Was Jose Baez retained by Casey on June 17, 2008?

[LinasK]

ITA with you! What if Casey went for a consultation with Baez to find out what could happen when LE found out Caylee was deceased? IMO, I still think Caylee died then was buried in the sand box because Casey was in panic mode and didn't know what to do. What if Casey threaten to expose George's affair if he didn't help her cover this up? I can't exactly put my finger on what I am actually thinking but I feel like Caylee died 6/15 or 6/16 and Casey hired Baez back on 6/17/09 just as he stated. IMO and just a theory.

I think the same thing, she did hire him on JUNE 17th, but even if it turns out it was July 17th, this is still months before anyone else presumably knew Caylee was dead. I think her guilty conscience told her to lawyer up!

 

[sleutherontheside]

During the 7/24/08 LE interview with GA.....GA admits there was an attorney in their home when YM arrived. Name of Paul Kelly. GA stated that Paul was a workers comp atty....but there was also a Paul Kelly with Universal. http://www.bichlerlaw.com/attorney-bios.html

http://www.wesh.com/news/17523471/detail.html
Regarding trust fund.........funny that YM states that PK was at the house that first night.

 

[Gma Kat]

My take FWIW.....feel free to broom it out the door or stick it under the mat for further consideration.

Mr. Baez hesitated a little bit before he disclosed the $70k from Todd M. He was sheepish when he admitted it and started by saying a member of the defense team but was prompted to give the name.

He stated the case started in June.......which according to all docs it did. The date used on all the docs for the charges are based upon the last date Caylee was known to be alive. A quick check of the docket shows as much.

As much as JB likes to add frivolous verbiage to a sentence and to explain, clarify, "if I may", etc......he put his head DOWN and stated
"I was retained June 17th". He was not looking up as he had throughout the other questions.....he looked at his shoes.

WHY???? Perhaps because it was a case of him deciding whether to tell the truth and take heat...OR.....becasue he had to decide NOT to perjure himself by going along with the July date.

Is this an error??? I'm not convinced based on his body language and voice inflection during the period. I think KC retained him for something......and maybe unrelated. Maybe she anticipated some trouble associated with another activity and retained him. You don't have to be facing charged to retain counsel.

IF she retained him in June, it may be for another matter that never came to light OR it may be for the reason we fear most. Time will tell here.

bbm: maybe it was for check fraud?????

 

[spqr]

Here is a scenario...

KC killed Caylee on the June 16th. She then put her under the playhouse. On the 17th of June she went and consulted with JB and he stated something to the effect of...if they (police) find her body (and all evidence at KC's house) you will be arrested and be on trial for death. Get rid of the body.

She borrows a shovel on the 18th and then spends a day or two (or 2.6) trying to find a place to dump her.

fast forward...here we are

JMO

 

[seagull65]

Did I hear correctly?

Was Jose Baez retained on June 17 2008?

I believe Jose gave this date in his testimony I haven't seen a thread on this and if true then this in my opinion is huge.

..... snipped

I'm going to go back and watch the hearing again to confirm. I'm surprised this has not been discussed yet.

I just listened to the hearing today and that was exactly what jumped out at me, too! I was like, "June 17? What in the world?" I couldn't believe he mentioned that date. I was also surprised about Macaluso donating $70,000 to the defense. Those were the two big things that jumped out at me.

edited to add: I don't think she did retain him as an attorney on that date obviously or he would have had her go to the police, but it's still so odd that he mentioned that date, maybe he just meant July 17 or whichever month that was that she retained him, but his mentioning that date made it seem like a Freudian slip, everyone will think that it was (and maybe it was, or maybe he just misspoke). (But it makes it look like he knows something about that date, or suspects something about that date, that she already needed a lawyer on that date. Not good.)

 

[Zoe Bogart]

Here's the link - at approx 17.30 mark

http://www.wftv.com/video/22877854/index.html

Baez retained June 17 as per his testimony under oath.

So Casey retained Baez as her lawyer 2 days after Caylee was last seen alive!

Any thoughts on this?

I haven't read through this thread so I'll just say that I'm sure I've heard JB say before this he was retained by KC June 17, and I think he "corrected" himself when questioned to "July 17". He acted like he "misspoke" as people in this case are so apt to do. I can given links but I'm sure he has said this before, and then "corrected himself", possibly in his usual "spontaneous" PR speeches or when the media has dogged him when leaving a building.

Does anyone else remember this? It would have been rather early in the case after KC's arrests, maybe between July and October, 2008.

 

[Zoe Bogart]

respectfully bbm

of course it is, BUT the thing that gives me one of those :shocked2: moments, is the consistency with which he makes these kinds of mistatements and mistakes.

This is her lawyer of choice, the man between her and the end of life as she knows it, who has been with her from the real retain-date, has spent the most time with her, has based his "ground breaking " Latino legal eagle reputation on, the highest paid case he's ever had... his Raison D'Etre

and he can't remember the right date... ? simply breath-taking

we take more care than that keepiong track of when we paid the electric bill....

I find this phenomenal... along with all the other stuff he bollocks up.

You'd think he'd have her wt, ht, birthdate, and eye color tatooed on his butt, and every key date engraved on what's left of his tiny little mind... it's stunning to me in quality of ineptitude here. (on JB's part)

I am awed that he's actually a real lawyer... not in a good way

it goes hand in hand with " I didnt keep track [of billable hours or expenses]"

are you serious? really? extraordinary

I could watch him all day, just out of amazement at the level of FAIL, and I am not even a lawyer:laugh: Baez has set the bar for the legal profession in a whole new category.

JMO / MOO

I agree with you. Not only does he get the retainer date incorrect (assuming it was July) he also bungles other things. On top of that, The Team knew they had this date in court for this indigency hearing, yet they didn't bring any records to back up what they were saying. They just stood up there saying they didn't know exact amounts, or dates, etc. Why not? Shouldn't they have been prepared? I mean, it's not like Judge Strickland got on the phone Thursday morning calling these "expert attorneys" and said be in court in one hour! Even their newest "expert" made errors and then claimed "I'm old" as an excuse. WTH? If my attorneys acted like that, plus smirked the whole time a la Baez, I'd be begging for a court-appointed attorney rather than risk my life with people who appear so incompetent (and not very bright).

It could also be June is an important month to Jose, that's why he keeps mentioning it. Maybe something important happened on June 17 (finally passed his Bar exam after the third try, college graduation, a loved one's birthday, met KC while she was hanging from a stripper pole). It could be any number of reasons it just slipped out. Maybe he left his crib notes at the office along with all the financial records they couldn't remember "offhand".

If it really was June 17th when KC retained him, I doubt that she told him what was going on. Maybe she just told him she needed to have an attorney on "standby". She could have pretended she was a wealthy woman who needed an attorney for legal matters as they arise. Who knows? I'd be shocked if he would have taken her on knowing Caylee was "missing" and she hadn't reported her absence to LE. without advising her to do so. Not only that, would she have had time to see an attorney on June 17? LE assumes she killed Caylee on June 16th, and then went to Blockbuster for videos with Tony. On the 17th, I would think she would have been looking around for a place to stash the body......or maybe not, since we know the poor child was just tossed into the woods without much thought. :snooty:

 

[LinasK]

I just listened to the hearing today and that was exactly what jumped out at me, too! I was like, "June 17? What in the world?" I couldn't believe he mentioned that date. I was also surprised about Macaluso donating $70,000 to the defense. Those were the two big things that jumped out at me.

edited to add: I don't think she did retain him as an attorney on that date obviously or he would have had her go to the police, but it's still so odd that he mentioned that date, maybe he just meant July 17 or whichever month that was that she retained him, but his mentioning that date made it seem like a Freudian slip, everyone will think that it was (and maybe it was, or maybe he just misspoke). (But it makes it look like he knows something about that date, or suspects something about that date, that she already needed a lawyer on that date. Not good.)

:snooty:Nope, she could have confessed outright to him without revealing where the body was, and he would have had no obligation to report it to the police. I've been told by a very prominent defense attorney, that even when they know their client is guilty (which they would usually rather not know, and won't ask) they justify it to themselves by "moral cover".

 

[LambChop]

When he stated June 17th.....he was under oath. Plain and simple. JMO

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Jose Baez

"This case began June, I was retained June 17th." Adding - JB was in thinking mode, it's not like he was talking fast. He looked to be deliberating when he mutter these words. I could understand a misspeak if one was talking rather quickly, not under oath and did not slow down to 'think' before they spoke. I don't believe the others' in the courtroom would want to trick JB with his own words if they felt he had simply made a mistake. I can't fathom this, I'm as befuddeled as KC looked when JB said the above.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUY9h0ZnKZA

1.04 Mark

Even if he did make a mistake shouldn't he be fully conversant with the facts by now and be able to state them under oath?

I don't think many people here would make that mistake and if he did make a mistake I hope that he rectifies it promptly and I will be happy to stop speculating.

He clearly states "this case began in June; I was retained June 17."

The camera jumps over to KC and her eyes go dim and she looks very dire. She looks kindof (not embarrassed) ??? perplexed, like why the heck did he reveal that - almost like she got socked or something. Who wouldn't KC want to know that she had consulted a Lawyer on June 17?

With all the 'sharp' people in that courtroom, would not one of them catch the error and speak up immediately? Is no one listening? This blows me away.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Near the bottom...Thursday, December 4th, 2008.

6:17 PM ET - We finally hear the story about how Casey Anthony found her attorney Jose Baez. During a jailhouse visit with her brother Lee, Casey Anthony says while she was in booking at the jail, a few other inmates asked her if she had a lawyer. When she said no, they suggested Jose Baez and said he was a good attorney. The next day Baez showed up at the jail and the rest is history, according to Casey.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/09/08/NGfindcayleeblog/

Thanks for this - not that I necessarily believe it.

 

[LambChop]

Thanks for this - not that I necessarily believe it.

Someone in an earlier thread stated that there was no one booked around the time KC was booked who had been a prior or current client of JB's. So apparently this is another mistruth on KC's part. JMO

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Someone in an earlier thread stated that there was no one booked around the time KC was booked who had been a prior or current client of JB's. So apparently this is another mistruth on KC's part. JMO

When you think about it, it does seem like JB came to her aid quickly under the circumstances. Is that normal - that Lawyers drop everything and respond immediately?

I'm remembering too that the A's were not too happy about JB in the beginning iirc.:waitasec: TM says that JB was at the house when he got there and told him not to speak to his client. TM was there to find Caylee. KC said if she got out she would assist in finding Caylee so, of course, this advice struck an odd chord within TM. He states he's never had that happen before when volunteering to help find a missing person.

CA asked TM to come, not KC or GA.

 

[JBean]

When he stated June 17th.....he was under oath. Plain and simple. JMO

But Yuri was also under oath at the bond hearing when he said he took the Pontiac on July 17.

 

[Ripley007]

This is a facinating thread!!!
I watched the hearing the other day and heard Baez answer this question and I never blinked an eye. The June 17th date didn't even register! I myself have mixed up June with July in regards to this case. When I first saw this thread and how many responses it had, I thought, what's the big deal? But as LambChop just said, the bottom line is he was under oath!!! Wow! Shouldn't the court address this possible "under oath mis-speak" next time they get together?
My memory has been that KC chose Baez because she went to highschool with his daughter and therefore, he was the only attorney she recognized off a list of possible attorneys the jail gave her. Is this true? Does Baez have a daughter KC's age, or is my memory flawed?

 

[YellowSubmarine]

But Yuri was also under oath at the bond hearing when he said he took the Pontiac on July 17.

I think what bothers me about this is I could see a simple one time mistake. But, JB says it twice. "This case started in June". "I was retained June 17th". He said it, and then restated it. Plus, neither CM or AL caught it, so that tells me there is some truth behind it.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

This is a facinating thread!!!
I watched the hearing the other day and heard Baez answer this question and I never blinked an eye. The June 17th date didn't even register! I myself have mixed up June with July in regards to this case. When I first saw this thread and how many responses it had, I thought, what's the big deal? But as LambChop just said, the bottom line is he was under oath!!! Wow! Shouldn't the court address this possible "under oath mis-speak" next time they get together?
My memory has been that KC chose Baez because she went to highschool with his daughter and therefore, he was the only attorney she recognized off a list of possible attorneys the jail gave her. Is this true? Does Baez have a daughter KC's age, or is my memory flawed?

Yes, JB's daughter is kc's age. But kc's story is that someone gave her JB's name in booking. I think that's bs, though, because not only do I doubt they talk about this sort of thing in booking, but also because kc would not have had any way to write down JB's name and #

 

[nort]

I heard some where that she bounced her retainer check written to him maybe they can actually find out through the bank what month that was. Maybe it was actually a stolen check of her parents and when the statement came in early July they wanted to know why she would be writing a check to a lawyer and Lee went looking for her. Just a thought nothing in stone..

 

[faefrost]

If Baez had been hired in June, would that have not made him the attorney of record at the time of the Universal Studios interview and her arrest? Which would be a reason he would already be exploiting loud and far to get those statements tossed from evidence. I really think he mispoke and the Judge realized it, saw the actual month on the papwerk and moved on.

 

[luvmygarden]

Does anyone think there is a possibility after CA threatened to take Caylee
away on June 15th from KC maybe she did hire JB to fight CA ?