Yes, Baez speculated. His testimony sucked. He should have known A, B and C a year ago. Etc. But in keeping the "big picture" in mind (which includes the inevitable appeals of what I HOPE will be a conviction of Casey), my overall thoughts are:
We can analyze the sufficiency of Baez's subpoena, it's breadth, it's legality and more generally whether he sucks as a lawyer (he's not brilliant - he's a local yokel who hangs at the jail to get clients). And on that basis decide whether his motion, as drafted, should be denied. It's fun to analyze all this and heck, that's what WebSleuths is for. But in the grand scheme of things, all it means is that appellate lawyers will agree with us and say "Yeah, that subpoena and motion totally sucked" and "WebSleuthers were right - Baez's response (he accused JJ of pointing to a map) was lame", etc. They'll argue ineffective assistance of counsel. They will say a crucial part of the defense was the question of how long the body was at the Suburban Drive spot and, through Baez's screw-ups, the question was never fully explored. Baez should have asked at the deposition, he knew about it at that point, etc. etc. But he didn't and that hurt Casey's defense. The risk of having a conviction overturned is so easily addressed at this point. Prosecutors reach an agreement with the blogger for an "in camera" review of stuff and everything is kept private. The blogger can even sit in the room while the review takes place. Plus, the whole process saves time and money - why? Because the case will no longer include:
(1) Three days of trial with Baez submitting blog posts by JJ to the jury and suggesting JJ omitted photos of the body location which JJ suggested he searched but didn't photograph. At summation, Baez will tell the jury they can't convict if there is any reasonable doubt and in my experience, some jurors find the most RIDICULOUS things to constitute "reasonable doubt" (especially if they are against the death penalty).
(2) Appellate arguments based on failure of defense counsel to fully explore an issue that was crucial to Casey's defense.
Who cares if Baez didn't do a good job with his overly broad subpoena and whether he screwed up at the JJ dep by not asking some questions? Prosecutors, and probably JJ too, want Casey Anthony to be convicted so probably, they'll get together on agreeing to some reasonable review of JJ's stuff to avoid (1) and (2) above. It won't hurt prosecutors and if it's a limited review with JJ present, it won't hurt JJ too much. I think the parties will be smart and arrange this.
Because of the above, I just don't see the point in arguing that Baez isn't entitled to A, B or C because his subpoena is overly broad, or he should have asked such and such question at such and such time, or whatever. Yes, you can dig up old stuff showing Baez knew A, B and C (or should have) one year ago but.....the State isn't prosecuting Baez, it's prosecuting Casey Anthony and assuming a conviction is obtained, Baez's scew-ups will benefit Casey in the end. Her appellate lawyers will not be boneheads like Baez. They will be brilliant lawyers from huge law firms with pro bono sections that do death penalty appeals. Which is why you will sometimes see prosecutors helping the defense (if it won't hurt the prosecution's case). Let's face it - with all Casey's antics, the trunk of the car, coffin flies, partying, lying to LE....there isn't much of a defense here. Baez doesn't have much to work with so defense has decided on "location of body" as one of a handful of possible defenses, and therefore prosecutors will want to make sure defense can't complain about not having evidence to support its (ridiculous) defense.
