Sarcasm....Snark....and otherwise Unprofessional Behavior

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Thanks for that link. I had to watch Yuri again -- he keeps looking at Jose like he is quite an <unusal person>.

Yuri's facial expressions are priceless!!

Mel
agree, and he is sooo good looking too:) Yuri's a true:hero:
 
Remember Robin Lunceford, :phone: JB said that he didn't know the call was recorded.
Love that smilie. How could JB have known it was recorded? Just because prisons record inmates telephone chats? :loser:

Baez claims to be working for "slave wages", another comment that should have been kept to himself.

Made to a VERY RESPECTED, African American Judge.:waitasec:

I totally missed the significance of that until you mentioned it, Tulessa. :doh: I swear, I have no idea how His Honor remains so patient with JB (and CM). I'd be needing a new gavel daily. :gavel::gavel::gavel:
 
Quite frankly, the forensic evidence is not advantageous for my client. Unfortunately, I can&#8217;t absolutely believe the depositions, so it&#8217;s not advantageous for us, so we can&#8217;t ask intelligent questions. Sorting through the wealth of new information is Paramount! This case will boil down to law enforcement not doing a thorough investigation. If a more thorough investigation had been done, my client would be at home making salmon patties right now. Aaah, you can quote me on that! Attorney Jose Baez

Now we know why JB can't ask intelligent questions. It's because the evidence and the depos are faulty. And I thought it was because JB struggled through the Florida Bar Exam three times. :tos:
 
I have to make a comment and I am not sure if this is the right thread or not so I am sorry if I am wrong. It is very aggravating that the DT constantly rips on "blogs" but at the same times takes what certain members formulate, figure out, dissect, conclude etc and uses it to their advantage. I love reading all of the comments, thoughts, and actual law based opinions here but if frys(yes i know it is spelled wrong) my bottom that they get to use the wonderful minds of people for the own gain and openly bash these same folks. I wish they could not see what is being said on the blogs...

I agree. I posted over on the questions thread that I found it bizarre (to say the least) that the DT is actually reading blogs in real time while in open court arguing for somebody's life. Strange indeed.

It's my opinion that many of the blogs are monitored as a result of a lesson learned by the DT.

Case in point; Go back to the duct tape threads here at WS and look at some of the in depth analysis of both the composition and market availability of the tape used to wrap little Caylee's face. The words "most common tape in America" would have never left Mr. Baez's mouth had anyone on the DT been monitoring this site at that time.

That's just ONE example of many that leads me to believe they are here for knowledge and information they do not possess.
 
It's my opinion that many of the blogs are monitored as a result of a lesson learned by the DT.

Case in point; Go back to the duct tape threads here at WS and look at some of the in depth analysis of both the composition and market availability of the tape used to wrap little Caylee's face. The words "most common tape in America" would have never left Mr. Baez's mouth had anyone on the DT been monitoring this site at that time.

That's just ONE example of many that leads me to believe they are here for knowledge and information they do not possess.

I agree and it totally drives me crazy...which btw is what they call any blog members...I believe that there are certain members here who should be on the DT payroll and these are the certain members who are "verified" on the blogs who have helped the DT more than the actual DT...MOO
 
Now we know why JB can't ask intelligent questions. It's because the evidence and the depos are faulty. And I thought it was because JB struggled through the Florida Bar Exam three times. :tos:

JB only took the exam once. They didn't admit him for other reasons.
 
My, my I wonder if HHJP has seen this letter. Sounds like even JB as acting as an "agent for the state".

If JP hasn't seen this letter will someone please send it to him :)
 
Morning everyone

This man makes me feel alot better about the case because I just don't trust JB and Mason and their antics....

http://www.wftv.com/video/27321100/index.html

Thanks for the Link! The look on his face when she starts in on decomposing body in the trunk / doesn't know it was Caylee's body in the trunk... hmmm any other missing bodies laying around the A compound these days? Too much! But he has been a voice of reason throughout and I always enjoy what he has to say!
 
Thanks for that link. I had to watch Yuri again -- he keeps looking at Jose like he is quite an <unusal person>.

Yuri's facial expressions are priceless!!

Mel

Although I'm sure it's difficult (especially when being questioned by the DT), I wish the facial expressions would be kept to a minimum. JA has this tendency at times as well. It just reads a little theatric to me. Yuri's testimony is strong, let that speak for itself.
 
I found the dog handler testimony today quite disturbing. Jose went so far as to say "what did the dog tell you". I'm paraphrasing, but that's certainly what the man insinuated.

um...Jose....dogs can't talk ;)

Mel

I know I posted this in a few threads, but this is the perfect example of what I am talking about. It isn't just the snarkiness or complete rectal cranial inversion of some of JB's comments. It is also that he seems completely clueless as to what his actual audience is. That comment about "what did the dog tell you?", yeah that might have scored him some laughs and a few points for clever with a disparate and somewhat bored pack of jurors. That might be a moment that they remember. But he is in an evidence hearing where the only audience that counts is the skilled experienced and professional observer wearing the black robe and sitting at the big desk. He is presenting for the judge. The judge does not want cute and clever. Especially not in a Frye hearing. The judge has already wasted 2 days on this nonsense. The judge is a consummate professional at filtering out exactly what he needs to make his decision from the sea of verbal chaff. All he wants is good solid information.

Watch LDB's handling of witnesses during this hearing. Note how direct she is with them. Both her own and the defenses witnesses. Notice how quickly and succinctly she gets the information that she needs from each. No double talk. No cuteness. No cleverness. No Perry Mason gotcha's. No snark. She knows she is presenting to the judge and quickly and efficiently elicits exactly the information he needs to make his decision.

JB just completely misses that. I mean the nastiness, snarkiness and such with the dog handler. The request to treat the witness as hostile. To what end. You don't need drama when presenting to the judge. You need facts and clear testimony. All JB did was create hostile witnesses (and a hostile judge, hostile opposing council, hostile co-council, a hostile gallery (well OK CA was pretty hostile beforehand so maybe not JB's fault)).

I'm actually most surprised that HHJP has not yet ordered the Bailiff to nail JB's feet to the floor in front of the podium to prevent him from wandering and pacing for dramatic purposes like a TV Lawyer.
 
I know I posted this in a few threads, but this is the perfect example of what I am talking about. It isn't just the snarkiness or complete rectal cranial inversion of some of JB's comments. It is also that he seems completely clueless as to what his actual audience is. That comment about "what did the dog tell you?", yeah that might have scored him some laughs and a few points for clever with a disparate and somewhat bored pack of jurors. That might be a moment that they remember. But he is in an evidence hearing where the only audience that counts is the skilled experienced and professional observer wearing the black robe and sitting at the big desk. He is presenting for the judge. The judge does not want cute and clever. Especially not in a Frye hearing. The judge has already wasted 2 days on this nonsense. The judge is a consummate professional at filtering out exactly what he needs to make his decision from the sea of verbal chaff. All he wants is good solid information.

Watch LDB's handling of witnesses during this hearing. Note how direct she is with them. Both her own and the defenses witnesses. Notice how quickly and succinctly she gets the information that she needs from each. No double talk. No cuteness. No cleverness. No Perry Mason gotcha's. No snark. She knows she is presenting to the judge and quickly and efficiently elicits exactly the information he needs to make his decision.

JB just completely misses that. I mean the nastiness, snarkiness and such with the dog handler. The request to treat the witness as hostile. To what end. You don't need drama when presenting to the judge. You need facts and clear testimony. All JB did was create hostile witnesses (and a hostile judge, hostile opposing council, hostile co-council, a hostile gallery (well OK CA was pretty hostile beforehand so maybe not JB's fault)).

I'm actually most surprised that HHJP has not yet ordered the Bailiff to nail JB's feet to the floor in front of the podium to prevent him from wandering and pacing for dramatic purposes like a TV Lawyer
.
Now, HOW is Mr Baez gonna AMBUSH anyone with his feet nailed to the floor?

Because, seriously, he thinks no matter how many times he is admonished, he is going to be able to DO THIS.

MOO and stuff.

edited to remove snark.
 
:goodpost:

I know I posted this in a few threads, but this is the perfect example of what I am talking about. It isn't just the snarkiness or complete rectal cranial inversion of some of JB's comments. It is also that he seems completely clueless as to what his actual audience is. That comment about "what did the dog tell you?", yeah that might have scored him some laughs and a few points for clever with a disparate and somewhat bored pack of jurors. That might be a moment that they remember. But he is in an evidence hearing where the only audience that counts is the skilled experienced and professional observer wearing the black robe and sitting at the big desk. He is presenting for the judge. The judge does not want cute and clever. Especially not in a Frye hearing. The judge has already wasted 2 days on this nonsense. The judge is a consummate professional at filtering out exactly what he needs to make his decision from the sea of verbal chaff. All he wants is good solid information.

Watch LDB's handling of witnesses during this hearing. Note how direct she is with them. Both her own and the defenses witnesses. Notice how quickly and succinctly she gets the information that she needs from each. No double talk. No cuteness. No cleverness. No Perry Mason gotcha's. No snark. She knows she is presenting to the judge and quickly and efficiently elicits exactly the information he needs to make his decision.

JB just completely misses that. I mean the nastiness, snarkiness and such with the dog handler. The request to treat the witness as hostile. To what end. You don't need drama when presenting to the judge. You need facts and clear testimony. All JB did was create hostile witnesses (and a hostile judge, hostile opposing council, hostile co-council, a hostile gallery (well OK CA was pretty hostile beforehand so maybe not JB's fault)).

I'm actually most surprised that HHJP has not yet ordered the Bailiff to nail JB's feet to the floor in front of the podium to prevent him from wandering and pacing for dramatic purposes like a TV Lawyer.


Great post actually. I simply cannot believe that JB is allowed to give a witness a 100 page document and not tell him where to go as a reference point. He just makes the witness shuffle through the entire thing. It is maddening to me.
 
:goodpost:




Great post actually. I simply cannot believe that JB is allowed to give a witness a 100 page document and not tell him where to go as a reference point. He just makes the witness shuffle through the entire thing. It is maddening to me.

Even more embarassing to JB is Linda coming to the witnesses rescue and providing the page number(s). The judge surely can't be impressed with the DT at this point.

MOO

Mel
 
This....
I picked it out of an article linked up in the daily news thread.

Baez responded, with his voice quivering at times, &#8220;I agreed to that and I have several e-mails to Mr. Ashton where I explain to him the methodologies that we were challenging on this process&#8230; Now, I don't want to use the words coercion or forcing my hand or anything of the kind, but I think if we're going to limit somebody's cross examination on a specific witness on a critical point when I have specifically explained it time and time again to Mr. Ashton that we were questioning the methodologies.&#8221;

How dare him accuse JA of coercion. JB has nobody but JB for being placed behind the 8-ball. If he had not played "cute" and tried to one up the SAO by not complying with the judge's order, the motion for SANCTIONS (not CONTEMPT) would never have become an issue. JB is so much like his client it is amazing.
 
Although I'm sure it's difficult (especially when being questioned by the DT), I wish the facial expressions would be kept to a minimum. JA has this tendency at times as well. It just reads a little theatric to me. Yuri's testimony is strong, let that speak for itself.

I have to respectfully disagree...I think YM does a very good job of keeping his facial expressions in check. Isn't it funny how people can see the same thing differently? Must be handler's bias:floorlaugh:

Seriously, though I had to sit in a trial and listen to my husband's wife OUT RIGHT lie on the stand. By commission and ommission. The things she said were absolutely infuriating and my attorney had to tell me to cut it out a few times when my mouth went slack. It is very very hard. Especially for those of us with an Irish temper. I find it hypocritical of CA to be calling out JA on it though since she and CA and GA haven't been able to master the art of the stone face.
 
I have to respectfully disagree...I think YM does a very good job of keeping his facial expressions in check. Isn't it funny how people can see the same thing differently? Must be handler's bias:floorlaugh:

Seriously, though I had to sit in a trial and listen to my husband's wife OUT RIGHT lie on the stand. By commission and ommission. The things she said were absolutely infuriating and my attorney had to tell me to cut it out a few times when my mouth went slack. It is very very hard. Especially for those of us with an Irish temper. I find it hypocritical of CA to be calling out JA on it though since she and CA and GA haven't been able to master the art of the stone face.

Okay, Strawberry, now you have me totally confused. Your husband's wife...wouldn't that be you? lol
 
Baez claims to be working for "slave wages", another comment that should have been kept to himself. JMHO

Justice for Caylee

OMG, who's fault is that? I thought his pay was being able to be around PRINCESS ICA. He didn't seem to mind when she was spending 6 hours a day in his office day in and day out. Gee, I wonder what they were doing all day? All lovey dovey and hugging each other. I know I'm not supposed to talk bad about him, but he just makes me sick. Besides the fact he is so in over his head it's not even funny.

I'm so curious about "Casey's frame of mind"? Wouldn't that be admitting she did it? sorry to jump around or be off topic
 
:floorlaugh:

God forbid!!! I meant ex-husband's wife!!

It's funny how certain people can make you come all unglued when you talk about them because you know what they are saying, all they are saying, is just one big lie. And they get away with it. jmo
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
76
Guests online
184
Total visitors
260

Forum statistics

Threads
609,329
Messages
18,252,709
Members
234,625
Latest member
XtraGuacPlz
Back
Top