2011.01.25 Defense Requests More Time to Submit Expert Reports

[AZlawyer]

If these experts were never actually retained by the defense as expert witnesses... could they file a bar complaint against Jose?

yes

 

[ThinkTank]

Originally Posted by lauriej
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - List of Motions **NO DISCUSSION HERE PLEASE**

12/16/2010 Notice of Taking Deposition(s) Via Skype / Webex
State taking deposition of Defense Expert Dr. Barry Logan on January 18, 2011

..how can baez possibly state in his motion that "the undersigned has made multiple attempts to reach" him, apparently to no avail------when they had him right there via skype last week??

I thought the SA canceled that depo?

Ashton said in the Jan 14th Hearing that he had to cancel some scheduled depositions of Defense Experts, but did not say specifically which ones. Dr. Logan was set for depo Jan 18th. Baez says in his Jan 25th Motion for more time, that anticipates being able to comply with the Court's Order "prior to his deposition".... so, that implies that Dr. Logan has not been deposed by the State yet, not done on January 18th, as scheduled.

There has not been any official Notice of a new date for deposition of Dr. Logan, filed with the Clerk - and no Notice of cancellation of the Jan 18th deposition filed with the Clerk.

 

[denjet]

If these experts were never actually retained by the defense as expert witnesses... could they file a bar complaint against Jose?

I was wondering that too ... can the prosecution ask the court for Jose to produce contracts or retainer agreements for his experts if they feel Jose has been disingenuous about experts he's retained and led the court and the prosecution to believe would offer expert testimony ?? :waitasec:

And, also, since Jose told the court and JAC that his out-of-state experts had completed 50% or better of their work, can't the court force Jose to produce that work ? ...

 

[The World According]

The state already did ask for the financial agreements between the defense and they even specified, those before and after she was declared indigent for costs. This is a normal thing the defense would/should turn over, it is fair game for the prosecution to inquire about how much they have been paid at trial. The judge said for the prosecutors to ask for them from each defense expert in their depositions when Jose whined he has not the time to stop everything and search through his records to find each and every retainter agreement, contract, etc. I recall Mr. Ashton continued that it should be a relatively simple task to pull up his trust account file and print out what he has paid each expert.

In the words of Anne Finnell, "There has been considerable resistance", but in the end they will have to produce them.

Baez only puts off the inevitable. It is the oddest thing I have ever seen. This nonsense is serving no one, least of all his client.

I do recall Kathy Reichs being on interviews saying she was part of the defense team. The others I am unfamiliar with.

 

[P1569]

Not sure if I might be right/wrong with this but from what I can understand of the side mouths talking in their motions

Experts for FRYE hearings
Dr. Scott Fairgrieve, Dr. Kenneth Furton, Dr. Barry Logan

Experts for Trial
Dr. Timothy Huntington, Dr. Werner Spitz (protocol), Dr. Jane Bock, Richard Eikelenboom

Experts not going to testify for anything but still listed by defense.
Dr. Kathy Reichs
Mason stated in reconsideration motion (page7) http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26455761/detail.html
It is not anticipated that she would be required to provide other testimony.
Dr. William Rodriquez
Mason stated in reconsideration motion (page9) http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26455761/detail.html
Engaged primarily as a consultant to aid defense with forensic area and is not likely to testify
Dr. Henry Lee : As it has not become necessary to call him as a witness
Motion for extension http://www.wesh.com/pdf/26611795/detail.html
Dr. John Leeson: Solely as a consultant and will not be called as a witness
Dr. Larry Kobilinsky never removed officially from witness list
Dr. Michael Freeman has been withdrawn from the witness list.

JMO

 

[denjet]

Not sure if I might be right/wrong with this but from what I can understand of the side mouths talking in their motions

Experts for FRYE hearings
Dr. Scott Fairgrieve, Dr. Kenneth Furton, Dr. Barry Logan

Experts for Trial
Dr. Timothy Huntington, Dr. Werner Spitz (protocol), Dr. Jane Bock, Richard Eikelenboom

Experts not going to testify for anything but still listed by defense.
Dr. Kathy Reichs
Mason stated in reconsideration motion (page7) http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26455761/detail.html
It is not anticipated that she would be required to provide other testimony.
Dr. William Rodriquez
Mason stated in reconsideration motion (page9) http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26455761/detail.html
Engaged primarily as a consultant to aid defense with forensic area and is not likely to testify
Dr. Henry Lee : As it has not become necessary to call him as a witness
Motion for extension http://www.wesh.com/pdf/26611795/detail.html
Dr. John Leeson: Solely as a consultant and will not be called as a witness
Dr. Larry Kobilinsky never removed officially from witness list
Dr. Michael Freeman has been withdrawn from the witness list.

JMO

Thanks so much for sorting this out !! :seeya:
It's hard to follow the defense's "expert witness shuffle" ...
So really, the defense is probably down to, at the most, 7 ... isn't that about half what they had listed previously ?
And out of the 7, it's yet to be seen if they ALL will remain on the list ...

 

[Fluffy Puppy]

I wonder if Jose Baez has ever lead a defense that utilized experts? He sure isn't acting like it.

Just my opinion.

 

[P1569]

I wonder if Jose Baez has ever lead a defense that utilized experts? He sure isn't acting like it.

Just my opinion.

Not sure if Baez did in the Diaz case, but Mason certainly has and he is there to help guide this young lawyer. jmo

 

[Numbers]

Not sure if I might be right/wrong with this but from what I can understand of the side mouths talking in their motions

Experts for FRYE hearings
Dr. Scott Fairgrieve, Dr. Kenneth Furton, Dr. Barry Logan

Experts for Trial
Dr. Timothy Huntington, Dr. Werner Spitz (protocol), Dr. Jane Bock, Richard Eikelenboom

Experts not going to testify for anything but still listed by defense.
Dr. Kathy Reichs
Mason stated in reconsideration motion (page7) http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26455761/detail.html
It is not anticipated that she would be required to provide other testimony.
Dr. William Rodriquez
Mason stated in reconsideration motion (page9) http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26455761/detail.html
Engaged primarily as a consultant to aid defense with forensic area and is not likely to testify
Dr. Henry Lee : As it has not become necessary to call him as a witness
Motion for extension http://www.wesh.com/pdf/26611795/detail.html
Dr. John Leeson: Solely as a consultant and will not be called as a witness
Dr. Larry Kobilinsky never removed officially from witness list
Dr. Michael Freeman has been withdrawn from the witness list.

JMO

This annoys the crap out of me. It does not say "This person will not testify." It says, "We don't think this person will testify."

So which is it? Seems to be a cheap way to avoid having to provide a report. Then a few weeks before the trial - vwah la! - he'll have "new" information and he'll put these persons back on the witness list. As in "Screw you, Ashton."

I sure hope I hear a "Screw you, Baez" from Judge Perry if this is the case.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Tho I do not post much..I do read..and I dont know about you all..but I am sick and tired of this guys delaying tactics..IF there is not "Plea Deal" coming soon..then I tend to think that Jose Baez is going to be forced kicking and screaming into court to do the job he signed up for years ago!! and Im sorry but tho Casey has alot against her..she does deserve a competent lawyer..and maybe this time..JB may GET IT!! He has no idea on how to conduct himself..

I truly hope Judge Perry holds him accoutable to uphold his rulings..enough is enough!!

Thankyou :maddening:..I feel better now to express my disgust on Jose's behavior..and CM's..well I may have to put it to "Past his Prime" excuses:twocents:

 

[CarolinaMoon]

I've been reading all the threads tied to this topic and read the motion. Needless to say, it is one confusing mess.

Baez has resisted from the beginning the idea of letting the defense know anything about his experts. He has pushed Ashton to the edge, forcing him to file motion after motion and he has pused Judge Perry to give more detailed and extensive instructions.

Baez does know that he has to turn the information over, or he never learned his lesson from the Diaz case. He failed to disclose an expert with his presentation and was not allowed to use it in the trial.

At this point, I have to believe that Baez has no evidence from these people that will save the day for him. A possible trip to Chicago to try and get these people to "confab" and come up with something is ludicrous. He really dares to remove himself from the case at the very time the State is supposed to be completing depositions? :banghead:

I hope we get some response from the SAO tomorrow and that Perry sets a hearing for this pronto.

I keep envisioning Baez walking down a long hall, looking at doors, hoping to find one with the name of an expert. He gets to the end, turns around, and says, "I don't have any." Just like Casey at Universal.

 

[Fluffy Puppy]

Not sure if Baez did in the Diaz case, but Mason certainly has and he is there to help guide this young lawyer. jmo

But.... but... but..."this young lawyer" won't even listen to the judge's instructions, why should we think he listens to anything Mason tells him?

I sort of feel sorry for Mason, lol.

 

[joypath]

:great: LOL thought that title just might get attention!:great:

:twocents: Perhaps, just perhaps, the scientific specialists aka defense hired/pro bono/JAC funded experts-consultants-witnesses-geniuses-opinionators are JUST sick and TIRED of trying to converse with an individual who WILL NOT LISTEN!
:twocents: It is NOT an easy task to "conversate" :rocker: technical "stuff" with an individual who is not within the same field or have some glancing awareness of the terminology of the field and, dare I :innocent: be so opinionated to say, JB has demonstrated* within the courtroom that he misses the mark when discussing scientific "lingo". In fact, he's not even on the shooting range, never mind hitting a bull's eye! :floorlaugh:
:twocents: Really, how many times can one repeat :banghead: "nope, not within scientific certainty or 2 SDs or not every step of protocol is mandatory or we utilize logic and deductive reasoning within this field, Jose" before one stops responding to the bothersome gnat! :truce:



* Remember when he :loser: tried to carry on the testimony for LKB using her super-duper giant 3 ring binder to force the State to release all bench notes and CVs, raw data points, instrumentation logs, proficiency testing reports, accreditation history on any and all testing facilities & staff.....:waitasec: he :waitasec: "butchered" the scientific terminology along with the vernacular!

 

[The World According]

Found it!! I knew I remembered her saying she was on the Casey Anthony defense team and would be testifying.

"I've been told I will definitely be testifying" Kathy Reichs said in 2009
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32544789/ns/today-today_books/

Here is the important Q and A

Reporter: You have been brought into the Casey Anthony defense team.

"Are done with your report? Have you submitted your report? Will the defense team want to use what you have concluded?", the reporter asked her


"I have completed that phase of my work, but it is an ongoing process and all of the members of the defense team constantly work together and keep one another informed as to what is going on".
So , out of her own mouth,she completed her work two years ago!!!!!

When the defense did not produce the proper expert's reports...they whined and misled the judge, with excuses like it's the holidays, they are traveling, they need time to prepare these reports, I have never asked them to.....it is the prosecutors fault, we are playing catch up; because, they keep throwing more at us...yada yada yada.
The judge told the defense he just does not believe them on this issue. I have been doing this for over thirty years and I just simply do not believe that these experts are of no opinion and or that you have no idea what these experts who are billing the taxpayers, are opining, he told them. (paraphrased) I concur.
There is zero chance, literally zero chance that she examined the skeleton, released it to the funeral home never to see it again, has a photographic memory and did not find a need to memorialize her conclusions. There is a report alright, or I am Mother Teresa!!!!
BAAAAAM!
Like I said earlier, she is a wealthy woman, and her being in location B does NOT prevent her from having her staff go in her office pull the file and fed ex the papers to her to sign, and fed ex to Cheney Mason. The defense wants to use words like ..likely wont be testifying, etc. That is not going to cut it. Either she is on the witness list and they hand over the report or she comes off the witness list. Put up or shut up.

http://www.wesh.com/video/26611998/detail.html

 

[beach]

Found it!! I knew I remembered her saying she was on the Casey Anthony defense team and would be testifying.

"I've been told I will definitely be testifying" Kathy Reichs said. 2009

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32544789/ns/today-today_books/

Here is the important Q and A

Have you completed your report, the reporter asks her

"I have completed that phase of my work, but it is an ongoing process and all of the members of the defense team keep one another informed"

BAAAAAM!

Yeah, that was from August 2009. It will be interesting to see if "definetly" really means "definetly". She kinda slips by specifically answering if she has prepared a report though. Ann Curry asks her directly and Reichs craftily changes the subject by saying she has studied the skeletal remains and come to her conclusions completeing that phase of her work.

Do I believe she did her exam and didn't take notes or prepare a report? No freakin' way. But I do think JB said, "Hey, I don't want to know anything about reports...don't send me a copy. I'll call you when and if I want it."

I am so tired of the games. May can't get here soon enough. :sigh:

 

[Tulessa]

Found it!! I knew I remembered her saying she was on the Casey Anthony defense team and would be testifying.

"I've been told I will definitely be testifying" Kathy Reichs said in 2009
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32544789/ns/today-today_books/

Here is the important Q and A

Reporter: You have been brought into. You are on Caylee Anthony defense team

"Are done with your report? Have you submitted your report? Will the defense team want to use what you have concluded?", the reporter asked her


"I have completed that phase of my work, but it is an ongoing process and all of the members of the defense team constantly work together and keep one another informed as to what is going on".
So , out of her own mouth,she completed her work two years ago!!!!!
BAAAAAM!

Uh Oh! :loser:

 

[sumbunny]

In other words..they defense team and expert witnesses are working closely together to get their stories straight

Something feels unethical about it all.

 

[A_News_Junkie]

Found it!! I knew I remembered her saying she was on the Casey Anthony defense team and would be testifying.

"I've been told I will definitely be testifying" Kathy Reichs said in 2009
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32544789/ns/today-today_books/

Here is the important Q and A

Reporter: You have been brought into. You are on Caylee Anthony defense team

"Are done with your report? Have you submitted your report? Will the defense team want to use what you have concluded?", the reporter asked her


"I have completed that phase of my work, but it is an ongoing process and all of the members of the defense team constantly work together and keep one another informed as to what is going on".
So , out of her own mouth,she completed her work two years ago!!!!!
BAAAAAM!

Have I told you lately that I love you in a fellow 'blogger' kinda way!
:gthanks::Crown: :tyou:

 

[The World According]

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/26455761/detail.html
Cheney Mason in his own words in this document sets out that she is going to be a rebuttal witness. These two are really trying the judge's patience, he and Baez. woooooahhhh.

quote
Found it!! I knew I remembered her saying she was on the Casey Anthony defense team and would be testifying.

"I've been told I will definitely be testifying" Kathy Reichs said in 2009
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32544789/ns/today-today_books/

Here is the important Q and A

Reporter: You have been brought into the Casey Anthony defense team.

"Are done with your report? Have you submitted your report? Will the defense team want to use what you have concluded?", the reporter asked her


"I have completed that phase of my work, but it is an ongoing process and all of the members of the defense team constantly work together and keep one another informed as to what is going on".
So , out of her own mouth,she completed her work two years ago!!!!!

When the defense did not produce the proper expert's reports...they whined and misled the judge, with excuses like it's the holidays, they are traveling, they need time to prepare these reports, I have never asked them to.....it is the prosecutors fault, we are playing catch up; because, they keep throwing more at us...yada yada yada.
The judge told the defense he just does not believe them on this issue. I have been doing this for over thirty years and I just simply do not believe that these experts are of no opinion and or that you have no idea what these experts who are billing the taxpayers, are opining, he told them. (paraphrased) I concur.
There is zero chance, literally zero chance that she examined the skeleton, released it to the funeral home never to see it again, has a photographic memory and did not find a need to memorialize her conclusions. There is a report alright, or I am Mother Teresa!!!!
BAAAAAM!
Like I said earlier, she is a wealthy woman, and her being in location B does NOT prevent her from having her staff go in her office pull the file and fed ex the papers to her to sign, and fed ex to Cheney Mason. The defense wants to use words like ..likely wont be testifying, etc. That is not going to cut it. Either she is on the witness list and they hand over the report or she comes off the witness list. Put up or shut up."
http://www.wesh.com/video/25882964/index.html
http://www.wesh.com/video/26611998/detail.html
Perhaps Ms. Finnell can help the boys with the rules, she sure seems to know to list everyone and then decide at trial who she will actually call. Good grief!!!

 

[mitzi]

ITA with you...and I know that many have stated it, but I honestly believe that Baez has contributed very little to this case for the past 2 1/2 years (with the exception of some pretty bad motions). I believe he got caught up in all the "celebrity" and has delegated duties from the onset. He really doesn't know the law. While I do think that it works to the defense's benefit to stall and put off the inevitable, I think when it comes down to it, Baez doesn't know what he doing.

It is so apparent when you look at who signs the motions...the attorneys who JB had working for him when this case began are all gone, like so many of the high profile attorneys [Lyon(s), Baden, and where the heck is Sims?...watching TV somewhere?] have gone...and now he has Medina and that attorney that he had HHJP swear in recently. It takes awhile, but eventually his subordinates "see the light" that all of us here see. :banghead: