Casey Anthony reportedly planning to dump lawyer Jose Baez

[RR0004]

I agree but I also think the foreman led and he did not like the prosecution and as much as said so.

But people don't put all that together - they think wow who is the lawyer that won that case? And Baez is the answer they get.

I guess time will tell if Jose maintains his "wow" factor.

 

[katydid23]

You're never going to get that because then there is no way to stop the opposite from happening, having jurors who are seated with already a bias towards one's guilt or innocence. You could have the same thing happen, only in this case most of the jury won't even bother to listen to the OS because they've already formulated an opinion.

Well, given the two options, I will take that one. :floorlaugh:

 

[Solace]

I guess time will tell if Jose maintains his "wow" factor.

Absollutely, I am going to say he doesn't get this lucky again.

 

[bayouland]

I am giddy that things are not going the way KC expected them to go. I don't think she expected to be losing half of her appeals team, or to be meeting the degree of backlash that has erupted since the release of her so-called diary. She essentially hasn't gotten a great deal of press on it, and the press she's gotten has been less than stellar. Darn it, Van Der Sloot's guilty plea came out at roughly the same time as her video outing, and the local news outlets only seem passivily interested in her shenanigans. Cheney can't be happy with her latest baggage that she seems to have piled on herself.
I can't wait to see what type of train wreck is around the next corner for KC.

Reminds me of the People Vs Larry Flynt movie (except for the $$$)
Larry Flynt to Attorney - paraphrase....
You can't quit, I am the most fun, rich, and always in trouble...

 

[cityslick]

Well, given the two options, I will take that one. :floorlaugh:

That can work against what you want though. What if you seat a jury who is biased to already believe the client is innocent (especially possible if the client is a well known person, like a celebrity).

 

[Scamperoo]

I did not say the truth is irrelevant - but any lawyer will tell you especially when talking about this case that he was not there to tell the truth,he was there to win and he did.

Why is when I post something, it gets read into that these are my beliefs. Obviously, he was not there to tell the truth, he was there to win.

And I am not the only one who knows this - watching HLN last night the usual lawyer who comments on this case said exactly that "he was not there to find the truth, he was there to get his client off".

That is a reality.

Um....isn't stating that her defense attorney "wasn't there to find the truth" make the truth irrelevant? that is how it seems to me, CA's defense team went one step further they concocted a lie. All the time knowing Caylee was dead at the hands of her mother. So they knew the truth and it was irrelevant.

If the lawyer finds evidence that his client did do it, he doesn't have to tell anyone. But he would have to recuse himself from defending the individual - the ruling prevents a lawyer from lying in a court of regulation, as well as suborning perjury. A lawyer couldn't legitimately or ethically go on defending the client if he found proof that the client was within fact guilty.

This is what a defense attorney is supposed to do

 

[logicalgirl]

Actually I said that would be a misconception Ranch. You might want to read my post again. He won the case as much as you may not like that. It is a fact.

Okay we are playing tennis here - back and forth, back and forth.

You say he had a big win six months ago and will always be remembered for winning the unwinnable case. Uh Huh - agree - You are correct. A big check mark or a gold star if you like them better!:great:

Six months have gone by. I said he was slinking out of town with his tail between his legs or something to that affect - today.

What good is the memory - when he has nothing tangible to show for it? He wanted accolades in the media - he got none. He wanted contracts - he got none. He wanted bags of money for himself for appearances and selling OCA's appearances and interviews. Okay so he got a few bucks from the Iowa pics he kindly leaked. So all in all - epic fail.

Yesterday when he won, he was a smiling smirking, cocky, glib, face in every camera he could find type of guy. He went to New York to sell himself and OCA. Epic fail. Today he is a heavier, somewhat stern, dejected, almost closed mouth individual who expresses frustration at any mention of this case and fobs it off to Mason and friends. Clearly not a man who is upbeat with a future so bright he needs to wear shades.

A man OCA has kicked to the curb who we hear is about to have his houses foreclosed on. Clearly "not winning"

You seem to be talking about yesterday and I'm talking about today. You think he'll be forever remembered as winning and I agree - a winning pariah.

Issue solved.:innocent:

 

[21merc7]

Is it 4:59 p.m. yet? Someone has got to file something for JB to be gone. Either him or her. I'm impatient, as you can see, lol.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

IMO it wasnt Baez alone that can take the glory for this victory. It was a combination of decisions starting with how fast that jury was picked. Remember the last juror chosen didnt want to be and wasnt death penalty qualified. How long does it take to vio dire a death penalty case anyways? Something like 3 weeks at least was my impression and this jury was chosen with ramming speed. That was the 1st strike against the prosecution. Then they get sequestered strike 2. Then IMO cagey tactics are employed by the defense and IMO photoshopped pics to lean credit to their case and ofcourse liars galore. Whip all of that into a parfait of confusion and Voila, a not guilty verdict...

The Pinellas Twelve weren't the sharpest crayons in the box, but HHJP's jury instructions were lacking one very important element: It was not made perfectly clear to them that they were charged with first determining Casey's guilt or innocence on the charges and not whether or not she should be sentenced to death. The decision about the DP was the second phase of their duties that would come after the verdict had been rendered - not before. I honestly believe that the jurors did not understand their duties and that HHJP was remiss in not being more explicit about this in his jury instructions. jmo

 

[bayouland]

Thank you City. That is all I am saying. As much I sat that shaking my head when Baez put in the gas can thing with the duct tape and wondered what the f$#@ are you talkin about. And as much as I was in shock when the verdict came down- I do believe I walked straight into the wall when leaving the bedroom - the fact is he got her off - he kissed up to the jury every day and every evening - so that he actually had me laughing - but it worked apparently - the jury did not like the prosecution and when that happens they just don't give a chit.

I agree with you. Baez played the role of the underdog and let everyone underestimate including the Judge giving him concession after concession because he was "learning" while he smoozed, lied and did everything like his future career depended on it.

He fooled all of them. The man is not an idiot, and he will go on to make plenty of money. (and I hate it).

JMO

 

[cityslick]

Um....isn't stating that her defense attorney "wasn't there to find the truth" make the truth irrelevant? that is how it seems to me, CA's defense team went one step further they concocted a lie. All the time knowing Caylee was dead at the hands of her mother. So they knew the truth and it was irrelevant.

If the lawyer finds evidence that his client did do it, he doesn't have to tell anyone. But he would have to recuse himself from defending the individual - the ruling prevents a lawyer from lying in a court of regulation, as well as suborning perjury. A lawyer couldn't legitimately or ethically go on defending the client if he found proof that the client was within fact guilty.

This is what a defense attorney is supposed to do

While what you say isn't false, there is no way to prove that any defense lawyer knows what is truth and what isn't based on attorney/client priviledge. It sometimes works the other way as well. A prosecutor knows they can convict a suspect on a charge, but decides to add additional charges with much less (if any) evidence. For example, a murder suspect on trial for one murder, but adding charges for two more additional murders with very little evidence to link the suspect to.

 

[Scamperoo]

WE have to STOP the stupid practice of choosing jurors from a pool of people WHO DO NOT READ OR LISTEN TO THE NEWS. We cannot choose juries made up of people who do not have the curiousity or the concern or the brains to want to know what is going on in their world. We see what happens if we choose jurors like that. FCA's jury listened to Opening Arguments and that was that. They stopped listening or thinking after that and just focused on what the night's entertainment was going to be.

I agree to some extent, we choose jurors biased in favor or supposedly neutral or totally ignorant of the world around them and expect a reasonable verdict. How about taking the the first 12 people who qualify after a background check and let them do their best. Just seems rather silly to choose an apathetic jury not inclined to find anyone guilty to stack the deck , particularly when some DA's are rewriting the rules. JMO

 

[Solace]

Okay we are playing tennis here - back and forth, back and forth.

You say he had a big win six months ago and will always be remembered for winning the unwinnable case. Uh Huh - agree - You are correct. A big check mark or a gold star if you like them better!:great:

Six months have gone by. I said he was slinking out of town with his tail between his legs or something to that affect - today.

What good is the memory - when he has nothing tangible to show for it? He wanted accolades in the media - he got none. He wanted contracts - he got none. He wanted bags of money for himself for appearances and selling OCA's appearances and interviews. Okay so he got a few bucks from the Iowa pics he kindly leaked. So all in all - epic fail.

Yesterday when he won, he was a smiling smirking, cocky, glib, face in every camera he could find type of guy. He went to New York to sell himself and OCA. Epic fail. Today he is a heavier, somewhat stern, dejected, almost closed mouth individual who expresses frustration at any mention of this case and fobs it off to Mason and friends. Clearly not a man who is upbeat with a future so bright he needs to wear shades.

A man OCA has kicked to the curb who we hear is about to have his houses foreclosed on. Clearly "not winning"

You seem to be talking about yesterday and I'm talking about today. You think he'll be forever remembered as winning and I agree - a winning pariah.

Issue solved.:innocent:

There you go!:great:

 

[Solace]

Is it 4:59 p.m. yet? Someone has got to file something for JB to be gone. Either him or her. I'm impatient, as you can see, lol.

Really? Oooh. More info hitting the waves. Look forward to it!

 

[logicalgirl]

There you go!:great:

Hugs :grouphug: all around - LOL Solace! :loveyou:

 

[21merc7]

Really? Oooh. More info hitting the waves. Look forward to it!

No, no, no, I have no idea! But if JB is not going to be an attorney for her anymore - one of them has to file the appropriate paperwork with the Court for that to become real, not rumor. I was making fun of JB filing everything at 4:59 p.m. on Fridays during this entire saga with the Court, and then not getting anything right and having to correct it. I was just joking around.

Oooh, wonder if he will demand an "Emergency Hearing" to get out???

I don't think he is going anywhere. jmo

 

[Solace]

Um....isn't stating that her defense attorney "wasn't there to find the truth" make the truth irrelevant? that is how it seems to me, CA's defense team went one step further they concocted a lie. All the time knowing Caylee was dead at the hands of her mother. So they knew the truth and it was irrelevant.

If the lawyer finds evidence that his client did do it, he doesn't have to tell anyone. But he would have to recuse himself from defending the individual - the ruling prevents a lawyer from lying in a court of regulation, as well as suborning perjury. A lawyer couldn't legitimately or ethically go on defending the client if he found proof that the client was within fact guilty.

This is what a defense attorney is supposed to do

No, it does not make the truth irrelevant to me - it makes it irrelevant to the defense attorney - he wants to get his client off. He is not going to tell them what he thinks is the truth and hope that they find her innocent. He is going to put up whatever sticks and hope it will work and he did and it did.

Defense lawyers do it all the time; at least on the shows I have seen and I watch them all the time; they blame another family member, they blame a best friend, they blame a witness. This did not start with Baez.

This is reality and Baez did what he was supposed to do as hard as it was to watch for ALL of us. He did it and he won.

 

[Melanie]

Is it 4:59 p.m. yet? Someone has got to file something for JB to be gone. Either him or her. I'm impatient, as you can see, lol.

I'm waiting for the same thing - it hasn't happened. I think that maybe this bombshell was released to take the focus off the video IMHO.

If Jose truly quit, he'd be down at the courthouse. We know by the trial how fast that man can file a motion

I think he's playing with the media....

MOO

Mel

 

[Solace]

No, no, no, I have no idea! But if JB is not going to be an attorney for her anymore - one of them has to file the appropriate paperwork with the Court for that to become real, not rumor. I was making fun of JB filing everything at 4:59 p.m. on Fridays during this entire saga with the Court, and then not getting anything right and having to correct it. I was just joking around.

Oooh, wonder if he will demand an "Emergency Hearing" to get out???

I don't think he is going anywhere. jmo

i don't either. She is worth too much to him. (I think). Her offers have gone down considerably -

 

[Solace]

However SCAMP - Had KC been found guilty - the we would have seen a lot more of the truth re her personality from Baez in order to save her from death. But it never got that far. It is hard to take but it is true.