2010.12.22 Prosecutors Call for Sanctions Against the Defense

[beach]

I bumped the only open Judge Perry thread:

What is Your Opinion of Judge Perry Now? - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Thanks nums!

JSR, since that is the only one, I say open a new one so the stats, history and info don't get lost in the mix of opinions.

 

[JSR]

Yeah and got his bachelors and masters degrees at Tuskegee Univ. about 30 miles from me down here in the deep south. Unlike Cali, we don't have any problems carrying the DP down here. lol

That my friend, is the truth. The South definitely follows through on the death penalty. Here in California getting death never means death. You're more likely to die of natural causes than for our state to actually execute you.

 

[JSR]

Thanks nums!

JSR, since that is the only one, I say open a new one so the stats, history and info don't get lost in the mix of opinions.

Ok will do. I just didn't want to open one and have it be a no-no. LOL. I still have a hard time searching on this thing.

 

[Lera213]

The "week" of December 27th. Not until the 27th.

ETA: That doesn't look right when I read it again... it sounded kinda snippy and that was not my intention. I'm so used to writing fragment sentences (screenplays). What I meant was that Judge Perry told the State and Defense that he would be on vacation the "week" of the 27th and that he had no plans to be in that courtroom that week.

Thank you and I didn't take it snippy at all.

 

[LolaMoon08]

I, and I completely agree with Beach, that Judge Perry will hit the defense with a hefty fine. I also agree that something happened during that deposition, that set JA off. It is my personal opinion that this witness came prepared for the deposition with their "written report." Maybe even referred to it as their "report." A report that JB said didn't exist therefore he could not turn it over per discovery rules.

I do have a question though... what if this witness had a written report? Would JA be able to ask him if JB had a copy of this report? Would he be able to ask how long JB has had this report? Would he be able to request, from the witness, a copy of the report at that moment?

 

[beach]

I, and I completely agree with Beach, that Judge Perry will hit the defense with a hefty fine. I also agree that something happened during that deposition, that set JA off. It is my personal opinion that this witness came prepared for the deposition with their "written report." Maybe even referred to it as their "report." A report that JB said didn't exist therefore he could not turn it over per discovery rules.

I do have a question though... what if this witness had a written report? Would JA be able to ask him if JB had a copy of this report? Would he be able to ask how long JB has had this report? Would he be able to request, from the witness, a copy of the report at that moment?

BBM

The scope of questioning allowed in depos is very broad. You can ask all kind of things (even things CA wouldn't think are "relevant" :innocent. So the answer to your first 2 questions are yes. #3 - If it were asked, I am sure JB would object and I don't really know if the witness would be required to personally produce it to the prosecution. (*paging AZ*)

I bet JA grilled Dr. Bock about the Sept. 2010 date of her report....er, "affidavit".

 

[nums24]

I would die of laughter if Judge Perry asks Baez "is there anything else?" and Baez replies "No, your honor. Happy New Year." Jose grabs his briefcase, ready to leave when JP says "Okay, I have this motion filed by Jeff Aston on (insert date) in my hands." LOL

I do think it is going to be held on January 3rd. I even think JB might be on his best behavior while they hear the first six (?) motions. I think his pen will be a-clickin' though.

At the end of this video report approximately 2:00 min mark, WFTV reports that the sanctions motion will be heard on January 3, 2011:

http://www.wftv.com/video/26303684/index.html

 

[AZlawyer]

I, and I completely agree with Beach, that Judge Perry will hit the defense with a hefty fine. I also agree that something happened during that deposition, that set JA off. It is my personal opinion that this witness came prepared for the deposition with their "written report." Maybe even referred to it as their "report." A report that JB said didn't exist therefore he could not turn it over per discovery rules.

I do have a question though... what if this witness had a written report? Would JA be able to ask him if JB had a copy of this report? Would he be able to ask how long JB has had this report? Would he be able to request, from the witness, a copy of the report at that moment?

BBM

The scope of questioning allowed in depos is very broad. You can ask all kind of things (even things CA wouldn't think are "relevant" :innocent. So the answer to your first 2 questions are yes. #3 - If it were asked, I am sure JB would object and I don't really know if the witness would be required to personally produce it to the prosecution. (*paging AZ*)

I bet JA grilled Dr. Bock about the Sept. 2010 date of her report....er, "affidavit".

I think all 3 questions would be appropriate in a depo and, because JB was already ordered to turn over any reports, if I were the SA I would demand a copy then and there before any changes might accidentally be made. :innocent:

 

[beach]

I think all 3 questions would be appropriate in a depo and, because JB was already ordered to turn over any reports, if I were the SA I would demand a copy then and there before any changes might accidentally be made. :innocent:

And that my respected friend is exactly why I paged you. :bowdown:

When you put it that way, I get it. Basically the witness would HAVE to produce it because...well, HHJP said to and he is the final word no matter WTH ya are.

 

[Blaise]

His future is pretty well set. he is now thanks to this case a "big name TV lawyer", at least enough so to market himself as such into the Spanish speaking community of central Florida.

And that is such a slap in the face of the Spanish speaking community of central Florida. And I think they're way smarter than that. Just because you share a common ethnicity doesn't mean you're required to embrace a fool.

Blace

 

[Just Jayla]

And that is such a slap in the face of the Spanish speaking community of central Florida. And I think they're way smarter than that. Just because you share a common ethnicity doesn't mean you're required to embrace a fool.

Blace

This post just reminded me of when JB said that Zenaida Gonzalez was as common a name as David Smith, in the latino community, dontcha know.

I took 8 years of Spanish into my college years, live in the DC metro area where there is a high Salvadorian/Peruvian population, used to work for a cleaning company and nearly all of our 1000 person staff were latino, have enjoyed many New York Puerto Rican entertainers....never heard of Zenaida. Probably heard the names David and Smith by the time I was 4.

On the white pages site, I found 10 Zenaida Gonzalez' in Miami-I found 32 David Smiths.
JB make me giggle.

 

[believe09]

So the hammer has dropped just where we speculated it would be. Caught.in.a.big.hairy.lie.

And this benefits ICA how? I mean, bad decision. Really bad. SA will undoubtedly have an official transcript of the prior hearings when JB states there are no reports.

oops. Hate being impeached with your own words.

 

[Aedrys]

So the hammer has dropped just where we speculated it would be. Caught.in.a.big.hairy.lie.

And this benefits ICA how? I mean, bad decision. Really bad. SA will undoubtedly have an official transcript of the prior hearings when JB states there are no reports.

oops. Hate being impeached with your own words.

Oh he'll find some way to make it not his fault. "But your honor, CM was there that day, and had his hearing aids turned off, and never heard the mail being delivered. He also can't anything without his glasses, forgot them at home, and so he probably thought the reports he tripped over on the floor at a much later time were junk mail and threw them away. And all the experts report to CM, and he can barely hear them with his bad hearing aids, so they might have told him they had reports, but he didn't hear them and so didn't tell me. What this boils down to is a conspiracy by the SA tog et my experts to prey upon a deaf and blind old man so that I don't get the reports I need! Not my fault, your honor!"

 

[believe09]

Shhhhh Aedrys-no playing for the other team. (JK)

You have a gift-you really do.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

Baez response: Just filed

Laughing so hard at this I have tears just streaming......

Hilarious! - and someone is quite the artist! :floorlaugh:

 

[faefrost]

And that is such a slap in the face of the Spanish speaking community of central Florida. And I think they're way smarter than that. Just because you share a common ethnicity doesn't mean you're required to embrace a fool.

Blace

I do not mean to imply that any ethnicity would behave in that way just because of their ethnicity. But there is a larger non english speaking population in that region, that will not be as informed or familiar with the case simply because of the language barrier. Yes the vast majority are smart enough to recognize JB for what he is. But he will still be able to farm quite a great deal of business from a sizable group that is not familiar with this case, but does have a non specific "name recognition" of JB as a famous TV lawyer. It's the psychology of marketing regardless of ethnicity and it is preying off some of the worst tendencies of all of us. It is how and why blatantly crooked politicians get re-elected time after time. The only reflection of ethnicity in this comes from JB himself. His Spanish heritage and Spanish Language skills are what will permit him to do this. If he was of Haitian decent and spoke french, that is the community he would be looking towards. the ability to flip languages from the one that the main news of the infamy is presented, declare 'I am one of you" and present himself as a famous TV person is what allows this. Ethnicity doesn't really matter beyond one must be in play for this "clever use of marketing" (scam) to work. As groups we are all that stupid, regardless of our racial or ethnic heritages. And we know JB is going to do it. He has pretty much all but told us so by declaring himself the most famous hispanic lawyer in Florida.

 

[nums24]

I came across this OLD article, but the comments from Mason seem so ironic right now:

The defense team said it believes the State Attorney's Office leaked information to the news media about a Florida Bar investigation of Baez. Mason said it's a rare request that will be tough to prove.

"I view it more as an effort to harass the prosecution team," Mason said. "If that's the case, they're wasting their time."

Mason said he thinks the will side with the defense on a motion asking for access to the crime scene where Caylee's remains were found. But Mason said he believes it will likely be a win for prosecutors to force Baez to redo his potential witness list, which is virtually a carbon copy of the state's list.

"They listed three, but said the defense includes the state's witness list," Mason said. "That's not good enough."

http://www.wesh.com/r/18596486/detail.html

 

[nums24]

Per the hearing notice, this motion will not be heard on Monday:

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26331400/detail.html

 

[RR0004]

Per the hearing notice, this motion will not be heard on Monday:

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26331400/detail.html

Perhaps not in open court?
The State needs this info yesterday, IMO.

ETA: I see that Mr. Kronk made it in (#3).

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Didn't Judge Perry give the defense until December 23rd to hear the Kronk motion? I clearly remember him saying that.

Also, the list provided by the defense (http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26331400/detail.html) includes any number of motions that will require Frye hearings (decomp odor, canines, root decomp (which we don't have) and so on. I know the Frye hearings are much more complex and don't they require some expert testimony?

Also, Mason may WANT to have all these motions covered in Monday's hearing, but I don't see that happening at all. Judge Perry is the one who makes that decision. I would be surprised if he didn't take up the State's motion for sanctions.

Sounds like Monday will be a grab-bag as far as which motions will be covered.