2011.03.04 Motions Hearing - #2 (PM)

[sleutherontheside]

Mason was telling the Judge how when their investigator (J Lyons no doubt) tried to serve former jail guard Sylvia H with a subpoena for a deposition that the investigator was told by Sylvia's current police dept to leave and not come back.
LDB told the Judge that he should know what the investigator said to Sylvia to cause her to shut the door on him when he showed up at Sylvia's house to "interview" her and serve her the subpoena.

Mason huffed and puffed about how he wrote to the Police Chief about his little deputies could not try to run off his investigator and obstruction and blah blah blah.

The Judge said the problem would be solved by having Sylvia served the subpoena when she arrives to court for her testimony in the Hearing involving the Defense Motion to Suppress Statements Made to George, Cindy, Lee, Maya, Roby, and Sylvia H. (which is not completed yet - will resume on Monday).

I believe the PI J Lyons is waiting ... and waiting ... and crouching ... and ready to pounce on Sylvia when she arrives for the Hearing to personally serve her and get his own personal revenge on Sylvia's people trying to run him off and for Sylvia avoiding him.

PI J Lyons has no choice but to wait because they keep changing up the order in which they are calling witnesses. He probably thought the Motion involving Sylvia was going to be heard on Wednesday.

I have not forgotten my offer to contact the JAC.....left a message for that party and "they" were out this afternoon. I will get an answer. I do want to add that Judge Perry said he would inquire as to the protocol for serving a LEO in that jurisdiction. CM implied he had it covered. My point is......LE from her own area would likely be more able to serve her. An outside suprise process server would not be needed.

 

[RR0004]

I have not forgotten my offer to contact the JAC.....left a message and "they" were out this afternoon. I will get an answer.

...and the question was???
Sorry...this is something new to me.

 

[sleutherontheside]

...and the question was???
Sorry...this is something new to me.

The question was / is.......Can an indigent for costs client's defense PI be paid for time spent in court?

According to the JAC handbook....there are parameters to work paid to a PI.

In other words...my interpretation is unless he is actively conducting business that someone else can not, he will not get paid for his two day mock turtleneck fashion show...or today.

My JAC acquaintance will clarify.

 

[jennyb]

I could not attend today's hearing, but have watched InSession and read up on it a bit. JB was constantly being overruled when he objected and LDB's objections were 99% sustained. Being wrong all the time in court doesn't look so good on tv. CM is no longer bored in court. We're going to see some fine lawyering when he is up to the podium. JB's apology was court-ordered. We'll see how long he can behave out of character. Dorothy Sims doesn't comb her hair. I saw her up close and in person for two days in a row. The clothes issue this morning was unbelievable! Those are the clothes I saw Michelle M. bring in yesterday morning upon the arrival of CA. If she couldn't get into them in time, she should have been brought in wearing her jailhouse scrubs. So what? She's an inmate and there is no jury present to judge her. Jeremy L. thinks that railing in the courtroom was made for him to rest his head. He makes as many facial expressions and head shakings as GA and ICA. I hope he gets booted out of the courtroom with CA and GA. I'm going to ask the bailiff why the gum chewing rule doesn't apply to the Anthonys & Jerry L. The bailiff will come right up to others and make them spit their gum out or leave the room. He gave me advice on a good restaurant downtown the other day so I know he'll speak to me.

Thanks Amil. I do hope there's a way to get Jeremy L out of the courtroom for the trial. He looks like he's fixin' to stay, sucking the air out of the room -- a total scenery chewer. I'm sick of looking at his mug!

 

[sua_sponte]

...
Agents of the state? Who would need that title or assignment. jmo

It's a VERY important distinction for the defense, and a title or assignment that they definitely need the Anthony's to have. Our 6th amendment rights protect us from being "secretly interrogated" by police once criminal proceedings have begun and we have invoked our right to counsel. That means the state can't direct anyone else to do the questioning for them, even those who would otherwise not be prevented from questioning her (like her parents). If the defense can show that her parent's questioning was at the state's behest, e.g. they were serving as agents for the state, then the state violated her rights and her statements can't be used against her. It's a smart move for the defense to make. I'm just not so sure that it will be successful.

 

[ThinkTank]

http://www.wftv.com/video/27084637/index.html
RAW VIDEO: Cindy Anthony Testifies 03/04/2011

(14:17 minutes) KC turns and looks at Baez and then pats Baez on the knee - after Cindy says Melich told her that Baez probably made up the Caylee sighting tip to put the blame on somebody else - wouldn't put it past him, that's just the way he is

 

[katydid23]

http://www.wftv.com/video/27084637/index.html
RAW VIDEO: Cindy Anthony Testifies 03/04/2011

(14:17 minutes) KC turns and looks at Baez and then pats Baez on the knee - after Cindy says Melich told her that Baez probably made up the Caylee sighting tip to put the blame on somebody else - wouldn't put it past him, that's just the way he is

OMG. Look at the self-satisfied smile on Baez'z face. Lord.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I watched him really carefully and he didn't seem snowed by her song and dance at all. He looked nonplussed. Another fast-talking expert. Ho hum.

My impression was she had all the buzz-words, she said "methodology" about 20 times and was just basically flapping all around. Might work in some circumstances but he was hearing the "substance" very well and it seemed to come down to a lot of white noise.

She's going to have to do a whole lot better than that. Maybe she will, but so far it was very unimpressive once you get past the flapping.

That's another thing - how does she have the expertise to question methodology? A law degree doesn't make you an expert on anything outside of the law, if that.

 

[RR0004]

It's a VERY important distinction for the defense, and a title or assignment that they definitely need the Anthony's to have. Our 6th amendment rights protect us from being "secretly interrogated" by police once criminal proceedings have begun and we have invoked our right to counsel. That means the state can't direct anyone else to do the questioning for them, even those who would otherwise not be prevented from questioning her (like her parents). If the defense can show that her parent's questioning was at the state's behest, e.g. they were serving as agents for the state, then the state violated her rights and her statements can't be used against her. It's a smart move for the defense to make. I'm just not so sure that it will be successful.

I just want them to show the very first call home...and then I will be satisfied.

 

[Amil]

I just read that GA's parents were in the courtroom for the hearings. They are an elderly couple and sitting on the prosecution side. I can't find a photo of them - anyone???

 

[SoCalSleuth]

I'm not concerned about these motions. I don't think it would make a difference if they threw all of KC's statements out. The bottom line is she did not report her daughter missing for 31 days and even if KC was handed a "script" as to what to do and say--"they" didn't say it had to be an Oscar winning performance! No one, and I mean NO ONE is ever going to believe that KC acted like a normal mother would if her daughter had been taken by someone and she didn't know where she was. No way, no how.

 

[strach304]

The prosecution still needs to show a strong showing of murder. I think the defense in this case would be very happy and consider it a win if they can raise reasonable doubt as to that aspect. We can see Casey is a headcase. What kind of nut exactly is she? Homicidal? An accident she couldn't dare own up to? That duct tape will be pivotal imo.

 

[strach304]

That's another thing - how does she have the expertise to question methodology? A law degree doesn't make you an expert on anything outside of the law, if that.

After reading the defense expert depos I don't think she will do that well against JA. I'm sure he's the one that will be arguing these.

 

[logicalgirl]

Thanks Amil. I do hope there's a way to get Jeremy L out of the courtroom for the trial. He looks like he's fixin' to stay, sucking the air out of the room -- a total scenery chewer. I'm sick of looking at his mug!

Double thanks Amil! I bet it was even more interesting watching this on TV after you had already been in court and saw their real personalities which we don't really get to get a good look at when we watch the hearings.

And yes, jennyb, right up there beside you with that thought - I thought it was just me who was thinking WTH - Bailiff!

 

[logicalgirl]

I just read that GA's parents were in the courtroom for the hearings. They are an elderly couple and sitting on the prosecution side. I can't find a photo of them - anyone???

The only time I saw an older couple leaving with the "group" is at the very end of "I think" the last hearing. We were asking who they were and making guesses - thanks Amil!

 

[Intermezzo]

I just read that GA's parents were in the courtroom for the hearings. They are an elderly couple and sitting on the prosecution side. I can't find a photo of them - anyone???

Where did you read that Amil?
okay, I found posts on the Hinkymeter by someone who attended the hearing and sat next to and behind George's parents, and Mallory.

I will look...I posted earlier in this thread asking who the elderly couple was on the Prosecution side...they sat apart..she had on a Grey top, he had on a White jacket.

ANJ has photos with the grey haired elderly couple

http://s158.photobucket.com/albums/...ceptsandasksthecourttotakenofurtheraction.jpg

[/IMG]

[/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

Look at photos 13, 14, 15 and 23(is a good one showing both)...there is someone wearing salmon/orange between them..but they are all separated.

_________________________

OMG I am SOOO Happy with myself...I was able to post thumbnail images YIPPEEE..Carry On
_______________________
UPDATE
Found this photo for March 2...it's a bit blurry but it looks like an elderly couple at the back of the gallery...to the right and left shoulder of the Officer..
Does that look like Mallory next to the elderly lady?

[/IMG]

 

[Intermezzo]

I personally think that ICA may have sunk her own ship as far as any appeal over incompetent counsel may work.

Her constant note taking.
Her reading along with testimony.
Her underlining and passing of notes to her legal team.
Her letters admitting she is studying legal books in jail.
etc etc.

To claim that she was ignorant of his incompetance won't get her very far now.
Oh yes - she'll try.
Oh my !! epic fail.

I am leaning strongly towards.. she would never get or win an appeal using "ineffective counsel"

 

[mobius99]

The only time I saw an older couple leaving with the "group" is at the very end of "I think" the last hearing. We were asking who they were and making guesses - thanks Amil!

Is this true? I saw the older couple too and took mental note of it because other than GA&CA I haven't seen many other obvious couples in court. They seemed to be the right age to be GA parents.

Did KC see them?

 

[logicalgirl]

Is this true? I saw the older couple too and took mental note of it because other than GA&CA I haven't seen many other obvious couples in court. They seemed to be the right age to be GA parents.

Did KC see them?

No idea because KC had already left the courtroom before the camera caught them filing out. There was no special panning on them, just captured in a general pic of people filing out the door.

 

[jennyb]

I wonder if they left, horrified. Can you imagine your son putting on that kind of display??? What must they be thinking.