State of Florida's Motion to Strike Defense Witness List

[bunnyphoenix1]

The games are going both ways.

As for the $900, JB should pay for what he requested. Other wise, we the tax payers have to pay for it. As a tax payer, I object. We are hurting down here as it is.

I'm actually quite surprised that in the USA accused people have to pay to see the evidence. Where I come from, the accused must be provided with a FREE copy of all the evidence. What if Casey was indigent?...would she have to go without some of the evidence?

 

[RR0004]

I know it's not the American way, but I do prefer the UK situation where the Prosecutor doesn't interview their witnesses. They already have statements from the police from them and they are required to call them cold. Frankly, I think that is the fairest way to conduct a prosecution. And if there are going to be conferences with the witnesses, why shouldn't the defence be allowed to be in attendance, particularly if they will need to ask them questions also? It's not like in the movies where they pull out the incriminating evidence at the last minute....the defence is entitled to know, in advance, the evidence the SA will be leading against them. And sadly, not all prosecutors always behave honestly. I think you saw that in a case there recently where the prosecutor was prosecuted! We've had them jailed where I live too.

ETA...re your bolded part, Baez should be privy to the State's witnesses' testimony. That is why they have disclosure obligations.

Then he can wait and do it on his own.

 

[RR0004]

I'm actually quite surprised that in the USA accused people have to pay to see the evidence. Where I come from, the accused must be provided with a FREE copy of all the evidence. What if Casey was indigent?...would she have to go without some of the evidence?

She's applies to the court for help.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Then he can wait and do it on his own.

Do the rules allow him to meet with the other side's witnesses without the SA present? Or would it be considered improper for him to do that without going through the SA?

I take it you don't agree that the Accused should be allowed to know what the SA is discussing in conferences with their witnesses?

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

She's applies to the court for help.

I assume the Judge has the power to waive photocopy fees and things like that? Is that what you mean? If she had a public defender would that happen automatically or would she still need to make an application?

So, can an accused person say, "I haven't seen the evidence against me because I didn't want to pay for it?". I really am surprised the Prosecution aren't required to serve a free copy on the defence.

 

[fuzzykpd]

That is what I was just thinking too...where is LKB? Is she just sitting back waiting for JB to flub it all so there may be grounds for appeal due to ineffective council? Surely that can't fly in any court of law.

Seems LKB is staying in the background for a change but isnt her expertise in the area of Forensics anyway? All is other pretrial stuff is more in line with your basic criminal attorney.

as a footnote, it makes me sick to see how they fawn over her in court. a precurser to their what thier actions will be in front of the jury. lots of shoulder massages and tender touches, sitting close etc to show KC isnt a bad person. they have to know she is and that's whats sickening IMHO