'They Haven't Even Found Caylee's Clothes,' Anthony Says #2

[ClockWatcher]

AWC has been very busy posting. Can anyone explain the contempt issue with the motion to strike...who's the plaintiff? Casey?

The contempt, IIRC, was issued at Dominic for failure to appear for his M&M depo. Without being able to read the motion, that's my best guess.

Hopefully as soon as all these motions etc... hit the OC clerks office and are recorded and verified, the media will be kind enough to grab copies and post them for us.

 

[mysteriew]

7/16/2009 A BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO BAR PRIVILEGED TESTIMONY OF MR. LEONARD PADILLA, MR. TONY PADILLA, MS. TRACY MCLAUGHLIN, & MR. ROBERT DICK. EXHIBIT A (PRIVACY AGREEMENT) ATTACHED.

Apparently, there is some kind of agreement attached (exhibit A) to this motion. It will be interesting to see what LP has to say about this!

This is going to be interesting. Because IIRC I asked Tony P. if they signed a confidentiality agreement and he said no they didn't. I remember being skeptical, because I couldn't believe that a defense attorney would allow someone with his client 24/7 and not have them tied to a confidentiality agreement. Tony later explained that Leonard P. wasn't working for JB. That Leonard was working for this unnamed person who had put up the money for the bail (an author maybe?)

I also find it hard to believe that if JB had a signed confidentiality agreement, that he would have allowed Leonard to say many of the things he has said without some sort of legal manuvering to get him to stop. Leonard has said many things that allegedly came from Casey, from the other family members. Things that he allegedly learned while they were staying at the home. Many of the things that Leonard has said has hurt the defense badly. So if JB had a signed confidentiality agreement, why did he allow it?

 

[BionicSurfer]

Isn't there a WS member who knew how to get in touch with him? I'd love to know what he has to say about this agreement! OOOOOH LEONARD-WHERE ARE YOU? :singing:

Ok I gotta say, NOTHING about this case makes me happy, but this 'holla out' to Leonard made me smile!

Back OT, This filing by JB makes me lean towards believing there's something damming in these statements. If KC was out on bail, helping to locate ZFG what is there to be afraid of?
Wasn't there a 'hotel guy' thast Jessie mentioned being on board? Could that be where the $ came from for bail?

 

[wonders]

I think it's strange that LP hasn't been deposed yet.
Why do you think that is?

 

[aafromaa]

snipped & bolded by me

This is going to be interesting. Because IIRC I asked Tony P. if they signed a confidentiality agreement and he said no they didn't. ...
I also find it hard to believe that if JB had a signed confidentiality agreement, that he would have allowed Leonard to say many of the things he has said without some sort of legal manuvering to get him to stop. ...?

Is it possible that there is a difference between a confidentiality agreement and a privacy agreement? The words privacy agreement are what is used in the motion - I think. I also think I read that this was to prevent LP & associates from taping or recording KC - not infringing upon her privacy - hence a privacy agreement - but I don't think that would also include a confidentiality agreement which is why JB is saying that LP was working for the defense as he is trying to extend the attorney/client privilege to conversations that might have taken place with LP & associates or that they may have overheard. I don't know if this is the case, but I'm with you, if JB had a confidentiality agreement with LP from the get-go, I think he would have filed some type of injunction to force him to stop talking a long long time ago. I don't know enough about extending the attorney/client privilege to those hired by the defense to say whether or not I think JB has a chance at this. And I don't know if LP & associates were ever actually "employed" by the defense. But I am curious to know what parts of LP potential testimony that JB finds threatening enough to try to ban his testimony.

 

[aafromaa]

I think it's strange that LP hasn't been deposed yet.
Why do you think that is?

As you used the term "deposed" I'm guessing you are referring to the ZFG lawsuit depositions, and I've wondered about this too. But I've also wondered why we don't have LE's interviews or statements with LP in the criminal investigation - or have I missed that somewhere?

 

[AZlawyer]

As you used the term "deposed" I'm guessing you are referring to the ZFG lawsuit depositions, and I've wondered about this too. But I've also wondered why we don't have LE's interviews or statements with LP in the criminal investigation - or have I missed that somewhere?

As far as the statements taken by LE, I think those were just recently released to Baez and that's why he's filing this motion--to prevent them from being released to the public or used at trial.

I really want to see this "Exhibit A", the "Privacy Agreement". I doubt that document supports Baez's argument that Padilla et al. were his "agents", because Baez says that part of the agreement was oral. And if they weren't his agents, it seems to me that the Privacy Agreement might be binding on Padilla et al. for many purposes--media appearances, etc.--but it would not prevent LE from getting the info or using it at trial. Much like a "confidentiality agreement" when you settle a civil case (e.g., for sexual harassment) is not going to mean that the information is confidential from law enforcement or even from an opposing party in another civil case.

 

[AZlawyer]

Just read the "Privacy Agreement" on the official docs thread. It would not prevent Padilla et al. from reporting what KC said to them, just from questioning her. I suspect KC is fully capable of babbling on without being questioned.

 

[Muzikman]

Just read the "Privacy Agreement" on the official docs thread. It would not prevent Padilla et al. from reporting what KC said to them, just from questioning her. I suspect KC is fully capable of babbling on without being questioned.

I just went to the courthouse and got a copy of this... figures it would be put up before I got home! I got some other docs though also, that I don't think are up yet.

But from a layman's perspective, I agree that there is nothing in there preventing LP and crew from talking. Just from questioning her, or making money from books, etc.

 

[wonders]

As you used the term "deposed" I'm guessing you are referring to the ZFG lawsuit depositions, and I've wondered about this too. But I've also wondered why we don't have LE's interviews or statements with LP in the criminal investigation - or have I missed that somewhere?

BBM
Am I using the wrong term?
I was just wondering why in general. Yeah I guess I thought I had missed it as well.

 

[AZlawyer]

I just went to the courthouse and got a copy of this... figures it would be put up before I got home! I got some other docs though also, that I don't think are up yet.

But from a layman's perspective, I agree that there is nothing in there preventing LP and crew from talking. Just from questioning her, or making money from books, etc.

It also says quite specifically that Baez is NOT employing Padilla et al. So his little "oral contract" story is not going to fly, and KC's statements to the bond/security people should not be covered by any A/C privilege.

Even if Baez had employed these people for security, I don't see how KC's statements to them would qualify as having been given for the purpose of seeking legal advice, which would be required for them to be covered by the privilege.

 

[wonders]

As far as the statements taken by LE, I think those were just recently released to Baez and that's why he's filing this motion--to prevent them from being released to the public or used at trial.

I really want to see this "Exhibit A", the "Privacy Agreement". I doubt that document supports Baez's argument that Padilla et al. were his "agents", because Baez says that part of the agreement was oral. And if they weren't his agents, it seems to me that the Privacy Agreement might be binding on Padilla et al. for many purposes--media appearances, etc.--but it would not prevent LE from getting the info or using it at trial. Much like a "confidentiality agreement" when you settle a civil case (e.g., for sexual harassment) is not going to mean that the information is confidential from law enforcement or even from an opposing party in another civil case.

Thank you AZlawyer what you say make perfect sense.

 

[wonders]

Just read the "Privacy Agreement" on the official docs thread. It would not prevent Padilla et al. from reporting what KC said to them, just from questioning her. I suspect KC is fully capable of babbling on without being questioned.

Thank you AZlawyer again.
This is great news to my eye's.

BBM I do agree.

 

[The Eunice Burns]

It also says quite specifically that Baez is NOT employing Padilla et al. So his little "oral contract" story is not going to fly, and KC's statements to the bond/security people should not be covered by any A/C privilege.

Even if Baez had employed these people for security, I don't see how KC's statements to them would qualify as having been given for the purpose of seeking legal advice, which would be required for them to be covered by the privilege.

Thanks, AZlawyer. What do you think the defense's "end game" is w/ these motions? I have an opinion, but I don't know if it's a knee jerk reaction. After reading thru the Appendices, I formed an impression that they are going to try and implicate someone or some persons from those who came near or had knowledge (Kio) of the area where Caylee was found. Also, they do not want Tracy's testimony coming out for one thing. It must be very damaging to KC's case. Also, I get the impression w/ these motions that AL is trying to "clean up" after JB. Or, am I off base w/ these thoughts?

 

[AZlawyer]

Thanks, AZlawyer. What do you think the defense's "end game" is w/ these motions? I have an opinion, but I don't know if it's a knee jerk reaction. After reading thru the Appendices, I formed an impression that they are going to try and implicate someone or some persons from those who came near or had knowledge (Kio) of the area where Caylee was found. Also, they do not want Tracy's testimony coming out for one thing. It must be very damaging to KC's case. Also, I get the impression w/ these motions that AL is trying to "clean up" after JB. Or, am I off base w/ these thoughts?

I think everything you said makes perfect sense. On the other hand, I have often had a lot of trouble understanding JB's "strategy" to use that term loosely.

 

[Brini]

Why has Casey made comments that 'LE didn't even find Caylee's clothing yet?' Why wasn't the clothing with the body? What did Casey do with the clothing? Was it left in her trunk somewhere and she dumped it elsewhere? That clothing could hold alot of clues. Was there blood on the clothing? vomit? (yuck!) Remnants of some weapon (bat? stick? something?) I believe the clothing held clues of something violent which is why she got rid of it.

On the other hand, how can we believe ANYTHING KC said? IF she said that.

 

[LambChop]

I think everything you said makes perfect sense. On the other hand, I have often had a lot of trouble understanding JB's "strategy" to use that term loosely.

LOL: It appears from the privacy agreement that JB was more interested in keeping LP and the "Sunshine Group" from doing a book instead of protecting his client from anything she may have said AGAINST his orders. JB did tell her not to discuss the case with anyone, right? Or is that just another thing that slipped through the cracks by JB???

 

[octobermoon]

LP coming up on HLN with Mike G.

 

[RR0004]

LP was supposed to be on HLN...has anyone seen his appearance yet? Nevermind...it's on now.

 

[grinchmaiden]

HLN is reporting after speaking with LP that there was no employment by JB. Is it just me or does JB seem to do things that are going to make certain that KC will be able to claim ineffective councel. I am not trying to be mean really I'm not, I just don't understand. If I have this wrong please tell me, I don't post often and lurk mostly but I was just wondering.