2010.04.29 Motion to Seal Casey's Jail Logs. Why?

[jerseygirl48]

Do you think it's possible that a line in the sand can be drawn as follows:

-- If the case is discussed, tape released (perhaps with an exclusion for minors and parents/guardians)
-- If the case is not discussed, tape not released

I have no sympathy whatsoever for ICA or her miserable excuse for parents, but the line from Bent that affected me said something along the lines of "these people have not yet been convicted of crimes.". That sort of forced me to look at things differently, even though I don't want to.

If they do draw a line in the sand (admittedly wishful thinking on my part vs. a complete blackout), we'd probably get the tapes. CA would have no chance of keeping quiet about the case!

My other fear is if this case holds, what impact might the previous releases have??

 

[Dear Prudence]

I am not exactly sure it has been positively identified as Esther Kim with Harper as the visitor of KC, although....

Esther Kim spent almost 2 hours with KC at the jail on July 6, 2009.

She was accompanied by Andrea Lyon who has ties to Harper Collins.

Also present was Benjamin Davis, Director of Media Relations for VCorp.

Perhaps AL could have flown in an atty from San Francisco, an MD from San Diego, or a professor from Ohio State but why would Benjamin Davis be present?

Unless, of course, Benjamin was there to try Viagra and Esther Kim the salesperson was going to report findings....never mind, not going to go there!:dance:

LOL! That was funny. Thanks for the laugh.

I didn't mean to imply any of those others were the person that visited but rather that Kim is a common surname and was wondering how it was verified that was the Kim that works for Harpers. Davis is a common name also.

So from your answer it's a reasonable presumption being made.

 

[beach]

Finally, there's no mention of restricting public access to jail visit videos or telephone recordings at all, which would be supported by Bent! Maybe JB didn't want to make that motion because he might win it...and then how would he explain the fact that the As STILL didn't want to visit or call their Princess?

*snipped*

Amazing. Although, I don't think Baez wants them visiting or talking privately either. They ALL talk too much and none of them can be trusted. Even he knows that much.


In re. this motion - I saw this coming a couple of weeks ago when Richard Hornsby posted it on his blog. The defense can thank him for this little gem. They would have NEVER discovered that new case law on their own. Not a chance.

 

[Aedrys]

I just find it highly ironic that an adult accused of killing a minor and throwing said minor's body away like trash is now using a court case that involves protecting the jail logs and such of minors and is trying to apply it to her adult case to try and block her jail logs and such. What level will she and her defense not stoop to in this case? Or should I really not be asking that?

I just couldn't believe it. Do they really think if they keep asking in different ways, they're going to get a different answer? I can't wait for HHJP to give them a big, fat NO, and DO NOT ASK AGAIN to them (I can dream on that last part, okay?)!

 

[Aedrys]

*snipped*

Amazing. Although, I don't think Baez wants them visiting or talking privately either. They ALL talk too much and none of them can be trusted. Even he knows that much.


In re. this motion - I saw this coming a couple of weeks ago when Richard Hornsby posted it on his blog. The defense can thank him for this little gem. They would have NEVER discovered that new case law on their own. Not a chance.

I keep waiting for Hornsby's name to be added as part of the defense...geez, man, stop helping them!

 

[Dear Prudence]

I just find it highly ironic that an adult accused of killing a minor and throwing said minor's body away like trash is now using a court case that involves protecting the jail logs and such of minors and is trying to apply it to her adult case to try and block her jail logs and such. What level will she and her defense not stoop to in this case? Or should I really not be asking that?

I just couldn't believe it. Do they really think if they keep asking in different ways, they're going to get a different answer? I can't wait for HHJP to give them a big, fat NO, and DO NOT ASK AGAIN to them (I can dream on that last part, okay?)!

I don't see any irony at all regarding the referenced minors. The Bent ruling pertains to the case of Matthew Bent and Jesus Mendez, minors being tried as adults for attempted murder for dousing a boy with rubbing alcohol and setting him fire. Pretty brutal.

What is ironic is that the Bent ruling pertains to their recorded telephone calls being released to the public, not jail visitation logs. Baez is using this ruling to try to get the jail logs ruled as not public records when he really should use it to keep the recordings of visits and phone calls private.

 

[Gnatcatcher]

Do you think it's possible that a line in the sand can be drawn as follows:

-- If the case is discussed, tape released (perhaps with an exclusion for minors and parents/guardians)
-- If the case is not discussed, tape not released

I have no sympathy whatsoever for ICA or her miserable excuse for parents, but the line from Bent that affected me said something along the lines of "these people have not yet been convicted of crimes.". That sort of forced me to look at things differently, even though I don't want to.

If they do draw a line in the sand (admittedly wishful thinking on my part vs. a complete blackout), we'd probably get the tapes. CA would have no chance of keeping quiet about the case!

My other fear is if this case holds, what impact might the previous releases have??

I'm inclined to think that anything at all they talk about is relevant to the case. For example, when Cindy said "dad got a flat tire" and Case responded with glee "Guess what? That happened to ME!", it speaks to her character, which is totally relevant. I can't think of any one particular phrase that doesn't apply somehow to her state of mind, except maybe that she ate baloney and coleslaw and she doesn't do grits, maybe that.

 

[sleutherontheside]

While under Florida's liberal public records laws the phone calls and visits are available by request, I have to look at the issue from an appeals standpoint.

Aside from JB filing a motion to seal as opposed to filing a motion that offers a "reason" to grant his requests......I consider the implications of KC feeling like she "can't" talk to her family a factor in preparing for mitigation.

I would anticipate an appeal effort being made based upon "hampered mitigation preparation" (my own words).

While family visits could yield some information, releasing the visits and calls to the general public is not a priority. If LE has no issue with what is discussed in possible visits then the public should feel secure knowing that she is in fact being watched.

While wildly entertaining to some, KC's bean dip is really not important. As far as visitors.....I am on the fence. as far as family visits and calls.....I think it best to allow some privacy in the interest of preserving mitigation prep in her case. The alternative just isn't worth the risk.

 

[butterfly1978]

I have to wonder if what Baez real motive for filing this motion is. Maybe it is to see if he can actually win it and if so, have his conversation with Robin thrown out if its brought up

 

[faefrost]

I'm inclined to think that anything at all they talk about is relevant to the case. For example, when Cindy said "dad got a flat tire" and Case responded with glee "Guess what? That happened to ME!", it speaks to her character, which is totally relevant. I can't think of any one particular phrase that doesn't apply somehow to her state of mind, except maybe that she ate baloney and coleslaw and she doesn't do grits, maybe that.

It may be or it may not be. But what Bent seems to say is that the news media and the general public does not have a blanket interest in everything they say. The tapes still exist. The SA may still review them, and if the SA decides they have evidentiary value, then they become public record as part of the SA's document dumps and Sunshine Law releases. So we would still eventually get the conversations with "she's close" or the callusness of only wanting Tony's phone #. But we may not hear the stuff about the chile party, etc.

 

[countzero]

You all do realize that the horse left this barn years ago. Far too late to make frivilous attempts to close it. So what if the logs are closed to the public. We all are fully aware of JBs history of being a media grabber and he cannot resist the opportunity to notify them at the slightest moment to break some "huge waste of an announcement ". Whether we read it from any jail released log or by way of JBs blabbering, we will know. We will know by any further motions he files. JB just wants to be the first to shout it out and feel important. Whatever JB. We will know.

 

[The World According]

OK, it appears that Baez is requesting (1) that the jail visitor logs be sealed, pursuant to the Bent opinion, and (2) that the commissary records, telephone logs and visitor logs be "not subject to public records disclosure" because they are private.

I don't see how Bent supports the argument about the visitor logs, and it looks like Baez isn't even arguing that Bent prevents the release of commissary records or telephone logs. He's just rehashing the "privacy" argument already rejected by HHJP.

Finally, there's no mention of restricting public access to jail visit videos or telephone recordings at all, which would be supported by Bent! Maybe JB didn't want to make that motion because he might win it...and then how would he explain the fact that the As STILL didn't want to visit or call their Princess?

Wrong on the facts, wrong on the law. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6_1Pw1xm9U[/ame]

Thank you for all you do here friend!

 

[beach]

I keep waiting for Hornsby's name to be added as part of the defense...geez, man, stop helping them!

He knows FL criminal law and it is obvious he has done more research than Baez or Mason regarding this case. And he isn't costing the taxpayers a dime.


There really is no excuse. I've used both Westlaw and LexisNexis, but primarily Westlaw. If you are intent on challenging a law (like Baez has been about the Sunshine Laws et al), you can *flag* that particular law and Westlaw notifies you anytime a ruling comes down that affects the law negatively. They will email you - believe me! (I won't call it spam, but Westlaw loves email. lol) I'm sure Lexis has a similar feature. If they had flagged those laws, they would've known about Bent.

 

[diz39]

He knows FL criminal law and it is obvious he has done more research than Baez or Mason regarding this case. And he isn't costing the taxpayers a dime.


There really is no excuse. I've used both Westlaw and LexisNexis, but primarily Westlaw. If you are intent on challenging a law (like Baez has been about the Sunshine Laws et al), you can *flag* that particular law and Westlaw notifies you anytime a ruling comes down that affects the law negatively. They will email you - believe me! (I won't call it spam, but Westlaw loves email. lol) I'm sure Lexis has a similar feature. If they had flagged those laws, they would known about Bent.

Flagging a law that could work towards his clients advantage for changes seems lower on the priority list for JB than say an appearance on JVM. But, hey, what do I know? MOO

 

[zoey]

Flagging a law that could work towards his clients advantage for changes seems lower on the priority list for JB than say an appearance on JVM. But, hey, what do I know? MOO

didn't jb once work for lexes?? One would think that he would know this little item.....but then again that might require something----I truly don't think he is used to doing things on his own....needs a push or something right in his face. (generally a camera is best) But what do I know! Thinking back to him stating no one was really all that computer savvy--they should have hired a teenager to get them warmed up....(works for me!)---

Scary what he doesn't do and scary what he does do......where or where is the Perry Mason handbook.....:waitasec::furious:

 

[The World According]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJSelSDYgRg[/ame]

July 29, 2008 Two and a half ears ago the judge denied the defense request to stop releasing the jail visit tapes.


Baez, "My client IS cooperating. I really believe this child is alive".
Florida prosecutor Stacie Honowitz, " Such inconsistent statements, her working , the babysitter, her leaving the child with the babysitter.....everything she said has been proven to be a lie, she gave false leads to police. Cooperating means telling the truth, so no she is NOT cooperating."

 

[Horace Finklestein]

didn't jb once work for lexes?? One would think that he would know this little item.....but then again that might require something----I truly don't think he is used to doing things on his own....needs a push or something right in his face. (generally a camera is best) But what do I know! Thinking back to him stating no one was really all that computer savvy--they should have hired a teenager to get them warmed up....(works for me!)---

Scary what he doesn't do and scary what he does do......where or where is the Perry Mason handbook.....:waitasec::furious:

Oh YEAH! He said he instructed judges on how to use lexis nexis or some such nonsense.

 

[beach]

Oh YEAH! He said he instructed judges on how to use lexis nexis or some such nonsense.

Oh my. :shakehead: *shudder*

Considering that Baez himself cited bad case law supporting an earlier argument in one of his motions, that thought is downright frightening. He obviously isn't familiar with the basics of KeyCite or Sheparding a case to make sure the law he is citing is still good law. It is so simple - all you do is type the citation into the search engine and *voila* the case appears! A red flag icon appears if the law is no longer good law. A yellow flag appears if there has been SOME negative history. (And we all know how much JB loves his color coded graphs ) The SA DID do that and was able to use the same case (since it had been overturned) to support their position.


Well, for any judges or anyone else that was a student of his, both Westlaw & Lexis have some excellent tutorials that teach you everything you could ever want to know about how to navigate their software. There really isn't any need for a JB tutor. :angel:

 

[Numbers]

Oh my. :shakehead: *shudder*

Considering that Baez himself cited bad case law supporting an earlier argument in one of his motions, that thought is downright frightening. He obviously isn't familiar with the basics of KeyCite or Sheparding a case to make sure the law he is citing is still good law. It is so simple - all you do is type the citation into the search engine and *voila* the case appears! A red flag icon appears if the law is no longer good law. A yellow flag appears if there has been SOME negative history. (And we all know how much JB loves his color coded graphs ) The SA DID do that and was able to use the same case (since it had been overturned) to support their position.


Well, for any judges or anyone else that was a student of his, both Westlaw & Lexis have some excellent tutorials that teach you everything you could ever want to know about how to navigate their software. There really isn't any need for a JB tutor. :angel:

In Josespeak, "teaching judges" equates to "glorified salesman."

 

[Dear Prudence]

In Josespeak, "teaching judges" equates to "glorified salesman."

:clap: yes, and didn't Jose assign KC law research so she could "teach" her boys?