Motion to Delay Judge's ruling on the Video

[Bittiness39]

The state probably never INTENDED to use the tape. But they knew JB would protest its release. So then JS sees the tape and says, "Heck guys...this tape is so indicative of that whackadoodle's guilt...that the public just can't see it and not go...wow so guilty that KC, like I, the judge did." They don't have to show the tape and they get wording from the judge that says it is inflammatory and shouldn't be seen by a pretrial jury pool. Sweet. Meanwhile, JB is hemming and hawing and taking all of these depos...and he won't be able to raise the issue AT trial about KC's cruel treatment because the state didn't first bring it in. BRILLIANT.
STATE: 1 JB: 0 HA!!!!!!!

Because I believe that that is the portion of the tape that JB was so upset about. Her reaction and the events within the jail that led up to it. Showing the videotape without sound of KC and JB to me is a violation of the attorney client privilege and would have taken us down a very slippery slope. Hence, JB was fighting the video of her reaction to watching the coverage of the news that remains (not yet id'd as Caylee's) were found near GA/CA's home. He totally thought the SA would use this video. Fought against it like the SA predicted he would. Gave all of these depos that gave us the description of her reaction. Now we will never have the visual save in our imagination. And to put the cherry on top of it for the SA, the Judge who saw the video correctly seals it...says it will harden the potential jury's reaction to the defendent and that it is too inflammatory for a pre-trial jury pool to see. JB was set up. LOL. Set...Game...Match.

Yes, its a little confusing for me that the jail video also shows her later with JB.

When JB filed his ammended 15 page motion, he indicated in a footnote on page 4 of the document http://www.wesh.com/download/2009/0527/19583157.pdf , that the SA had notified him they would not be using the video at trial. From the footnote they clearly meant they would not use the video that shows he and his client. So it may be possible that they would still use the video portion of her reaction at the trial.

ITA. I just thought it was faster to quote myself from an earlier post and to clarify what I originally posted in the thread.

 

[cyberborg]

With regard to KC's video reaction, it can be as simple as a 'drat!' visual reaction or mouthing of words versus an "oh my g*d" -- thinking of her other jail video temper tantrum with clenched fists.

Either way, to me the hype, JB's drive as well as the Judge's strong comments when sealing the video speak volumes and -- this got a lot more media attention thanks to JB.

KC is her own worst enemy and the visuals of her expressions at trial are going to speak volumes, this isn't going to be a 1-2 hour motion but a few weeks. There will be plenty of video bytes.

 

[KenoshaKid]

what REALLY gets me about this, is that if she WAS innocent, she would have flipped out TOO.

Why did JB fight this, and why did Strickland agree that it may contaminate the jury pool? Shouldnt anyone wondering if she was innocent seeing her panic at remains of a child (yes, caylee was not positively identified but there were no other missing children of that description in the area which the news was saying repeatedly) feel that it was ...reasonable?

Personally I was afraid it would convince fence sitters she was innocent.

I know!!! My thoughts exactly. That's why i don't put much faith in it as any help for the prosecution. I think it could be argued either way (but I gotta say, I am nosy and wanna see it anyway. Heh) :crazy:

 

[SoSueMe]

With regard to KC's video reaction, it can be as simple as a 'drat!' visual reaction or mouthing of words versus an "oh my g*d" -- thinking of her other jail video temper tantrum with clenched fists.

Either way, to me the hype, JB's drive as well as the Judge's strong comments when sealing the video speak volumes and -- this got a lot more media attention thanks to JB.

KC is her own worst enemy and the visuals of her expressions at trial are going to speak volumes, this isn't going to be a 1-2 hour motion but a few weeks. There will be plenty of video bytes.

I agree, I'm thinking it shows a KC that is angry they found the body. At the very least, I think her actions must confirm she knew the body was Caylee.

 

[trixi491]

Im confused...from what I read, I took it as that today the judge ordered a protective seal and then also granted a motion to intervene for the Orlando Sentinel? Does that mean there will be a hearing where the media can object? I thought it was sealed for good but then saw that granted motion to intervene? I'm sooo confused

 

[MAMABEAR]

I agree, I'm thinking it shows a KC that is angry they found the body. At the very least, I think her actions must confirm she knew the body was Caylee.

OMG---I can see her now---as soon as she saw JB---she started jumping up and down with her fist up in the air and maybe even hitting JB. OMG

Yup I see it now. I don't need to see the video anymore. Had to be somethin else for the Judge to stop it's release.

 

[JSR]

Although I haven't read the judges order yet, I think this was a FANTASTIC move. I will admit I wanted to see the video for myself. However, JB in a colossal error made much more of a stink about this video than needed. In turn, he gave us a word for word account of what is contained in the video. And never filed any of his motions under seal. He was so adamant on tainting the public against the SA and some huge "conspiracy" he failed to see that the public was gaining access to the very thing he didn't want them to see (we got it only in written format).
In turn, Judge S cut JB at the knees since he wanted yet ANOTHER hearing so he could LEAK more information of supposed misdeeds by the State. Remember at the last hearing when they wanted to blast the jail of this alleged "conspiracy" and read from depositions the jail had no chance to review. Not only did JB want ANOTHER hearing but he wanted to delay it, and wanted more time. And he's still been deposing jail staff regarding this motion. What he needs to be focused on is the trial, not by trying the taint the jury pool against the State. IMO that's the last thing that should be on JB's mind.
In the end, the Judge's carefully written order shows that this video must show some very very very damning behavior from Casey. Basically it played out just as the state would want. The information still got out and they didn't have to lift a finger to get it out there. JB and the Judge did it all for them. It's bloody brilliant! :clap::clap::clap:

 

[Bittiness39]

Im confused...from what I read, I took it as that today the judge ordered a protective seal and then also granted a motion to intervene for the Orlando Sentinel? Does that mean there will be a hearing where the media can object? I thought it was sealed for good but then saw that granted motion to intervene? I'm sooo confused

The media was already going to have the right to challenge the decision b/c of the sunshine state laws. If the Judge rules in favor of the Orlando Sentinel (ie allows them to view and release KC's reaction to the news that remains of a child were found near her home...etc...) after sealing the tape claiming it met the three part test and would harden potential jury members to the defendent and be to inflammatory to a pre-trial jury pool...THEN, it would follow (to me) that they want the Defense to get a change of venue when it is ruled upon and hearings are set for the change of venue. If the Judge keeps with his original ruling today and denies the Orlando Sentinel access to view and release the contents of the tape to the public...it is still a win win for the SA. They don't have to show what is clearly going to be viewed by some as a SUBJECTIVE tape (meaning no probative value...some might view her reaction as understandable at hearing about a small child's remains and not see it as evidence of KC's guilt) at trial. Therefore, the SA, has the public knowing from the Judge's own mouth that this tape is way to darning for the defense. Without having to show it. And by not bringing up the matter at trial, JB can't bring up the whole, "The jail framed KC. It was cruel and unusual punishment what they did. It was terrible. Inhumane...even the deputies who were with her for that awful moment feel the same way. And fellow jury you will get to hear it from their own mouths. Officers working for the SA feel that KC was unfairly and inhumanely treated," arguement in front of the jury.
Thanks to JB fighting the gag order. We know that there was a tape. We know thanks to his depositions that KC reacted to remains not yet identified as Caylee in an odd manner. But we will never see the tape. Win win for the SA. Lose lose for JB.

 

[beach]

Sincerely, the only reason KC will not get a fair trial, is her lead counsel. If JB were a fly on the wall of his own office today, I bet AL wishes she were a fly swatter. He got so played. Like a record. This makes me do my little happy dance...that no one else can see.

--respectfully snipped

omgosh! Loudest I've laughed at anything I've ever read here! LOL LOL LOL!

you're killin' me girl! hahaha!

 

[nssherlock]

This is why the SA likely had no intention of releasing the tape at trial. Remember, it is JB who fought AGAINST the gag order. It was JB who wanted to be on television nightly. It is because of JB's fighting the gag order that we even knew there was a video in the first place. Much less what was on it.
The SA played him brilliantly. He fought against the video. He deposed everyone. We now know that she hyperventillated...asked for a sedative...became very upset. The video is subjective as your post proves. Now we will never see it. The Judge saw it and CORRECTLY sealed it. He had to state a reason since Florida has very liberal laws about release being the sunshine state and all.

JB got played. He is the reason we even know about the video in the first place. We would NEVER have known about her reaction/video of it at all if he hadn't fought vs. the gag order. It is his fault. And as counsel he is an ineffective court jester doofus.

Her (KC) reaction has been so well documented by all of the deputies in depo that I am still wondering what - besides the reaction - is on the video - could the visual be that much worse than the description? I think no..... So what could be so bad/different on video that it would "harden" my opinion of KC's guilt? I am most intrigued by the Judges choice of words..........anyone else?:waitasec:

 

[SuziQ]

If this includes the video taping of Baez and KC that day, then I think the most inflamatory part of the video is that which Baez is said to be sobbing and KC is pissed off with her arms crossed and wouldn't even look at him.

Below is the Judges order:

http://www.clickorlando.com/download/2009/0617/19779227.pdf

 

[Bittiness39]

Her (KC) reaction has been so well documented by all of the deputies in depo that I am still wondering what - besides the reaction - is on the video - could the visual be that much worse than the description? I think no..... So what could be so bad/different on video that it would "harden" my opinion of KC's guilt? I am most intrigued by the Judges choice of words..........anyone else?:waitasec:

I am guessing it is because everyone views things on tape in a different way. One person may see her reaction as being clear evidence of guilt. Another might read her reaction as a normal reaction to hearing the horrible news that a toddler's remains have been found like trash in the woods. It is subjective. Therefore, there is no probative value as the Judge pointed out. The reaction is likely darning. But for every 10 or so people who see the tape and decide her reaction is proof of KC's guilt there might be 1 person who sees the tape and decides otherwise. It really is not that great value to the SA. When you think about it. REMEMBER, the Judge saw the whole tape. Not just KC's reaction to the news...but also her subsequent visit after the fact with JB. Granted the video is without sound...and the SA had already told JB that had NO INTENTION of showing that portion of the tape to anyone...then imagine this:
First part of the tape, KC hypervenillates, asks for a sedative, acts strangely but doesn't cry over remains of a child not yet identified as Caylee.
Second part of the tape shows KC looking ticked off...we can't hear the audio but it appears as though she is angrily yelling at JB. Arms crossed across her chest. Appears mad not crying.
Put the two together and I would say that the entirety of the tape would only further suggest evidence of KC's guilt. JMO. But we should not ever and will not ever see that second portion as LittleBitty35 believes it is a violation of the attorney client privilege. Even though there is no audio.

 

[JSR]

Her (KC) reaction has been so well documented by all of the deputies in depo that I am still wondering what - besides the reaction - is on the video - could the visual be that much worse than the description? I think no..... So what could be so bad/different on video that it would "harden" my opinion of KC's guilt? I am most intrigued by the Judges choice of words..........anyone else?:waitasec:

Actions speak so much louder than words. IMO based off of Judge S's choice of words, this video shows some incredibly damning behavior. We all watch people interact and react. We all know, without having to be told, what certain body language or mannerisms mean. I'm convinced you would have to be very hard pressed to interpret anything other than guilt from the way Casey reacted on that video. Again, just from what I've gathered from Judge S's written order. Coupled with the fact that JB fought like hell to keep it from the public.

 

[butwhatif?]

What I dont understand, is how can this video be more inflammatory than the decomp evidence that was released, or anything else we've seen?

Isn't all evidence likely to taint a jury pool? What sets this apart from everything else?

 

[MomofBoys]

Is it widely believed that Baez did have his hand tucked into the back of KC's pants while comforting her, or is that topic non grata? I know it was discussed, but is it valid speculation or considered rumor?

Because THAT would be quite bad, but then wouldn't Strickland take action against Baez beyond just sealing the video? Or is that why Strickland filed the complaint? Hmm.

 

[MarleneM]

What I dont understand, is how can this video be more inflammatory than the decomp evidence that was released, or anything else we've seen?

Isn't all evidence likely to taint a jury pool? What sets this apart from everything else?

IAW Baez's request, we may never know. Unless it is released, we can only continue to speculate.

 

[MomofBoys]

Will we definitely see it at trial?

The thing is...Judge Strickland has been pretty fair. If he says this is highly inflammatory, I don't think then that the reaction is up for debate in terms of how people might see it. There is more than "This can't be happening!" or whatever she is said to have said. I'm thinking there has to be some kind of startling visual. We've read what has been said to have happened and to me it doesn't sound that bad. It sounds like it could be a natural reaction of grief or surprise. So what did the judge SEE?

My curiosity has been racheted up to an incredible level by what Strickland said. I want to see that video so badly I could just pee myself, really.

 

[JSR]

Will we definitely see it at trial?

My curiosity has been racheted up to an incredible level by what Strickland said. I want to see that video so badly I could just pee myself, really.

We may or maynot see this video at trial. Regarding the bolded statement above- That my friend is the beauty of the order Judge S issued. He legally and carefully sucker punched JB and team. He's given the defense what they want but added an extra zinger that clearly shows Casey HAS exhibited some very damning behavior on that tape!

I'll say it again- It's bloody brilliant! :clap::clap::clap:

 

[MADJGNLAW]

Is it widely believed that Baez did have his hand tucked into the back of KC's pants while comforting her, or is that topic non grata? I know it was discussed, but is it valid speculation or considered rumor?

Because THAT would be quite bad, but then wouldn't Strickland take action against Baez beyond just sealing the video? Or is that why Strickland filed the complaint? Hmm.

I have been trying to find out when this complaint is going to be fully investigated and if they will release the basis of the complaint Strickland filed. Anyone know how long that takes? Still waiting to hear about the complaint DC filed as well. The media is not reporting anything further.

 

[MAMABEAR]

We may or maynot see this video at trial. Regarding the bolded statement above- That my friend is the beauty of the order Judge S issued. He legally and carefully sucker punched JB and team. He's given the defense what they want but added an extra zinger that clearly shows Casey HAS exhibited some very damning behavior on that tape!

I'll say it again- It's bloody brilliant! :clap::clap::clap:

I think I have it in my brain now---Thanks to all ya'll. How do you think JB is taking this? Is he sittin there thinking he won something? In the past he hasn't seemed to fully understand what is goin on. Say like when he ask KB what law school she went to. He thought he was so smart---but looked like a dum___s. Then he really didn't grab what he looked like that time he pissed off Ashton. Does he look at stuff the way others do?