2011.06.03 SIDEBAR THREAD (Trial Day Nine)

[ziggy]

not that I know anything about this...

With CM today - I was beginning to think he wanted to get the witness declared as hostile so he could pose leading questions and slide in some insinuation - or to get them angry so the make some kind of bone headed statement.

But just in general CM seems to be taking a real affront to people to don't bow obeisance to his "age and wisdom" - soooo :twocents::twocents:

It was cross exam and the defense attorney can ask leading questions on cross. I think he's just a horse's a$$ myself.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I think Baez's biggest problem as a lawyer is he doesn't know when to stfu. He makes a point, which probably bolsters his confidence, then he shoots himself in the foot.

Couldn't agree with you more. He knows he hasn't scored much so far in this trial, so when he does get a small win, he feels compelled to turn that into a huge "gotcha". When he falls on his face, it completely erases even the small win.

Slow and steady seems to be a foreign concept to him at this point.

 

[Eye Wonder]

Translation: "I haven't figured my next story yet"

:floorlaugh: SOOOO TRUE!

 

[21merc7]

oohhh we need to get all the sidebars

JB is well, JB is that type of guy who likes to cut the legs off of people to make himself appear taller. also a Spiteful .....

OMG! I have not hear that one before, too funny and too accurate!!! :floorlaugh:

 

[logicalgirl]

Were the hairs in the trunk identified as Caylee's?

This was the crime evidence collection expert - he made it very clear (to Mr. Baez) that it was not his job to identify the evidence but to collect it, bag it and seal it to be sent to the appropriate labs.

Mr. Baez even had a hissy fit when LDB asked the tech for his opinion, based on the 30 or 40 human decomposing bodies he has had to collect -if this vehicle smelled of human decomposition.

Baez kept trying to get him to drop the human and just stick to decomp, but no cigar.

 

[grandmaj]

HLN hasn't figured it out yet that there is no one to testify to the sexual abuse except Casey? Did they forget all of these wonderful things she said about her father and mother and homelife? They already tried to get it out of George. He denied it. Now who are they going to get it from?

 

[lmcgill]

Is there a list of defense witnesses?

Thanks

 

[Miaa]

HLN hasn't figured it out yet that there is no one to testify to the sexual abuse except Casey? Did they forget all of these wonderful things she said about her father and mother and homelife? They already tried to get it out of George. He denied it. Now who are they going to get it from?

Another invisa-person.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I thought he said he did wear a hairnet but the defense team did not, they only wore gloves.

Are you questioning the excellent hearing of "the mock juror", Shelbar? :snooty:

(Lol...I misunderstood.)

 

[Sun]

So, I have a glass of wine, I'm making homemade spaghetti sauce, pasta and meatballs and am thinking about my "wow" moment today.

Don't know if it's been discussed, but did ya'll catch when ICA said "when this goes to trial" in one of the jail videos???

IMO, Casey's was likely thinking that the State didn't have the evidence "to be able to prove" that Caylee was dead or that she was in any way connected to the death. Those jail visitation videos were all done before Casey was indicted for first degree murder.

 

[wandering]

Maybe she was only thinking there would be a trial for child endangerment and lying to police? I think she thought the body would be found and Zanny would be blamed.

I'm waiting for an explanation for why KC left her purse in the car. Imo, I think she was hoping someone would steal it (the car). I believe that was her plan, but the dummy cameras probably scared off any would-be thieves.

And you all know the rest of the story...

:boohoo:

 

[LancelotLink]

not that I know anything about this...

With CM today - I was beginning to think he wanted to get the witness declared as hostile so he could pose leading questions and slide in some insinuation - or to get them angry so the make some kind of bone headed statement.

But just in general CM seems to be taking a real affront to people to don't bow obeisance to his "age and wisdom" - soooo :twocents::twocents:

That was the silliest thing I have seen all day. Jose made a remark to YM that he noticed how YM would address the jury on direct but he didn't on cross. After that, I notice that GB and CB and others do address the jury on cross. Why would CM make such a demand from this witness? "I'm over here!"
He acted the same way with NL, and he busted out laughing, as if to say, "Forget you, old codger."

 

[Intermezzo]

I also posted this in the Amy H Testimony thread..........interesting tidbit! I don't think we've ever seen a transcript from a sidebar.

Watching WKMG talking heads after testimony ended today. Tony P obtained the transcript of the sidebar at the end of Amy's testimony. Apparently, she was served with a subpena by the defense to keep her in FL for the purpose of impeaching her testimony. She was very upset because she had an afternoon flight back to Barcelona. HHJP asked JB what specifically he intended on impeaching her with and he said "I'd rather not say". In the end, HHJP allowed her to leave and said if the DT needs her testimony again, he will arrange for her to appear via Skype! Waiting to see if the transcript appears on Click Orlando!

I just saw that clip on the local news
I heard Transcript to a Sidebar....I stopped what I was doing and rushed over to the TV....
Now of course we will be re-reading Amy's depo to try and see if there actually was conflicting statements..

IMO I doubt it...and IMO Casey (with the help of Baez and Mason) wants to get back at Amy..Amy became the enemy when she filed charges against Casey for stealing and agreed to prosecute..... this is an opportune moment for ICA to try...
:twocents:

 

[npcougar]

"I'd rather not say." ?? How typical of JB.

I bet he is going to call an ex-boyfriend of Amy's who dated KC. He pressed her about dating other guys who dated KC.

 

[Softail]

HLN hasn't figured it out yet that there is no one to testify to the sexual abuse except Casey? Did they forget all of these wonderful things she said about her father and mother and homelife? They already tried to get it out of George. He denied it. Now who are they going to get it from?

Zanny? :waitasec:

 

[Eidetic]

Grab a stool and get comfortable!

http://americanpublichousereview.com/2009.05/wharf_rat_fells_point_baltimore_md/

Fells Point! Baltimore- the drinking town with a football/baseball problem

 

[logicalgirl]

My favorite witness this morning was the Femaie Detective that CM was cross examining.

He objected to her turning to the jury to give each answer, and demanded she look only at him. HHJP sighed and said her requirement is only to answer his question.

The Female Detective looked at Mason as if to say - oh so you want to dance? Watch this!

Mason moved away from the podium and tried to get in her line of vision but it didn't work, because then we could barely hear him.

Needless to say, she continued to turn towards the jury to answer his question.

Result:
Female Detective - 10/10
Mason: Mincemeat

:great: :floorlaugh: :great: .....Priceless!

 

[AZlawyer]

I need to clarify. I was talking about hearsay with Uklaw and made some posts stating the question as to whether Dr. Lee tested evidence call for hearsay. Upon reflection, I think Uklaw is right and it isn't hearsay because an action can be subject to hearsay but only if it states something, like a nod or the shaking of the head, etc. Dr. Lee testing something would probably not fall into that area.

However, since Dr, Lee is apparently not testifying, it could be. I'm not sure. Or at least, asking him if Dr. Lee tested the evidence likely cued the state that the next question would elicit hearsay.

In any event, the question lacked foundation and would be irrelevant if Dr. Lee was not testifying.

I just wanted to clear that up because I don't want to give incorrect information, especially to any law students!!!!!!

Yes, I think it would have gone like this (speculation only):

Baez: And didn't Dr. Lee also inspect the trunk?

GB: Yes.

Baez: And did he find something you didn't find?

GB: HE SAID HE DID, YES. (hearsay)
----------------

There was no way GB was going to be able to answer that line of questioning without saying Dr. Lee CLAIMED to have found one hair in the trunk and three hairs in the trash bag. (See the MythBusters thread for my post dated 3/6/10 regarding the details, but to summarize Dr. Lee did not find any 17 hairs.)

I mean, GB doesn't know if Dr. Lee really found those hairs or not. Maybe they fell off Dr. Lee's own head while he was inspecting the evidence and then Dr. Lee picked them up and said, "AH HAH! A HAIR!"

 

[shelbar53]

Are you questioning the excellent hearing of "the mock juror", Shelbar? :snooty:

(Lol...I misunderstood.)

sorry, thought you were mason

 

[beach]

I need to clarify. I was talking about hearsay with Uklaw and made some posts stating the question as to whether Dr. Lee tested evidence call for hearsay. Upon reflection, I think Uklaw is right and it isn't hearsay because an action can be subject to hearsay but only if it states something, like a nod or the shaking of the head, etc. Dr. Lee testing something would probably not fall into that area.

However, since Dr, Lee is apparently not testifying, it could be. I'm not sure. Or at least, asking him if Dr. Lee tested the evidence likely cued the state that the next question would elicit hearsay.

In any event, the question lacked foundation and would be irrelevant if Dr. Lee was not testifying.

I just wanted to clear that up because I don't want to give incorrect information, especially to any law students!!!!!!

Thanks for clarifying, gitana! :blowkiss:

I just kept seeing snippets of this debate from several posters and wanted to make it clear why Dr. Lee was no longer an expert for the defense so the whole point was moot. JB shouldn't have even brought up his name in front of the jury, imo.