Defense claims judge had inappropriate convo with blogger?

[elementary]

Let's talk the defence's motives:

Cheney Mason is no fool. I can't imagine he would willingly give the defence a foot bullet by submitting this motion without gambling in the defence's favour. Surely there is behind the scenes scuttlebutt about the identity of a replacement judge. I understand that R Hornsby mentions a particular judge, but that does not make it so; unless that is the scuttlebutt and the odds are stacked highly in favour of the defence.

It's also interesting to note that CM says he is on the point of retirement. He has nothing to lose for himself with regards to future appearances before JS, unlike Baez.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

The law is what matters here, and AZLawyer very kindly posted in this thread in regards to what THAT law is. Regardless of the outcome of the motion, I do not find it to be frivolous in nature. It does not escape me that JS interrupted a proceeding to ask for MD to be brought up and he said an awful lot more then "hello" to MD.

They did not file the motion until they knew that JS called MD at home. They received this information and filed the motion within the time the law sets forth. I personally do not see any "hinkiness" here.

No matter how one feels personally about Casey, I would hope it could be kept in mind that it is the justice system we ALL use and we should want it to work accordingly in the event we were ever sitting at a defense table. JMHO

So, what is it that you "think" Judge Strickland said to MD? You say "it was a lot more", which according to MD was nothing more than to say the Judge found MD's blog to be fair and impartial.

Do you have proof that it was more than this, or are you just saying that it was more without actual proof to back that statement up?

 

[ZsaZsa]

That's not only ridiculous, it's just not true.

For example, convicted drug dealers aren't arrested for "appearing" to traffic drugs. They are convicted due to solid, factual findings that such a crime occurred.

The law is interested in, and base their conclusions on facts, not assumptions, and certainly not "appearances"!

Thanks.
RE appearance of Impropriety- IF that were the case, the whole Anthony family would all be behind bars now..

 

[magic-cat]

Was Mr. Nechel SITTING with Brad Conway and the Anthonys? Am I seeing this right?

 

[ZsaZsa]

Let's talk the defence's motives:

Cheney Mason is no fool. I can't imagine he would willingly give the defence a foot bullet by submitting this motion without gambling in the defence's favour. Surely there is behind the scenes scuttlebutt about the identity of a replacement judge. I understand that R Hornsby mentions a particular judge, but that does not make it so; unless that is the scuttlebutt and the odds are stacked highly in favour of the defence.

It's also interesting to note that CM says he is on the point of retirement. He has nothing to lose for himself with regards to future appearances before JS, unlike Baez.

His client has a lot to lose though, ask his last one- he's on Death Row....

 

[Dignity4Victims]

Let's talk the defence's motives:

Cheney Mason is no fool. I can't imagine he would willingly give the defence a foot bullet by submitting this motion without gambling in the defence's favour. Surely there is behind the scenes scuttlebutt about the identity of a replacement judge. I understand that R Hornsby mentions a particular judge, but that does not make it so; unless that is the scuttlebutt and the odds are stacked highly in favour of the defence.

It's also interesting to note that CM says he is on the point of retirement. He has nothing to lose for himself with regards to future appearances before JS, unlike Baez.

By the time all is said and done, I am confident that Baez won't be standing before JS or any other Judge for that matter.

At least not in the role of "attorney".

 

[Nore]

You forget this is a jury case. A JURY decides on guilt or innocence. The only decision up to JS is on issues regarding LAW and it application to the issues in this case. Period.done.that's it. Whether JS visits reads or otherwise views blogs, or social networking sites is irrelevant. The only issue JS needs to remain neutral on is the application of law in this case. If that weren't the case no judge in this country could read the newspapers.

-------------------Thats what I thought! Thank you very much for making that clear.:angel:

 

[ZsaZsa]

Was Mr. Nechel SITTING with Brad Conway and the Anthonys? Am I seeing this right?

Yes, he was, he was next to BC and he mentioned in his original report that he spoke briefly to GA, shook his hand and offered him his condolences. Contrary to what has just been reported, the case was finished and GA/CA were walking parallel to Dave to the doors when the Bailiff approached Dave.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

Was Mr. Nechel SITTING with Brad Conway and the Anthonys? Am I seeing this right?

You're seeing it right. MD also handed Baez his "business" card after the hearing before this last one.

It was caught on video by one of the media.

 

[Sparky]

Where do you see that this was during the hearing?
The proceeding had clearly finished. Casey had left the Court Room, her attorneys were heading for the door and all others were waiting to get out. Dave was one of them, as he is about to exit the Bailiff tells him to wait.

You can also hear a couple of times someone stay step outside please as everyone is leaving. Then you can hear a female say I think we're done here as people are clearing the courtroom. It looks like DM is one of the last ones trying to exit before he is told to wait.

 

[magic-cat]

Yes, he was, he was next to BC and he mentioned in his original report that he spoke briefly to GA, shook his hand and offered him his condolences. Contrary to what has just been reported, the case was finished and GA/CA were walking parallel to Dave to the doors when the Bailiff approached Dave.

So, he is sitting shoulder to shoulder with GEORGE ANTHONY between HIM and his attorney, with Cindy there on Georges other side...he is an OBVIOUS friend of the defense and the judge is biased AGAINST the defense because he spoke to a man who is a known Anthony lover AND was sitting with them in court? Yeah, ok...well, that tells me why the hinky meter was in OVERDRIVE at least! lol:banghead:

 

[beach]

It sounds more like the kind of dirt that AL dabbles in, file a motion, dig up some dirt on the Judge. Typical strategy for those defending a guilty client. It's like legal extortion.

Point taken! Well, one thing is for sure, life was much easier for the SA when it was just JB they needed to outsmart.

 

[absolut_alexis]

The law is what matters here, and AZLawyer very kindly posted in this thread in regards to what THAT law is. Regardless of the outcome of the motion, I do not find it to be frivolous in nature. It does not escape me that JS interrupted a proceeding to ask for MD to be brought up and he said an awful lot more then "hello" to MD.

They did not file the motion until they knew that JS called MD at home. They received this information and filed the motion within the time the law sets forth. I personally do not see any "hinkiness" here.

No matter how one feels personally about Casey, I would hope it could be kept in mind that it is the justice system we ALL use and we should want it to work accordingly in the event we were ever sitting at a defense table. JMHO

If the justice system is limited to judges are forbidden personal opinions, we'll be pretty limited by what judges we have. Our judges are not robots. They are people who understand the law and make unbiased rulings, not because they are without personal opinion, but despite personal opinion.

Otherwise every time a defendant cursed (or worse) at a judge in open court, the judge would have to be removed because the insult could lead to potential bias, and small towns would have constant changes of venue, because the probability of a judge having an outside connection to a case would be high.

Has the judge been consistently fair? Yes. Will he be removed? No.

 

[magic-cat]

Yeah, that is SO biased of Judge Strickland, to invite a conversation with Mr. Nechel, friend of the Anthonys and thereby the defense. And him handing his BUSINESS CARD to Jose in a previous hearing? This is nothing but a set-up in my opinion. Mr. Nechel probably knows full well how the judge got his phone number. He probably GAVE it to him by way of a business card just like he did Jose.

 

[cuppy199]

Judicial conduct is governed by a Code of Judicial Conduct and the rules are called canons. Here are the Florida Judicial Canons. http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/ethics/index.shtml

It is not unethical to talk to people, to have friends, to express social courtesies even by calling someone. Judge Strickland is not going to be the trier of fact in this case -- that will be the jury. Judge Strickland's key role as presiding judge is to maintain order in his court and proceed with the trial of this matter. He doesn't have to be neutral as long as his decisions have considered everything he is supposed to consider.

Think about it. What happens in a bench trial (tried before a Judge alone) and there is inadmissible evidence presented but not admitted into evidence. We expect that Judge to ignore that evidence when making the decision. Judges can real newspapers, watch television and generally be part of the community.

The old mantra of "appearance of impropriety" is often misused for a yardstick for the speaker's concerns rather than a standard of judicial conduct. What might be improper in the eyes of a super sensitive observer is not improper for the majority of us. Part of the standards involve what do other Judges do.

Just because the defense writes and files a motion doesn't mean it has any merit at all. Makes them look busy.

I just wanted to quote this one from another of our WS family who is a lawyer and their opinion on this motion. I also wanted to say that the judge's job is to determine the law, but it's up to the jury to weigh the evidence and decide what happened and whether Miss Anthony is guilty or not and if found guilty the judge has to follow the law by what the jury decides.

 

[beach]

​

So, he is sitting shoulder to shoulder with GEORGE ANTHONY between HIM and his attorney, with Cindy there on Georges other side...he is an OBVIOUS friend of the defense and the judge is biased AGAINST the defense because he spoke to a man who is a known Anthony lover AND was sitting with them in court? Yeah, ok...well, that tells me why the hinky meter was in OVERDRIVE at least! lol:banghead:

MD stated in one of this blogs that he exchanged words (and maybe scribbled a note ?) to Brad Conway in re. some point made in court. OH! I do recall that it had to do with how to insure the safety/privacy of docs (issue defense brought up in court one hearing) and Dave was advising him in a way to do it on the web. I cannot remember the blog to link it....but I read it yesterday. Maybe in his most recent blog.

I would look for you, but I have 2 exams tomorrow and unfortunately, they don't have a darn thing to do with this case. lol Must.go.study.NOW.

 

[mitzi]

You're seeing it right. MD also handed Baez his "business" card after the hearing before this last one.

It was caught on video by one of the media.

Yup! Also, MD also gave his card to Brad C. and told him he had a "little something" for him. Whatever it was, he ended up mailing it to him.

Was just now at his blog, and I guess "fame" isn't so fleeting...DM will be on some guy's "BlogTalkRadio" tonight to discuss. About 95% of posters there are telling him to not do it and just stay silent, but of course, he is unable to do that.

 

[Dear Prudence]

I just watched the WESH video with R. Hornsby's comments, at the end of the video it is stated that they believe that Chief Judge Belvin Perry would probably take over:

http://www.wesh.com/video/23179601/index.html


Judge Perry's info can be found here:

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/judges/chief_judge/index.shtml

Yee Haw! A judge from Texas. I ABSOLUTELY would love it.

 

[magic-cat]

So Marinade Dave, who was sitting with the Anthonys in court during the hearing in question(thereby indicating he is sympathetic to the defense), and had already given his business card to Jose in a previous hearing, blogs about the good judge calling him up and telling him how FAIR his blog is. Then he later is interviewed NUMEROUS times by the defense, and did not REALLY see the motion until after ALL those interviews were completed, and then interviewed with the press ABOUT Judge Strickland BEFORE the motion was even filed, hours before I might add...This smacks of no good!

 

[magic-cat]

I think you're BUSTED buddy!:furious: