2011.01.06 Baez Slapped with Formal Sanction

[Sparky]

I have checked also...only WESH has it..

Did someone from Baez's office Fax it to Court Admin Office and a WESH reporter, having good fortune or insight, happened to be there at that time in order to get a copy...

Even today as I search....Other than WESH, No other media outlet has posted an article about it with a copy of the letter or check..

BBM
Seriously..I think Baez had it faxed to WESH. What are the chances WESH was at the Court Admin Office when this little tidbit came in. Maybe the letter was faxed by accident.

 

[Jomo]

If it was faxed from JB's office maybe someone did not think to just do a cover sheet and the check and sent the letter in error. I don't think the letter had to be reported to the clerk's office. So, again, someone in JB's office not paying attention sent too much information. jmo

If the letter had been originally intended to be sent to the court clerk, wouldn't they have been included in the cc: at the bottom left of the letter?

I think that CM and JB know that they would be crucified by the public if they were to go directly to the media so they are using the court clerk and the sunshine law to release statement...knowing full well that the bloggers and the forums will do the work.

I think they have decided that if they can't shut the bloggers up, they are going to use and manipulate them to their own ends.

 

[LCoastMom]

TWA :tyou: again for your timely videos. So much time has passed, the over the top interviews of CA are no longer fresh in our minds. It's an excellent idea to refresh what has transpired that brought us here - to this exact point in time.:doh:

It was not just the ineptitude of JB, (although he surely drove that bus) with the ever grieving grandma :boohoo: as his co-pilot - there was no other way for this "saga" (nod to CM) to play out!

That letter to JA reeks of pure CM - BS! It was released to the press so the defense can say :gift: Lookie here!! :dramaqueen: We've been trying to make nice! The SA just won't cooperate, mean, mean JA! :maddening: ullhair:

:sigh:

 

[Leila]

A good friend of mine had some interesting thoughts about what else might be behind the plea to give JB a break and I thought I would share them. I wonder if the final results are also in on the Laura Buchannan investigation? To me, that would be another tipping point that would be pushing the Defense farther into the corner for a plea.

Also, if Baez is going to have to face another complaint of his own, based on the LB investigation, Bar will go heavier on him if there are
already sanctions recorded against him. That might be a different indicator of why Mason would like JA to go easy on JB. Not that I
think he deserves it in any way, but maybe CM is signaling, "this young, inexperienced lawyer is already going to get hammered, let's
not add to the pile."

Good Point! I think there's a lot going on behind the scenes, and it's not outside the realm of possibilities that there are other issues that Baez will be facing and a sanction on top of the other issues will be tough for him.

But, it all goes back to personal responsibility. It's Baez's own actions and failure to comply with the rules of the court, and the judge's orders that earned him the sanction. On top of that, he's been engaged in unethical activities and has not been professional in his conduct. This is all adding up, and he needs to take responsibility for all that he's done.

 

[Sparky]

Ok I think I now have this figured out. If you watch the video, WESH states it was faxed into the Court Admin Office. Then if you look at the video starting at .44 you can see it on the computer screen. I now think it was emailed from someone, just don't know who emailed it.

http://www.wesh.com/caseyanthony/26486629/detail.html

 

[Solace]

Good Point! I think there's a lot going on behind the scenes, and it's not outside the realm of possibilities that there are other issues that Baez will be facing and a sanction on top of the other issues will be tough for him.

But, it all goes back to personal responsibility. It's Baez's own actions and failure to comply with the rules of the court, and the judge's orders that earned him the sanction. On top of that, he's been engaged in unethical activities and has not been professional in his conduct. This is all adding up, and he needs to take responsibility for all that he's done.

Personally, I like watching him make an a$%#$ out of himself as he goes to court ill prepared and flies off the handle as he did with the motion to get JJ's pictures, saying "I could get this subpoena like that and snapped his fingers (if I were a prosecutor) and then insulted the lawyer for JJ.

He inevitably has an "I thought I could get it there on time, or we did file the 300 pages of reports (all CVs) which anyone could get, or I didn't know I had to, or let me look Your Honor, I think I have it here or just looking to see if we took that deposition".

I especially love the part in the State's interview of Lee where DDB references a transcript and Baez says "I would like a copy of that". That was a transcript that I myself had in my possession.

Love watching him trip and fall.

I can't wait for the trial.

 

[cyberborg]

I was hoping another news source would have the check and letter, then I could see if there were any differences in headers or numbers, etc. However, it seems WESH is the only station to have received this. I'll keep looking.

JB sold it to WESH as an exclusive for $583.73.

 

[LCoastMom]

bbm
The Defense has been using that line since LKB and Andrea Lyon.
The placement of the line and the wording has changed in this filing though

Mason's Motion for Reconsideration "One of the Attorneys for Defendant"
but it usually states "One of the Attorneys for Casey Marie Anthony"

Here's an earlier example Go to page 3, page 20

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...mpermissible Prosecutorial Motives 4-2010.pdf

Thank you, I guess earlier on I thought it presented a team approach - but with most of the team MIA - it just seems redundant. But, so do all the ridiculous motions and well... everything these two have pulled.

 

[LCoastMom]

JB sold it to WESH as an exclusive for $583.73.

"Do you have something to offer my client? It's a two-way street. … The door is open if you can assist me or my client."

Does give new meaning to "What's in it for me?!"

 

[Intermezzo]

Ok I think I now have this figured out. If you watch the video, WESH states it was faxed into the Court Admin Office. Then if you look at the video starting at .44 you can see it on the computer screen. I now think it was emailed from someone, just don't know who emailed it.

http://www.wesh.com/caseyanthony/26486629/detail.html

Or did the reporter Scan the docs, from a portable printing device in the news truck, and emailed it to the Station so they would have it for the newscast?

 

[Sparky]

Or did the reporter Scan the docs, from a portable printing device in the news truck, and emailed it to the Station so they would have it for the newscast?

Ohhh..good thought! But then how would you explain WESH just happens to be there when these came in? Beats me...

 

[LancelotLink]

Or, did WESH scan the documents faxed to them so they could put them up on their website?

 

[The World According]

JB sold it to WESH as an exclusive for $583.73.

OMG!!!! That is the best!!!!:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[nums24]

JB sold it to WESH as an exclusive for $583.73.

That's hysterical!!!

Here is the letter that WFTV posted, it does not have the fax number at the top, so you could very well be right!

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26497497/detail.html

 

[Steely Dan]

:no: Now why is it that Mason wrote the letter and not Baez? Regardless, Baez was the one that got the fine and he should be the one apologizing and what not...not having Mason write the letter for him. JMO though...it's like a little kid getting their friend to write a not for them so they don't get in trouble. :no:

Baez lost his crayons.

No, he will not. Remain calm everyone. The judge does not enjoy the reputation he has by ruling, then setting aside his own rulings. Judge Perry is not the kind of guy that makes empty threats. He is not the parent you see telling the child I am counting to three, one.....two....
then starting the counting all over again.
He is not that guy. Motion will be denied, and he will grab the next pile of documents, what's your next motion....

Otherwise the threat of sanctions would become a joke in his courtroom. That is the one thing he will not have. I believe that as sure as the sun comes up in the morning. He made a ruling. He will stand by it. I wish the Anthonys cared half as much for that baby's justice as you all do friends. Glad to know you.....all of you! I sure wouldn't wanna play on any team opposing you!!!! You guys and gals remind me of Meghan Kelly! She sure set it straight for Cindy Anthony!! I bet she wouldn't back up off of sanctions. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJl3S4Shkjk

Well, after reading Mr. Hornsby's new post, .....I am still....hopeful, not positive, but hopeful. lol

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/category/casey-anthony/
He knows his Florida law!!!!

Thanks for that! If it wasn't so tragic it would be hysterical.I love how CA says something about cutting off the grandmother of the missing little girl :boohoo: while at the same time avoiding the fact that she said KC knows where Caylee is. Then it's the national media's fault for not getting out the picture of a child she may already know is dead and exactly where the body is. :banghead:

The summation by Kelly is priceless.

 

[ZsaZsa]

Hi RR, ITA with your assessment of Perry's intention/message with the impositions of sanctions, but I kind of disagree with Hornsby's interpretation of the case law. Bear in mind I'm not a Florida attorney, so take my opinion for what it's worth....nothing. LOL

In the cases Hornsby cites as controlling:

Specifically, absent statutory authority, a trial court has no legal authority to require either a prosecutor or a defense attorney to pay “attorney fees” or “court costs” to the other side or to the court. See State v. Nelson, 27 So. 3d 758 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (“The trial court does not have inherent authority to assess costs against the State Attorney’s Office in criminal cases.”);

IMO, the KEY word in this case's rule is "inherent". To me, the word inherent in this context leaves the door open for special case-by-case circumstances. I interpret it as, "as a general rule, the courts can't just willy nilly assess costs in criminal cases (but, CAN assess costs if circumstances call for it). That's totally JMO, though.

The other case he cited (Williams), talks about how the court can't assess costs unless there's a specific statute allowing it. In this instance, there was statutory authority for Perry to impose sanctions. (statute being Florida rules of criminal discovery).

Up here, (canada), statute always trumps case law, and I'm sure it's the same in Florida. I'm not saying Hornsby is wrong, I'm just offering my two canadian pennies.

I know nothing about the Law but I AM sure that HHJP knows far more Law than RH. I have seen reported here that in his career he has had only one ruling overturned. The odds against him making a mistake in this one are definitely against RH.

 

[kaRN]

I'm sorry if this has been discussed. I had a revelation and am posting first and will read back laterbut.. In support of the possibility of a plea deal. Why wasn't AF there today via skype if she couldn't be there in person? You'd think she has a vested interest in the subject of jury selection. Also Nums reminded us yesterday IIRC, that the state appears to have missed the deadline for naming their mitigation specialist.Hmmmm and so soon after missing all the other deadlines.

 

[nums24]

I'm sorry if this has been discussed. I had a revelation and am posting first and will read back laterbut.. In support of the possibility of a plea deal. Why wasn't AF there today via skype if she couldn't be there in person? You'd think she has a vested interest in the subject of jury selection. Also Nums reminded us yesterday IIRC, that the state appears to have missed the deadline for naming their mitigation specialist.Hmmmm and so soon after missing all the other deadlines.

I wanted to clarify that yesterday's deadline was for the touch dna report, page 3, section 3: http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...tional Discovery & Other Dicovery Matters.pdf

The mitigation expert was to be named by January 1, 2011. (page 3, sec 5 - same link)

ETA: It was the defense that had to name their mitigation expert.

 

[Gaia713]

It's about time imo. Baez's behavior has been unprofessional from the get-go and he continues to show his lack of understanding of the law and his disdainment for the same. He figures he'll ge t his own way EVERY TIME. It was so refreshing t o see his little "stunt" backfire on him. I just wish the sanctions had been more. He really got off easy imo.

 

[sumbunny]

Was the defense team due to turn over 2 of the expert witness statements today? Or, am I mistaken?
IIRC, 2 were due within 10 days and the rest in 20 days?