S.A. Concerned Defense will Sell Pics of Caylee's Remains

[bunnyphoenix1]

She is not convicted of a crime at this point. They can take action after the conviction.

I assume you are a Florida lawyer???

No "seizure laws" governing this and no injunctions to prevent sale available?? Where I come from they could seize the money, then she could apply to have it returned if/when she was acquitted. So you say they can sell, sell, sell and live the highlife off the proceeds of crime until they are convicted? That seems very odd to me.

 

[lisalei321]

I think the Florida law enacted in 2001 would prevent any photos from being published. This law came about as a direct result of media and other people requesting the autopy report/photos in regards to Dale Earnhardt's death.

"The Florida Legislature's March 29, 2001 law, also known as the Earnhardt Family Protection Act, was sponsored by Senator Jim King (R-Jacksonville) and changed Florida's previously long standing and historically open public records laws from that day onward. The Earnhardt law deemed Florida's medical examination autopsy photographs, video and audio recordings exempt from public inspection without the expressed permission from applicable next of kin."

I was going to say I don't think Casey is cold blooded enough to give permission for these photos to be published - but I honestly don't know about that!

Since the autopsy was more an examination of the remains, not a full autopsy, I would imagine the X-Rays and any photographs taken at the ME's office would be covered under this law. I don't know if it applies to crime scene photos, though. This is an interesting motion on the SA's part and I am wondering why they felt this motion needed to be filed.

Thank you, I thought this was a "law" already in effect!

 

[Broderick]

Nothing anywhere in the article accuses the A's of selling any photos. It would be nice, IMO, if we could actually discuss what the article DOES say instead of making unfounded accusations.

If you read the Orlando Sentinel article it is a bit more clear.

"It has been widely reported the major media outlets have paid substantial sums of money for 'licensing fees' for photographs and videos of Caylee Marie Anthony depicting her image while she was still alive," Assistant State Attorney Linda Drane Burdick wrote in the motion. "It is imperative that this court take steps to prevent any image of her remains from being used for commercial gain. This request is not to suggest or infer that defense counsel will engage in such conduct."


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...-caylee-remains-photos-010609,0,6545675.story


Baez can't sell anything, and if he has, he is in big trouble up to and including disbarment per Florida Statutes.

 

[Macushla]

If the judge rules against the SA in this matter, I hope the Prosecution goes ahead and realeases ALL the photos under the Florida Sunshine law - at least the ones that are not covered by the "Earnhardt Law"! That way the photos are out there and no one has to pay a penny for them.

While I doubt this scenario will play out, it is the only way to prevent anyone making a profit off these photos.

I have the uneasy feeling that at some point photos will start cropping up all over the place, too many people will have had access to them by the time the trial comes around. It can be very hard to discover a leak when so many will have had their hands on and examined any photos, etc. I hope this doesn't happen, but I am a pessimist about this kind of thing, so I will either be pleasently surprised or sadly not surprised at some point. Hope it is the former and not the latter.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Curious as to who you think it is, as speculation has inferred that the gentleman with a long standing feud with officials in Orlando might be. He was contacted early on by a sideline player and he makes the list of Florida's top twenty most influential people. As I read speculation some time ago, he most certainly has the means.

I don't think it is anyone on the Florida top twenty Billionaire/Millionaire list.

 

[2goldfish]

I hope these photos are never released in any way by anyone. I do not want to see them

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Why can't Casey still profit? She has only been charged and not convicted. If she took the photos (for which licensing fees were paid), wouldn't she hold the rights to sell them instead of the A fam? We do know she took a substantial amount of photos. Also, if she gave JB her POA to sell them for her...he could have been doing this all along before the Murder charges came down (and still could be).

This clues me in a bit more to who could be behind paying her defense team (isn't Geraldo, imo). Btw~ Her defense team is NOT working Pro Bono. They are being paid by an anonymous person/persons/organization and they all had to sign an agreement according to Dr. Baden's wife in an interview via Geraldo.

I don't know how it works in Florida, but I know that where I am, police would have power to seize all things/monies etc that were reasonably suspected of being the proceeds of, or used in a crime. It would only be after an "acquittal" or through negotiation or court order that the monies would be returned. Otherwise, people like bank robbers or drug dealers, could give all their money away before conviction.

 

[Katana]

I hope these photos are never released in any way by anyone. I do not want to see them

Me neither. I don't even like looking at the crime scene pictures where they found her body. I definitely don't want to see pictures of the autopsy.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Caylee's photos would not be considered to have been used in the crime tho.

 

[Devon]

Does anyone seriously believe that any of the A family themselves (even KC) will really consider selling pictures of little Caylee's skull and disarticulated skeleton to the media for profit? Come on!

I think the motion is to prevent anyone else from obtaining them and using them for profit, i.e. as someone has already mentioned, unscrupulous experts etc. If such a thing did occur, it would not be the fault of any of the A's personally.

 

[Black Magic Woman]

So in the Earnhardt law when it says "without the expressed permission from applicable next of kin." , does that mean that Casey or the A's could give permission and bypass the restriction?

 

[SeriouslySearching]

This is one thing I don't even think the A fam would do. Casey, however, is a different story.

 

[sometimer]

After thinking about this, it just doesn't make much sense. The ME for the defense can take pictures and xrays. (If they can find a place to do this) If they were going to sell something, nothing would stop them from selling those if there goal is to profit on photos. The defense team will need to review the the first pictures if they are going to be used in court. It sounds like just a big pi&&&ng contest! Are they trying to say the defense does not have their clients best interest in mind? Are they trying to prove the defense Attorney is incompetent? This would not be good for the procecution.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Caylee's photos would not be considered to have been used in the crime tho.

Of course not...lol.

But the money gained from selling them may be considered "proceeds of crime".

 

[debs]

Regardless of WHO would profit from the sale of images of Caylee's remains, I believe we can all agree that selling pictures of the bones of a little girl whose death is still very much a part of the public awareness would be horrific. Who could honestly say that if these pictures appeared on any other website but WS (cuz I know there's an ethical standard here that isn't enjoyed by some other sites) that we wouldn't go look. Sure, our first inclination is to say "I WOULDN'T GO LOOK!!!!!!!!!!" and be offended at the mere thought.

Meanwhile, I can't begin to tell you how many people saw Geraldo show pictures of Anna Nicole Smith's dead son, and another website that posted pictures of an alleged dead Anna. So the interest for people to SEE the pictures is definitely there. The overwhelming curiosity of this case (if WS is a small microcosm) and the overwhelming attention it has received for MONTHS on national television shows.

Someone would want to profit, and someone else would want to pay for it. I'm not naive enough to believe that without the State's Attorney's office stepping in one more time to protect Caylee, those who would most benefit from selling the pictures and/or video would do so, in a stinky rotten heartbeat.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Does anyone seriously believe that any of the A family themselves (even KC) will really consider selling pictures of little Caylee's skull and disarticulated skeleton to the media for profit? Come on!

I think the motion is to prevent anyone else from obtaining them and using them for profit, i.e. as someone has already mentioned, unscrupulous experts etc. If such a thing did occur, it would not be the fault of any of the A's personally.

Of course the A's wouldn't sell those pictures, I doubt very much that they would even want to see the pictures themselves. People seem to forget that regardless of whatever mistakes they may have made, they completely loved and adored little Caylee.

 

[countzero]

Does anyone seriously believe that any of the A family themselves (even KC) will really consider selling pictures of little Caylee's skull and disarticulated skeleton to the media for profit? Come on!

I think the motion is to prevent anyone else from obtaining them and using them for profit, i.e. as someone has already mentioned, unscrupulous experts etc. If such a thing did occur, it would not be the fault of any of the A's personally.

bold by me:

Money and greed are motivation enough for anyone, let alone the A's.

To answer your question; I bet my sweet bippy the A's would sell those photos in a nano second.

 

[impatientredhead]

I don't know how it works in Florida, but I know that where I am, police would have power to seize all things/monies etc that were reasonably suspected of being the proceeds of, or used in a crime. It would only be after an "acquittal" or through negotiation or court order that the monies would be returned. Otherwise, people like bank robbers or drug dealers, could give all their money away before conviction.

Monies stolen during the crime or collected via the crime (drug dealing) would be different than this situation. They would be collected or frozen as evidence. The Son of Sam Laws are being rewritten from their initial forms because once they got to the supreme courts in many states they were deemed in violation of the first amendment. The newer and more effective route is via liens against all properties belonging to the convicted, past and future, the state reimburses their costs incurred from those funds and if there is a victims family to file for damages they will split the funds collected. But you have to be convicted before these liens can be in place.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Does anyone seriously believe that any of the A family themselves (even KC) will really consider selling pictures of little Caylee's skull and disarticulated skeleton to the media for profit? Come on!

I think the motion is to prevent anyone else from obtaining them and using them for profit, i.e. as someone has already mentioned, unscrupulous experts etc. If such a thing did occur, it would not be the fault of any of the A's personally.

Are you saying you think the As have more integrity than the Defence experts and that the SA thinks the same?? Personally, I think they are most concerned about the family selling them, and my personal view is, that they would sell them if they could...I also suspect they will also sell the funeral rights to a tv stations and magazine...but time will tell. I believe they want to make a living out of this and don't want to return to jobs.

 

[Devon]

After thinking about this, it just doesn't make much sense. The ME for the defense can take pictures and xrays. (If they can find a place to do this) If they were going to sell something, nothing would stop them from selling those if there goal is to profit on photos. The defense team will need to review the the first pictures if they are going to be used in court. It sounds like just a big pi&&&ng contest! Are they trying to say the defense does not have their clients best interest in mind? Are they trying to prove the defense Attorney is incompetent? This would not be good for the procecution.

It is certainly very strange, since as you say, the defence can simply take their own pictures. Maybe the prosecution is just reluctant to turn over theirs.:waitasec: