2010.01.25 Hearing

[Cat13067]

Does this mean she won't live long enough to stand up and face her own bad cheque charges?

I really don't know.

 

[wonders]

I as usual I am very confused now.
Is JB saying the defense has no money to request the items he wants from Oak-???? and the FBI? Is that why he keeps asking for the state to produce it so that he dosen't have to pay to get it? JS tells him he has to request it if he wants it?
Casey is indigent? Judge say she can request a public defender? The seams have come apart and now we have ravaling?
Am I off base here?

 

[debbie0604]

I think you give them far too much credit. I think it was an accident.
He dropped his folder and all the papers fell on the floor, there was nothing else going on, they were wrapping it up and AL was speaking to the judge.... then it happened, she stopped to look and then carried on.

I'm waiting to see who will capture this on a loop.

He may have dropped them in "flustration." :crosseyed: hee hee... He didn't seem to have it all together today IMO.... :waitasec:

 

[Tulessa]

And nobody even made eye contact with him let alone a tee hee. It was completely ignored.

And I loved it.:woohoo:

 

[Gnatcatcher]

Does this mean she won't live long enough to stand up and face her own bad cheque charges?

Jill K is sick, not Amy or Casey. Kronk's ex-wife.

 

[debbie0604]

Oh My Gosh, I finally got something about the Sunshine Laws. I'm sure I'm about to state the obvious for most of you but it just became clear to me why the most convicting evidence gets left for last. The Defense would not request fingerprint evidence because the fingerprint evidence would convict their client and leave no room for reasonable doubt. The State may know about the print/s but because it's lawful for the FBI to hold on to the evidence in case some other reason comes up for them refer to it, they are not required to expose the evidence according to the Sunshine law. JB would have to ask for fingerprint evidence directly. Do I have this right? The Defense would not ask for damning evidence about their client even though they are dying to know what concrete evidence there is as well. If I were them, I'd assume they have a KC's fingerprint on the tape. The State has no reason/desire to hand that evidence over because they don't have to unless it is specifically asked for. What am I missing?

Also I sense that the Judge keeps trying to tell JB to brush up on the policies of how to obtain discovery, but JB is either playing dumb or is dumb. He keeps insisting that the State give him everything but that's not how it works under the law. Since JB wants to rewrite all laws in order to help KC, he keeps stomping his foot and the Judge is :waitasec: what don't you understand JB? I told you that you must request that, pay for it, etc. JB keeps saying, but I don't want to do it that way, etc. You know the song by Barry Manilow "I Write the Songs ...". JB's themesong should be "I Want to Write the Laws ...".

Hmmm... JB isn't playing dumb...

JMO. :dance:

 

[kaRN]

Does this mean she won't live long enough to stand up and face her own bad cheque charges?

SNAP as my kids would say. :woohoo:
I work with people facing life and death illness and wonder if maybe JK wasn`t in a very angry place with repect to her illness when she did that interview in the first place. Dredging up stories from the last millenium might have been an important and empowering thing for her to do then but not so much now.
But then I don`t understand why her testimony is admissable anyway.:waitasec:

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Hello WS

Very interesting today.

To my understanding JB was arguing that "anyone else" having committed the check fraud would not be facing the counts/severity of charges Casey was-that Casey was some how facing a harsher punishment than historically, defendants of the same crime have had to endure.

Is/was JB saying that the SA is being "personal" in their handling of the check fraud case against Casey?

All of this was along with his theme of Casey, -Ms. Anthony if your nasty-being "unpopular." JB seemed to laugh at the ridiculousness of the obviousness that he/they were having to argue this only because the defendant in this case happens to be...Casey Anthony.

I felt like he was giving me the impression that said, "isn't it ridiculous that we are even standing here on something so minor as this? we all know that we are only here because...This Is Casey Anthony-duh, snort, snort...I mean come on!"

What I am trying to understand is this: I know that it is the defense's job to defend their client but is it always a theme/tactic that the defense claim there are personal motivations on the part the prosecution/court when it comes them bringing their case against Casey Anthony?

I was almost waiting for the judge to say, "hey, SA...sounds like JB is saying that you guys only want to give grief to Casey Anthony on this issue because you don't like her-she's not popular. Is that true?" I know the judge isn't going to say something like that but why is JB allowed to make that accusation and it go unanswered?

JB continued using the idea of Casey being unpopular as examples of the many different ways she was not being treated equal and was asking the judge to see that and counter act that even though that "may be unpopular." If I heard that right he is insinuating for a moment that the judge be strong and rule for what is right, having the 'whatever' to overcome doing something that would be seen as 'unpopular' but what is the right thing to do under the law.

I got the impression JB feels there are a lot of people out to get his client. Is this part of making Casey seem like a victim? Is this a normal part of an allowed defense, to make it seem like the prosecution and the judge are corrupt?

I am just giving my impressions as a person who is watching my first ever court case. As that person, if I were to believe JB-I would be left with the impression that the system Casey is being tried under is corrupt.

:cow:

This drove me nuts. JB was trying to explain to the Judge that KC was not being treated fairly because people don't like her because they think she killed her two year old child. JB was pointing out that if it were a person who was not thought to have killed their two year old child within the same week they were stealing their friend's checks, that that person would not be facing such a severe punishment. That's exactly what I heard JB say. Life is not always fair it's true. Ask Caylee.

Now listen up children of the world, it is NOT okay to steal. You cannot steal from your grandma, your friends, a store, a bank, a gas station. You should not even take home office supplies from your workplace without your employer's permission. It is not okay to take things that belong to other people who paid for them whether YOU think they wouldn't mind or not. The law is "do not steal". The law isn't do not steal but, if you do, we'll discuss the value of what you stole to see if it was okay or not. I know there are categories within crimes but it's best to know not to steal - period. Things get too complicated imo.

 

[Cat13067]

He may have dropped them in "flustration." :crosseyed: hee hee... He didn't seem to have it all together today IMO.... :waitasec:

I think he is having a hard time with AL being the lead attorney. I noticed in court how AL had her arm around KC. Maybe JB feels he is losing his magic over KC...poor baby.

 

[Cat13067]

This drove me nuts. JB was trying to explain to the Judge that KC was not being treated fairly because people don't like her because they think she killed her two year old child. JB was pointing out that if it were a person who was not thought to have killed their two year old child within the same week they were stealing their friend's checks, that that person would not be facing such a severe punishment. That's exactly what I heard JB say. Life is not always fair it's true. Ask Caylee.

Now listen up children of the world, it is NOT okay to steal. You cannot steal from your grandma, your friends, a store, a bank, a gas station. You should not even take home office supplies from your workplace without your employer's permission. It is not okay to take things that belong to other people who paid for them whether YOU think they wouldn't mind or not. The law is "do not steal". The law isn't do not steal but, if you do, we'll discuss the value of what you stole to see if it was okay or not. I know there are categories within crimes but it's best to know not to steal - period. Things get too complicated imo.

Wonder if JB will use the "unpopular" nonsense when he asks for COV?

 

[debbie0604]

Respectfully snipped:
When JB's files fell, my boyfriend says really dead-pan, "Jose dropped his s..t". I died laughing. That was my favorite part.

LOL!!!!!! That's funny as he77!!! :floorlaugh:

 

[logicalgirl]

I as usual I am very confused now.
Is JB saying the defense has no money to request the items he wants from Oak-???? and the FBI? Is that why he keeps asking for the state to produce it so that he dosen't have to pay to get it? JS tells him he has to request it if he wants it?
Casey is indigent? Judge say she can request a public defender? The seams have come apart and now we have ravaling?
Am I off base here?

JS and the SA don't have the jurisdiction to insist the FBI or anyone out of State turn over files. The defense would need their own lawyer, who represents the defense lawyers, to request/demand it.

 

[Trapshooter]

Wonder if JB will use the "unpopular" nonsense when he asks for COV?

I would bet my bottom dollar that will be his entire issue.....unpopular and not being treated fairly! :banghead::banghead::banghead:

JB: Woe is me, woe is KC......gag me with a spoon!

 

[ZsaZsa]

I as usual I am very confused now.
Is JB saying the defense has no money to request the items he wants from Oak-???? and the FBI? Is that why he keeps asking for the state to produce it so that he dosen't have to pay to get it? JS tells him he has to request it if he wants it?
Casey is indigent? Judge say she can request a public defender? The seams have come apart and now we have ravaling?
Am I off base here?

The defense already has everything from Tennessee that the Prosecutor has- what JB wants in addition was not clear, but it is something that the Lab is unable/unwilling to produce. Judge Strickland told JB that the Prosecution doesn't have it, so JB will have to take it up with the Lab's Attorneys and arrange a hearing. SA did not address this further.
JB needs to make up his mind- ironic that his first complaint of the day was that Casey was not being treated the same way all other criminals would be in the same circumstances, regarding the fraud charges- but it is obvious that when it comes to getting ready for the Murder Trial, naming a date, he want more special considerations so he can be 'thorough'-- I wonder how many criminals are allowed a year and a half and no sign of readiness for trial?

 

[Just Jayla]

Strickland "If States correct, lengthy sentence or worse she'll be acquitted and walk free"

I took this as him meaning a lengthy sentence or worse-the the death penalty-, or acquital.

 

[wyome]

JS and the SA don't have the jurisdiction to insist the FBI or anyone out of State turn over files. The defense would need their own lawyer, who represents the defense lawyers, to request/demand it.

Now that's bizarre. The lawyers need lawyers to request files about the case; files which were clearly created in the first case, to build same case.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

So, with the shaking of the hands and hugs we saw today (C & G w/ the defense) it certainly looks like they approve of throwing Kronk under the bus now. Gosh, I wonder if Bradley was making that statement up when he said the Anthony's didn't want to see anyone else put "under the microscope" ?

Ha - I can think of one or two people the A's don't want to see put "under the microscope".
Hint: One of them already claims to be "under a microscope".

 

[Just Jayla]

This drove me nuts. JB was trying to explain to the Judge that KC was not being treated fairly because people don't like her because they think she killed her two year old child. JB was pointing out that if it were a person who was not thought to have killed their two year old child within the same week they were stealing their friend's checks, that that person would not be facing such a severe punishment. That's exactly what I heard JB say. Life is not always fair it's true. Ask Caylee.

Now listen up children of the world, it is NOT okay to steal. You cannot steal from your grandma, your friends, a store, a bank, a gas station. You should not even take home office supplies from your workplace without your employer's permission. It is not okay to take things that belong to other people who paid for them whether YOU think they wouldn't mind or not. The law is "do not steal". The law isn't do not steal but, if you do, we'll discuss the value of what you stole to see if it was okay or not. I know there are categories within crimes but it's best to know not to steal - period. Things get too complicated imo.

I personally agree with you, 1000%....but mostly it's because I loathe KC and her sins.

But the other part of my brain is bugging me, reminding me that it is true that many first time offenders barely get a slap on the wrist these days. If it's been paid back and if it's the first offense, most people do not serve or even get any jail time for uttering a bad check. Part of my job is bringing charges on bad checks to the criminal courts, and most victims, including our company, don't care or want them to get jail time as long as they pay us back. It's the fact that they avoid me that makes me have to take it to the courts.

I knew JS was going to rule in this vein, because he has mentioned several times in other hearings that he recognizes that KC has no criminal record to date.
However, and I am not sure this can be submitted to the court, but if I were the state...I would have mentioned the fact that, in sworn statements, CA, LA and SP have all said KC stole checks from them as well. This means, she does have a history there. Just not a criminal history.

ETA-I think JB could have stated what he stated way more concisely and without the pity party-He could have simply pointed out that most people do not receive 5 years on their first offense (and the state knows this) and that KC has made her debt whole. Then, he could have shut up and let JS do what he was already gonna do.

 

[wonders]

Casey's UNPOPULAR therefore she is in a corrupt justice system?

I don't know about anybody else but six hundred and something dollars is A LOT of money to me and I'm sure it was to Amy too. JB made it sound as if Casey pick a penny up off the ground after it fell out of Amy's pocket. What a slap in the face of anyone who has been stolen from.

 

[darnudes]

Did anyone else catch another " Casey tussle" over the microphone? There is whispering going on, I presume Casey to Baez, then the grab by Baez to remove the mic out of her reach, troubled looks by all parties then Lyons places her hand/arm very close to Casey to stop her from doing it again. I can't make out the whispering maybe someone else can.


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIpHhRe8f04&feature=sub[/ame]

at 6.11