2009.05.28 Motions Hearing

[Verité]

Bold mine.

Yep me too. I want to see it because I want to make up my own mind on this case. I don't want to rely on anyone's spin.

JB and his ilk will always have something of an advantage here because they are the only ones speaking publicly - they can spin and spin and spin. The louder they are and the more they try to distract attention from being focused on the evidence (which speaks for itself) the more sure you can be that the defense is desperate.

Agreed! In fact, I think JB envisions himself as the Defense P.R. expert on the case, the one whose role it is to frustrate, and obfuscate, and deprecate
(add any other "cates" you think fit) the SA. IIRC, last year his daughter, who's apparently finishing college, is said to have headed up his P.R. firm,
but I think he's really the Head Spin-Man.

 

[trixi491]

Did anyone else think it was weird that Tammy Uncer said in her interview with LE that "KC randomly started to talk about football...it was weird." Then apparently to the defense she says that she was the one who prompted the conversation, most likely to get KC's mind off it. So which is it? I's like she's telling each side what they want to hear..

 

[Muzikman]

I didn't get to watch the hearing this morning and am catching up on the day's events in this thread.

Even though the above video isn't the one of G and C arriving, it's interesting to note that as KC got up to leave the courtroom, she didn't acknowledge her parents........didn't even look in their direction. Did she acknowledge them at any time today?

I was there, and standing near G&C when KC was leaving. While talking to her lawyers and facing the back of the courtroom her eyes did move over - she did look at them for 1/4 of a second but she did not acknowledge them in any way. I was watching this very carefully. Sad and cruel on her part.

 

[sumbunny]

I was there, and standing near G&C when KC was leaving. While talking to her lawyers and facing the back of the courtroom her eyes did move over - she did look at them for 1/4 of a second but she did not acknowledge them in any way. I was watching this very carefully. Sad and cruel on her part.

It's so nice to hear from a person that can feel the emotion in the courtroom first hand.
Thank you so much.
Watching it on tv/computer isn't nearly as insightful as a person that is there in person.

What other feelings did you get throughout the entire hearing?
Cindy seemed extremely upset (more then usual)

 

[Muzikman]

Muzikman...did the media have any representation there?

WFTV's legal analyst Schaefer was there, but no media legal representation to argue the video motion, unfortunately.

I wonder if the ACLU or somebody would go in and argue on the public's behalf?

 

[Muzikman]

**THE BIGGIE: In the back row of the audience, behind Rev. Grund, there is a man that in my opinion, very much resembles Patrick B. He is sitting alone in the corner. Does anyone else see this resemblance?

Was not PB. I'm not sure who he was, I was trying to figure it out - after the hearing he went up to the judge's bench and was talking to Strickland. Maybe a law student?

 

[Muzikman]

Do lawyers usually shake hands with the baliff/officer who brings the suspect to & from court?

I noticed Andrea did.

Don't know if this was on camera or not, but when all the lawyers went up for a sidebar, Macaluso went over and shook the Court Reporters hand and chatted for a second. It seemed kind of odd to me....

 

[sadyjade]

Was not PB. I'm not sure who he was, I was trying to figure it out - after the hearing he went up to the judge's bench and was talking to Strickland. Maybe a law student?

Interesting. BTW, Thank you MM, for being there and giving us some insight!
I was wondering ... did you notice many Caylee buttons in the crowd?

 

[amethyst221]

Don't know if this was on camera or not, but when all the lawyers went up for a sidebar, Macaluso went over and shook the Court Reporters hand and chatted for a second. I seemed kind of odd to me....

I think TM is just trying to smooze with the locals and be charming or smarmy -guess it depends on one's POV.

 

[Muzikman]

It's so nice to hear from a person that can feel the emotion in the courtroom first hand.
Thank you so much.
Watching it on tv/computer isn't nearly as insightful as a person that is there in person.

What other feelings did you get throughout the entire hearing?
Cindy seemed extremely upset (more then usual)

You're welcome. It is a lot different than watching online - there is only one camera, all the stations show the same feed. There are a lot of things to see that the camera doesn't catch.

The main feeling I had was, ummm, astonishment that the defense is continually so unprofessional and unprepared. 5 of them there today, although only 3 talked. And that they are entirely there to play to the cameras - Baez's recitation of Lyon's record, for example. And the presser afterwards really takes the cake - Baez says "I employ you" when he means "implore you". And several other poor word choices that are actually laughable.

Cindy and George were definitely upset for some reason, much more so than the last hearing I went to. And it has to make it even worse to see people in the audience visibly laughing (quietly tho) at the Defense's many mistakes, which are obvious even to non-legal people.

 

[Muzikman]

Interesting. BTW, Thank you MM, for being there and giving us some insight!
I was wondering ... did you notice many Caylee buttons in the crowd?

I did not, but I wasn't really looking. I didn't even notice if G&C had them on, although I'm sure they did.

I want to watch it now, as the camera shows a different angle than I was able to see - expressions on KC and defense team's faces, for example.

 

[Spyglass]

I did not, but I wasn't really looking. I didn't even notice if G&C had them on, although I'm sure they did.

I want to watch it now, as the camera shows a different angle than I was able to see - expressions on KC and defense team's faces, for example.

Thanks for your first hand account, Muzikman.

Off-topic, please forgive me: What happened to the last doc dump; the one that was reportedly small and mostly things we've already seen, like civil case transcripts/videos? I know we're now awaiting the one defense got early last week, but there was also a small one that we talked about a couple of weeks ago and then it was never mentioned again.

 

[Muzikman]

Thanks for your first hand account, Muzikman.

Off-topic, please forgive me: What happened to the last doc dump; the one that was reportedly small and mostly things we've already seen, like civil case transcripts/videos? I know we're now awaiting the one defense got early last week, but there was also a small one that we talked about a couple of weeks ago and then it was never mentioned again.

Good question.
Still waiting for it. I still have to put in my request for the latest one, I will ask what's holding up the last one.

I'm guessing, but I think it may be that the SA's office is trying to hold down the publicity level? To counter Baez's change of venue motion.

Any legal eagles know if there is a time limit for them to make docs public?

 

[Friday]

I find this whole overdone thing about the tape showing the defendant's reaction weird. I try to think like a lawyer and be rational, but it always pops into my mind that it must look really, really bad. They've taken round after round of depositions of the same people and dragged this out eternally. It seems a crazy waste of resources and time. Are they really wasting time thinking about filing civil suits now, when their client's life is on the line?

IMO, there is no way that videotape could really help the prosecution unless KC seems angry rather than distraught. I despise KC, but as a jurror, I couldn't put any significance on the fact that she reacted so strongly even before the remains were identified, because the remains were clearly that of a human toddler, including the skull, and they were discovered just down the street from KC's house. Even the most innocent, stoic mother could easily leap to the obvious conclusion and fall apart at this news. I would.

Now, if the prosecution also had a videotape of KC's unpreturbed, indifferent reaction to the discovery of apparent remains at Blanchard Park, that could definitely sway the jury toward a guilty verdict. But that tape for comparison doesn't exist, and witness testimony won't carry nearly as much weight as a video tape, especially not in a death penalty case.

As I said at the beginning here, unless KC looks angry on the Dec 11th videotape, that tape could blow up in the prosecution's face. That doesn't mean I wouldn't love to see it, however, because it's about time we saw KC suffer instead of smirk for a change. In fact, if she's acquitted, that day will be the only time she suffered badly for murdering her child.

 

[Theonly1]

Links for information:

Please keep in mind that our Sunshine Law is BROAD and applies to many things so the statutes encompass a lot of other situations than what we are looking for.


This is the link to our Sunshine Laws:

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...tm&StatuteYear=2008&Title=->2008->Chapter 286

Inspection of Public Records can also be found under Florida Statute 119.07(1), I believe. And I think that 119.07(1) would be the place to look to answer the question about how much time would the Clerk have to turn over a public records request. So far, it looks like the time period is a "good faith" time period.

Florida Statute 119.07(1)(c) states, "A custodian of public records and his or her designee must acknowledge requests to inspect or copy records promptly and respond to such requests in good faith. A good faith response includes making reasonable efforts to determine from other officers or employees within the agency whether such a record exists and, if so, the location at which the record can be accessed."

And Florida Statute 119.07(1)(d)-(f) continues in this vein regarding if there is an exemption: "A person who has custody of a public record who asserts that an exemption applies to a part of such record shall redact that portion of the record to which an exemption has been asserted and validly applies, and such person shall produce the remainder of such record for inspection and copying."

119.07(1)(e): If the person who has custody of a public record contends that all or part of the record is exempt from inspection and copying, he or she shall state the basis of the exemption that he or she contends is applicable to the record, including the statutory citation to an exemption created or afforded by statute.

119.07(1)(f): If requested by the person seeking to inspect or copy the record, the custodian of public records shall state in writing and with particularity the reasons for the conclusion that the record is exempt or confidential.


So, I would think that if you have provided a WRITTEN request for the public record they have a good faith time period in which to respond. If they have reason to believe that part of the record is exempt and that a small part can be redacted then they can redact it and release the record. If the Clerk thinks that all or part of the record is exempt they have to give you in writing and state with particularity the reason for the exemption.

 

[celticthyme]

Respectfully snipped:


Thank God you brought this up, Cece! When Ashton broke into that infantile, ghoulish, toothy grin today, because the judge chided JB, I moaned aloud. It was asinine and unprofessional of him, especially in a death penalty case. At that moment, he looked so foolish that now I'm worried about the quality of the SAs in this case.

What do you think?

See Muzikman:

You're welcome. It is a lot different than watching online - there is only one camera, all the stations show the same feed. There are a lot of things to see that the camera doesn't catch.

The main feeling I had was, ummm, astonishment that the defense is continually so unprofessional and unprepared. 5 of them there today, although only 3 talked. And that they are entirely there to play to the cameras - Baez's recitation of Lyon's record, for example. And the presser afterwards really takes the cake - Baez says "I employ you" when he means "implore you". And several other poor word choices that are actually laughable.

You know, there were several choice moments yesterday while trying to watch this, I just couldn't help myself, and laughed right out loud, at home, in my kitchen! If you were actually there, and had to continually observe Baez trying to sound like he knew what he was doing, in the midst of what should be a very serious, dignified legal situation .... and he is just clueless!!

 

[Friday]

respectably snipped

Could the A's be upset due to the upcoming document dump? It seems they get the information before the public does. Perhaps that is why they are so upset, just throwing that out there.

I think the reasons GA, CA, and especially KC looked upset during the hearing was because nothing ever seems to get resolved at these hearings and especially because the new DP attorney made it clear there will be long delays before KC's trial ever takes place--ergo before KC can be "vindicated and set free."

 

[Crabcake23]

Did anyone else think it was weird that Tammy Uncer said in her interview with LE that "KC randomly started to talk about football...it was weird." Then apparently to the defense she says that she was the one who prompted the conversation, most likely to get KC's mind off it. So which is it? I's like she's telling each side what they want to hear..

Yeah, I caught this too. Makes a difference to me on who prompted that conversation. But, would a truly grieving mother engage in a conversation about football? I would be so distraught about the news, that anyone trying to chat football with me would pretty much get their head bit off. If I could stop crying hysterically long enough to scream at them, that is.

 

[nanny1]

Dose anyone that was in the courtroom yesterday know why no one objected when Baez stated that Jesse Grund was a suspect. As far as I know it was never announce that he was.. Except from Cindy..

 

[Theonly1]

Dose anyone that was in the courtroom yesterday know why no one objected when Baez stated that Jesse Grund was a suspect. As far as I know it was never announce that he was.. Except from Cindy..

Because there is wide latitude in the courtroom? Also, I don't know what strategy at this point the Grund's attorney may be going for. **If** they are considering a suit against Casey and/or the Anthonys for trying to portray him as the killer perhaps they would like it on record that Baez is going on about "Jessie as a suspect". I really don't know. If I was Jesse's attorney I think my natural inclination would be to leap up and object even if it was inappropriate to do so. That comment just dropped in the courtroom like a bomb. I wish I could have seen the Rev Grund's reaction.