ZFG Civil Case: Casey's Deposition #2

[lauriej]

Don't they have to file the appeal within a certain time frame?

yes, judgeP made it QUITE clear to them that they had 30 days or they would forfeit the right to an appeal.

..they filed immediatley.

sentencing hearing, after he'd handed out her liarX4 sentence.

judgeP: "you have 30 days to appeal,if you do not file within 30 days, you lose the right to appeal, do you wish to appeal?"

baez: (whispers with cheney): "uhh, we'd like to reserve...."

judgeP: (fed UP with baez and his not following the rules):"you have THIRTY DAYS! to appeal........etc etc DO you wish to appeal?"

baez : (looks over to cheney): " Yes...we do."

 

[peedoffinny]

Maybe Dr. Phil told the A's he would keep them there until they told the truth and it took a couple of days..... jmo

If that was the case, those two would still be there! In fact, Dr. Phil will die of old age waiting for the truth to come out of their mouths.

 

[strawberry]

I neither thought RH was wrong, nor said anything to that effect.

In fact, I was sticking up for him.

Somebody had a belief that RH maintained the 5th was deep -sixed at a deposition. Not in those words but you get the idea...

I believe it was a faulty recollection based in good faith....totally innocent & well-meaning.

But I found it hard to accept that RH said that. So, I said so. That's all.

And then I gave my own opinion.

My post is an opinion that the 5th amendment is available at a deposition.

My reasoning was that the US Constitution is not checked at the door of a room where a deposition is conducted and picked up on the way out.

The mere fact that we are dealing with a civil trial is no way negates
the Constitutional protections available via the amendments.

Say you are at a deposition.

You will not be subjected to an unreasonable or illegal search and seizure because the Constitutional Amendments protect you from that.

You also retain 5th Amendment protections......and thus you have the right against self-incrimination.

The 5th amendment won't get you out of the whole deposition though. You invoke it on a question by question basis.

opinion:wolf:
Oh God, I hope I haven't made it worse....

Ohh!

I also misunderstood your post to mean that RH was wrong...I think it was the sentence Horace bolded:

I really really doubt that Richard H verified that information.

I took that to mean he spouted off without doing his research rather than you doubted RH said so. KWIM?

 

[Anakerie]

..their appeal was filed with the 5th district appeals court on 7/20/2011.

..jurisdiction was given back to judgeP to hear the "costs for $$$$'s" hearing tomorrow.

..i see the DT filed a new motion "for an extension of time" a couple of days ago---granted.

http://199.242.69.70/pls/ds/ds_docket
--kc v state of florida---liarX4 conviction appeal docket---

[SIZE=-1]08/23/2011[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]Order Granting Relinquishment of Jurisdiction[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]TO CC FOR ORANGE CTY,FL FOR 30DAYS FOR TRIAL COURT TO CONSIDER THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS OF INVESTIGAION AND PROSECUTION. AE FILE CERT COPY OF CC ORDER WITH THIS COURT UPON RENDITION[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]08/29/2011[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]Motion Extension of Time Cort Rpter Trans-Cr Req[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]08/30/2011[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]Grant EOT Court Reporter Transcript-CR Req.[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]10/07/2011[/SIZE]

Different appeal I think.. I was talking about the appeal notice they filed for the lying to law enforcement convictions..

 

[lauriej]

Different appeal I think.. I was talking about the appeal notice they filed for the lying to law enforcement convictions..

..they never filed an appeal for lying to LE, and aren't going to.

..they have acknowledged-----she lied to LE----their appeal ( which has been filed--and is the docket i linked to ) is on the sentence she rec'd FOR the lying to LE, they say it was one lie, judgeP ruled it was 4.

 

[TrueJustice]

All Casey has to say is, that is not the same Zeniada! Zeniadas went to Mexico..:banghead:
I hope the judge handling this case has a backbone.

 

[robhkcmo]

..they never filed an appeal for lying to LE, and aren't going to.

..they have acknowledged-----she lied to LE----their appeal ( which has been filed--and is the docket i linked to ) is on the sentence she rec'd FOR the lying to LE, they say it was one lie, judgeP ruled it was 4.

she did appeal it....she is appealing the convictions, not the sentence.....

http://abcnews.go.com/US/casey-anthony-appeals-conviction-lying-police/story?id=14080086

 

[vlpate]

Respectfully here to you all. But I feel that ZG should be suing Cindy. It was Casey who in jail told the police that the woman in the picture they showed her WAS NOT ZG. But that night, Cindy went on national TV and stated that this ZG in question was the right one! And that statement was made after Casey informed Cindy the police had showed her a picture of the wrong ZG. Now it gets tricky. Cindy said she was speaking as Casey's representative on TV.

The bottom line is that Cindy is the one who sent the dogs after ZG after Casey had cleared her. So why is Cindy not being sued here???

Just for clarity, Cindy went on National TV and they showed a picture of the ZG Casey had cleared and said this was the nanny that kidnapped Caylee?

I would like to see this if there is a clip available...thanks.

 

[lauriej]

she did appeal it....she is appealing the convictions, not the sentence.....

http://abcnews.go.com/US/casey-anthony-appeals-conviction-lying-police/story?id=14080086

..which are the SAME thing...

..she was CONVICTED of lying X4----and therefore SENTENCED for lying X4.

..the DT appealed , saying that they believe the conviction AND sentence should be only X ONE.

..we'll see how this plays out---i'm apparently not good at explaining myself in a post.

 

[logicalgirl]

..which are the SAME thing...

..she was CONVICTED of lying X4----and therefore SENTENCED for lying X4.

..the DT appealed , saying that they believe the conviction AND sentence should be only X ONE.

..we'll see how this plays out---i'm apparently not good at explaining myself in a post.

Hello Everybody? Lauriej is right you know - it's that they want a four for one sentence bundle - the mobility companies are handing out bundles for billing right and left and I guess Baez thinks the law courts should also.

Why anyone would bother after HHJP does his massive and exhausting research I don't know - but then we're talking Baez and Mason here....from my perspective if HHJP says it's four separate lying and sentencing charges, then they'd be best to stop wasting their time and the Appeals Court time....but that's just me..

 

[logicalgirl]

CA's testimony for the Zenaida Gonzales is on video. I don't recall if I found them to read, but I saw the videos of CA and GA. Some of it was more intriguing than the trial testimony because they were both so belligerent.

Intriguing? You couldn't pay some of us to re-watch those videos - we're still having nightmares about goblins in pea green t-shirts....

 

[RR0004]

Maybe Dr. Phil told the A's he would keep them there until they told the truth and it took a couple of days..... jmo

IMO...they'd still be there...lol.

 

[MiraclesHappen]

Thank you for that info Niner.

That's what I was always thought also - that in a civil suit, a person could not use the 5th ammendment; which is the reasons that B___z and team used prior for the reasons that they wanted this delayed in the first place!

Didn't Richard H verify this for us at one time also??

Ooooooooh, Oh now I understand. :tyou: so much Strawb et al!!!

But alas, when I said that I really really doubt that Richard H verified that information it was with reference to the quote above.

MH :seeya::wolf:

I just wanted to come out and play :cheer::loveyou: artyguy2: but I'll make my way back to the question thread. fftobed:

 

[robhkcmo]

The constitutional privilege against self-incrimination applies to a civil proceeding. The U.S. Supreme Court stated the following:

"The privilege is not ordinarily dependent upon the nature of the proceeding in which the testimony is sought or is to be used. It applies alike to civil and criminal proceedings, wherever the answer might tend to subject to criminal responsibility him who gives it."

See McCarthy v. Arndstein 266 U.S. 34, *40, 45 S.Ct. 16, 17 (U.S. 1924).

 

[21merc7]

Ooooooooh, Oh now I understand. :tyou: so much Strawb et al!!!

But alas, when I said that I really really doubt that Richard H verified that information it was with reference to the quote above.

MH :seeya::wolf:

I just wanted to come out and play :cheer::loveyou: artyguy2: but I'll make my way back to the question thread. fftobed:

Stay out here and play with us! :heart:

 

[21merc7]

I have been pondering this delay. Granted I know nothing about Civil Law. I know that the Criminal Appeal has stalled this action until April or May according to the wftv article. It may be longer than that in reality if appeals work the same way they do here.

I think this could be a good thing. It could mean the teflon will have worn off. The fact that it will not be televised is good. It protects FKC from further claims of "death threats", from inflaming the public, it protects the integrity of the case. Most depositions are not public events anyway. This will keep the Judge focused on the case not on media/public reaction, and keep her Courtroom from being a zoo.

I don't like the further delays and am certain ZFG doesn't either, but maybe it will work out for the best for ZFG and an impartial Judge/Courtroom.

 

[strawberry]

Ooooooooh, Oh now I understand. :tyou: so much Strawb et al!!!

But alas, when I said that I really really doubt that Richard H verified that information it was with reference to the quote above.

MH :seeya::wolf:

I just wanted to come out and play :cheer::loveyou: artyguy2: but I'll make my way back to the question thread. fftobed:

Nooooo! Don't go away!! Silly! I want to hear what you have to say! Stay and play! :rollercoaster::blowkiss:

 

[Well Done 99]

Intriguing? You couldn't pay some of us to re-watch those videos - we're still having nightmares about goblins in pea green t-shirts....

LOL. Cindy Anthony's "that's it, I win" look at the end of her deposition will be etched in my memory and haunt me until the day I part this earth.

 

[natsound]

..they were then asked by the Appeals Court, to provide them with a copy of the transcript of the sentencing hearing, rather than just the sentencing order.

..they just asked on monday for a little more time to get that to them----request was granted.

..also---------you will recall at the sentencing hearing ---PRE-sentencing, lisabethF read off a whole lot of blah di blah case law this, case law that........(finally) ending with "it's therefore our position this was ONE lie, and not 4."

..judgeP asked her a few questions....then he went on his computer (for quite a few minutes) came back, cited HIS case law this, case law that------determined it WAS 4 seperate lies and sentenced her to each of the 4.

..their appeal------nope, we still say it's ONE---------what do YOU say District Court of Appeal ???

Sorry if it's obvious... the appeals court asked for a transcript of the sentencing hearing. Was this in lieu of actually filing a written appeal? Or is there a written appeal separate from the link you provided yesterday?

I know I could go and research this myself, but I only get five minutes here and there to spend online.. kids and work ya know! :seeya:

Oh, and have you all noticed the ad on websleuths for Full Sail University! I did a double-take... but we're all familiar with the name!

 

[strawberry]

@MattMorganESQ
Matt Morgan
Check me out on @drdrew @drdrewhln tonight at 9:00 pm EST. I will be discussing the #caseyanthony civil trial