2011.04.06 Sidebar Thread

[LambChop]

What struck me as ironic is JB saying the science should not be relied on when it involves the life/death decision of a person on trial when the science they want kept out is about testing the carpet of her trunk to verify the presence of death of her very own daughter. jmo

 

[Horace Finklestein]

The "all the way to the greek isles" comment was extremely offensive and nonsensical.

 

[Softail]

Wow, I googled "cabana boys" and got... erm... very distracted. I would have brought some of them over but I think there's something about "wear clothing" in the TOS and we don't want to end up in the Parking Lot. (But I invited a lot of them to the Basement Party.)

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSESGvcB-MPzS6oOW2FbiQmfIu9GY5Urzq0Fm65gxaqy_puKHLU

I prefer "Pool Boy" .. but that is just me. :crazy:

 

[TxJan1971]

The SA will determine just that by deposing them. If the SA believe she has been examined/expertly evaluated for use in trial, they will expect their expert to examine her also.
I would looooove to be a fly on the wall in that depo..for sure!!!

After Judge Strickland's reaction to reading her psych eval.. it's gotta be good.

Pip, is there some place I can go to refresh my memory on Judge Strickland's reaction to reading her psych eval? I must have missed that and would like to know more about that... Thanks!

 

[mobius99]

Well I must say, hearing what psychiatrists have to say about her would be very interesting. But unless the psychiatrists actually examine, treat or care for her, why would it fall under HIPPA?

Can someone remind us who these good doctors are? And have we seen any recent visitor logs. I'm curious how often they've made visits to see ICA in light of this new "state of mind" strategy from the defense.

TIA

 

[strawberry]

OMG! I started rewatching the end of the hearing I missed...when I started the last one available was part 9...then I had to go out...came back and part 9 ended and I started part 10 and see up to 12! How long does Baez go on!!! Can someone proffer me a guess?

 

[logicalgirl]

Not just the misconstrued facts--the misspelled words!!!

I do want to re-watch and see what all was happening there with the Petraco discussion. It seemed at the time that the DT was unprepared for that issue, lots of flailing and conferring and apparent distress at their table.

I thought the whole issue was that Baez quoted on a teensy slice because it fit in with what he was saying - but the rest of the Petraco evidence fits squarely in the prosecution camp and reinforces what they said.

Baez is saying the SA can't use it because it is um...work product - and HHJP was saying...wait just a darn minute ....use a bit, use it all.

Curses - caught at monkey business again since HHJP is going to read it for himself, except it sounded like he already had.

JA humming that old Neil Sedaka balladin the background - "Poor little fool, oh yeah, I was a fool "....

 

[logicalgirl]

OMG! I started rewatching the end of the hearing I missed...when I started the last one available was part 9...then I had to go out...came back and part 9 ended and I started part 10 and see up to 12! How long does Baez go on!!! Can someone proffer me a guess?

A mere 95% of it......:innocent:

 

[strawberry]

Pshwew JA is finally up

ETA: I was at work during the earlier sidebars so I'm gettin me a beer. Well, I see HHJP has woken up now that JA is up.

 

[Pattymarie]

HIPPA is a very precise law that stipulates anything related to Medical treatment, evaluation, medication, visits, testing, opinion, diagnosis is confidential up the wazo..
That's why the doctor's office mark off your name as soon as the pen leaves your finger, when a loved one has surgery the staff doesn't page "Smith family".

And to make sure that the HIPPA law is strictly enforced if a medical office/hospital is found negligent there are some mighty hefty fines that have to be coughed up.

I understand HIPAA, that's why I asked this question: Did these psychiatrists actually see her, examine her, render a diagnosis, treat her and or care for her? Was she their patient? Then HIPAA would apply.

Or have they just read about the case and maybe talked to her lawyers and then drew psych conclusions (much like we have here)? If so, I don't see how HIPAA would apply if she wasn't actually a patient.

I am curious as to how HIPAA is applied in a situation where the defense team is trying to get a certain psych evaluation for legal reasons in order to benefit their client in court. I would think (but don't know) that this has got nothing to do with the HIPAA law as it applies to an actual patient in a medical setting receiving care by health care providers.

Does anyone know the answer to this?

 

[Marina2]

The "all the way to the greek isles" comment was extremely offensive and nonsensical.

I agree. Does JB think that relevant science is confined to the US? It took scientists the world over to map the human genome. He really has no concept of the worldwide body of scientific knowledge. His cluelessness constantly amazes me.

 

[littlemisslegal]

i attended hearing today. started late 9:30 as they were setting up video conference. ended about 5:15 pm . short breaks. judge did a tv interview during break about loan budget and said he is very busy and missed his lunch today-lol. he does have humor and is a nice man to reporters. lots of back and forth with drs and scientist - seemed like same thing over and over until jeff comes forward. he is very powerful and good!!

said a few words to cindy - shes going to be needing a lot of support from friends when trial starts. at times i saw her head down and her shaking a bit . when words of decomp, maggots ect. i felt so bad for her. what pain she must have to have to go thru this all and she loved caylee a lot. others sitting near me commented on how they felt bad for her too.


no george today. cindys friend is always by her side. she must be a real good friend as she never lets cindy be alone in court. i did not expect 8 hours. parking was more than disney world. $15.00 for day. judge said status will be 9am friday. i must admit i felt myself nod off a couple times- it was very long day and some was repeptive i felt. hope camera did not catch me sleeping-lol.
deputy said media passes were going to get in first then extra seats at trial.

casey looked like a young teen college girl. cotton blouse black and white checked. grey sweater - slacks. hair plain in poney tail. she did some writing but all in all she remained very focused it seemed on listening . not so hyper today. some said she lies but maybe she did not kill caylee. will not say who i heard it from but two different people said it.one asked if i thought she was guilty and i always say - only thing i know is she lied and has some bizare behaviors in past and i say - let jury decide. when i look at her in court it seems like this can not be a mom who kills her child- the mind tries to process this for me- looks can not judge cause she looks like a pretty chearleader. the image of sexy is gone.except when she wears sweaters perhaps that cling. bless caylee and those who had no part in her death that loved her.

 

[faefrost]

I believe this is the um...Root Cause?

Ok, jumped into the net to dig around and this was what I gathered.

Several years ago there was a trial in New York that involved issues about PM hair banding. The prosecutor's 2 witness's stated that PM banding is so similiar to environmental influences that it would be careless to assume there's a difference. BUT, the DT put their expert on the stand and this expert is the very one Baez retained and is refusing to consent to this expert in testifying.

So, the DT(New York case) puts their expert on the stand and he says that it isn't true that PM and environmental banding are similiar. He goes into detail of what the difference is AND....GET THIS....this expert informs the court that he has done enough research on PM banding that he can give a general timeline of when death occured. According to him PM banding starts around day 3 post death. So now would that mean that Caylee was left in the trunk for at least 3 days?
__________________

This

And to further flesh it out. This testimony in that NY case where the expert hired, but not used by the DT. It was in a Frye hearing regarding death banding in hair. The NY court ruled in favor of the evidence and accepted the hair banding as scientifically valid.

From what I can gather, the reason HHJP was asking so many questions about this witness. JA didn't just enter in the NY court ruling, accepting hair banding under Frye. He also included the Frye hearing transcripts. But HHJP had some questions as to whether he could read or use those transcripts, because one of the experts in them might be covered under "work product" as it applies to KC's defense. So worst case he just looks at the NY case decision, which affirms the hair banding under Frye. best case he also looks at the expert testimony in that case.

And it was an absolute win/win situation for JA and the state just by bringing it up.

 

[Pattymarie]

i attended hearing today. started late 9:30 as they were setting up video conference. ended about 5:15 pm . short breaks. judge did a tv interview during break about loan budget and said he is very busy and missed his lunch today-lol. he does have humor and is a nice man to reporters. lots of back and forth with drs and scientist - seemed like same thing over and over until jeff comes forward. he is very powerful and good!!

said a few words to cindy - shes going to be needing a lot of support from friends when trial starts. at times i saw her head down and her shaking a bit . when words of decomp, maggots ect. i felt so bad for her. what pain she must have to have to go thru this all and she loved caylee a lot. others sitting near me commented on how they felt bad for her too.


no george today. cindys friend is always by her side. she must be a real good friend as she never lets cindy be alone in court. i did not expect 8 hours. parking was more than disney world. $15.00 for day. judge said status will be 9am friday. i must admit i felt myself nod off a couple times- it was very long day and some was repeptive i felt. hope camera did not catch me sleeping-lol.
deputy said media passes were going to get in first then extra seats at trial.

casey looked like a young teen college girl. cotton blouse black and white checked. grey sweater - slacks. hair plain in poney tail. she did some writing but all in all she remained very focused it seemed on listening . not so hyper today. some said she lies but maybe she did not kill caylee. will not say who i heard it from but two different people said it.one asked if i thought she was guilty and i always say - only thing i know is she lied and has some bizare behaviors in past and i say - let jury decide. when i look at her in court it seems like this can not be a mom who kills her child- the mind tries to process this for me- looks can not judge cause she looks like a pretty chearleader. the image of sexy is gone.except when she wears sweaters perhaps that cling. bless caylee and those who had no part in her death that loved her.

So are you saying that the feeling/atmosphere in the court today is sympathy for Cindy and reluctance to believe this pretty young cheerleader type girl could not be capable of killing her daughter?

 

[Amil]

Were you there today, Amil?

I was not at the hearing today. I'm trying to find some balance. Yesterday I stayed away from WS for many hours and actually felt better after doing some hh chores I'd been neglecting. Today, too. Now I'll be up all night watching the hearings. Last time I went to the hearing I felt physically repulsed by CA and her negative expressions and anger at the LE, the canines, etc. At the time all I was thinking about was her poor baby grandchild, Caylee, and all she was thinking about was her daughter. Made me sick. I didn't want to be in that room with her anymore. This may be abstract to some but being there and seeing CA and JB schmoozing makes me want to throw up, literally vomit. I'm just taking a break.

 

[Amil]

So are you saying that the feeling/atmosphere in the court today is sympathy for Cindy and reluctance to believe this pretty young cheerleader type girl could not be capable of killing her daughter?

Ha ha ha - very funny..... there are some young 20 something boys that come and think ICA is the bomb. There are some church friends of CA's that ache for CA. That about sums it up. There are only about 3 people sitting on CA's side of the courtroom. There is not one person in that room that thinks ICA is innocent except for the above noted folks. Give me a break.

 

[littlemisslegal]

So are you saying that the feeling/atmosphere in the court today is sympathy for Cindy and reluctance to believe this pretty young cheerleader type girl could not be capable of killing her daughter?

not saying that was atmosphere. only saying two people i never met before told me this on break in hallways, looks can not be what decides guilt i would hope!

 

[MissJames]

I was not at the hearing today. I'm trying to find some balance. Yesterday I stayed away from WS for many hours and actually felt better after doing some hh chores I'd been neglecting. Today, too. Now I'll be up all night watching the hearings. Last time I went to the hearing I felt physically repulsed by CA and her negative expressions and anger at the LE, the canines, etc. At the time all I was thinking about was her poor baby grandchild, Caylee, and all she was thinking about was her daughter. Made me sick. I didn't want to be in that room with her anymore. This may be abstract to some but being there and seeing CA and JB schmoozing makes me want to throw up, literally vomit. I'm just taking a break.

I totally get it and I'm glad you are taking care of yourself.:tyou:

 

[littlemisslegal]

Ha ha ha - very funny..... there are some young 20 something boys that come and think ICA is the bomb. There are some church friends of CA's that ache for CA. That about sums it up. There are only about 3 people sitting on CA's side of the courtroom. There is not one person in that room that thinks ICA is innocent except for the above noted folks. Give me a break.

were i sit has nothing to do with whos side i am on or if i think shes guilty or innocent. when we walk in deputy shows many of us empty seats . do not assume i think shes innocent or guilty . its my personal private thoughts on this. if i feel bad for cindy does not mean i think she is always right or her daughter is innocent or guilty either.

 

[ZsaZsa]

I understand HIPAA, that's why I asked this question: Did these psychiatrists actually see her, examine her, render a diagnosis, treat her and or care for her? Was she their patient? Then HIPAA would apply.

Or have they just read about the case and maybe talked to her lawyers and then drew psych conclusions (much like we have here)? If so, I don't see how HIPAA would apply if she wasn't actually a patient.

I am curious as to how HIPAA is applied in a situation where the defense team is trying to get a certain psych evaluation for legal reasons in order to benefit their client in court. I would think (but don't know) that this has got nothing to do with the HIPAA law as it applies to an actual patient in a medical setting receiving care by health care providers.

Does anyone know the answer to this?

If you ask the question over on the Lawyers only thread I'm sure AZ will know.