Tony Padilla Q&A

[DotsEyes]

This really has me wondering. I for one was not expecting anything earth shattering in terms of Cassey's guilt from Tracy, Rob, LP, et al as I pretty much assumed she would be on her best behavior and following all directives from her attorney at that point. I still am dubious as to why we are seeing this action now, particularly if there is any question to the authenticity of the original agreement and whether there was an intentional attempt to deceive the court to determine the outcome of a ruling about testimony in this case.

I am rambling now, apologies.

Sounds to me, if TP is correct - you have it figured out exactly right.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Since the signatures are on pages not on the same as the document, the signature sheets could be originals and the document could have been replace. Since TP doesn't have a copy unless JB admits to swapping the document, which is doubtful, how would TP prove that he didn't sign that document?

As an attorney, it is incumbent upon Mr. Baez to keep all records, especially IMPORTANT original, signed, and notarized ones. I wonder if Tony could tell us if each person signed a separate document containing the agreement and the signature page.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

This really has me wondering. I for one was not expecting anything earth shattering in terms of Cassey's guilt from Tracy, Rob, LP, et al as I pretty much assumed she would be on her best behavior and following all directives from her attorney at that point. I still am dubious as to why we are seeing this action now, particularly if there is any question to the authenticity of the original agreement and whether there was an intentional attempt to deceive the court to determine the outcome of a ruling about testimony in this case.

I am rambling now, apologies.

Tony can't really answer what she learned or exactly why she would feel the need to do this, but I remember when Tracy supposedly got her own attorney in order to protect herself against any charges for what information she did gather from Casey.

Tony, did she hire an attorney and if so...for what reason? Was it to protect herself? Was it to protect the confidentiality agreement? I never quite understood what happened.

 

[OneLostGrl]

Hello! I thought the same thing! Sorry, someone should really educate George on what he should wear to court. I realize it's hot in Florida (I live here) but a nice button down and a tie would be more appropriate. JMO!

I'm thinking Cindy wants him wearing his cheap shoes when he gets shoved under the bus.. why ruin a perfectly good pair of dress shoes, ya know?

 

[jon_burrows]

TP, is this normal operating procedure for a bail bondsman to sign a contract with the defendants attorney?

 

[OneLostGrl]

So why go on TV at all? A simple thank you for a nice home-cooked meal while a child is missing would suffice. I think it's a slap in the face to all of Casey's/A's victims to hear him say Casey is a nice, respectful person. They tried to pin this crime on someone else. Just about all her friends had to hire lawyers to defend themselves against whatever the scheme team comes up with.

I agree.

 

[Gypsy Road]

TP, is this normal operating procedure for a bail bondsman to sign a contract with the defendants attorney?

Good question. Thank you...Thank you very much! :crazy:

 

[Jolynna]

You mean is was just a clerical error and the wrong signature page was attached to the wrong document? Then how does LP's signature show up below TP's on the same page?

Attorneys are responsible for the errors of their staff. Can't shirk the non-delegable duty to produce accurate and true evidence to the court. Once JB signed it, he became liable for the content and exhibits. It's his baby, sink or swim.

Making a copy of a document that does not exist as an original is MORE than a clerical error. It is forgery and fraud.

The copy has been challenged in court. JB has to produce the original for the document to mean anything. It would be HIGHLY suspicious for JB NOT to have an original.

 

[milliac]

No Notaries do not keep logs or copies of things they notarize. In this case, all the Notary did was attest that the person signed that line directly above did so in front of them. Attesting to the signature, not the document - that is all the Notary does. The signature could have been attached to another document when Notarized, or none at all.

I am actually a notary in WA and I don't keep copies, but for all notarizations I keep a log book with their identification info, the type of document notarized, date/time and they sign it (even if they are known to me).

 

[magic-cat]

Speak for yourself, MJ.

I am a gentle and timid creature. :blushing::angel::angel2::innocent:

You are funny!:crazy:

If what TP ways is true, it's going to be difficult for JB to produce the original, signed in ink document. Has he been required by the court to submit the original document?

Not so difficult since the signature pages seem to be a completely seperate page from the actual document. As long as he has that original signature page he can whip something up, easily.

Maybe it's just that important that he decided to risk the forgery. He may have weighed the risks vs the benefits. Worse case scenario... the motion gets thrown out. Best case scenario...very damning testimony gets thrown out.

That is exactly what I think. I actually believe the defense has already gotten the statements made by LP and co., I know he said he had heard the cd that was presented in court, and as soon as they laid eyes on those statements he immediately concocted this motion and this document to attempt to stop that testimony from making it into the mainstream news, especially before the trial. I can hardly wait to see what Tracy had to say!

O/T but I was just thinking about JB and all the less than up and up things he has done. Is there a thread that lists all of his "mistakes" or "mis steps"? I mean he's done more than a few shady things and all he ever gets a slap on the hand (if that). I can't believe this guy is even allowed to practice law. Before he took the bar exam wasn't there something in his background that he had to "fix" before he was even allowed to go through the bar exam process?

Yes, one of them was back child support that he owed to his ex-wife, and he had some other financial inproprieties that he had to clean up before he could proceed.

 

[jandkmom]

As an attorney, it is incumbent upon Mr. Baez to keep all records, especially IMPORTANT original, signed, and notarized ones. I wonder if Tony could tell us if each person signed a separate document containing the agreement and the signature page.

But, he could put a new front pages of the document and keep the notarized pages. If the SA gets the original, they would have to run tests on the paper to see if the paper and ink on the first pages were the same paper and ink on the notarized pages. I think the key will be that there weren't notarized copies of Tracy's and Rob's signature were they?

 

[Muzikman]

Did he not think that TP wouldn't notice?

As LDB pointed out in court yesterday, none of Padilla's crew were noticed on this motion.

 

[magic-cat]

Didn't TP say earlier that he was in such a hurry or in a tizzy that he doesn't remember what he signed and that he forgot to ask for a copy? Could it be that he did sign an agreement afterall and that this doc is not forged? I may have that wrong, so I better go back and search for that post by TP.

No. He said he did NOT sign that document. He said he remembers what he signed and the document presented with the LP motion is not it. He said he was in such a tizzy about potentially being arrested that he failed to get a copy.:blowkiss:

 

[Jolynna]

You mean is was just a clerical error and the wrong signature page was attached to the wrong document? Then how does LP's signature show up below TP's on the same page?

Attorneys are responsible for the errors of their staff. Can't shirk the non-delegable duty to produce accurate and true evidence to the court. Once JB signed it, he became liable for the content and exhibits. It's his baby, sink or swim.

Did TP ever say his document read differently than the others? I would think it had to if it's been brought to the State's attention. If it was all the same document and then they added the signature page, I can see that perhaps that was done without malice.

ETA: thanks to all who have taken the time to explain!! I get it now.

Nobody scans in a legal document, cuts, pastes and rearranges without malice, IF that happened.

I'm not saying people can't remember things differently than they happened and make honest mistakes in their recollecting.

BUT, deliberately rearranging a legal document is an accident like counterfeiting money is an accident. If Tony signed a separate agreement from Tracy, Leonard and Rob, the copy of the signature sheets was forged.

If the document is real, JB will have an original, the prosecutor will have made a responsible challenge and Tony's memory was faulty.

 

[OneLostGrl]

Wouldn't the worst case scenario be that he gets disbarred over it?

Seems like providing forged docs to the court by an "officer of the court" would have much more serious consequences than just having the motion thrown out.

I don't know about you but I think it would be funny as he!! if he was disbarred and arrested! Couldn't happen to a better guy!

 

[MaedchenX]

Can someone explain to me what it is JB intended to show by, hypothetically, altering this document? From my understanding he has supposedly added the signature from the separate agreement with TP to a document agreed upon and signed by LP, Tracy, and Rob. Is this correct? Or is the content of the document itself in question as well? It hardly seems that there is anything (going only off of what I have read here and by TP's statements) that he would need to protect his client or himself from in regards to whatever TP might have witnessed or know. Why take such a colossal risk? I am sure it is obvious and I am simply not making the connection, can anyone help me here?

 

[OneLostGrl]

Very professional.

heck of a lot cuter than his uncle too! lol

 

[Muzikman]

Can someone explain to me what it is JB intended to show by, hypothetically, altering this document? From my understanding he has supposedly added the signature from the separate agreement with TP to a document agreed upon and signed by LP, Tracy, and Rob. Is this correct? Or is the content of the document itself in question as well? It hardly seems that there is anything (going only off of what I have read here and by TP's statements) that he would need to protect his client or himself from in regards to whatever TP might have witnessed or know. Why take such a colossal risk? I am sure it is obvious and I am simply not making the connection, can anyone help me here?

He intends to show that they were working for him, thus attorney/client privilege, thus their testimony is not admissable.

Whether or not the actual content of the agreement was changed - a clause or 2 could have been added to support his motion - is not known yet, although it does seem possible. Especially if none of the signing parties got their own copies, due to the confusion over their possible arrest that day. The signature pages are definitely in question.

Why take such a risk? to get their possibly very damning testimony thrown out.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

IMO, this thread should have been locked until he returned. Tony isn't going to want to search through this whole thread to find his questions, imo.

 

[MaedchenX]

He intends to show that they were working for him, thus attorney/client privilege, thus their testimony is not admissable.

Whether or not the actual content of the agreement was changed - a clause or 2 could have been added to support his motion - is not known yet, although it does seem possible. Especially if none of the signing parties got their own copies, due to the confusion over their possible arrest that day. The signature pages are definitely in question.

Why take such a risk? to get their possibly very damning testimony thrown out.

See now, I get that. What I don't understand is why any document needed to be forged/altered to prove privileged, because by all accounts there were two documents which seem to allude to some sort of agreement by all parties to that effect albeit in separate documents. I guess the mash-up is what is most confusing to me, why not simply submit both agreements? I suppose I understand the ends that he is reaching for, but not the means. That does not make sense to me. Particularly since it seems to relate mostly to TP's potential testimony rather than the other 3.