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

[beach]

I'm thinking this needs to be posted one.more.time.

Ricahrd Hornsby is an Orlando criminal defense attorney who is also a WS member. Below is a quote of his I snipped from the "Judge Strickland IS stepping down" thread that is now closed. (linked below)

Originally Posted by rhornsby

The winner in today's developments is the prosecution.

Judge Perry is a former prosecutor who is a no-nonsense, law and order, black letter law judge. Unless the legal issue is well settled in the defense's favor he will never rule for them; whereas Judge Strickland would be more apt to give an expansive view of the law.

More importantly, Judge Perry is the legislative liaison for the ninth circuit. So you can assure yourself that that the purse strings for the defense budgeting conference will be pulled tight.

BBM -- all emphasis mine

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5087183&postcount=373"]http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5087183&postcount=373[/ame]


Love him or not, rhornsby is batting 1000% so far in every prediction he has made involving this case. He knows the legal climate in Orlando and in an earlier post he opined that the defense would look back and see that asking JS to step down was the biggest mistake they ever made. Part of that reason is the "more importantly...." he stated above.

In the JAC Post Hearing Memorandum, JAC also made their opinion quite clear that they have their doubts whether the $275,000 already received by the defense had been spent in a prudent manner.

I'm not saying that attorneys can't be wrong. I'm just going with the assumption that they have more knowledge than we do when it comes to interpreting the statutes. And, particularly in re. Richard Hornsby, how they could be expected to be applied in Orange County, FL.

 

[MD MOMMY]

I'm thinking this needs to be posted one.more.time.

Ricahrd Hornsby is an Orlando criminal defense attorney who is also a WS member. Below is a quote of his I snipped from the "Judge Strickland IS stepping down" thread that is now closed. (linked below)



BBM -- all emphasis mine

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5087183&postcount=373


Love him or not, rhornsby is batting 1000% so far in every prediction he has made involving this case. He knows the legal climate in Orlando and in an earlier post he opined that the defense would look back and see that asking JS to step down was the biggest mistake they ever made. Part of that reason is the "more importantly...." he stated above.

In the JAC Post Hearing Memorandum, JAC also made their opinion quite clear that they have their doubts whether the $275,000 already received by the defense had been spent in a prudent manner.

I'm not saying that attorneys can't be wrong. I'm just going with the assumption that they have more knowledge than we do when it comes to interpreting the statutes. And, particularly in re. Richard Hornsby, how they could be expected to be applied in Orange County, FL.

ITA RH has been on the money thus far. It's almost like he has a secret crystal ball LOL.

 

[logicalgirl]

Wait a minute!!!

I've been reading this new motion the Defense has written asking the JAC to authorize the out of state investigator and the mitigation specialist.

Their line of reasoning is that these two individuals have already invested hours of work, and to get a new investigator and mitigation specialist would mean starting all over.

Starting all over? :waitasec:

Haven't these "experts" been paid for their work? And haven't they turned in reports, summaries and progress reports, etc., that could be handed to the two new people who could start? If they have been paid for this progress, surely the progress reports belong to the defense.

Why wouldn't they take over from that point? This argument doesn't make sense to me.:banghead:

 

[beach]

Wait a minute!!!

I've been reading this new motion the Defense has written asking the JAC to authorize the out of state investigator and the mitigation specialist.

Their line of reasoning is that these two individuals have already invested hours of work, and to get a new investigator and mitigation specialist would mean starting all over.

Starting all over? :waitasec:

Haven't these "experts" been paid for their work? And haven't they turned in reports, summaries and progress reports, etc., that could be handed to the two new people who could start? If they have been paid for this progress, surely the progress reports belong to the defense.
Why wouldn't they take over from that point? This argument doesn't make sense to me.:banghead:

Well, since they haven't turned over anything - including identifying experts so the SA can depose.... who knows?


IMO, it is the only desperate argument they have to try to convince the JAC to let them continue with those non-Floridian experts, etc...

 

[beach]

LG, after re-reading your question, I should add that the 'summaries, progress reports, expert opinions' that may have already been submitted could differ greatly from the opinons of any new investigators, experts, etc...should JAC insist the defense is required to use those residing in Florida.

 

[logicalgirl]

LG, after re-reading your question, I should add that the 'summaries, progress reports, expert opinions' that may have already been submitted could differ greatly from the opinons of any new investigators, experts, etc...should JAC insist the defense is required to use those residing in Florida.

LOL - and may not come with the same opinions is right. However JAC also states the defendant should not expect the same kind of a defense as the defendant who is funding their own defense and may not ask for special circumstances for specialists because they are to his or her(the defendant's) liking......

An expert is considered sufficient to meet the requirements of an adequate defense under JAC rules and Florida law.

Whatch think?

 

[beach]

Thank You Muzikman!

On page 2
5)....
For the defense to have utilized the entire $275,000
while this case is still in the investigatory stage seems
unusual.

Yes!

My particular favorite followed yours in paragraph 6 -

Considering the money was raised during the course of this proceeding, the funds should have been dedicated to the Defendant's defense. As a part of the Court's review, the Court should verify that none of the funds were transferred to third parties such as family, friends, or other persons or institutions.

Gotta love it!

 

[beach]

LOL - and may not come with the same opinions is right. However JAC also states the defendant should not expect the same kind of a defense as the defendant who is funding their own defense and may not ask for special circumstances for specialists because they are to his or her(the defendant's) liking......

An expert is considered sufficient to meet the requirements of an adequate defense under JAC rules and Florida law.

Whatch think?

Well, we'll just have to see how JAC rules... it will be interesting.

I'm leaning toward, "Sure you are entitled to an expert of your choice that resides in Florida and agrees to accept payment pursuant to the Ninth Judicial Circuit's Article V ISC established rates.

 

[zoey]

Well, we'll just have to see how JAC rules... it will be interesting.

I'm leaning toward, "Sure you are entitled to an expert of your choice that resides in Florida and agrees to accept payment pursuant to the Ninth Judicial Circuit's Article V ISC established rates.

silly me....I thought all the experts were pro bono??????? When did that change???????

 

[beach]

silly me....I thought all the experts were pro bono??????? When did that change???????

Nope, not the experts. Remember CM proffering to the Court that forensic expert Henry Lee might be willing to accept a "crate of oranges" as payment? :innocent: Of course, as JS opined that might have just been a result of CM's "active imagination and a case of tight boots".

Maybe you're thinking about the attorneys Linda Kenney-Baden (dealing with the forensics) and Andrea Lyon (dealing with DP issues)? They testified when questioned by JA at one of the last hearings before JS as to what they had been paid, but I don't recall exactly what they said between all the double-talk.

 

[zoey]

Nope, not the experts. Remember CM proffering to the Court that forensic expert Henry Lee might be willing to accept a "crate of oranges" as payment? :innocent: Of course, as JS opined that might have just been a result of CM's "active imagination and a case of tight boots".

Maybe you're thinking about the attorneys Linda Kenney-Baden (dealing with the forensics) and Andrea Lyon (dealing with DP issues)? They testified when questioned by JA at one of the last hearings before JS as to what they had been paid, but I don't recall exactly what they said between all the double-talk.

what I am remembering (somewhat?--I get confused TMI)---when they staged that appeance at the crime scene...some of the interviews that followed...iirc, henry lee is pro bono---some of the others as well...the only one I really remember NOT declaring himself pro bono was jb....

I am also finding it interesting that fees have been going to brad conway in some articles...he is supposed to be probono as well....

 

[beach]

I know exactly what ya mean abou the TMI! Makes ya crazy! :crazy:

I could be totally wrong. It was just how I remember it - and I doubt that is worth even a measly :twocents: ! lol

 

[zoey]

I know exactly what ya mean abou the TMI! Makes ya crazy! :crazy:

I could be totally wrong. It was just how I remember it - and I doubt that is worth even a measly :twocents: ! lol

sadly think perhaps we both could be correct with all the other bs floating around.....YKWIM?????:twocents::dance:

 

[beach]

sadly think perhaps we both could be correct with all the other bs floating around.....YKWIM?????:twocents::dance:

I know EXACTLY whatcha mean, especially after watching the first portion of today's budget hearing!!!

No wonder the confusion!

 

[magnolia]

Nope, not the experts. Remember CM proffering to the Court that forensic expert Henry Lee might be willing to accept a "crate of oranges" as payment? :innocent: Of course, as JS opined that might have just been a result of CM's "active imagination and a case of tight boots".

Maybe you're thinking about the attorneys Linda Kenney-Baden (dealing with the forensics) and Andrea Lyon (dealing with DP issues)? They testified when questioned by JA at one of the last hearings before JS as to what they had been paid, but I don't recall exactly what they said between all the double-talk.

I'm confused~Early on, during his interview on Nancy Grace, I thought HL stated he was working pro bono????

 

[beach]

I'm confused~Early on, during his interview on Nancy Grace, I thought HL stated he was working pro bono????

Just skip right past and ignore me. lol

After watching this morning's hearing I am more confused than ever!

 

[zoey]

Just skip right past and ignore me. lol

After watching this morning's hearing I am more confused than ever!

IIRC LKB & AL are also on the pro bono bandwagon......but I'm thinking more are on that one---

 

[magnolia]

I have the utmost respect for Judge Perry and how efficiently he runs his Court. However, because, I am a stickler in regards to abiding by rules & regulations, I am very disappointed he allowed the Defense to keep the out-of-town experts. I understand his position on extra cost for in-state experts to start over from scratch, but I don't agree with it. Hiring the out-of-state experts, allowing them to devote so many hrs. to the case, knowing full well they could not continue paying them was nothing more than a well thought out strategy by the Defense,IMO. I believe every Defendant should be treated equally. Poor indigent John Doe would not be afforded the right to use out-of-state experts. I am disappointed the Court allowed the Defense to get by with this.

 

[logicalgirl]

Speaking about Baez's five bucks per hour - would it have been possible for Baez, when he was presentlng his expenses during the indigent process, to have reserved an amount for him to continue as lead counsel, if it appeared to be less than what JAC would be prepared to pay a public defender? If he had done that then there would obviously be none left to pay any experts, etc.

Is that possible? There is still something fishy going on.

Maybe I can ask the legal experts also.....

 

[jon_burrows]

Nope, not the experts. Remember CM proffering to the Court that forensic expert Henry Lee might be willing to accept a "crate of oranges" as payment? :innocent: Of course, as JS opined that might have just been a result of CM's "active imagination and a case of tight boots".

Maybe you're thinking about the attorneys Linda Kenney-Baden (dealing with the forensics) and Andrea Lyon (dealing with DP issues)? They testified when questioned by JA at one of the last hearings before JS as to what they had been paid, but I don't recall exactly what they said between all the double-talk.

I was just watching the rerun of the indigence hearing under Judge SS. I'm confused. It was said by CM that Baez was paid ~89k and Lyon was paid ~22k.

All the defense attorneys (plus Casey) left the courtroom for a powwow then came back. Lyon (under oath) said that she got 70k (minus 22k) from an indigent fund that was spent on a bunch of things (I can't remember but equipment was one of them). She also guessed that she spent at least 1000 hours on the case. I thought the 22K was for travel expenses only that came out of Casey's money via ABC? If Lyon used her fund from the University and didn't take Casey's money for travel then something is off here.

So, my question is...did Casey spend any travel money for Lyon or did Lyon take it from her indigent fund from her University. Sounds like Lyon isn't really doing this pro bono.

I think Judge P needs to order all the defense attorneys to do a complete and accurate accounting of accounts received/paid, hours and to whom. The dollars don't add up to me considering Casey got an additional 70k donation from her previous attorney that isn't even mentioned. It should be a prerequisite before the state gives her a dime. If my math is correct, they would have had to have blown at least $275k with nothing to show for it but a bunch of stumbling in court.

I think the Florida tax payers are being taken for a ride big time.

IMO