2010.12.21 Stream of Motions - General Discussion

[RR0004]

I have to say that after reading Baez's motion to strike the motion to Show Cause I have joined the ranks of the confused.

 

[Sun]

I have to say that after reading Baez's motion to strike the motion to Show Cause I have joined the ranks of the confused.

I'm feeling the need to use a lifeline too. I'm experiencing a high degree of confusion in trying to make some sense out of that 32 page doc that Baez filed. Can one legally file a Notice of Objection as an attachment to a Motion?

 

[Scamperoo]

Is that even allowed??

What planet is this guy on... Buckle up tomorrow is gonna be full of hubris, grousing, and humiliation. I have to say I think JB may well have an ulterior motive...cos, no one can be this imbecilic. I'm sure CM is aware of everything JB does and gives the "Okay" to carry on this farce, which is another thing that has me wondering.

 

[NoNameLeft]

On the email correspondence about the Frye hearings, I noticed Baez cc'd Ms. Sims when he mailed Mr. Ashton his 'Notice of objection'. He probably called her for advice before writing it. I wonder if it means she will be present during the Frye hearings later this month.

Motion to Strike the State of Florida's Motion For Rule To Show Cause page 26

 

[LolaMoon08]

Is Judge Perry going to rule on these tomorrow and Thursday, during the hearings or will he want to take time to think about it? I don't know if I can make it through the weekend not knowing?

 

[magiemay]

ok here is the link with all 32 pages !! A must read

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...,2246763.story

 

[angeldust]

magiemay the link doesnt seem to be working

 

[nums24]

magiemay the link doesnt seem to be working

This is the OS article with working link: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-casey-anthony-important-hearing-20110301,0,2246763.story


This is the 32 page motion referenced in that article:

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...of Floridas Motion For Rule To Show Cause.pdf

 

[Sun]

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi... For Mot. Hearings Beginning on March 2nd.pdf

In Baez's Defense Witness List and Evidence Schedule for Motions Hearing he has listed quite a few people that he will be using as witnesses that are NOT on the defense witness list. And, six people that are not on either the defense or State witness lists. How is it possible that Baez would be allowed to call any of these six witnesses to testify when they are not on the defense witness list (and not on the State's list either)?

Gabriel Adam
Deanne Adams
Jose Baez
LDB
Cindy Corrado
Cheney Mason

 

[faefrost]

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi... For Mot. Hearings Beginning on March 2nd.pdf

In Baez's Defense Witness List and Evidence Schedule for Motions Hearing he has listed quite a few people that he will be using as witnesses that are NOT on the defense witness list. And, six people that are not on either the defense or State witness lists. How is it possible that Baez would be allowed to call any of these six witnesses to testify when they are not on the defense witness list (and not on the State's list either)?

Gabriel Adam
Deanne Adams
Jose Baez
LDB
Cindy Corrado
Cheney Mason

Ummm LDB? Is he allowed to call opposing council? I kinda sorta thought that that sort of thing was rather highly frowned upon? :waitasec:

Abd the thought of him calling himself as a witness brings to mind the insanity that was the Colin Fergusson "Long Island Railroad Gunman" case from the 90's where "Mr. Fergusson" a truly deranged individual, chose to represent himself in a mass murder trial, and then proceeded to call himself and question himself on the stand. It was a truly surreal court moment to watch, and yet I still think the deranged crazy person might have had a greater grasp on the law and courtroom professionalism than JB.

 

[AZlawyer]

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi... For Mot. Hearings Beginning on March 2nd.pdf

In Baez's Defense Witness List and Evidence Schedule for Motions Hearing he has listed quite a few people that he will be using as witnesses that are NOT on the defense witness list. And, six people that are not on either the defense or State witness lists. How is it possible that Baez would be allowed to call any of these six witnesses to testify when they are not on the defense witness list (and not on the State's list either)?

Gabriel Adam
Deanne Adams
Jose Baez
LDB
Cindy Corrado
Cheney Mason

The witness list for trial and the witness list for this hearing are separate.

Ummm LDB? Is he allowed to call opposing council? I kinda sorta thought that that sort of thing was rather highly frowned upon? :waitasec:

Abd the thought of him calling himself as a witness brings to mind the insanity that was the Colin Fergusson "Long Island Railroad Gunman" case from the 90's where "Mr. Fergusson" a truly deranged individual, chose to represent himself in a mass murder trial, and then proceeded to call himself and question himself on the stand. It was a truly surreal court moment to watch, and yet I still think the deranged crazy person might have had a greater grasp on the law and courtroom professionalism than JB.

You can call counsel as witnesses if they have information relevant to the motions in question.

 

[ynotdivein]

I have to say that after reading Baez's motion to strike the motion to Show Cause I have joined the ranks of the confused.

Ah, then RR, you need to wait until Friday after the hearings are done, and then file a complaint explaining that you became confused while reading the Motion to Show Cause; you failed to report said confusion because you did not understand the TOS; and you blame said confusion on the participants in this forum collectively and individually, as well as on Tricia and CJBP. Please do not spell check your complaint, and do include a minimum of 1 grammatically incorrect sentence per page.

(Is it tomorrow yet?)

 

[faefrost]

Ah, then RR, you need to wait until Friday after the hearings are done, and then file a complaint explaining that you became confused while reading the Motion to Show Cause, you failed to report said confusion because you did not understand the TOS, and you blame said confusion on the participants in this forum collectively and individually, as well as on Tricia and CJBP. Please do not spell check your complaint and include a minimum of 1 grammatically incorrect sentence per page.

(Is it tomorrow yet?)

well played :laughcry:

 

[Itsy]

Ah, then RR, you need to wait until Friday after the hearings are done, and then file a complaint explaining that you became confused while reading the Motion to Show Cause, you failed to report said confusion because you did not understand the TOS, and you blame said confusion on the participants in this forum collectively and individually, as well as on Tricia and CJBP. Please do not spell check your complaint and include a minimum of 1 grammatically incorrect sentence per page.

(Is it tomorrow yet?)

Don't forget the run on sentences and the ones that aren't even close to sentences at all! :floorlaugh:

 

[RR0004]

Ah, then RR, you need to wait until Friday after the hearings are done, and then file a complaint explaining that you became confused while reading the Motion to Show Cause; you failed to report said confusion because you did not understand the TOS; and you blame said confusion on the participants in this forum collectively and individually, as well as on Tricia and CJBP. Please do not spell check your complaint, and do include a minimum of 1 grammatically incorrect sentence per page.

(Is it tomorrow yet?)

Even thinking about Jose's motions hurt my head.
And DANG! I can't get the remote to dvr tomorrow's hearing. Of all times for this to happen!!

 

[ynotdivein]

LOL you inspired me to go back and grammar-check my own post! Undercuts the grammar-snob snark when one uses run-on sentences oneself.

Itsy dear I hope your snurfles resolve for tomorrow.

ETA: RR, is your DVR full? I had to delete some things to get mine to cooperate.

 

[Itsy]

LOL you inspired me to go back and grammar-check my own post! Undercuts the grammar-snob snark when one uses run-on sentences oneself.

Itsy dear I hope your snurfles resolve for tomorrow.

ETA: RR, is your DVR full? I had to delete some things to get mine to cooperate.

Well now, YOU are NOT writing a motion here, are you?! :floorlaugh:

Everyday mistakes can be forgiven (I even make them myself), and I don't feel it's nice to correct anyone's errors on a forum/blog. But we're talking about a lawyer filing an official document with the court and that's....different! :crazy:

TY for the "get well" - I'm glad it's just a mild cold and not the flu, or I'd not be able to sit at the computer & run to the TV every few minutes, LOL

 

[RR0004]

LOL you inspired me to go back and grammar-check my own post! Undercuts the grammar-snob snark when one uses run-on sentences oneself.

Itsy dear I hope your snurfles resolve for tomorrow.

ETA: RR, is your DVR full? I had to delete some things to get mine to cooperate.

I can't even get to that to check...ooh...think I'll try something.

BBL

ETA: nope...need a new remote!

 

[ynotdivein]

Itsy, if we can be conscientious about our slip ups in such a casual/public forum as this NLB's haven--well, we might be forgiven for expecting actual attorneys filing public legal documents to display some similar level of conscientiousness, yes?

Perhaps even an elevated level of formality and care.

Perhaps.

Slightly OT--it is now "tomorrow" in my time zone and I'm restraining myself with some difficulty from starting a Hearing Thread... Lord only knows what we will be witness to over the next two days. Do we think JB realizes that this is essentially a dress rehearsal for him? Think he's nervous? Think he's slumbering blissfully? Snoring, even?

 

[Itsy]

Ynot, you'd think so, huh? Alas......

I'm quite sure he's not the only lawyer in the world that's made mistakes in their filings, but I'll bet he's in the top three percentile of those that make this many! IMHO, of course.