Procedure and legal questions

[trixi491]

If they can't use any evidence related to the body, would this still qualify as a death penalty case?

 

[TigerTiger]

Terry Lenamon's blog today has a post that gives the Florida rule for what lawyers can be on a Death Penalty case in Florida:

http://swartzlenamon.com/deathpenal...alified-criminal-defense-attorneys-in-florida

I dont see how any of the attys are meeting this rule. Baden and the Ca atty aren't from Fla and Jose Baez doesn't seem to have the qualificiations.

Here's info on Baez background from another lawyer site:

http://backseatlawyer.blogspot.com/2009/01/who-is-jose-baez-besides-being-casey.html

Looks to me like Lenamon is the only atty that meets the rule but I dont think he stayed on the case after last fall per what he said on Nancy Grace.

So who the heck can be a lawyer for Casey now? Doesn't make sense.

 

[amethyst221]

I need to go back and read his article again, because I just skimmed it quickly, but I was surprised at the stringency of the rules in Florida, especially to be lead counsel. I remember there were provisions that lawyers were eligible even if they were admitted PHV, just for the case, which is something we've had conflicting views about on WS. Of the lawyers we know are involved, LKB, depending on how many criminal cases she has tried to a conclusion, etc., may be "in the lead" for lead. I haven't heard anything about TM being an experienced criminal lawyer, although he is an experienced trial lawyer. Guess we'll see when the vast array of secret counsel referred to by the publicist/spokesperson are revealed.

 

[Nosey Parker]

Is it possible for the SA to request that a gag order be placed on the A's at this stage? Can gag orders apply to certain witnesses/players only, or are they carte blanche for everyone involved in the case?

The reason I ask is the obvious "media blitz" that the A's have planned. As the subject is obviously not "get off your *advertiser censored***s to find our granddaughter", it can only be a deliberate attempt to taint potential jurors. Can they be stopped?

 

[zoey]

Is it possible for the SA to request that a gag order be placed on the A's at this stage? Can gag orders apply to certain witnesses/players only, or are they carte blanche for everyone involved in the case?

The reason I ask is the obvious "media blitz" that the A's have planned. As the subject is obviously not "get off your *advertiser censored***s to find our granddaughter", it can only be a deliberate attempt to taint potential jurors. Can they be stopped?

according to the updates file ---- jb is on the circut now....

non of them like to share the spotlight.......it really is shameful --- I just hope they don't go on about blaming others for the coverage and such---:furious:

 

[amethyst221]

I don't suppose that anything precludes either side from asking again for a gag order. But the defense will never do it, and the State has already tried once and been ruled against.

 

[joyceandjay]

I don't suppose that anything precludes either side from asking again for a gag order. But the defense will never do it, and the State has already tried once and been ruled against.

WOAH, really I never knew that the State asked and was ruled against. Geez by who???

Why would a judge in his right mind allow the A's to parade their circus even after they discovered Caylee.

And Jose continue his leaks?

 

[sua_sponte]

Last night on the NG show LP stated that Roy K was tipped off concerning the location of Caylee's body by a deputy who overheard a conversation between CA and JB. This statement is nothing new. LP has stated this several times on NG's show.

What concerned me was that both NG and LP agreed that if evidence is collected by illegal means (attorney client prviledge in this case) it is not admissible in court. Further they stated if a search warrant was illegally given anything that was found as a result of this search warrant would not be admissible and therefore "fruit of a rotten tree".

If what LP says is true and JB can prove through phone records that there is a link between RK and someone at the police department.

Can the remains of little Caylee and all the evidence that was found at that site be deemed "fruit of a rotten tree", and therefore not admissible in the case against CA?

If all that evidence was thrown out, what would this do to the prosecution's case?

I don't think this is likely- but even worse case... The prosecution charged KC with murder and believed they had enough evidence to convict before the body was found. Even if all that evidence was lost, I think they could still prove their case.

 

[sua_sponte]

It would be a bummer but they were ready to go ahead without the body before it was found anyway.

The problem for JB is.....if KC told him where the body was and HE didn't do anything about it...wouldn't he be in trouble too? Maybe he would throw himself under the bus for KC in that case, but wouldn't that also constitute an admission by KC?

oops, guess I should have kept reading before I answered the same question.

 

[zoey]

Just trying to fiugre out why all the lies keep coming....my quesiton is this---ca is clearly lying at this point on several areas.....Could she be trying to tempt LE to arrest her on obstruction so she doesn't have to testify against kc???? Can't they use any of these things they are projecting against them/her????? It is making no sense that they continue lies when they know & have been warned.....But also knowing they don't want to testify.....

 

[Capri]

WOAH, really I never knew that the State asked and was ruled against. Geez by who???

Why would a judge in his right mind allow the A's to parade their circus even after they discovered Caylee.

And Jose continue his leaks?

by Judge Strickland

 

[Themis]

Is it possible for the SA to request that a gag order be placed on the A's at this stage? Can gag orders apply to certain witnesses/players only, or are they carte blanche for everyone involved in the case?

The reason I ask is the obvious "media blitz" that the A's have planned. As the subject is obviously not "get off your *advertiser censored***s to find our granddaughter", it can only be a deliberate attempt to taint potential jurors. Can they be stopped?

The court has to have in personam jurisdiction over the people to whom the order is issued. This is a criminal case.
When analyzing this question first ask, "Who are the parties to the criminal case? Answer: The People of the State of Florida and KC. That's it.
The attorneys prosecuting the case, who have appeared on the record, and the defense attorneys who have appeared of record in the motions in the case are also subject to the presiding judge's orders.
As to witnesses, after they have testified, the court can direct them not to discuss their testimony with anyone.

 

[trixi491]

It's funny how JB is always saying everyone is out to get KC and taint the jury pool. However, I've never seen ONE member of the SAs office or LE ever go on national television to talk about how clearly guilty KC is. Yet JB and the As are constantly giving public statements and interviews proclaiming her innocence. It's kind of pathetic really and JB should really keep his mouth shut and not point fingers..grrr

 

[zoey]

It's funny how JB is always saying everyone is out to get KC and taint the jury pool. However, I've never seen ONE member of the SAs office or LE ever go on national television to talk about how clearly guilty KC is. Yet JB and the As are constantly giving public statements and interviews proclaiming her innocence. It's kind of pathetic really and JB should really keep his mouth shut and not point fingers..grrr

most atty's that have been TH agree----he needs to keep his mouth shut as well as the a's....they are the leaders of the circus yet fail to realize this---blame/deny/blame/deny--then of course lie....:banghead:

 

[Nosey Parker]

Thank you for answering my question, Themis. I suppose we just have to put up with the spiel then.

 

[brownflower]

Spoke to a lawyer friend of mine today. Mind you, I live in Canada and things are a different up here. For one thing she said that if a client were speaking to their lawyer in prison that visit would be in a private room aand that there would be no way a deputy could overhear a conversation in that room unless they were spying. Is it easier for deputies to overhear conversations between a lawyer and a client in US prisons?

Having said that, she said if the information (Casey telling JB the whereabouts of Caylee's remains), was heard because the deputy was spying or snooping then that would be illegal and all the evidence gathered as a result of the deputy telling someone what he heard would not be admissible in court.

However, if the deputy overheard the information because Casey and JB were speaking about it in a nonsequestered area, then it's ok.

She felt that it would be highly improbable that this information would be gathered just by overhearing it (based on how the prisons and jails operate in Canada).

She also was quite concerned that if JB knew where the body was hidden and did nothing he could be charged with obstruction of justice.

 

[daisy7]

What are the rules about discovery and when evidence needs to be given to the defense? Can the SA hold onto the most incriminating evidence and release it to JB right before or during the trial?

 

[JWG]

What are the rules about discovery and when evidence needs to be given to the defense? Can the SA hold onto the most incriminating evidence and release it to JB right before or during the trial?

If you don't mind Daisy, let me rephrase your question with an example:

The search warrant for the Dec 19 search at the Anthony home mentioned the outline of a perfect heart from a heart sticker in the document dump. This was information provided to OCSO by the FBI via telephone. Not a lab report or even email.

To date we have not seen a report from the FBI that describes this. All we have seen are reports that say fragments or pieces of a sticker have not been found on the tape. But something is on the tape.

I am wondering, would the FBI possibly sit on issuing a report - possibly with the agreement of OCSO and the SA - as part of a little gamesmanship with the defense? I am wondering where this is where some of Baez's frustration comes from that is resulting in his inept attempts to get information from the FBI. They are sitting on certain reports that put the nail in his client, he knows it, and he wants the reports. Instead, he gets reports back that don't really point the finger at his client at all.

Is it possible that is happening, and if so, is it unusual or somewhat normal?

 

[nephers]

I wouldn't think it would be an advantage to the SA to hold evidence unitl just before trial. If they did this the defense could claim they didn't have enough time to properly prepare for trial which could give them grounds for appeal.

Discovery is a process of which it seems JB doesn't know much about. There are proper ways to collect and ask for discovery. If JB wants it, all he has to do is ask for it, and if the SA doesn't have it yet (ie, FBI reports, lab testing that may not be back yet) then they come to an agreement to hand it over when they get it.

The court of law shouldn't be a big game, but at times it is. There shouldn't be personal feelings brought in, so I doubt the the SA would specifically hold evidence to try to tick off JB and crew.

As someone pointed out a few days ago, it takes a long time putting together the info for the "doc dumps". There are hours, days, weeks of organizing the paperwork etc. But, they may bury something important in all the junk and make JB work to find the important stuff.

 

[chefmom]

If you don't mind Daisy, let me rephrase your question with an example:

The search warrant for the Dec 19 search at the Anthony home mentioned the outline of a perfect heart from a heart sticker in the document dump. This was information provided to OCSO by the FBI via telephone. Not a lab report or even email.

To date we have not seen a report from the FBI that describes this. All we have seen are reports that say fragments or pieces of a sticker have not been found on the tape. But something is on the tape.

I am wondering, would the FBI possibly sit on issuing a report - possibly with the agreement of OCSO and the SA - as part of a little gamesmanship with the defense? I am wondering where this is where some of Baez's frustration comes from that is resulting in his inept attempts to get information from the FBI. They are sitting on certain reports that put the nail in his client, he knows it, and he wants the reports. Instead, he gets reports back that don't really point the finger at his client at all.

Is it possible that is happening, and if so, is it unusual or somewhat normal?

I am only speculating here, but I believe that the FBI has several reports that they have not released, for whatever reason, to anyone other than maybe a verbal confirmation to the SA. I recall JB asking the judge for certain things and the SA stating they did not have them. The judge stated he did not have jurisdiction over the FBI labs and that JB needed to contact them and ask for them. Now, if JB has not done this, or has not done it properly, he may well be frustrated. In the 2/18 doc dump, it showed that the garbage bags and duct tape found at the A home, as well as a few other items, were turned over to the FBI lab at Quantico. I can't recall seeing any results on those items yet. I also wonder how long the FBI can and will hold onto these results before turning them over formally. And, I am dying to know if they have found something that is conclusive evidence of KC's guilt.