2011.04.08 Frye Hearing Thread

[nursebeeme]

if JB found these arguments so convincing why didn't he just argue like this lawyer is doing in the video instead of playing it?

If it were case law he could cite it..

I just am not following the logic here

 

[Turnadot]

The traffic cone was a brilliant touch.

 

[darnudes]

Baez has more clips, but they're only short ones he says - we are going to be here allllllll day.

 

[gelfie68]

The sound, all the way around, is awful today.

 

[jharres]

HHJP: The clips are not very helpful to me.

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

You know - I suspect this is something of an audition for JB's role as Talking Head - on.... hmm, wonder which media outlet?

 

[ynotdivein]

CJBP: Supreme Court says a lot during argument that you never see in a written opinion.

 

[Lanie]

I can't believe it's only been 2 and a half hours since this started. Sigh.

HHJP: Substantial evidence or probable cause?

Now Baez needs a moment to think. Also has more clips.

HHJP: Unless you have something to show different to previous clips, it's not very helpful to me.
Again, probable cause, or evidence of fact a body was there. Neither the Sims case or other case........argument is argument and you never see it in an opinion. Talk about things in written opinion.
Baez: I think the court has a good grasp of what the issues are in this case.
Me: LMAO

 

[Melanie]

IMHO - hopefully ICA is writing the same letter the other inmate wrote to release JB from his duties.

Just "my opinion".

Mel

 

[Chiquita71]

Jose said in this case the perp was stopped by LE and drugs were found. an officer was murdered and they wanted to tie in the drug stop and the murder. the supreme court was concerned that only the alert of the dog was what said there were drugs...????

HH: whether or not this is ah, substantial evidence or evidence toward probable cause.
JB: I have clips from two different cases. speaks of two cases that are in conflict.
HH: unless you have something different than what you have shown in these clips, is not helpful to me. You point is that evidence is so unreliable it should not be admitted.
JB: correct
HH: either the simms case or the other case does the fl supreme court can be argued but you may not see it in an opinion. do they talk about those things in the written opinion?
JB: i think the court has a good grasp...(oh jose...don't want to answer that question)
HH: simms was a post conviction relief case. mostly delt with ineffective council not fighting evidence. If council had done what you are doing now, that issue would not have been raised. ( :luv: )

 

[nursebeeme]

sims case comes up again and
*once again*
hhjp reiterates that it was an ineffective use of counsel case

 

[TiaM]

BAM!! HHJP just took away any future "ineffective counsel" appeal!!!

I love that man!

 

[faefrost]

DOH!

HHJP just cut the legs out from any "Infective Council" claim down the road.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Sims was an inneffective assistance of counsel case. BAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

HHJP schooling JB on the 3851 basis. "If that counsel was doing what you have been doing then there would not have been an issue."

OUTSTANDING

 

[JDzWife]

Extrapolate... JB learned a new word!

 

[nursebeeme]

"if your clips don't discuss case law they will not be helpful to me"

-hhjp

 

[jharres]

HHJP basically telling JB to quote case law and written opinions rather than showing him video clips.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Judge Perry - Problem - Unless you have something different in your other clips, this is not very helpful.

Exactly for the clips he played had to do with ineffective counsel for not raising those issues...His Honor just told him the same....so that in essence does not have anything to do with Frye in relation to the K9's...geesh Baez two totally different scenarios...

 

[wenwe4]

HHBP - said if other video clips only show argument and not case law - it is not very helpful to me.
JB - I will refrain from showing those other clips

 

[mitzi]

if JB found these arguments so convincing why didn't he just argue like this lawyer is doing in the video instead of playing it?

If it were case law he could cite it..

I just am not following the logic here

JB wants to show HHJP what an "all-around excellent attorney" he is:
"look judge, I even know power-point, and I am going to inundate you with it today."