Watching Motions Hearing Live on Friday 10-10-08

[Chezhire]

Didn't someone say on NG the other night that if a defendent tells her lawyer say where the body is or that they committed the crime he should excuse himself from the case?

The only thing the attorney cannot do if his client confesses is allow the client to perjure himself/herself. He does not have to recuse himself if a client confesses. Recusing oneself gets tricy if the client has already been deposed or testified under oath and then confesses... most attorneys would get out at that point. (Or should...)

 

[Pink Panther]

Then I don't understand why the prosecution was arguing against his motions? I'm thinking that what they are really arguing about is which case the evidence really belongs with...the child neglect case or in the upcoming murder charges? Am I understanding that correctly?

In some cases they were arguing that the information Baez was requesting didn't have anything to do with the neglect case. In other instances, the prosecution wasn't so much arguing as it was pointing out that information was available but that Baez had not taken the appropriate procedures to secure it.

MOO

 

[distracted]

Just my thoughts. Any comments?

I always appreciate your insight. I'm also not surprised on any of the Judge's rulings.

Good point on the home confinement - be careful what you wish for is appropriate here. He most definitely could tighten it up.

 

[4oneluv]

Flight risk isn't the issue!!! At least for me.

It's about her wanting to get out of that crazy house. She must miss partying and seeing all her boyfriends!
And it's about the risk of her tampering with evidence, and as someone else pointed out, about her threatening witnesses!!!

I hope the prosecuter mentions this....

Maybe she is trying to go to the park and take her picture with a lady in the background so that she can doctor it up and have it as evidence, so that she will have her proof of her picture in the park.

 

[Chezhire]

My personal beliefs on whether or not Caylee is alive have nothing to do with the science behind the DNA/Body Farm testing. The science doesn't lie.

 

[karenc333]

Does Casey really look afraid to you? While she busily shopped at Target with stolen checks and partied it up? And even now as she comes and goes? She is more concerned about her appearance than anything else. She doesn't even appear to be afraid of going to jail and IMHO it's because she thinks that there will be some than she can convince of her innoncence, despite ANY evidence to the contrary. Even if this poor babys body is found, she will blame it on others and IMO, there will still be a handful of people, that despite everything that she has said being a LIE will believe her. She is counting on it.

I don't know how Casey is feeling. People react in different ways so I really can't say. I'm saying IF Caylee is alive, there has to be a reason that Casey was not telling the truth.

 

[OcalaMom]

Then I don't understand why the prosecution was arguing against his motions? I'm thinking that what they are really arguing about is which case the evidence really belongs with...the child neglect case or in the upcoming murder charges? Am I understanding that correctly?

If you go back to the hearings, you'll note that on several occasions, the prosecution literally handed information over or agreed to provide what they had immediately to JB. They only opposed some of the motions and their arguments were largely based on the fact that JB was asking for info that was not in their possession or jurisdiction.

JB was told more than once that the prosecution was not responsible for doing JB's 'fishing' for him or for doing his leg work for him either.

 

[Pink Panther]

I don't know how Casey is feeling. People react in different ways so I really can't say. I'm saying IF Caylee is alive, there has to be a reason that Casey was not telling the truth.

Just for the sake of discussion, could you give one possible reason that she would not tell the truth and then refuse to speak?

 

[Pink Panther]

Maybe she is trying to go to the park and take her picture with a lady in the background so that she can doctor it up and have it as evidence, so that she will have her proof of her picture in the park.

They already have that picture, don't they? :waitasec:

 

[LCoastMom]

Back in the dark ages (before Windows,,,) when I worked for a criminal def atty I learned that no matter how moral he might be....he DID NOT ASK if his clients were guilty. He did not want to know. He was a great man and did wonderful things for the community adn lots of pro bono work, but he got a kick out of getting scum off ANY WAY POSSIBLE....so I'm skeptical for life... of what an atty may or may not know.

:Welcome-12-june: Gma Kat

Sounds like the way to go, I don't see how an atty would be able to best serve his client if he'd confessed. That said I could not defend someone I thought was guilty, although I agree all deserve best council available. Kind of a catch 22! I'd be a horrible DA...

 

[amethyst221]

I do not feel that most of Baez's motions were unreasonable. I'm glad that the judge granted 7 of the 9. In regards to requesting Casey have the ability to search for her daughter: I think there was a two-fold purpose for this motion. One- the public has been asking "Why isn't Casey helping in the search for Caylee?" I think that this motion makes it clear to the public that she can not physically go and search for her daughter at this time. Just making the motion in itself speaks volumes. Two-if the motion is granted, then it will allow Casey (In Baez's eyes) to assist with the search of her daughter with the information that she and Baez have (the info that she has withheld from the police). If the motion is denied- she can't be judged for not searching because of the physical restraints of her bond agreement. JMO

I'm late to this thread, but I have to disagree with this totally. It's too late to try to blame anyone else for her lack of concern about Caylee's whereabouts. Filing this motion makes her look like a hypocrite. If she tries to argue that it's the court's fault, through denying the motion, that she didn't search, then she just insults everyone's intelligence. The language in the motion was a feeble attempt at PR, but even JB had the good sense not to push that aspect of it in court, after hearing the court's initial comment/question. He spoke of it only in terms of preparing her defense.

 

[karenc333]

Except that she also has not given her own counsel any information that would help find Caylee.

She just wants out of the house. Cabin fever.

How do we know for sure what information she has given her counsel? I'm just saying that if there is anything that can be done to help find Caylee alive, it should be done. And if that means granting a motion that allows her to visit places of interest, it should be done. I'm not trying to debate on whether Caylee is alive or dead, I'm not wanting to bash LE, prsecution attorney, Casey, her lawyer, etc... I'm just stating my opinion in regards to the motion that would allow Casey to visit points of interest to assist with finding Caylee.

 

[karenc333]

Most parents would agree: Their child's safety comes before the parent's life, if need be.

That's what I'm saying... if Caylee is alive, maybe Casey is afraid that Caylee's life would be endanger.

 

[Chezhire]

:clap::clap::clap:

If you go back to the hearings, you'll note that on several occasions, the prosecution literally handed information over or agreed to provide what they had immediately to JB. They only opposed some of the motions and their arguments were largely based on the fact that JB was asking for info that was not in their possession or jurisdiction.

JB was told more than once that the prosecution was not responsible for doing JB's 'fishing' for him or for doing his leg work for him either.

Great post, OcalaMom. Couldn't have said it better had I tried!

 

[jennyb]

but even JB had the good sense not to push that aspect of it in court, after hearing the court's initial comment/question. He spoke of it only in terms of preparing her defense.

Thank you.

 

[karenc333]

I think JB "asked for it" by calling up the state and asking for "open file" discovery. I don't think he drafted discovery requests for information (Interrogatories) and things (Requests For Production; Entry Upon Land, To Test, etc) - thus he needs to go do his homework. I think he was refused same and he rushed to the motion practice instead of putting pen to paper drafting requests for that which he wants.

Gotcha. I'm also thinking that there is confusion about what evidence is involved with the child neglect charges.

 

[magnolia]

I'm not defending Casey. I'm just saying that if there is anything that could be done to find Caylee alive, then it should be done. JMO

And, in answer to your question, yes I am a parent. I have 4 children ages 3-21. If someone took my child, I would do whatever I could to get them safely home to me. If I felt that by going to the media or police would endanger my child's life, I would be hesitant to do those things.

Lets say hypothetically that Casey knew a Nanny or someone else took Casey. For whatever reason, she was in fear that Caylee would be in danger if she went to LE.

Have you seen the shopping videos? How do you explain Casey's "care-free" demeanor right after she finds that someone abducted her daughter? The young women I saw in that video was focused on forging her best friend's checks to buy for herself and her friends.Those videos convinced me that Casey had no remorse whatsoever that her child was no longer with her. The videos also convinced me that Caylee's death was not an accident.

 

[one_hooah_wife]

However, prosecution takes a risk here. If there isn't enough to re-test, they could lose having that evidence at trial.

Respectfully Snipped

I agree with most everything you have offered with the above exception.

While I believe violation of due process will be argued by the defense, I do not believe that the prosecution's evidence would be deemed inadmissible. I believe instead that the defense would be allowed to place into record the fact that they were not afforded the right to independent analysis.


Arizona v. Youngblood (1988)

"Unless a criminal defendant can show bad faith, the State's failure to
preserve potentially useful evidence--of which no more can be said than that it could have been subjected to tests, the results of which might have exonerated the defendant--does not constitute a violation of the due process clause of the United States Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment."

State v. Estep (1991)
"The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does
not require the prosecution to preserve samples for independent analysis unless the sample possesses an exculpatory value that is apparent before the sample is destroyed, and the defendant is unable to obtain comparable evidence by other reasonably available means.”

The above cases were also cited as precedence for State v. Abercrombie, (2007), in which a trial court granted defendant’s motion for an independent lab analysis. However, due to the reported weakness of the sample, the forensic testing did not allow for an independent test. The jury convicted the defendant on felony murder, which was subsequently appealed based largely on the inability of the defense to have access to the States evidence for independent analysis, claiming denial of due process. Ultimately, the State Supreme Court found that "there was no evidence that the consumption of the DNA evidence by the State’s testing was the result of bad faith." The conviction was upheld.

 

[sandcastles4me]

The only thing the attorney cannot do if his client confesses is allow the client to perjure himself/herself. He does not have to recuse himself if a client confesses. Recusing oneself gets tricy if the client has already been deposed or testified under oath and then confesses... most attorneys would get out at that point. (Or should...)

Thank you! Good to know.

 

[LeLe1953]

In some cases they were arguing that the information Baez was requesting didn't have anything to do with the neglect case. In other instances, the prosecution wasn't so much arguing as it was pointing out that information was available but that Baez had not taken the appropriate procedures to secure it.

MOO

I felt like JB was wanting everyone to do his job for him. If he didnt spend 6 hrs a day with KC he would find the time to get it done. He is a piece of work.