The Female Bounty Hunter

[zadari]

I honestly do not believe anyone knows where Caylee is besides Casey. I think the more you try to look deeply into this the more you become wrapped around the warped mind of Casey. We need to step back and look at the basics, solidify what we do know vs what we don't. Hypotheticals need to be thrown away. Work with the facts and go from there.

awesome post ..

 

[kaelieanne]

I think this case is such a zoo and everyone who comes near it gets their personal life torn apart, their motives questioned, and their 15 minutes if they want it or not. Lawyering up is not a sign of guilt to me, it is a logical response to attempt to control the splatter she is about to pick up. I am sure she is going to talk to the police, she may know something she didn't realize was relevant (or even considered to be true) until she left, and whomever she did tell it has gotten back to LE who says they are interested. Someone around her probably advised her to contact an attorney, or an attorney contacted her.

I completely agree with you on this! And I pray that neither I nor any of my family ever "stumble" into a circus like this. Regardless of what this poor woman has to say, she will have her life dissected and held up to the public. I wish this on no one.

 

[whittymom4]

Why does she need immunity if she was just doing her job? I don't understand that at all.

She is smart to have an attorney. If in court it comes out that the female bounty hunter had information but didn't share it with LE she could be charged with withholding evidence or maybe accessory after the fact. Not sure but that is the way I understand the immunity offering. Anyone close to this case should have an attorney it seems.

I am new to this site and everyone probably already knows this but I didn't, LP is an attorney. In 1982, Leonard Padilla opened the Lorenzo Patino School of Law with Attorney Doug Nareau, Heman Smith, and Judge Lorenzo Patino. The Lorenzo Patino Law School provides an affordable legal education for those wishing to practice law. :clap: That is pretty cool. http://leonardpadilla.net/home


Back to our FBH...(female bounty hunter, until we get her name or initials). I tried to find a photo of her on LP's site but there isn't one. I guess in that profession you need to protect your identity or it would be hard to catch criminals.

I am sure LP and team know a lot more than anyone after being that close to KC and the rest of the A's. Plus because the fbh is a woman, KC was probably trying to compete with her (in KC's mind) and we know KC liked RD. So she would probably tell the FBH things to make KC look important. So KC would feel superior. Just my thoughts. I didn't realize her name was Tracy... ooops...

 

[whittymom4]

awesome post ..

OT but your little princess is so cute, absolutley a doll. God bless her...

 

[Gaia713]

I don't understand either...Did she do something illegal?

There have been reports that evidence may have been planted at blanchard park.

The female bounty hunter is asking for imunity & LP is being asked to take a Polygraph.

Something is going on...!!!

Deflection - LP is asked to take a polygraph. He says he has no problem doing that. Why are they focusing in on him instead of the Anthonys who will NOT take polygraphs?

 

[Themis]

[Snipped]
If in court it comes out that the female bounty hunter had information but didn't share it with LE she could be charged with withholding evidence or maybe accessory after the fact.

Sorry, this is not true. First, an accessory after the fact has to do something that encourages the crime or helps cover up the crime after the fact. Just because she was present in the house after the arrest and release on bail doesn't make her an accomplice. She would have to have some duty to make a report and she does not. Immunity is sometimes requested and given just to be safe and for no other reason. The following is from Wikipedia, but it is a good discussion of the topic.

[edit] Aiding and Abetting under U.S. Law

Courts often refer to aiding and abetting as an alternate theory of liability rather than a separate crime. Under 18 U.S.C. § 2, aiding and abetting liability is available in all federal criminal prosecutions; however, the availability and extent of civil aiding and abetting liability varies from statute to statute.
Where available, aiding and abetting liability generally requires three elements: 1) an underlying violation by a principal; 2) knowledge of that violation and/or the intent to facilitate the violation; and 3) assistance to the principal in the violation.
As indicated by the Supreme Court, “In order to aid and abet another to commit a crime it is necessary that a defendant 'in some sort associate himself with the venture, that he participate in it as in something that he wishes to bring about, that he seek by his action to make it succeed.” Nye & Nissen v. United States, 336 U.S. 613, 618 (1949) quoting Judge Learned Hand in U.S. v. Peoni 100 F.2d 401, 402 (2d. Cir. 1938).
In 1982, the United States Supreme Court held that accomplices may not be executed for the capital crimes of other criminals, if there is no evidence that the accomplice knew or even suspected that the primary wrongdoer might commit murder. In Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782 (1982), the accomplice was sitting in a car outside a house where a robbery was committed, and had no inkling that his partner in crime was going to kill the robbery victim.
Some states, including the state of California, have a system that distinguishes between an accessory, an accomplice, and a principal (or co-principal) in a different way. In this system, the difference between an accessory and an accomplice is not as listed above. An accessory would ONLY be someone who aids and abets the principal (the person who committed the crime OR helped in the planning of the crime) to escape justice after the crime has been committed (there is no more accessory "before" and "after" the fact... what was once "accessory before the fact" is now just "co-principal", and what was once "accessory after the fact" is now just "accessory". An accomplice is NOT a formal legal term in many states... it is "legal slang", and denotes ONLY "an accessory or co-principal that agrees to testify against another principal in a court of law".
Accomplice Liability (unlike conspiracy, no agreement necessary) – Actual assistance required and principle must know of Accomplice's actions. • Defendant must intend to commit or to assist another in committing (requires specific intent)
• In some situations (the mental state might be that the accessory might think that the principal will commit the crime) • in some states the required mental state, or culpability, is the knowledge the principal’s mental state
Model Penal Code: a person who attempts to aid a person is guilty of being an accessory, regardless of whether the act or the attempted act occurred (§5.01.3) • Detectives are not culpable if they have a different [[mens rea]] (e.g. not to permanently deprive one of goods)
Some courts take the position that any active assistance establishes a mens rea.
Common law categories • Principles in first degree • Principles in second degree – one who gives "constructive prence" • Accessories before the fact; An accessory before the fact is one who procure counsels or commands the commission of a felony but who, unlike a principal in the second degree, is not present, actually or constructively, at the commission of the criminal act. • Accessories after the fact is defined as • Knowledge (not just suspicion) that a felony had been committed, and completed, by the assisted person;
Accomplices are liable for the crime itself and all other foreseeable crimes • Even if the principal has an immunity the accomplice can still be tried • accomplice is imputed with the mens rea of the actor (intent to commit or encourage the crime) (former lover looking for girl) • Both parties must have the same intent (relative helped robber rob store to help police catch him) • One is not an accomplice if they do not actively aiding or abetting or counseling the crime • Don't give people accomplice liability just because they are present, but they seem to be consenting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accomplice

 

[DotsEyes]

There is only one reason to request immunity from prosecution before talking to LE and the reason is that the person requesting the immunity has information and has committed a chargeable offense directly involved with the information.

There is another type of immunity and it is for civil matters. It has to do with respondeat superior, a legal term which means that the person was acting in the course and scope of employment or hired agency for another and the employer is responsible for the acts of the employee/hired agent.

Whether the FBG (female body guard) wore a wire, withheld evidence, participated in taking things from the A home (as CA has suggested), planted evidence, assisted in destruction of evidence, performed her own search of the A home, bugged the A home or any number of things, we simply do not know. She may be requesting that LP&Co. immunize (indemnify) her from any civil action against her by the A's, by paying any monetary judgment that may be awarded in the event of a lawsuit.

Whatever the case may be, there is a very good reason that she will not talk without immunity and the only real issue here is why has she not been granted her request.

 

[ThoughtElf]

Themis.

Wouldn't anything she knew/heard be hearsay anyway?

 

[passionflower]

maybe waiting for the 'hear say bill' to pass........she has lots of info.......IMO
I would read her book!

 

[wedavis]

I think the mysterious statement this past week by LE regarding LP taking a polygraph: "and he knows why" is somehow related to information from the female body hunter and the information she obtained...

 

[Chilly Willy]

Forget telling her employer, did Tracy tell LE anything?????

That's the important thing. Whatever Tracy told Rob or LP would not be admissible in court as it's hearsay. I really don't think Tracy knows much of anything and I doubt that Casey opened up to her at all. It sure does make for a great story on NG though.

 

[Chilly Willy]

I think the mysterious statement this past week by LE regarding LP taking a polygraph: "and he knows why" is somehow related to information from the female body hunter and the information she obtained...

If that were the case, they'd be asking Tracy to take a lie detector test, not LP. The sheriffs department said that the FBI knows why they want to administer the test, not that LP knows why.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Themis.

Wouldn't anything she knew/heard be hearsay anyway?

Anything that she saw or heard directly would not be hearsay.

 

[RR0004]

There is only one reason to request immunity from prosecution before talking to LE and the reason is that the person requesting the immunity has information and has committed a chargeable offense directly involved with the information.

There is another type of immunity and it is for civil matters. It has to do with respondeat superior, a legal term which means that the person was acting in the course and scope of employment or hired agency for another and the employer is responsible for the acts of the employee/hired agent.

Whether the FBG (female body guard) wore a wire, withheld evidence, participated in taking things from the A home (as CA has suggested), planted evidence, assisted in destruction of evidence, performed her own search of the A home, bugged the A home or any number of things, we simply do not know. She may be requesting that LP&Co. immunize (indemnify) her from any civil action against her by the A's, by paying any monetary judgment that may be awarded in the event of a lawsuit.

Whatever the case may be, there is a very good reason that she will not talk without immunity and the only real issue here is why has she not been granted her request.

Speaking of requests...and slightly OT...whatever happened with the prosecution's request for a gag order?

 

[bobodedoo]

Anything that she saw or heard directly would not be hearsay.

Also, don't forget that an excited utterance is not hearsay, nor is a statement against interest. There are a couple other exceptions to the hearsay rule, but those are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head that could potentially apply in this case.

 

[wedavis]

If that were the case, they'd be asking Tracy to take a lie detector test, not LP. The sheriffs department said that the FBI knows why they want to administer the test, not that LP knows why.

So I misremembered.

 

[Chilly Willy]

So I misremembered.

Gosh, I'm sorry it came across that way. It wasn't my intention at all.

 

[magic-cat]

There is only one reason to request immunity from prosecution before talking to LE and the reason is that the person requesting the immunity has information and has committed a chargeable offense directly involved with the information.

There is another type of immunity and it is for civil matters. It has to do with respondeat superior, a legal term which means that the person was acting in the course and scope of employment or hired agency for another and the employer is responsible for the acts of the employee/hired agent.

Whether the FBG (female body guard) wore a wire, withheld evidence, participated in taking things from the A home (as CA has suggested), planted evidence, assisted in destruction of evidence, performed her own search of the A home, bugged the A home or any number of things, we simply do not know. She may be requesting that LP&Co. immunize (indemnify) her from any civil action against her by the A's, by paying any monetary judgment that may be awarded in the event of a lawsuit.

Whatever the case may be, there is a very good reason that she will not talk without immunity and the only real issue here is why has she not been granted her request.

Bold mine...How do we know that they have not granted her request and that she has not already spilled what she knows?

 

[magic-cat]

Gosh, I'm sorry it came across that way. It wasn't my intention at all.

Hi Chilly...maybe like me, you just have a gift for it? lol:crazy:

 

[Chilly Willy]

Hi Chilly...maybe like me, you just have a gift for it? lol:crazy:

It's good to have skills. :crazy: