2010.07.09 - Evidence List for Inspection

[RR0004]

Oh, they can ask for whatever they want - doesn't mean they'll get it! As Judge Perry is fond of saying....

I do seem to vaguely recall them talking about some experts from overseas during that JAC hearing. I'd be REALLY interested in seeing the invoices that they've submitted to the JAC so far.

Does everything have to be decided in open court? Could they have made the request without our knowledge?

 

[RainyGirl]

After watching the Cheney interview, I get the succinct impression that they don't want to talk about Henry Lee. lol

bbm. In the legal circles I travel in, Henry Lee's name and reputation are MUD. I understand and respect that other individuals still believe in him (read: BAEZ), but I'm just stating my opinion and experience. He's kinda considered an "untouchable" as far as scientific experts go.

JMO....

 

[ThinkTank]

Originally Posted by Muzikman View Post
Ya know, it's REALLY hard to tell from their notices. Both the amendments - with a different address to do them at - and the cancellations were filed the same day.

Maybe one lawyer filed the amendment, the other lawyer filed the cancellation?

Here they are:
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/46886388...t-Cancellation

It is confusing. Cheney Mason drafted both amended Notices (changing locations) AND the Notices of Cancellation. ALL docs were signed on July 7th, but the only ones file-stamped are the Notices of Cancellation and they weren't filed until Friday, July 9th at 4:53pm. :innocent:

It appears to me they have been cancelled, but I can't tell for sure.

You have to put the Notices of depositions side by side.
The Notice filed on June 28, 2010 is exactly the same as the Amended Notice filed July 7, 2010, except for the LOCATION/Address where the deposition will be taken.

The Cancellation is to cancel the Notices filed June 28, 2010, because that is no longer accurate.
The Amended Notice shows the deposition of the same people, on the same date, at the same time - only in a different location.

 

[Muzikman]

Does everything have to be decided in open court? Could they have made the request without our knowledge?

Not totally sure. I believe everything has to be public in some form, written or oral, since they're getting public money.

 

[whiteangora]

Just watched Cheney's responses to Kathi Belich's questions. Why does a 5 year old's temper tantrum come to mind?

In my opinion all charm (if any) Cheney ever possessed is gone. When he took on this case he knew the media came with the territory. I think he is quickly realizing this case isn't "fun" anymore, and regardless of their bluster, he is on a losing team. Someone's a little tense!

JMO.

He sure has a lot of nerve calling Kathi B and her boss "stupid".
I think he should watch some of his past interviews where he was so uninformed about the case it was pathetic and painful to listen to.

 

[LambChop]

According to KB, the taxpayers are footing the bill. I bet it's really necessary to have those experts from the Netherlands! Wonder what happens when none of the experts tells Baez what he wants to hear. KB was on fire today - stating that the video of the defense going over evidence will be made public and it just made their motion (which is unutterably redundant) look even sillier. Mason should be ashamed for the way he acted toward her. Not one ounce of class in that man. He could have politely said "no comment". Sad.

I know, snort, snort.....he tells her she should be doing her job....I think she was....what a baby. Good lord they were acting like they have something to hide, it's none of the media's business???? Not for the public to know. Does JB think the public is stupid, look at the list of experts and what they do and you can tell what they are looking at. JB says they don't want the public to know and then tells everyone they'll be looking at the car....okay, glad JB said that because I certainly would have never guessed that........

jmo

 

[beach]

Wow, I just watched the WFTV video of Cheney being a complete . TOTALLY unprofessional. I would never hire him!

http://www.wftv.com/video/24243769/index.html

OMG...I knew he was a jerk, but..... unbelievable.

I did think it was hilarious that he was trapped and no one would open that darn door so he could escape KB. :rolling:

 

[ThinkTank]

Originally Posted by Muzikman View Post
Ya know, it's REALLY hard to tell from their notices. Both the amendments - with a different address to do them at - and the cancellations were filed the same day.

Maybe one lawyer filed the amendment, the other lawyer filed the cancellation?

Here they are:
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/46886388...t-Cancellation



You have to put the Notices of depositions side by side.
The Notice filed on June 28, 2010 is exactly the same as the Amended Notice filed July 7, 2010, except for the LOCATION/Address where the deposition will be taken.

The Cancellation is to cancel the Notices filed June 28, 2010, because that is no longer accurate.
The Amended Notice shows the deposition of the same people, on the same date, at the same time - only in a different location.

Muzikman question .... is there a DATE STAMP on the AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION?

We need to see if the Cancellation was filed before the Amended (both filed on the same day).

If the Amended was filed first ... then it looks like Mason filed the Amended to show the new LOCATION for the depositions, but then immediately cancelled the depositions completely??

There is a date of July 9, 2010 and time of 4:53 on the Cancellation Notices.
Can you find out the Date and time stamp on the Amended Notices?

 

[beach]

Originally Posted by Muzikman View Post
Ya know, it's REALLY hard to tell from their notices. Both the amendments - with a different address to do them at - and the cancellations were filed the same day.

Maybe one lawyer filed the amendment, the other lawyer filed the cancellation?

Here they are:
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/46886388...t-Cancellation



You have to put the Notices of depositions side by side.
The Notice filed on June 28, 2010 is exactly the same as the Amended Notice filed July 7, 2010, except for the LOCATION/Address where the deposition will be taken.

The Cancellation is to cancel the Notices filed June 28, 2010, because that is no longer accurate.
The Amended Notice shows the deposition of the same people, on the same date, at the same time - only in a different location.

I get what you're saying, but I am still confused. If all they wanted to do was change the location, all they needed to do was file an amended notice with the new location information and make sure all parties are served. (At least that is all that is required in the jurisdiction where I am.) No need to file a notice of cancellation, unless they were really cancelled.

I guess time will tell. I would think the media would be reporting on it. :waitasec:

 

[ThinkTank]

I get what you're saying, but I am still confused. If all they wanted to do was change the location, all they needed to do was file an amended notice with the new location information and make sure all parties are served. (At least that is all that is required in the jurisdiction where I am.) No need to file a notice of cancellation, unless they were really cancelled.

I guess time will tell. I would think the media would be reporting on it. :waitasec:

You are right. I see now.
It does look like the depositions were cancelled completely.
We need to see the DATE/TIME stamp from the Clerk's office on the Amended Notices, to see if the Amended was filed before, or after, the Cancellation Notices.

 

[joypath]

bbm. In the legal circles I travel in, Henry Lee's name and reputation are MUD. I understand and respect that other individuals still believe in him (read: BAEZ), but I'm just stating my opinion and experience. He's kinda considered an "untouchable" as far as scientific experts go.

JMO....

And.....add that there are some circles with scientific "types" avoiding collision courses with said individual, practicing cordial behaviors but Titanic avoidance protocols! Now this in no way diminishes the amazing cult background and popularity that his lectures garner during the story telling hour, the historical feats of TEAM accomplishments are significant and can NOT be denied but they ARE TEAM WORK based! (Ahem, rather like MOST of forensic science!) and as RainyGirl so aptly stated, the preceding statements are my feeble FEMALE (a frequent negative issue with said individual of record referenced above!), humble opinions.

 

[Muzikman]

Muzikman question .... is there a DATE STAMP on the AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION?

We need to see if the Cancellation was filed before the Amended (both filed on the same day).

If the Amended was filed first ... then it looks like Mason filed the Amended to show the new LOCATION for the depositions, but then immediately cancelled the depositions completely??

There is a date of July 9, 2010 and time of 4:53 on the Cancellation Notices.
Can you find out the Date and time stamp on the Amended Notices?

No date stamp on the copy that was printed out for me. It's possible that they could have been scanned before they stamped it, I guess.

I also recall, when looking in the actual file, that there was an envelope from Cheney's office. I believe that 2 of these notices were MAILED, while the other 2 were dropped off. Not sure about that, they could have all been mailed.

 

[beach]

You are right. I see now.
It does look like the depositions were cancelled completely.
We need to see the DATE/TIME stamp from the Clerk's office on the Amended Notices, to see if the Amended was filed before, or after, the Cancellation Notices.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I sure don't know that I am 'right'. I am just talking out loud & speaking from my own experience.

The whole thing is strange. And my opinion may be colored a tad because I don't trust Cheney Mason as far as I can throw him. :innocent:

 

[ThinkTank]

No date stamp on the copy that was printed out for me. It's possible that they could have been scanned before they stamped it, I guess.

I also recall, when looking in the actual file, that there was an envelope from Cheney's office. I believe that 2 of these notices were MAILED, while the other 2 were dropped off. Not sure about that, they could have all been mailed.

Thank you MM!
OK, I'm gonna email Kathi B and see if she can find out if the depositions were cancelled or not?

 

[Omachka]

A little late, but here is Judge Perry's order concerning the appointment of a special magistrate for the inspection. I don't think it was published, it is A good read!

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/4688688...mergency-Motion-to-Appoint-Special-Magistrate

Thanks for putting that up for us MM. What would we do without you? I see in the order that the state and defense will review the tapes before they can be released to see if anything needs to be redacted. I'll bet :twocents: that the defense will want to redact the entirety of the tape because the media might horn in on their circus...er I mean take it out of context and lower the chances of his client having a fair trial.

 

[beach]

This defense motion to keep the list of evidence secret is idiotic. If HHJP grants it he gets minus 5 points in my book.

Apparently, the defense team is upset that the news media is going to videotape experts and lawyers going in and out of the building to inspect evidence, and then will speculate wildly about what evidence is being inspected. Therefore, the defense wants to ensure that the news media does not get any ACTUAL information about what evidence is being inspected, because that would result in the media's reporting being more...um...accurate, which would be...um...bad? Right? :waitasec:

LMAO! I just read this motion. haha! ITA with your thoughts, AZ.


Mason devotes paragraphs 6 - 10 to bashing the news media and "John Q. Public", including the Floridian taxpayers funding these circus ringleaders. And then FAILS TO INCLUDE THE MEDIA ON THE PROOF OF SERVICE! What a joke of a motion! This in a state that embraces the Sunshine Laws and the public's 'right to know'.


I can't help but believe that part of Cheney Mason's motive for this ridiculous pleading is self-serving. HE has been criticized so heavily for his complete lack of knowledge of the facts and evidence of this case. The man is embarrassed and does not want HIMSELF subjected to public scrutiny, IMO.


I'll have to be peeled off the floor if HHJP grants this. Like AZ so succintly opined above - it serves no purpose and his argument makes zero sense.

 

[sleutherontheside]

A google search of Richard and Selma-Schieveld-Eikelenboom and twitter offers this.......

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=http://maurice.ooip.nl/2007/03/23/schaamteloos/&ei=Vxg9TOWTPIOB8gaMofWmBg&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CC0Q7gEwBg&prev=/search%3Fq%3DRichard%2Band%2BSelma%2BSchieveld-Eikelenboom%2Band%2Btwitter%26hl%3Den

a snip....

Greepsporen Handle Tracks
Spores produced by intense single-handle (usually short) contact of a person with a (rough) object, or with the body of another person.
Examples grip marks on fasteners such as ropes and torn pieces of tape. Usually deliver sufficient cellular material to grip track to leave it with current technology, a comparative DNA analysis to obtain suitable DNA profile.
Also forcibly broken garments and drawn to places on the body of a victim that indicate strangulation or other violent physical contact can handle traces are found. In practice, the alleged grip tracks have been secured from clothing and / or bodies of victims often a DNA profile is obtained equal to that of the victim. Only in some cases, DNA characteristics of another person to observe.

This page was translated from Dutch to English.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Testimony Abstract regarding Richard Eikelenboom in the Masters case.
http://www.uis.edu/innocenceproject/events/touchdna/documents/RichardEikelenboomtestimonyabstract.pdf

page 3 and 4 where it discusses the BACK of boots if 2 people carried a body.

page 5 where it discusses low copy DNA ,the FBI not doing the extra 6 cycles.

If you go to this link.... http://pendulumfoundation.com/newsletter2/?p=70 and read about the Masters case you can't help but notice some of the same legal maneuvering that we have seen in KC's case.

 

[christee]

Ya know, it's REALLY hard to tell from their notices. Both the amendments - with a different address to do them at - and the cancellations were filed the same day.

Maybe one lawyer filed the amendment, the other lawyer filed the cancellation?

Here they are:
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/46886388/07092010-Defense-Depo-Amendment-Cancellation

I live abt 30 mins from Knoxville but I didn't catch anything on our local news about the depos.

 

[countzero]

A google search of Richard and Selma-Schieveld-Eikelenboom and twitter offers this.......

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=http://maurice.ooip.nl/2007/03/23/schaamteloos/&ei=Vxg9TOWTPIOB8gaMofWmBg&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CC0Q7gEwBg&prev=/search%3Fq%3DRichard%2Band%2BSelma%2BSchieveld-Eikelenboom%2Band%2Btwitter%26hl%3Den

a snip....

Greepsporen Handle Tracks
Spores produced by intense single-handle (usually short) contact of a person with a (rough) object, or with the body of another person.
Examples grip marks on fasteners such as ropes and torn pieces of tape. Usually deliver sufficient cellular material to grip track to leave it with current technology, a comparative DNA analysis to obtain suitable DNA profile.
Also forcibly broken garments and drawn to places on the body of a victim that indicate strangulation or other violent physical contact can handle traces are found. In practice, the alleged grip tracks have been secured from clothing and / or bodies of victims often a DNA profile is obtained equal to that of the victim. Only in some cases, DNA characteristics of another person to observe.

This page was translated from Dutch to English.

Well now, this is all fine and dandy IF it's accepted science here in the states and the testing was done with similar conditions Caylee was subjected to and found in. But if they are attempting to compare found dried DNA samples to materials NOT found with DNA, then I cannot see how their forensics is usable. I am not saying they will test Caylees evidence. I do understand they cannot. just previous testing done to come up with their stated results.

It's like comparing apples to oranges. Or am I misunderstanding what they are saying. (Not the first time I've had to have something explained to me more than once to get it.)