2009.10.12 New Defense Motion-Modify Access to Crime Scene Photos

[Snaz]

I don't think they are referring to altering the photos when they say manipulation. IMO, they want to be able to enhance, skew, reverse, enlarge, color correct, etc....the photos that they view so they can see the details THEY are looking for. As much as JB and his antics irritate me, the word manipulate just mean handle in this reference. No worries.

ITA... but then the reverse also holds true when the defense accuses the State of manipulating the photos, doesn't it?

 

[sleutherontheside]

ITA... but then the reverse also holds true when the defense accuses the State of manipulating the photos, doesn't it?

Of course...and as long as photos presented with any enhancement coincide with unaltered photos and a description of what manipulation took place, I see no issue. Experts can look at a photo file an peel back the layers of what changes have been made. When I use Gimp (software) there is a track of alterations made. There comes a point when alterations begin to degrade the quality of the photo and that info can be verified.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

BBM in color.
That last sentence is not digesting for me....Please Help.
You mean the Judge will allow KCs team to manipulate the truth by playing with pictures?
Because why alter the picture if not to change something?
I am lost on that last sentence.

Not at all. In my mind, manipulating pictures would include cropping, re-sizing, re-adjusting contrast, brigtness, etc. to make items more visible.

We do it all the time here at WS to zoom in on and clarify details of pictures.

I was in no way thinking of manipulating as changing the content or photo-shopping images.

I'm also assuming that the only pictures the defense refers to are those of the actual remains. Under Florida Law, they may not be made public. To send them anywhere without a secure server would allow too many opportunities for hacking, illegal prints being made, money being made.

If the photos are only those of the remains, it would behoove the defense to get their experts down to Florida for a few days.

 

[jandkmom]

MM, while you were gone, there was speculation you had been kidnapped...but we collectively decided to wait 31 days, go out clubbing, and get tattoos before we started looking for you.

We would have called to check on you too, but your number was in our Sim card in our other phone that we can't find right now, but trying to call you would been a waste, and huge waste.

 

[Just Jayla]

MM, while you were gone, there was speculation you had been kidnapped...but we collectively decided to wait 31 days, go out clubbing, and get tattoos before we started looking for you.

.....and while we were all out clubbing, someone back here at WS started a "My Musikman is Missing" thread.....

 

[Spangle]

Does he think that waiting 8 months will make the Judge forget that this question has all ready been asked and answered.

Geezes... This isn't the only murder case in Fl. How are all the other defense teams dealing with this issue????

 

[snow_walker]

Seriously, I wonder what JB and the rest of the def team have been up to in the last 8 months? If looking at those pics was such a low priority that it could wait till now (I would have thought they would have been very important), then they must have been doing something else with their time.. looking at the evidence, or interviewing 'witnesses' or possibly searching for entomologists and other expert witnesses of their own.

So far I haven't seen anything from that whole team that impresses me, but I don't want to make the mistake of under-estimating them. Simply because they can't get any of their legal papers in any sort of order, does not mean they haven't done some sort of intelligent work on behalf of their client.

 

[Patty G]

Here is the motions hearing for reference.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3143296&postcount=84"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Official Documents-Audio-Arrest Updates No Discussion[/ame]

 

[cecybeans]

Does he think that waiting 8 months will make the Judge forget that this question has all ready been asked and answered.

Geezes... This isn't the only murder case in Fl. How are all the other defense teams dealing with this issue????

Methinks Baez is about to become a term in the urban dictionary of slang meaning:

a) to delay unnecessarily in order to monetarily profit from a venture, or to file poorly written legal documents protesting and claiming injury or unfair treatment when said profits run out OR

b) to conduct business in a way which is counterintuitive to both expeditious productivity and/or the best interest of the client

 

[countzero]

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Methinks Baez is about to become a term in the urban dictionary of slang meaning:

a) to delay unnecessarily in order to monetarily profit from a venture, or to file poorly written legal documents protesting and claiming injury or unfair treatment when said profits run out OR

b) to conduct business in a way which is counterintuitive to both expeditious productivity and/or the best interest of the client

 

[truckengirl]

I still think this motion has something to do with the insect test result documents that he received last week. NOW all of a sudden after 8 months he wants his experts to look at pictures of the crime scene, sounds like there was something in those docs he wants them to dispute.

 

[Fl Breeze]

I am surprised that it over took 8 months before JB came back with the "I was only acting like a competent, computer-savvy attorney. I mean I can't get our fancy, high tech, state of the art, secure server to work."

I just knew he would never spend the the money and time to do this.

I am not so sure JB even knows what a computer server is. I think AL looked at this stupid, JB server idea and filed this new motion (probably after laughing her large ____ off.)


IIRC, JB even taught classes to other attorneys on internet search techniques before he was admitted to the Florida Bar.


I hope those attorneys got their money back.

 

[MissJames]

.....and while we were all out clubbing, someone back here at WS started a "My Musikman is Missing" thread.....

Now that MM is back ,does that mean we have to stop the party? Can't we look for someone else now?Huh?Can weeeee? :woohoo:

 

[AlwaysShocked]

I counted five (5) spelling/punctuation errors in the one page document. I would also question referring to the Judge as "Stan" but I did not count it as an error.

Jose needs to find himself a decent legal secretary in additon to an IT person!

 

[doogiesgirl]

I have never started a thread before so Mods if this is old news or if I've done something wrong please delete this. Thank You. DG


Well I am outraged once again by the Defense. When I went into "Today's Current News" I found the article about this being the one year anniversary for KC's indictment. After clicking on several links within that article I got to a link that shows a motion that JB & AD signed on Oct. 7, 2009 regarding the crime scene photographs. Remember at the hearing on Jan. 9, 2009 the Defense came up with the bright idea of a secure server for their experts to view the photographs of the crime scene showing Caylee's remains? Well now it seems they have a problem with their own solution and have filed a motion to have it modified. I am worried that "someone" wants to sell some photos of Caylee's remains to make some money. But that's just my own opinion. I'll let you read it for yourself.

BTW-If this is old news, I apologize as I was ill the beginning of the month and my laptop also crashed so I wasn't on here every day as usual. This is the first I've seen and heard of this motion. Laptop still not working so I only have limited time to check in and sometimes not each day. But I thought you all would want to know about this. Anyway here are the links I found this at:

"Motion to Modify Order Compelling Access to Crime Scene Photographs for Defense Experts"
"Modify Court Order of Jan. 9, 2009 requiring the Defense to set up a secure server for experts to view the photographs of crime scene"
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=13087553

Found it through clicking on several links beginning with this article posted in "Todays News" thread: (Just as an FYI)
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...sey-anthony-anniversary-101409,0,240444.story

 

[Muzikman]

Being discussed here.
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90144"]Oct. 12, 2009 New Defense Motion-Modify Access to Crime Scene Photos - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

I got this motion on Monday, the DocStoc link is mine. Just wondering how you got to it by clicking through on the Sentinel's site? Are they using my docs?

 

[Horace Finklestein]

It looks like a bunch more nonsense. They need to zoom in and zoom out and compare and do all of these things...It doesn't even make sense. I don't know what they think they'll magically discover. Why wouldn't they even examine the site where the remains were found once they had clearance to do so if all of this were so important? Seems to me it's just more small parts of a big picture that Baez is trying to paint - that everyone is incompetent and Casey can't get a fair trial. What I mean is, he's going to have a mountain of documents head high by trial time in which he shows all of the things for which he's been refused access, hasn't been assisted on, etc (not sending his experts to the crime scene, fbi lab goofs, problems with the server for the pics to be viewed, no change of venue, the nonsense 'drop the murder charge' motions.

Of course they are all silly, but I think he's hoping that if he has hundreds of these little nonsensical complaints, it will look valid, and an appellate court will be buffalloed into thinking 'miss anthony' didn't get a fair trial. No defense, just an offense against the prosecution. Wouldn't the progenitors of our legal system be proud?

 

[believe09]

I counted five (5) spelling/punctuation errors in the one page document. I would also question referring to the Judge as "Stan" but I did not count it as an error.

Jose needs to find himself a decent legal secretary in additon to an IT person!

Volunteers? :angel::innocent:

 

[lawlady84]

I wouldn't worry too much about an appeal, it's a pretty high standard for not getting a fair trial. You'd be surprised how common it is for defense lawyers to throw everything but the kitchen sink to distract. The appellate court will look at the trial court's rulings, and usually, as long as everything is by the book and there is no error of law, the trial court ruling stands.

The idea is that the trial judge is there day in and day out, and gets a feel for the evidence (and the lawyers). Strickland will be able to see through JBs frivolous claims, and won't (I hope) get bogged down since he'll read the motions and realize most of the claims don't have merit. The Appellate Court will defer highly to Strickland's rulings.

In theory at least, the justice system doesn't want to give each accused 3 separate trials - the trial is conducted on the lowest level, and the appellate courts only step in if it seems like the judge did something wrong or was mistaken on a point of law. Successful appeals are very rare.

 

[lawlady84]

I wouldn't worry too much about an appeal, it's a pretty high standard for not getting a fair trial. You'd be surprised how common it is for defense lawyers to throw everything but the kitchen sink to distract. The appellate court will look at the trial court's rulings, and usually, as long as everything is by the book and there is no error of law, the trial court ruling stands.

The idea is that the trial judge is there day in and day out, and gets a feel for the evidence (and the lawyers). Strickland will be able to see through JBs frivolous claims, and won't (I hope) get bogged down since he'll read the motions and realize most of the claims don't have merit. The Appellate Court will defer highly to Strickland's rulings.

In theory at least, the justice system doesn't want to give each accused 3 separate trials - the trial is conducted on the lowest level, and the appellate courts only step in if it seems like the judge did something wrong or was mistaken on a point of law. Successful appeals are very rare.