All Texas Equusearch-Related Filings #1

[logicalgirl]

I was kind of wondering that too. Because in reading the order it is clear that not only did the original order not change, but that the defense was singled out for their behavior and extra restrictions were placed on them as a result?

Who on earth would interpret that as "defense can finely see the records!" I mean really?

Just Baez. :banghead:

 

[Intermezzo]

Basically, Mark NeJame and TES won bigtime. Defense's losing streak continues apace. Talk about endlessly shooting yourself in the foot!

No wonder Cheney and Baez immediately hotfooted to the media with their lying spin.

Exactly...NeJame and TES won..

The previous Order remains in full force and effect.

So what's New?
1..The Defense is ordered not to, basically, leak any information. PERIOD.

2..The location for the review of the files will be at a mutually agreed upon location between the Defense and counsel for TES.

3..If the Defense finds searchers they want more info on..then TES, the State Prosecutors and the Defense will attempt to determine if disclosure of the docs should be released to the Defense..if they can't agree the files will be tabbed and brought before the court subject to the conditions of the previous Order .Not sure if the Defense thought the Judge would include the State Prosecutors in this scenario..

4..The Monitor will now be a Magistrate.

:waitasec: I don't see how this is a Victory for the Defense..a Victory for TES yes, and IMO even the State Prosecutors..since the Judge has included them along with TES to determine if disclosure of information regarding searchers should be released to the Defense...

 

[Intermezzo]

Baez get lots BC didn't get, he gets to show the State and MN his notes on why he wants to have a better look at anyone - and the HHJP too if no one agrees - that's pretty special isn't it?:croc:

It sure is special..the Defense got the State Prosecutors involved as well, BC didn't get that..

 

[faefrost]

b. If the Defense identifies what is considers to be relevant or material searchers after its inspection and investigation, then the attorneys for Texas EquuSearch, the State and the Defense shall attempt to determine whether disclosure of the documents should be released to the Defense. If an agreement cannot be reached then the identified file or documents shall be tabbed and brought before the Court for a hearing subject to the conditions set forth in the previous Court Order.

I would like to be optimistic .... but .... in light of the past wrangling by the Defense ... I have a feeling there is going to be continual and intense debate over any additional (more than 32 files already disclosed to the defense) searcher records which the defense might contend are relevant ....

MN has already made his position perfectly clear --- that NO OTHER searchers are relevant, other than the 32 already disclosed who searched in the close proximity of where Caylee's remains were found.

Now, the defense is going to have to present very compelling reasons to the Judge for why they need more ...

Precisely. And that's what makes it a huge win for TES. Now JB has to fight tooth and nail and provide in court justification to the judge of precisely why he wants each and every piece of paper beyond those 32 files. He has to argue for each one individually. He cannot use them to "Kronk" someone. He cannot do one of his snide media dumps of info or hold a press conference. He must make an individual case for each and every file, with the Defense, the TES lawyer arguing against and the special magistrate and the judge looking on.

The defense lost hugely on two points on this issue. That seal that prevents them from disclosing any information. That was directed at them and them alone. Note it did not specify that the SA cannot divulge information, nor did it specify that TES themselves must keep their records private. It laid out the defense as the untrustworthy party specifically. This was a HUGE warning to them (granted with this crew they seem to be missing picking up on alot of these). It clearly spells out to everyone that the judge knows what they are doing, he is watching it closely, and it will be stomped on in surprisingly harsh ways should they attempt it again.

Further that review by the judge. There is no longer any flexibility. If they want something they will have to do so publicly before the judge. Every time. Once again they have lost the judges trust, period.

When Baez agreed to withdraw his motion in order to facilitate allowing the existing order to stand, it was not a matter of compromise. It was a matter of consequences. HHJP most likely clearly spelled out for JB and CM what the actual outcome would be if he wished to argue that particular document in open court. With particular emphasis on BC's public statements as he resigned. I know that it is unethical under the Florida bar for one lawyer to threaten another with filing a disciplinary action. But is it unethical for a Judge to tell a Lawyer, "if you submit this piece of paper in this form I will be obligated to not only rule on it, but submit a bar complaint on the basis of what it says!"?

 

[strawberry]

Baez filed this on Motion for Reconsideration on 5/6/10 after HHJP took over:

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...or Rulings By Disqualified Judge 5-6-2010.pdf

The above in relation to TES is what was withdrawn on 7/15/10 at the hearing during/after the sidebar. Then HHJP issued this order:

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...ior Rulings by Disqualified Judge 7-21-10.pdf

Then Nejame filed the Motion to Quash. The Baez filed Response to Motion, then Nejame filed his response and today the judge issued his order on all the above.

:bow::blowkiss:Thank YOU!! I could NOT follow all the motion to motion on the response to the motion to the quash to the response to the latin term...that does make more sense now. JB withdrew it a long time ago then...so yes it does look like JB got a spanking.

 

[ThinkTank]

Precisely. And that's what makes it a huge win for TES. Now JB has to fight tooth and nail and provide in court justification to the judge of precisely why he wants each and every piece of paper beyond those 32 files. He has to argue for each one individually. He cannot use them to "Kronk" someone. He cannot do one of his snide media dumps of info or hold a press conference. He must make an individual case for each and every file, with the Defense, the TES lawyer arguing against and the special magistrate and the judge looking on.

The defense lost hugely on two points on this issue. That seal that prevents them from disclosing any information. That was directed at them and them alone. Note it did not specify that the SA cannot divulge information, nor did it specify that TES themselves must keep their records private. It laid out the defense as the untrustworthy party specifically. This was a HUGE warning to them (granted with this crew they seem to be missing picking up on alot of these). It clearly spells out to everyone that the judge knows what they are doing, he is watching it closely, and it will be stomped on in surprisingly harsh ways should they attempt it again.

Further that review by the judge. There is no longer any flexibility. If they want something they will have to do so publicly before the judge. Every time. Once again they have lost the judges trust, period.

When Baez agreed to withdraw his motion in order to facilitate allowing the existing order to stand, it was not a matter of compromise. It was a matter of consequences. HHJP most likely clearly spelled out for JB and CM what the actual outcome would be if he wished to argue that particular document in open court. With particular emphasis on BC's public statements as he resigned. I know that it is unethical under the Florida bar for one lawyer to threaten another with filing a disciplinary action. But is it unethical for a Judge to tell a Lawyer, "if you submit this piece of paper in this form I will be obligated to not only rule on it, but submit a bar complaint on the basis of what it says!"?

Thank you! always enjoy reading your thorough postings.
I thought that JB did not withdraw his most recent filing wherein he accused MN of coercing the Anthonys into signing the waiver, and used BC as back up for that argument. It is my understanding that JB withdrew another Motion that he had filed previously about asking the Judge to reconsider Judge S's prior rulings. Then MN filed his bad faith Motion - then JB filed the recent thing about the waiver.

So, it is my understanding that JB's filing containing Cindy's emails is still on the record ... and BC needs to file something with the Court stating that the statements involving him, in that filing, are untrue ... is that correct? BC's issue with the filing is a separate issue from TES/MN right?

 

[Intermezzo]

I believe ThinkTank means that an appellate issue may remain because BC had been given access to ALL the records before the defense did. I'm just guessing though.

That's only because BC actually took the initiative and went to NeJames office to review the files, like the Prosecution did..

But wait :waitasec:..Baez, or someone in his office, did do something..
They did search and find the number to call a copy company to send to Nejames office to copy the docs...unfortunately for Baez, that was not part of the Judges Order...

 

[Intermezzo]

Considering BC is a couple of rungs on the ladder smarter than JB is, one would conclude if BC didn't find anything, JB won't either.

Doesn't mean he won't try, but even if he thinks he did, he will have to convince HHJP he did.
Even if he finds a witness, then the SAO gets the name too, right?

BBM
He has to convince counsel for TES and the State Prosecutors first.

 

[Intermezzo]

Baez filed motions for the above state deposition transcripts, probably to determine if he needed to depose them, they are all State witnesses that have already been deposed:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/39566240/05142010-Motion-For-Transcription


The JAC filed their response:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/40240701/20100524-JAC-Response-to-Motion-for-Transcription-Services


Today was the judge ordering the depositions be transcribed.


Here is ThinkTank's master State Witness List:

https://docs.google.com/document/edit?id=1eypXuLsh5uatd0yhKQPIBl3_qCYIw5K-bc0q2jEVkHo&hl=en&pli=1#

Thanks for the info nums24..I can't open the doc about the transcriptions.

 

[ThinkTank]

Exactly...NeJame and TES won..

The previous Order remains in full force and effect.

So what's New?
1..The Defense is ordered not to, basically, leak any information. PERIOD.

2..The location for the review of the files will be at a mutually agreed upon location between the Defense and counsel for TES.

3..If the Defense finds searchers they want more info on..then TES, the State Prosecutors and the Defense will attempt to determine if disclosure of the docs should be released to the Defense..if they can't agree the files will be tabbed and brought before the court subject to the conditions of the previous Order .Not sure if the Defense thought the Judge would include the State Prosecutors in this scenario..

4..The Monitor will now be a Magistrate.

:waitasec: I don't see how this is a Victory for the Defense..a Victory for TES yes, and IMO even the State Prosecutors..since the Judge has included them along with TES to determine if disclosure of information regarding searchers should be released to the Defense...

How will this work out physically speaking?
The State Prosecutors and MN will NOT be present while the defense is reviewing the docs, with the SMag monitoring, correct?

So, the defense reviews and tabs ... then what? They call up MN and LDB and FG and JA and say come on over and lookie what we tabbed and lets see if we can agree that I get more info, so we don't have to take this to the Judge to decide?

 

[nums24]

Thanks for the info nums24..I can't open the doc about the transcriptions.

Which link please? I'll fix it, so sorry :waitasec:

 

[ThinkTank]

OK so it sounded like the "deal" was if JB withdrew his latest B.S., such and such would happen. But such and such was what they already had plus restrictions. Am I reading that wrong? Or did he withdraw something else and not the one that made BC quit? I'm so confused...

As far as I understand it ... JB did NOT withdraw the filing that made BC quit ... the one with Cindy's emails in it, and the one that BC says contains untrue statements involving BC ...

 

[ThinkTank]

So this would mean BC did not get access to anything JB couldn't have access to..... I got the impression from the poster I quoted that the implication was "the defense did not get the same access to the records that BC got."

This is a great win for TES and MN! :dance:

Sorry for any confusion I may have contributed to ... I should have said that this is what JB is whining about, and will "try" to use for an appeal issue ... but it will not work. Judge P. covered all the bases, so JB would not be successful with that appeal issue. MN had told the Judge in one of the last Hearings that JB was trying to create bogus appeal issues with his arguments. JB was trying to say that BC was allowed to look at all the records with no time restraints and no restriction on taking notes and no monitor watching over him - JB tried to slip in that BC had no restrictions on being able to COPY anything from the records, but that did not fly.

 

[nums24]

How will this work out physically speaking?
The State Prosecutors and MN will NOT be present while the defense is reviewing the docs, with the SMag monitoring, correct?

So, the defense reviews and tabs ... then what? They call up MN and LDB and FG and JA and say come on over and lookie what we tabbed and lets see if we can agree that I get more info, so we don't have to take this to the Judge to decide?

BBM - FWIW, That's the way I interpreted today's order.

 

[Intermezzo]

Which link please? I'll fix it, so sorry :waitasec:

Actually, it's working now...I had to update my Reader program.

 

[ThinkTank]

How will this work out physically speaking?
The State Prosecutors and MN will NOT be present while the defense is reviewing the docs, with the SMag monitoring, correct?

So, the defense reviews and tabs ... then what? They call up MN and LDB and FG and JA and say come on over and lookie what we tabbed and lets see if we can agree that I get more info, so we don't have to take this to the Judge to decide?[/QUOTE]

BBM - FWIW, That's the way I interpreted today's order.

In my view, this has become much more complicated?
The judge has added another step in the process of the doc review. Instead of the defense reviewing, and tabbing, and then giving to the Special Mag to take to the Judge ..... NOW, the defense reviews, tabs, and then has to assemble MN and all the State Prosecutors to have a pow wow about the tabbed files .. then when (not IF) they do not agree on the relevance ... then the Special Mag takes the info to Judge P. to decide.

The judge is leaving it up to a group of people to "get along" who no doubt, do NOT get along, and do not agree on ANYTHING! I don't even see how they are going to mutually agree on the location of the doc review, without the judge stepping in and making a ruling on that as well???

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

In my view, this has become much more complicated?
The judge has added another step in the process of the doc review. Instead of the defense reviewing, and tabbing, and then giving to the Special Mag to take to the Judge ..... NOW, the defense reviews, tabs, and then has to assemble MN and all the State Prosecutors to have a pow wow about the tabbed files .. then when (not IF) they do not agree on the relevance ... then the Special Mag takes the info to Judge P. to decide.

The judge is leaving it up to a group of people to "get along" who no doubt, do NOT get along, and do not agree on ANYTHING! I don't even see how they are going to mutually agree on the location of the doc review, without the judge stepping in and making a ruling on that as well???

. . . and all of this with the 4,000 records before what deadline?

 

[logicalgirl]

In my view, this has become much more complicated?
The judge has added another step in the process of the doc review. Instead of the defense reviewing, and tabbing, and then giving to the Special Mag to take to the Judge ..... NOW, the defense reviews, tabs, and then has to assemble MN and all the State Prosecutors to have a pow wow about the tabbed files .. then when (not IF) they do not agree on the relevance ... then the Special Mag takes the info to Judge P. to decide.

The judge is leaving it up to a group of people to "get along" who no doubt, do NOT get along, and do not agree on ANYTHING! I don't even see how they are going to mutually agree on the location of the doc review, without the judge stepping in and making a ruling on that as well???

Maybe that's the whole point of this ruling? He knows they don't get along, will continue to argue, with Baez whining even more, so he has decided to put an end to it. It's not like HHJP takes a long time to make a decision. He should be able to plow through a stack of requests/dissents fairly quickly. I'd bet money HHJP already knows the parameters he will use to make each decision and I'll also bet they are very very narrow.
Anyone care to "raise me?"

 

[ThinkTank]

. . . and all of this with the 4,000 records before what deadline?

I don't recall if the Judge set a date for the TES doc review to be completed?
But both sides only have until August 31st to put names on their witness list (if defense team magically comes up with any "witnesses" they want to add to the Defense Witness List, out of the 4,000 TES searchers).

 

[ThinkTank]

Maybe that's the whole point of this ruling? He knows they don't get along, will continue to argue, with Baez whining even more, so he has decided to put an end to it. It's not like HHJP takes a long time to make a decision. He should be able to plow through a stack of requests/dissents fairly quickly. I'd bet money HHJP already knows the parameters he will use to make each decision and I'll also bet they are very very narrow.
Anyone care to "raise me?"

Yes, maybe Judge P. ruled that they must hash it out between themselves before bringing it to him, so he doesn't have to have a long drawn out Hearing for each individual request? That baloney will have already been done and Judge P. can go straight to making his rulings.