2011.1.21 HHJP: NO to Kronk's prior bad acts!

[Oakley]

Justice for Mr Kronk today.....Justice for Caylee come May.

 

[LancelotLink]

o/t

lol!

(Cindy Anthony)

(George Anthony)

That's a really interesting point about KC taking the stand. For that matter, after reviewing what Baez has put on the Defense's Mitigation Witness List, KC might implode in Phase II of the trial.

o/t

The judge's decision is a really great thing to happen to Roy Kronk. One other thing comes to mind, though. Wonder if he is thinking of a possible defamation case down the road? He might be willing to let it go; I guess a lot depends on what happens when he is on the stand.

Given the pusillanimous behavior of JB at the bond hearing, trying to rip into Yuri about vacation and taking his time, I'd say we will see plenty of implied and outright poo slinging. And BTW, IMO JB at that bond hearing~JB thought he looked like a tough guy ripping Yuri to shreds, but he reminded me of a teacup yorkie with no teeth trying to gum someone's ankles.

 

[faefrost]

o/t

lol!

(Cindy Anthony)

(George Anthony)

That's a really interesting point about KC taking the stand. For that matter, after reviewing what Baez has put on the Defense's Mitigation Witness List, KC might implode in Phase II of the trial.

o/t

The judge's decision is a really great thing to happen to Roy Kronk. One other thing comes to mind, though. Wonder if he is thinking of a possible defamation case down the road? He might be willing to let it go; I guess a lot depends on what happens when he is on the stand.

Isn't it next to impossible to bring a case of defamation, libel or slander against an attorney for things said in even the vaguest inference of good faith in defending their client before the court?

JG would have a strong case against Cindy and the A's. But I don't think RK will ever be able to touch JB or CM.

 

[Elphaba]

Defamation case: I think he would have a legitimate gripe with Padilla, given that LP is the one that spearheaded this witch hunt of Kronk. LP is the one that went on national tv and drug Kronk through heck.

 

[The World According]

Defamation case: I think he would have a legitimate gripe with Padilla, given that LP is the one that spearheaded this witch hunt of Kronk. LP is the one that went on national tv and drug Kronk through heck.

Yes, here you go friend.

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/4453889...yers-Letter-to-Leonard-Padilla-on-Feb-20-2009

 

[chefmom]

Isn't it next to impossible to bring a case of defamation, libel or slander against an attorney for things said in even the vaguest inference of good faith in defending their client before the court?

JG would have a strong case against Cindy and the A's. But I don't think RK will ever be able to touch JB or CM.

BBM

What about the things said outside of court, in front of tv cameras, or on national tv shows? Surely that can't be okay. And the idea of him broadcasting the videos of the disgruntled ex stating that she thought RK was the killer? That has to cross a line. Please tell me that JB can't just say any dirty, sleazy, underhanded thing he wants about anyone that he wants and get away with it just because he has a client. moo

 

[Elphaba]

Indeed they will try, I bet and often.
I must find the spot in the hearing, but Cheney mumbled some bs about we will just bring it up if we need to impeach him and then the state, of course, has the right to object. I remember thinking at the time....

Oh my they are going to pull stunts like bring up stuff the judge already ruled on, the state will jump up and object, the judge will sustain the
objection (agree with the state), but indeed the jury will have already heard it and one cannot unring the bell. We CANNOT have a drinking game to where we all take a shot every time the State has to object. I am setting that rule in advance. WE CANNOT. We'll wind up in our local e r rooms with alcohol poisoning.

What was the short little lawyer who owned the firm in the Ally McBeal series, the one that had all of the little stunts he would pull, and his reputation preceded him with the judges? They'll know better, but play dumb. That seems to be their current and only strategy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lgr_2lRM3G4


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118254/quotes?qt0308698
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLMFeCVwrRI

OMG this also reminds me of this actor's role as the hospital lawyer, Alan Birch, on Chicago Hope. I could only wish HHJP would do to Baez what the CH's "Judge Aldrich" did to Birch when Birch stepped out of line during a hearing:

"I want you to stand up and tell everyone in this courtroom that you are a toad" -- Judge Aldrich orders to Alan Birch
"I am a toad" -- Birch to courtroom

 

[Macushla]

This cracks me up! Attorney Deen must read here..

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2011/01/casey-anthony-a-birthday-present-for-roy-kronk.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+entertainment%2Ftv%2Ftvguy+%28TV+Guy%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

QUOTE:Attorney Deen, offering more analysis for WESH, explained Perry’s problem: “The judge is in a position of trying to guard the public money, but on the other hand, he cannot thwart this defendant’s ability to move around and investigate her case.”

O/T OK, to our legal analysts, law students, paralegals, legal secretaries and everyone else who reads here and is connected to the legal profession: what is it about the word THWART? Is it part of lawyering 101 that you are required to use this word? Is there a list of 'top ten words a lawyer should use?" Or is this one of those cases that once a word comes to your attention, you start seeing/hearing it all over the place. The word probably has been used before, but you never paid attention to it.

 

[strawberry]

Oh don't you know it. The defense will "accidentally" let something slip, get a slap on the wrist. Sorry, too late, it's already in the mind of the jury.

That's just the way Baez rolls....unfortunately.

Moo

Mel

I missed JVM last night so went to read the transcript:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1101/21/ijvm.01.html

MITCHELL: "Well, that`s according to the prosecution. And by the way, we can tell you that we invited Jose Baez and Shady Mason part of Casey Anthony`s dream team, to be on our broadcast today."

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

His Honor already stated, they could not use his prior sexual behaviors against him. But that won't stop Mason from bringing it in, once RK takes the stand. He will try very hard to discredit the very man who listened intently to ICA's words (she's close to home) along with KioMarie's mention of the "zone"...and burying pets there besides hanging out drinking, smoking whatever...

As I recall, RK once was a Bounty Hunter and a PI...what he and his wife did in the privacy of their bedroom, is nobody's beeswax...Since Mason is touted to be the king of reasonable doubt, he will try very hard to discredit the man who found Caylee's remains. I don't doubt for a hot second, LE did check into him...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[The World According]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClNL_1b0OIo[/ame]

 

[Intermezzo]

Mason does seem like the type to blurt out something he knows he shouldn't and then the judge has to say, "The jury will disregard that remark". I have always wondered if the jury really can disregard comments like that. I don't think I could.

bbm
Good point,
To disregard means not to consider or ignore BUT IMO a person does not Forget..

 

[MissJames]

I don't think JB was too happy about losing this fish to Kronk RK.

IIRC WFTV called this weeks ago because JB defaulted by not filing anything. JB denied that reporting to save face, by claiming that RK is still very much a focus. Without the prior bad acts it is even more likely to backfire since the Jury will likely perceive RK as Caylee's hero.

I am glad that HHJP closed the loop on this so that there are no loose ends. Keep it tidy.

If this case goes to trial I'm willing to bet the defense brings it up ,anyway. There will be an objection and the jury will be told to disregard,but they will have heard it. That's the way this defense seems to operate .:loser:
Sorry,JB. Still won't work .:twocents:

ETA Should have read the rest of the thread before adding my 2cents. Not an original thought in my head!!!!!

 

[MissJames]

bbm
Good point,
To disregard means not to consider or ignore BUT IMO a person does not Forget..

There will come a time for jury deliberations.If a juror is holding out because of a connection to RK (assuming the defense slips something in ) they won't be able to use this as an argument with the other jurors,right? The other jurors won't let it slide,IMO.

 

[MissJames]

O/T OK, to our legal analysts, law students, paralegals, legal secretaries and everyone else who reads here and is connected to the legal profession: what is it about the word THWART? Is it part of lawyering 101 that you are required to use this word? Is there a list of 'top ten words a lawyer should use?" Or is this one of those cases that once a word comes to your attention, you start seeing/hearing it all over the place. The word probably has been used before, but you never paid attention to it.

I think WS has a lot of FANS !!!!!:great:

 

[Intermezzo]

There will come a time for jury deliberations.If a juror is holding out because of a connection to RK (assuming the defense slips something in ) they won't be able to use this as an argument with the other jurors,right? The other jurors won't let it slide,IMO.

Right, and I agree....
The person could not use it, voice it as an argument in deliberations with other jurors...
I only meant that the "statement" does stay with them in their minds...and I wonder if it plays at all in their own decision making....unconsciously that is...:innocent:

 

[LancelotLink]

Right, and I agree....
The person could not use it, voice it as an argument in deliberations with other jurors...
I only meant that the "statement" does stay with them in their minds...and I wonder if it plays at all in their own decision making....unconsciously that is...:innocent:

I believe it would stay with them and I also believe the defense would hope it stayed and hope it affected their decision, else, why bother trying slipping those little drops of poison?
I imagine we will see several sidebar discussions...daily!

 

[LambChop]

Can't the defense only cross-examine on the subject which the state brings up in their questioning of the witness? So if the state keeps it to how RK found the body and what he observed and nothing else defense can't ask those personal questions that they would love for the jury to hear.

 

[LancelotLink]

Can't the defense only cross-examine on the subject which the state brings up in their questioning of the witness? So if the state keeps it to how RK found the body and what he observed and nothing else defense can't ask those personal questions that they would love for the jury to hear.

I believe you are right. Those are the rules. However, rules and JB are strangers. I look for him to TRY and slip something in, such as "You know alot about duct tape, don't you Mr. Kronk?"
Objection!

 

[LolaMoon08]

I think if the defense tries to attack Mr. Kronk on the stand, the jurors will find it deplorable. I don't know how the State plans to line up their witnesses, which I think will be interesting to say the least, but I hope that he testifies after the Anthony's. I think once the Anthony's testify, the jurors are going to be shocked, disgusted, and just sad for Caylee. The defense would be stupid to attack Mr. Kronk if he testifies after the Anthony family, Casey's friends, listen to the 911 call, the phone call Casey made to her house, etc... Her defense may just get her the death penalty if the jurors see that Casey has no problem destroying another persons life.