Casey files for-Indigency; Defense reveals how much it's been paid!

[3doglady]

Are you sure about that QB? Not that I doubt your saying so, but I thought it meant he would be paid the same rate as a public defender, no more than that. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

I know Mason just may be working for a crate of oranges like Dr. Lee, and I think Lyon(s) was just getting paid expenses but that seems up in the air also now, and LBK was working pro bono, but I suppose that also means her expenses were paid.

The JAC expenses meeting will be interested because I understand from their post hearing comments they wrote after the indigency hearing they were not yet satisfied with the explanations Baez gave for his expenditures, and Baez still has to justify those. I assume they were okayed by Strickland but after reading JAC's comments, it doesn't seem so. I'm really interested to know who's in and who's out based on who gets the money and who doesn't. JAC sound like a taxman's audit - eek!

IIRC Rhornsby explained that JB would be paid the public defender rate. I'll look for a link.

 

[beach]

Was there a motion for that or was that simply a request they had made during the last hearing?
Glad to hear it. Of course it should be public, its public funds after all.

It was both. A request addressed to the judge in open court is a verbal motion.

(Contrary to popular belief, all motions are not typed documents.)

 

[strach304]

So you think he could still be able to claim his fees at some later date?

He would get paid at the end of the trial. I don't remember which thread I read it on.(I read them all) His fee would be the state approved rate, the same as a public defender. It may have been in one of the media links but I do have a certain recall of BS and RH commenting on this too.

ETA: OOh, I think I remember now. It's either on the questions for lawyers thread or the RH thread. RH explains how JB must do an accounting for his services and submit it to the JAC. Not sure if the getting paid at the end of trial came from that. Seems I saw that somewhere very recently. Media link, probably BS. Anyway, I got the impression JS is the only one not pro bono.

 

[logicalgirl]

So you think he could still be able to claim his fees at some later date?

As I said before - I'm probably wrong - but I think he will be the only lawyer who will be paid, at the public defender rate. plus costs and expenses. That may be why he stood up and said he is lead attorney.

I can't see a lawyer putting in the amount of time he is going to have to do (now finally) to give ICA a relatively passable defense at trial. There is a lot of work, and there is only so much he can fob off on his free help. Seriously, he won't have time to take that many other cases, at least for the next six months, would he? How would he support his law firm? We know he's blasted through the cash from the ABC deal so that won't help.

Lighting the beacon for AZLawyer - Helloooo Az - your thoughts?

 

[logicalgirl]

He would get paid at the end of the trial. I don't remember which thread I read it on.(I read them all) His fee would be the state approved rate, the same as a public defender. It may have been in one of the media links but I do have a certain recall of BS and RH commenting on this too.

ETA: OOh, I think I remember now. It's either on the questions for lawyers thread or the RH thread. RH explains how JB must do an accounting for his services and submit it to the JAC. Not sure if the getting paid at the end of trial came from that. Seems I saw that somewhere very recently. Media link, probably BS. Anyway, I got the impression JS is the only one not pro bono.

Does he have to wait until the end of the trial to submit it? I remember reading something in I think a thread that had part of his background in it where he called in his expenses at the end of a trial he was involved in, which isn't exactly the way it's usually done.

But surely he would be able to submit them monthly, as long as there was a JAC approved method of accounting?:waitasec:

 

[Omachka]

The order that Judge Strickland signed only grants indigency for costs and no mention is made of fees. The order is HERE I think the only fees that the defense is going to get are fees they already took out of the money she got from selling pictures unless another order gets filed.

 

[QB.]

The order that Judge Strickland signed only grants indigency for costs and no mention is made of fees. The order is HERE I think the only fees that the defense is going to get are fees they already took out of the money she got from selling pictures unless another order gets filed.

That's what I thought too, I linked the order up thread and an article from WFTV saying this order was for costs only and not lawyer fees. There seems to be some debate though that he will submit hours later for fees and possibly have that covered. Is that right?
:waitasec:

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

ORLANDO, Fla. --
Judge Belvin Perry finalized a schedule Monday shoehorning three critical hearings in the next eight days.

On Thursday morning, a hearing will be held to talk about how much taxpayer money Anthony should be budgeted to aid in her defense, now that she has been declared indigent.

On Friday, defense attorney Jose Baez asked Perry if the budget concerns will be discussed in private. Perry decided the budget hearing will be held in open court Thursday.
more at the link:
http://www.wesh.com/caseyanthony/23437124/detail.html



JPJr. is holding the hearing for their budget in open court.

There are no travel fees the JAC will pay for, IIRC. They will pay the attorneys and experts but at their rate of pay.

 

[LambChop]

So you think he could still be able to claim his fees at some later date?

It appears from what he has made off of KC he has already been paid. Defense attorneys should not be rewarded for delaying a trial. jmo

 

[SallyLu]

As I said before - I'm probably wrong - but I think he will be the only lawyer who will be paid, at the public defender rate. plus costs and expenses. That may be why he stood up and said he is lead attorney.

I can't see a lawyer putting in the amount of time he is going to have to do (now finally) to give ICA a relatively passable defense at trial. There is a lot of work, and there is only so much he can fob off on his free help. Seriously, he won't have time to take that many other cases, at least for the next six months, would he? How would he support his law firm? We know he's blasted through the cash from the ABC deal so that won't help.

Lighting the beacon for AZLawyer - Helloooo Az - your thoughts?

This has been going through my mind too. Oh drat......:innocent:

 

[QB.]

I've been looking for a link for the indegency hearing. I thought I remembered CM saying they were not seeking fees for lawyers. I finally found the hearing on youtube and CM stated they are not seeking lawyer fees.
The clip is not great but its the best I could find.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVxt_F_-V78&feature=related[/ame]
at the 6:28 mark, CM - none of the lawyers are seeking attorneys fees at all. He says they want to ensure they have the necessary fees for depositions, expert fees, travel costs, etc. (I'm paraphrasing here)
Again at 8:02, CM - lawyers are appearing pro bono....

So, it appears they will not seek lawyer fees even for JB.

 

[Mamabear1963]

Why do I think I smell stinking fish...they are NOT doing this out of the goodness of their heart because they think KC is innocent and needs rescued.

They are getting something...fame...copyrights for a book or movie...something...they may not be asking for fees....but they aren't just doing it...MOO :croc:

 

[LambChop]

As I said before - I'm probably wrong - but I think he will be the only lawyer who will be paid, at the public defender rate. plus costs and expenses. That may be why he stood up and said he is lead attorney.

I can't see a lawyer putting in the amount of time he is going to have to do (now finally) to give ICA a relatively passable defense at trial. There is a lot of work, and there is only so much he can fob off on his free help. Seriously, he won't have time to take that many other cases, at least for the next six months, would he? How would he support his law firm? We know he's blasted through the cash from the ABC deal so that won't help.

Lighting the beacon for AZLawyer - Helloooo Az - your thoughts?

Think about how much KC received from ABC and other monies donated by TM and AL ($70,000 ea. = $140,000 plus $205,000). Where did all that money go? JB is the only one not working pro bono. Three cases, fraud, civil, criminal. We know how much has been spent on the criminal so far. My guess is JB has a nice little nest egg socked away. Probably charged an arm and a leg for the fraud trial. Maybe that is why he wants a PRIVATE meeting with the judge. Does not want Morgan to know what is going on with the money????? I don't know...but sounds fishy to me. JMO

 

[LambChop]

Why do I think I smell stinking fish...they are NOT doing this out of the goodness of their heart because they think KC is innocent and needs rescued.

They are getting something...fame...copyrights for a book or movie...something...they may not be asking for fees....but they aren't just doing it...MOO :croc:

So fishy it makes the fish market smell like a rose garden. Remember when then Todd Black at the time said ABC had offered a $700,000 plus deal for movie/book rights but it was put away in a drawer? ABC may not be able to make a deal with KC but who would be the next best person to get all the info they need? It's not right, but the "deal in the drawer" statement is what bothered me. jmo

 

[Intermezzo]

As I said before - I'm probably wrong - but I think he will be the only lawyer who will be paid, at the public defender rate. plus costs and expenses. That may be why he stood up and said he is lead attorney.

I can't see a lawyer putting in the amount of time he is going to have to do (now finally) to give ICA a relatively passable defense at trial. There is a lot of work, and there is only so much he can fob off on his free help. Seriously, he won't have time to take that many other cases, at least for the next six months, would he? How would he support his law firm? We know he's blasted through the cash from the ABC deal so that won't help.

Lighting the beacon for AZLawyer - Helloooo Az - your thoughts?

BBM
I agree.

 

[logicalgirl]

Just want to say I am not at all doubting the information QB has posted, just trying to make sense of it in my "logical" little brain.

When I run "pro bono" and Baez together through my logic processor, the whole thing spits out and say "HUH"?

That does not sound at all like the Baez we've grown to love to mock. I want to hear it from him - "I'm getting nothing to defend this person, ICA - it's all pro bono." Doesn't that sound like the punch line to a joke to you?

 

[Mamabear1963]

Just want to say I am not at all doubting the information QB has posted, just trying to make sense of it in my "logical" little brain.

When I run "pro bono" and Baez together through my logic processor, the whole thing spits out and say "HUH"?

That does not sound at all like the Baez we've grown to love to mock. I want to hear it from him - "I'm getting nothing to defend this person, ICA - it's all pro bono." Doesn't that sound like the punch line to a joke to you?

BBM, exactly my thoughts.

 

[Anais]

Just want to say I am not at all doubting the information QB has posted, just trying to make sense of it in my "logical" little brain.

When I run "pro bono" and Baez together through my logic processor, the whole thing spits out and say "HUH"?

That does not sound at all like the Baez we've grown to love to mock. I want to hear it from him - "I'm getting nothing to defend this person, ICA - it's all pro bono." Doesn't that sound like the punch line to a joke to you?

LOL you are so funny!

But in all seriousness I have to say you are 100% on the money. JB doesn't seem the type of atty. to be doing something like this pro bono! He is after all a fairly new guy on the block, is he not?

 

[Omachka]

That's what I thought too, I linked the order up thread and an article from WFTV saying this order was for costs only and not lawyer fees. There seems to be some debate though that he will submit hours later for fees and possibly have that covered. Is that right?
:waitasec:

I was at that hearing when they discussed this and I pulled out my notes. I didn't write down anything about the attorneys being allowed to file for their fees later and I don't remember them saying so... although I think there was some discussion with the Judge in private on this IIRC. Maybe the confusion is over what constitutes costs and what constitutes fees or maybe there is a rule of law somewhere that had been discussed elsewhere that they could come back later. That doesn't seem quite fair to me if it wasn't in the order... what do I know, I'm just a lowly tax payer. :crazy:

 

[QB.]

Just want to say I am not at all doubting the information QB has posted, just trying to make sense of it in my "logical" little brain.

When I run "pro bono" and Baez together through my logic processor, the whole thing spits out and say "HUH"?

That does not sound at all like the Baez we've grown to love to mock. I want to hear it from him - "I'm getting nothing to defend this person, ICA - it's all pro bono." Doesn't that sound like the punch line to a joke to you?

LOL, I know what you mean.
I think I posted the links mostly to convince myself they actually said they are working pro bono, all of them.
Something about that still sticks in my craw too.
For me the lingering doubt is linked to not getting full disclosure about ALL of the money. Apparently JS saw the accounting and believed it was above board but we never saw it.
It continues to raise questions for me, where the heck did all the money go to? Until I see that answered I will continue to doubt what is going on here too.

Wouldn't it be fun to get that full accounting revealed in the hearing this Thursday?