Sidebar Discussion #4

[atthelake]

...I mean he led Baez through many minefields and prevented him from making mistakes, heck he even gave him hints along the way.

Jeez, and it still sticks out in my mind when Linda said to them - if you keep going........that will allow all the checks etc. to come in. Yes, many were - in hindsight - giving him more than perhaps deserved.

Enjoying this discourse - but even with agreed upon/and our lovely WS disagreements amongst us that aren't......you know........ I do believe that all did their jobs well even with some of their "giving too much" to Baez.

:websleuther:

 

[BigMomma]

I don't agree at all. They shared laughs because they work together and have for many years. You would be very surprised I guess to realize that defense attorneys, judges, and prosecutors laugh together every single day outside of the courtroom, in sidebar, and in chambers. They have a rapport. There is nothing untoward about that. Judge Perry knows the power he holds is great as a judge and he cannot violate the law due to his personal feelings about Casey. It would be up to Ashton and the prosecutors to go after Casey's family for perjury, not the judge. Judges do not prosecute! They oversee trials and hand down sentences.


I hear your frustrations and I understand how upsetting it all is, but Judge Perry is not the scapegoat here. The jury failed miserably and there is not a person in the world that could control that.

This is very true. Judges, opposing Attorneys will fight it out out in a court of law, then go out and play golf together on the weekends, some opposing sides have very close friendships with Judges as well, but they know when and where to cut it off and be all business, especially in a courtroom. It might not happen too often, but it does happen

 

[Spice]

A violation is a violation. It has nothing to do with whether we are social animals or not. Why bother having rules if it's alright to disregard them?

Agreed. But I do think when it came time to consider her behavior, this violation would not be looked at as severe enough to render time served null and void. (The courts etc) It is beyond common and it wouldn't be looked at as behavior that would paint her as deviant etc. Although we all know she is.

Again, not sticking up for her at all, just pointing out that her behavior would be judged on a continuum of deviant or severe. Letter writing (kiting) is probably on the record of every single prisoner and wouldn't effect decisions regarding time served.

 

[Spice]

BBM - Passing letters is severe. That is why the rule is in place.IMO

And her letters contained nothing of that nature. I am not disagreeing that she broke a rule, I am not saying that I was happy that she was granted time served. I am just looking at it all and I don't think this had anything to do with Perry showing her preferential treatment. Things are just not that black and white. I respect your opinion and understand everybody's frustrations but we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[atthelake]

Since this is a sidebar - I have a sidebar question for the sidebar.

I use Firefox , and want to clear the cache as someone was discussing yesterday. I have gone through tools area, but can't figure out how to do. Can someone do a quick shout out to me please, thanks!

 

[LambChop]

Agreed. But I do think when it came time to consider her behavior, this violation would not be looked at as severe enough to render time served null and void. (The courts etc) It is beyond common and it wouldn't be looked at as behavior that would paint her as deviant etc. Although we all know she is.

Again, not sticking up for her at all, just pointing out that her behavior would be judged on a continuum of deviant or severe. Letter writing (kiting) is probably on the record of every single prisoner and wouldn't effect decisions regarding time served.

Plus this was a jailhouse issue. If they felt the letter writing was anything other than just being social she would have been marked down for it and it would have affected her probation. Obviously the powers-to-be at the jailhouse thought little of it and turned the letters over to SA as discovery. KC was in jail longer than most inmates and given her other good behavior this was probably much ado about nothing for them. jmo

 

[krkrjx]

And her letters contained nothing of that nature. I am not disagreeing that she broke a rule, I am not saying that I was happy that she was granted time served. I am just looking at it all and I don't think this had anything to do with Perry showing her preferential treatment. Things are just not that black and white. I respect your opinion and understand everybody's frustrations but we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Casey was entitled to time off for good behavior. She got it. I have no problem with it.

My only real issue with Judge Perry was with sentencing on the lying convictions. His sentence for lying were one year on each count, to be served consecutively, but then for reasons I cannot fathom, he allowed those consecutive terms to run concurrent with a sentence that had by then already been served. That made no sense to me and it still doesn't make sense to me.

Casey should have been sentenced to four consecutive years on her four lying convictions, period. From that four years, she would get credit for time she had been in jail awaiting trial, plus time off for good behavior at whatever percentage the law allows. But the first 412 days of Casey's total time in jail up to that point should not have been counted when imposing the lying sentences, as that 412 days was her sentence on the separate fraud convictions. And it had already been served! It's not like she was still serving that sentence at the time the new sentence was imposed. Even then I would have not wanted it run concurrently but it would have at least made a bit of sense.

I have never understood the wisdom behind consecutive sentences (when it could just as easily have been concurrent) only to have that consecutive term run concurrently with totally unrelated convictions, more than a year after that sentence had been served.

 

[Spice]

Casey was entitled to time off for good behavior. She got it. I have no problem with it.

My only real issue with Judge Perry was with sentencing on the lying convictions. His sentence for lying were one year on each count, to be served consecutively, but then for reasons I cannot fathom, he allowed those consecutive terms to run concurrent with a sentence that had by then already been served. That made no sense to me and it still doesn't make sense to me.

Casey should have been sentenced to four consecutive years on her four lying convictions, period. From that four years, she would get credit for time she had been in jail awaiting trial, plus time off for good behavior at whatever percentage the law allows. But the first 412 days of Casey's total time in jail up to that point should not have been counted when imposing the lying sentences, as that 412 days was her sentence on the separate fraud convictions. And it had already been served! It's not like she was still serving that sentence at the time the new sentence was imposed. Even then I would have not wanted it run concurrently but it would have at least made a bit of sense.

I have never understood the wisdom behind consecutive sentences (when it could just as easily have been concurrent) only to have that consecutive term run concurrently with totally unrelated convictions, more than a year after that sentence had been served.

I wonder why he made that decision as well. It always astounds me that people do very little of the sentence that is handed down to them. (crowding, budget etc) I can only assume that it had something to do with the way the law was written and what standard procedure would be in a situation like that. I am confident that he did what he had to do within the power he held to do it.

It would be unethical for him to "stick it to her" just because he didn't like the verdict. And he strikes me as a very ethical man. Y'know what I mean? There has to be a legal reason that we laymen do not understand.

This case, from beginning to end, has defied reason. I am just not of the opinion that Judge Perry ever gave her preferential treatment. I believe that his record speaks for itself and have confidence that he did what he had to do, ethically and professionally.

 

[jon_burrows]

Plus this was a jailhouse issue. If they felt the letter writing was anything other than just being social she would have been marked down for it and it would have affected her probation. Obviously the powers-to-be at the jailhouse thought little of it and turned the letters over to SA as discovery. KC was in jail longer than most inmates and given her other good behavior this was probably much ado about nothing for them. jmo

A guard was fired for helping them pass notes. The letter writing stopped after she was caught. The jail system does not take this sort of offense lightly or the guard would still have her job.

IMO

 

[mollymil23]

Since this is a sidebar - I have a sidebar question for the sidebar.

I use Firefox , and want to clear the cache as someone was discussing yesterday. I have gone through tools area, but can't figure out how to do. Can someone do a quick shout out to me please, thanks!

Go to tools>options>privacy
there should be a highlighted link that says "clear recent history" or something like that. Click that and it will give you the option of just clearing cache or other info as well, depending on your version of firefox.

eta:looks like can just go to tools and go down to "clear recent history" and skip some of that...

 

[LambChop]

Casey was entitled to time off for good behavior. She got it. I have no problem with it.

My only real issue with Judge Perry was with sentencing on the lying convictions. His sentence for lying were one year on each count, to be served consecutively, but then for reasons I cannot fathom, he allowed those consecutive terms to run concurrent with a sentence that had by then already been served. That made no sense to me and it still doesn't make sense to me.

Casey should have been sentenced to four consecutive years on her four lying convictions, period. From that four years, she would get credit for time she had been in jail awaiting trial, plus time off for good behavior at whatever percentage the law allows. But the first 412 days of Casey's total time in jail up to that point should not have been counted when imposing the lying sentences, as that 412 days was her sentence on the separate fraud convictions. And it had already been served! It's not like she was still serving that sentence at the time the new sentence was imposed. Even then I would have not wanted it run concurrently but it would have at least made a bit of sense.

I have never understood the wisdom behind consecutive sentences (when it could just as easily have been concurrent) only to have that consecutive term run concurrently with totally unrelated convictions, more than a year after that sentence had been served.

Judge Perry followed the guidelines of what is normal in sentencing. He could not give KC a harder sentence than was given to someone else. It's what they do, IMO. But to impose a harder sentence on her because of who she is would not be something they would do. They all have rules they have to follow. jmo

 

[Harmony 2]

This thread will be closing in five minutes. I am preparing sidebar #5...

 

[Spice]

A guard was fired for helping them pass notes. The letter writing stopped after she was caught. The jail system does not take this sort of offense lightly or the guard would still have her job.

IMO

A guard is held to a totally different ethical standard than a prisoner. That guard should have lost her job. What she did was ridiculous.

 

[atthelake]

Go to tools>options>privacy
there should be a highlighted link that says "clear recent history" or something like that. Click that and it will give you the option of just clearing cache or other info as well, depending on your version of firefox.

eta:looks like can just go to tools and go down to "clear recent history" and skip some of that...

Thanks! I had about a gig in memory of caches!!!!!!

 

[krkrjx]

Judge Perry followed the guidelines of what is normal in sentencing. He could not give KC a harder sentence than was given to someone else. It's what they do, IMO. But to impose a harder sentence on her because of who she is would not be something they would do. They all have rules they have to follow. jmo

But, IMO, he did give Casey a harsher sentence than another person convicted on four lying counts would have received. In most cases a person would receive one year on each count but have them run concourrently. Perry sentenced Casey to consecutive sentences, when he didn't have to.

Had he given her concurrent sentences on the lying charges I would not question it running concurrent with the sentence on the fraud charges. But as is, to sock it to her on one hand but be lenient on the other hand, makes me say, "huh?"

 

[Harmony 2]

[ame=http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7532409#post7532409]click for sidebar discussion #5...[/ame]