State Motion to recover Investigative Costs
- Thread starter grandmaj
- Start date
GreenTurtleGirl
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2009
- Messages
- 32
- Reaction score
- 0
OK, WFTV said OCSO is asking for $119K over the $25K or so they were granted.
BigFatMommyDog
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2008
- Messages
- 4,932
- Reaction score
- -25
This was posted at the clerk's site (I included the 9/15 order by hhjp for reference....
9/20/2011 Response
Defendant's; to State's Notice of Filing of Revised Investigative Costs Expense Reports of the Orange County Sheriff's Office
09/19/2011 Notice of Filing
of Revised Investigative Costs Expense Reports of the Orange County Sheriff's Office Pursuant to Court Order of September 15, 2011
09/15/2011 Order Granting
in Part and Denying in Part State of Florida's Amended Motion to Tax Special Costs of Investigation and Prosecution and to Reserve Jurisdiction
link for reference, you must enter the data to pull up the case
http://www.myorangeclerk.com/enu/Pages/orange-county-clerk-of-court-home.aspx
IfIMay
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2011
- Messages
- 982
- Reaction score
- 3
Wonder if Lisabeth ratcheted up her whining with this new filing. I admit I rather enjoy her ranting and reminding the Court about what to consider. I also love when Judge Perry puts her back in her newbie spot. :great:
logicalgirl
Peace Hawk
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 16,024
- Reaction score
- 2
Well, here it is as posted back a page in this thread - you can read it for yourself - she didn't really even get wound up for this argument - IMO.
http://www.cfnews13.com/static/artic...pense-0920.pdf
Aedrys
If justice doesn't get you, karma will.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2010
- Messages
- 6,719
- Reaction score
- 17
God, I sincerely hope not. Talking about selling his soul just to get her parents on his show. I can't imagine he would go that far just to talk to them. That is just crazy, IMO.
IfIMay
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2011
- Messages
- 982
- Reaction score
- 3
I guess when Judge Perry said $100k after her little "$50 call it even" mandate.. she lost some wind in her sails. Thanks LG.. :blowkiss: I guess I missed the link. :blushing:
logicalgirl
Peace Hawk
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 16,024
- Reaction score
- 2
Welcome IfIMay - it seemed just like a silly motion after HHJP was so comprehensive about why he made his last decision.....So she is arguing again there is something wrong with his decision making process?
IfIMay
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2011
- Messages
- 982
- Reaction score
- 3
"The Defendant was charged with four misdemeanor counts of lying to Yuri Melich during a missing persons investigation; she was not charged with allowing a missing person investigation to continue". ooh... Lisabeth's got her back up. She's more and more like her mentor, Cheney, every day. Soon she'll graduate to er.. finger pointing!
Aedrys
If justice doesn't get you, karma will.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2010
- Messages
- 6,719
- Reaction score
- 17
So now, it's argument over technical carp. Good Lord, they are stripping out all of the logic. What happens when someone lies during a missing person's investigation? THE INVESTIGATION CONTINUES!!!!! I can't believe this carp that is coming out. How freaking ridiculous!!!! And Ms. Fryer just keeps going no matter how foolish she sounds. She is right up Cheney Mason's alley. Sheesh.
krkrjx
The answer is blowin' in the wind.
- Joined
- May 4, 2010
- Messages
- 13,088
- Reaction score
- 43,253
She was not charged with allowing a missing person investigation to continue??
Um...what charge would that be? IMO, when someone makes a statement to LE, that person is hoping the investigation will go in a specific direction. In this case, lying about a child being missing caused a missing child investigation to commence. Ongoing lies caused said missing child investigation to continue.
LE knew Casey was lying about certain things but even so they really had no evidence that Caylee was not in fact a missing child. They HAD to proceed as if she was missing. Casey's lies instigated the missing child investigation and her continued lies kept it going. Casey not only "allowed" the investigation to continue, she encouraged it by her actions.
Um...what charge would that be? IMO, when someone makes a statement to LE, that person is hoping the investigation will go in a specific direction. In this case, lying about a child being missing caused a missing child investigation to commence. Ongoing lies caused said missing child investigation to continue.
LE knew Casey was lying about certain things but even so they really had no evidence that Caylee was not in fact a missing child. They HAD to proceed as if she was missing. Casey's lies instigated the missing child investigation and her continued lies kept it going. Casey not only "allowed" the investigation to continue, she encouraged it by her actions.
logicalgirl
Peace Hawk
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 16,024
- Reaction score
- 2
Seriously - I know Ms Fryer is a newbie Lawyer, but is that not one of the silliest statements you have seen in motion?
MissJames
a yellowflutterby changed my life : )
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2008
- Messages
- 6,658
- Reaction score
- 1,304
I envy those who work with HHJP. They get to watch the expression on his face when he reads this carp.
logicalgirl
Peace Hawk
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 16,024
- Reaction score
- 2
Okiedokie - our faithful news reporter, pasted this in This Weeks News a day or so ago, and I'm surprised to see we are not yet talking about it - but I guess everybody's "mad on" at the Anthony's is overshadowing this news...
I think this is a new order but I can't find it yet...
Hearing on the 28th with HHJP!:crush:
I think this is a new order but I can't find it yet...
Hearing on the 28th with HHJP!:crush:
NavySubMom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2010
- Messages
- 1,389
- Reaction score
- 31
I saw this and it was referenced somewhere in a thread, but I have searched/googled and not yet seen the OSCO broken-down list JP asked for detailing the hours spent so JP could assess an additional OSCO $$ amount they are asking. apparently it has been filed with JP, and then Lisbeth also filed a DT motion about the funds Casey should pay.
When I looked at this I thought the hearing on the 28th is about unsealing the jail video when Casey hears about remains being found and has some kind of panic attack, or maybe a gran mal seizure :floorlaugh:
I don't know what new discussion we could have about these 2 items because we cannot find the actual OSCO new document filed.
MOO
logicalgirl
Peace Hawk
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 16,024
- Reaction score
- 2
My point exactly! But I was hoping it was just me that was unable to find these documents - but I assume the hearing was about L. Fryer complaining about the amounts ordered, but I could be wrong. Maybe it is just because I am sick to death of discussing the Anthony's that I am searching around for anything at all to discuss? IMO the Anthony's are a no-win, never solve subject - we are all rational intelligent beings and they are...well....
NavySubMom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2010
- Messages
- 1,389
- Reaction score
- 31
my sense was that JP made his order re: what Casey would have to pay upto and including his Sept. cutoff date when the missing person investigation ended, but added that if OSCO wanted to submit a detailed breakdown of actual hours by person and what they were actually doing, that OSCO amount could be increased. That breakdown was due to JP this past Monday. Then I figured he would just issue a new order without a new hearing.
I am pretty certain the hearing about the unsealing of the videotape is the 28th. maybe there are 2 hearings that day? not sure. I will try to search WS for info discussing the hearing re: the video as it has been discussed somewhere here .......
and I don't know why, but I find searching on WS cumbersome and it takes me forever to find what I am looking for, probably just me.
I am however a master of google searches.......
IMO, MOO, etc.