wish anyone would take over the case, anyone but Baez would be refreshing. We know that wont happen.The only way I see Jose stepping aside is if it is literally against his will.

I sure hope Mrs. Baden is still on the case. If she is not, to me that represents another delay as the defense tries to find someone in her specialized expertise to join the team.

I have been assured that no matter how Baez is or is not prepared, there is zero chance ( short of all of her lawyers sleeping through the hearing at the defense table ) of her wining a ineffective assistance of counsel claim. The worst we will experience is Cindy extending her fifteen minutes by claiming Casey did not get a fair trial due to IAC. There is always the remote control to solve that.

 

[Kentjbkent]

TWA.....do you consider RH giving sooooooooooo many interviews about the case.....about KC......his personal thoughts.....sharing his wife's theory about what happened..........his blog..........

an issue?

IMO...if JB were to leave.....or CM were to leave.......would a fresh start with an attorney with no prior public comments regarding the case not be a better choice?

Personally, I think if some possibility arose for Richard Hornsby and KC to meet in an attorney visiting room to discuss possible representation, that meeting would last less than 10 minutes!

I see a DEFINITE clash of personalities and think KC would probably banish him from her kingdom with the swoop of her wrist!

Would be a huge mistake but she is not exactly known for making "good choices"!

 

[The World According]

My guess is all the other attorneys feel JB should try to work out a plea deal for KC, while JB wants to walk her right down to the end of that hallway. It's what KC is use to doing...... jmo

We know from Cheney's earlier opinions he shared with the local media there that he believes the case should be plead out. An interesting number I learned recently is 90 % of criminal cases are indeed plead out.

"You can pretty well predict there's going to be a life sentence, either a plea and get it over with or have a circus trial and then be convicted and get life," Mason said.

 

[kaRN]

I don't think KC deserves RH. She has exactly the 'boys' she deserves IMO, LKB included.

 

[The World According]

Remember when Leonard began his conversation with Casey with look, do not tell me those lies, I know there is no nanny, you need to tell me the truth so we can find the baby? She threw him out of her house. It made me laugh that she said, "Get out of my house!"

Also, when she was supposedly going to be given an opportunity to visit one family member alone, she said she picked pop. Lee she said would have a pad with a list of questions, and mom would grill her...so she wanted pop who would just pet her and compliment her for the hour.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCQ9r_0DaCI[/ame]

There is no way , imo, she even likes Cheney if he is in the visits telling her the truth about her chances. Having over thirty years of experience, I trust he knows how to placate different personality types and adjust his approach accordingly. He may have, therefore, came at her in a different approach than we are imagining.
The only thing I know for sure is that in Casey's mind, Jose is her only ally.
Once the trial is over and she never hears from again, will she wise up? Of course and she will, there is no doubt in my mind, try to appeal based on IAC. It is the number one reason for appeals. Some lawyer will think it is worth their time to get the free press and volunteer to take her appeal case on. They will try. They will fail. Cheney had it right two years ago....it is a circus.

Check out another quote from Cheney: ""Then all the talking, all the press interviews and the parents going on this show and that show and the lawyer going on different shows establishes they have no credibility whatsoever," Mason said.


"The most important thing is how did she die?" Mason said. "It could have been an accidental death -- and we've talked before -- an improper disposal, it could have been a brutal homicide. We don't know".

Since he , and rightfully so, imo, places high value on this part of the case, one would think that the Oakridge Lab depositions would be a focus of the defense. This is where they are going to see if they can challenge information about there having been a decomposing body in the back of Casey's trial. It would be a huge HUGE win for them if they manage to get this excluded from the trial. I cannot imagine them "splitting up the team" to do these depositions. What do you make of it?

Also, another reason the splitting up the team seems to reek havoc is Cheney says things to the media that are directly in conflict with what the defense has maintained all alone. I am really looking forward to the hearing on the 15th to see who argues this issue of TES to the judge. We will get plan A from Jose and the emergency plan from Cheney. Despite Todd, Andrea and Jose screaming from the mountain tops that they have people that DID SEARCH there , and that they will testify that the ground was DRY, Cheney told reporters recently that is simply not true. "The public has been made to believe that these people searched the exact area where the body was, or tried to and couldn’t,” Mason said. “The fact is they didn’t try to, and they didn’t. They weren’t there. And it was impassable at the time."
This negated two years of defense motions. Mr. Nejame has been explaining this with photos that indeed the area was, in Cheney's words, "Impassable" , under water! I think this is the real reason Andrea bailed, the conflict between the lawyers and the very public dressing down Cheney does at literally laughing at the defense's actions before he came on the case. It was not about the money. Indeed it was Andrea, imo, who pushed Jose to declare Casey indigent. She first raised this in open court when the Motion to Perpetuate the testimony of Jill Kerley was being argued. She is in a new income bracket after the success of her book, The Angel of Death Row, and she could afford coach plane tickets and or appear by Skype or phone for the hearings until the trial. It is that they did not like, trust or respect one another and she got fed up.

PS: I guess Cheney Mason changed his mind about how ill advised giving press interviews, because he sure does do them!! [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8Hx5BKP4lA[/ame]

When Andrea was on her book tour I figured as soon as she got all the mileage out of that she could, she would bail. She did. In that respect of course it is about the money. She put up with or suffered the fools, if you will, while it served her purpose, but after that she was late for the door! MOO

 

[The World According]

My guess is all the other attorneys feel JB should try to work out a plea deal for KC, while JB wants to walk her right down to the end of that hallway. It's what KC is use to doing...... jmo

Good one!!!!
That could be the title of a book, "The End of the Hallway...the Casey Anthony story".

 

[Gma Kat]

....

Now there is one little gotcha I can see on the horizon, given KC's history and her propensity to throw anyone under the bus in her own defense. I would not be surprised to see a claim slip out from KC, of a sexual relationship with JB, during that period when she was on bail and at his office every day. It's just too easy to pull off, and we know she already pulled this "sexual abuse" trigger on both her brother and her father. How that would play out would be anybodies guess at this point. (and please note I am NOT accusing JB of an inapropriate sexual relationship with his client. I am merely pointing out that his lying sociopath of a client has already pulled that charge on the men closest to her in her life, for her own purposes. So he should be expecting it at some point.) Regardless even if there was some charge of such a relationship or proof of it, they would still have to show that it had a gross impact on the trial outcome, or that a different outcome would have been likely given the evidence.
.......

Quote snipped for brevity:

ITA with your hypothetical on JB and KC..... I have always wondered, with courtroom flirtations with JB and her comments about her crush on his associate, that she might claim that she was too googley-eyed and manipulated into doing things as a result. I'm not saying such an appeal would or should be granted, but when a person is grabbing at straws.......

plus we haven't seen JB in action during the trial. He may still lay an egg or two for the defense to use later in the appellate process.

(Makes me smile to say appellate process because that means there has been a conviction!!!)

 

[The World According]

BIG problem here though....

Richard Hornsby stated on this very forum that in order to accept an offer to join the defense team (like that's gonna happen), they would have to SHOW HIM THE MONEY!

Problem is......MONEY IS GONE! ALL GO BYE BYE! :banghead:

Hi Kent, you are correct. I looked though his quotes and he sure enough emptied the bucket on this matter! LOL!! "
11-26-09

Richard Hornsby answering a question about would he be a lawyer on this case.
"I'm having a hard enough time justifying my motives behind my attack on WJS; could you see me defending myself if I took over now.

But lets say she shows up at my doorstep (hopefully sans bacne). I would review her documents, ask her story, ask her what her realistic expectations are given the evidence, and then...... QUOTE HER A LOT OF MONEY TO REPRESENT HER.

I would then require 1/2 down, just like I require each client. If she could not pay, I would ask her parents to co-sign and pay on her behalf, etc.

You see, when this case first occurred, it did not become a media sensation the same day. Baez was her attorney of record within 14 hours of her arrest.

That meant she was arrested at midnight, was booked and processed, went to initial appearance, found time to get Baez's number, he then drove from Kissimmee (about 30 minutes away) then met with her, got a contract signed, got paid, and then entered his Notice of Appearance at the downtown Orlando Courthouse. He did not fax it in, the original is shown as clocked in at the courthouse around 3:45 p.m. WTF?

I am sorry, nobody had any idea that this case would take off like it did - thus the invaluable media exposure that might justify taking it on for free.

And media exposure aside, I am not personally getting involved in a case where a potential client's daughter has been missing for 31 days unless I receive a significant down payment and a guaranty of complete payment from a reliable source.

I am sorry, I am usually very logical about my thought process - but as a practicing lawyer in the same jurisdiction as Baez, I can't imagine not just entering a notice of appearance in such a serious case without assurance of payment, but doing so within 14 hours of the person's arrest.

Somehow they had to have had prior contact for him to have entered a notice of appearance that quickly - and that equates to a guilty conscious on the part of Casey Anthony if I am correct in my suspicion. Because innocent people do not seek out a criminal attorney before they are arrested, guilty ones do."

"Yes, I have turned away many clients. I see it this way, I agree to represent clients - they don't hire me.

I have my own personal experiences in life that shape my morality. If after meeting with a client I think he beat, not hit, but beat his own child or his wife, I decline those cases because it is my personal choice.

HOWEVER, if I was court appointed to take the case for some reason (I used to take on court appointed cases) I would defend the person as vigorously as possible and put my personal beliefs aside.

Why, because in the first scenario, the client has a choice and I have a choice. In the latter, the client has no choice because he is indigent and I have previously agreed to take any case assigned.

Also, I will not discuss whether I would take her case if I had the option anymore. Because it is a moral debate that would be based on hind-sight. What would be the point, the debate could never be won by either side."

 

[whiteangora]

TWA, I have to say that you have outdone yourself with your posts on this thread, especially the last 2 pages, 6 and 7.
Very seldom do I read a post twice but you have such a magical way with words that a second read is almost a must.
Thank you so much for your intuitive insight. :blowkiss:

 

[ThinkTank]

The question has been raised here, as to which of the Defense team will conduct the Defense depositions of the Oak Ridge Lab personnel in Tennessee on July 13th and July 14th -- the same two days which Baez has scheduled all of the out-of-state experts to be flown in to inspect the evidence.

I would imagine that Defense team LKBaden would do the Oak Ridge depos in Tennessee, and the Prosecutors will want to be present for those depositions.

My question is .... why doesn't the State ask the Defense to RE-schedule the depositions in Tennessee?
And if the Defense refuses to do that, then the State file a Motion asking the Judge to make a ruling on rescheduling the depositions in Tennessee?

July 13, 2010 - Defense depositions in Tennessee - Oak Ridge Lab
State will be present also
Dr. Michael Burnett - 8:00am
Dr. Madhavi Martin - 10:00am
Dr. Mark Wise - 1:00
Dr. David Glasgow - 3:00pm
2 hours have been reserved for each deposition

July 14, 2010 - Defense depositions in Tennessee - Oak Ridge Lab
State will be present also
Dr. Arpad Vass - 8:00am
8 hours reserved for depo

July 13 - July 14 - Defense, State, Sherriff's Office will be present
Defense wants experts to view OCSO records/evidence

 

[gitana1]

ITA ... It's my belief that KC will never fire Jose because he's probably the ONLY one who's been telling her, and still continues to her, he can get her off !! I can see no other reason for her to stick with Jose who's telling her what she wants to hear ...

Well, that and she's given him all the money she had available for her defense so either she sticks with him or gets a PD.

 

[gitana1]

I have a question please ..... I agree that JB may not have done enough wrong to be guilty of ineffective assistance of counsel, specifically. However, generally speaking, can a lawyer be removed from an active case/trial if the lawyer has been found to have committed felonies during their representation of a client? Even if the client does not complain? Would the powers that be, which govern lawyers, take the action to remove the lawyer, whether the client wants them to continue representing them, or not?

I think of what happened to attorney Macaluso - he is gone - he is not allowed to practice law.
I wonder if the clients who Mac was representing will be given a new trial because of his representation of them?

Well, if JB is disbarred while still on the case, then sure, he will not be able to practice law and could no longer represent casey. And one can get into trouble with the bar due if they are caught committing certain crimes, usually those considered crimes of moral turpitude like fraud, rape, etc.
I doubt that will happen in this case, though. I'm sure there are lots of attorneys who do things like JB did. But I venture to guess usually they are warned and that's about it, like JB was. He was warned and stopped what he was doing.
There is a culture in the legal system that tends to try to protect lawyers from discipline. Its aim is probably to prevent a more negative public perception of attorneys and also to protect "one of their own."
Right out of law school, after I took the Bar but before I got the results, I worked for an attorney along with other classmates of mine. Shady stuff began to be happening. This guy was up to his gills in cocaine, refused to take calls of clients who were constantly calling and coming by, (one even threatening to come with a gun), asking for their settlement checks. This was a personal injury attorney.
It got so bad that I played over and over again how I could quickly jump out the second story window in the back into the bay below, if trouble happened.
Well, we were young, almost new attorneys and had awe and respect for the profession and for our boss and how we were perceived as newly graduated JDs. So it took longer than normal for us to realize we needed to get the hell out of there at all costs. When we got our paychecks one day out of the attorney-client trust account, that was it for me. I got the he!! out.
It turns out this guy had been stealing the clients settlement monies to cover for "loans" he had taken from the attorney-client trust account. (As many of you likely surmised by now!) Huge no-no for lawyers. Basically the worst thing you can do almost. But, he simply resigned from the profession and that was enough. I think he even avoided much of a criminal prosecution for what he did. He may have spent a few days in jail, I can't completely recall but I remember it was very little that happened to him and I was shocked by that.
Passing notes for a client is much, much less of an error. It doesn't seem to be a breach of the ethical duty to his client. I know many of us can't stand JB because he represents the enemy (although many of us can't stand him because he seems to be a smug, arrogant, mediocre, know-it-all), but I highly doubt he is going anywhere. He is reprehensible to us but not so much to the legal profession. He's here to stay on this case. JMO.

 

[gitana1]

This is starting to be not even funny anymore. It really is a mess. I am not a charmed by Cheney Mason, but he is the only death penalty qualified lawyer left standing, so we will have to make do. Mr. Cheney cannot leave Mr. Baez alone again. That just cannot happen.
________________________________________
In this week's emergency hearing Casey's defense requested to see the evidence without the sheriff's office staff being in the room. What in the world? The sheriff's department will be called on to testify that the evidence was in their care, custody and control, always. Otherwise, it is not coming into trial. How could Jose hope the judge would allow such a ridiculous request? For starters, once again, he did not notice all of the parties, namely the OCSD. Jose made a rambling argument, wrong on the facts and wrong on the law, as usual. In my opinion it was a disaster; of biblical proportions. It was .....ineffective , alright.

Respectfully snipped by me for space.

I think a disaster of biblical proportions is taking this a bit far. That would be reserved, IMO, for things like letting slip, on the record, that your client told you she's guilty, something like that. JB is a just a garden variety crummy lawyer, nothing more. I compare this to the mentally ill vs. not guilty by reason of insanity argument. He seems to be a bad lawyer but he's not ineffective in the context used to win an appeal.

By the way, I think the order that the room be air conditioned was not a bone to the defense, it was made to make sure evidence is preserved by not being examined in an over-heated room.

JMO.

ETA: I am letting myself get too carried away. TWA was just using a figure of speech!!!

 

[gitana1]

I don't think Jose would ever step aside, and Casey would never ask him to. I am sure she thinks she is in love with him or that he is the only one in the whole world who has stood by here. She sees the other lawyers come and go, Jose is the one constant. I was just saying I wish Richard would take over out of sheer frustration. I wish anyone would take over the case, anyone but Baez would be refreshing. We know that wont happen.The only way I see Jose stepping aside is if it is literally against his will.

I sure hope Mrs. Baden is still on the case. If she is not, to me that represents another delay as the defense tries to find someone in her specialized expertise to join the team.

I have been assured that no matter how Baez is or is not prepared, there is zero chance ( short of all of her lawyers sleeping through the hearing at the defense table ) of her wining a ineffective assistance of counsel claim. The worst we will experience is Cindy extending her fifteen minutes by claiming Casey did not get a fair trial due to IAC. There is always the remote control to solve that.

Wow, we have all seen how casey swoons at the sight of JB. Can you just imagine how she would react to RH, who IMO, is much, much better looking than JB? It would be hilarious to see in court. I think he'd have a hard time controlling her behavior/reactions during hearings as her manic grooming, flirting and grinning would likely be in overdrive! What a mess that would be!

 

[The World According]

Respectfully snipped by me for space.

I think a disaster of biblical proportions is taking this a bit far. That would be reserved, IMO, for things like letting slip, on the record, that your client told you she's guilty, something like that. JB is a just a garden variety crummy lawyer, nothing more. I compare this to the mentally ill vs. not guilty by reason of insanity argument. He seems to be a bad lawyer but he's not ineffective in the context used to win an appeal.

By the way, I think the order that the room be air conditioned was not a bone to the defense, it was made to make sure evidence is preserved by not being examined in an over-heated room.

JMO.

Hi Gitana, thanks for helping me. I only use that phrase in a joking way, biblical proportions, it reminds me of my Grandmother. You would have loved her, she was hysterical. We just need a little levity sometimes in this very sad case. I know I do.

I guess I better stick to normal language since no one knows my inside jokes. Someone nearly had me for lunch because I once said Get A Rope. It is just a little funny people here in Texas say, like get out of town, or your mamma, or get the heck out of here.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgrGyR6EYbY[/ame]

It is from a commercial. It is only funny to me and if you had never heard it used this way, I guess the person worried that I was literally suggesting a little prairie justice.

LOL!!!

I honestly do not think that Jose doesn't try. I think he is just inexperienced. There is a good reason there are requirements to being death penalty qualified and reasons someone who has met them must be lead counsel. It just seems odd to me that he is only going to be there for half of the important things that go on. There are worse cases than what we have going on here, for sure. I agree with you. She will not prevail on appeal. I only believe she will try, which to be fair, is her right to do so.

 

[gitana1]

Hi Gitana, thanks for helping me. I only use that phrase in a joking way, biblical proportions, it reminds me of my Grandmother. You would have loved her, she was hysterical. We just need a little levity sometimes in this very sad case. I know I do.

I guess I better stick to normal language since no one knows my inside jokes. Someone nearly had me for lunch because I once said Get A Rope. It is just a little funny people here in Texas say, like get out of town, or your mamma, or get the heck out of here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgrGyR6EYbY

It is from a commercial. It is only funny to me and if you had never heard it used this way, I guess the person worried that I was literally suggesting a little prairie justice.

LOL!!!

I honestly do not think that Jose doesn't try. I think he is just inexperienced. There is a good reason there are requirements to being death penalty qualified and reasons someone who has met them must be lead counsel. It just seems odd to me that he is only going to be there for half of the important things that go on. There are worse cases than what we have going on here, for sure. I agree with you. She will not prevail on appeal. I only believe she will try, which to be fair, is her right to do so.

No, thank you! I'm getting too caught up in what I think I know as an attorney and not what I know about posters like you! You always write great posts! Do not change your style, please. I love it!