2011.04.08 Frye Hearing Thread

[Chiquita71]

JB: probable cause level...
HH: when did they do arguments on harris?
JB: june 09, the law is so much in conflict for this to be admitted as probable cause.

 

[sleutherontheside]

JB can't remember why he played these in the first place.

 

[momtective]

These videos are a complete waste of the courts time! jmo but I think HHJP agrees with me.

 

[gamom]

What evidence is there other than a dog alert?????? A dead toddler JB. Good enough?

I hate to say it, but I am kind of with the DT on this motion. The dog hit on the backyard where no body was found and did not hit on the area where the body was found. On one hand we argue the remains smelled strong to a human nose but a dog could not pick up the scent? Even after all the water, I still find this interesting.

I don't think the dog's hit on the backyard will have any bearing on the jury finding KC guilty. This was only relevant before little Caylee's body was found to prove she was deceased. We already know she is dead, so I don't get why the testimony of the dog is needed. MOO

 

[21merc7]

Judge is trying to tell JB he needs caselaw. Fully written decisions. (Again.) Videos of portions are nothing. Undecided cases are nothing. Cases that have nothing to do with this one are nothing.

AAARRGGHH!!!

 

[sleutherontheside]

JB has his arguments and facts and soundbites mixed up worse than a bag of chloroform laden garbage. Maybe the chloroform got to him?

I am stunned.

 

[ZsaZsa]

HHP has that look on his face that says "Stop trying to tell ME what the law says". The more JB talks, the worse it gets...

 

[sassy_texasbelle2]

Have they ever sited case law during these hearings?

 

[zoey]

I hate to say it, but I am kind of with the DT on this motion. The dog hit on the backyard where no body was found and did not hit on the area where the body was found. On one hand we argue the remains smelled strong to a human nose but a dog could not pick up the scent? Even after all the water, I still find this interesting.

I don't think the dog's hit on the backyard will have any bearing on the jury finding KC guilty. This was only relevant before little Caylee's body was found to prove she was deceased. We already know she is dead, so I don't get why the testimony of the dog is needed. MOO

dog wasn't allowed to go where the body was found...they were searching for other bones that were missing....

 

[Chiquita71]

JB: there is no legal basis for the court to enter this evidence because it has never been done before. different types of dog evidence. you are going to say a dog is looking at a line up and admitting evidence. difference between that and drug evidence. they outlined a three pronged test. this type of line up evidence must be reliable. the dog must be reliable. you cannot say the evidence is reliable if the dog is not trained right. Garus was either right or wrong by the car, but wrong on suburban. how can we say this dog is reliable?

 

[Eidetic]

These videos are a complete waste of the courts time! jmo but I think HHJP agrees with me.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...y-anthony-trial-photos,0,7769386.photogallery

(photo is not from today's hearing, rather hilarious and appropriate)

 

[wildchild1961]

DOH!

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

JB doesn't even see that happened. It's obvious he doesn't understand how the Judge is setting the stage. He blows right past what the JP says and immediately returns to arguing the exact same thing, in the exact same way that JP told him doesn't apply. It's beyond unproductive. Who does that?

PS.. my first time watching a hearing live.. lol
pat

 

[Lanie]

Why does Baez talk like this? "I'm going to refrain from showing the others." My translation: "I'm itching so bad to show all these clips I can barely stand it, but I will take many deep breaths and get a grip on myself and hopefully I won't require others from the DT to hold me down, and I'm not going to show any more clips."

 

[ZsaZsa]

I hate to say it, but I am kind of with the DT on this motion. The dog hit on the backyard where no body was found and did not hit on the area where the body was found. On one hand we argue the remains smelled strong to a human nose but a dog could not pick up the scent? Even after all the water, I still find this interesting.

I don't think the dog's hit on the backyard will have any bearing on the jury finding KC guilty. This was only relevant before little Caylee's body was found to prove she was deceased. We already know she is dead, so I don't get why the testimony of the dog is needed. MOO

Huh? A child was missing, the dogs hit on the child's backyard and her mother's
car. That led the investigation in quite a different direction than the mother was trying to steer them in... relevant.

 

[ShadowGal]

Jose says he would argue not to believe Forgy

 

[sleutherontheside]

Have they ever sited case law during these hearings?

Yes but when they do it is usually suggested to them by HHJP that they are not citing applicable cases law relating to this case and their argument.

They cite lots of cases that apply in other settings..

 

[Capri]

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: )

Priceless! So much for ineffective counsel, LOL

 

[jharres]

JB arguing that the fact that there was only one car makes the findings of the dogs unreliable. Also saying that Dept. Forgey is unreliable and should not be believed.

 

[nursebeeme]

jb now saying that there is no line up ...... citing ramirez

 

[sleutherontheside]

Judge asking for facts of the Ramos case.