Defense claims judge had inappropriate convo with blogger?

[marspiter]

I personally don't find this motion to be that unusual giving the defenses past motions and strategy. They failed to provide evidence showing Casey's innocents as ordered by the court but they have managed to dig up dirt on every player in this case no matter its relevance, or accuracy. The motion itself as with every motion supplied by the defense has flaws like the notary date and such.

I don't think it's any secret that I tend to side more with the prosecution side on this case. I've even made the comment that in this case I would not make a good juror do to the fact that after following this case I could never be impartial even if I felt I could logically weigh only the evidence presented.

After reading through alot of this thread. I admit I skipped around alot because I didn't want to participate in some of the more personal debates on this thread. However after looking at things I would agree that possibly the best thing in this case would be for JS to step down.

I agree he has been more then fair to the defense in this case. He has also been very neutral and has sided on the appropriate side of the law and tried to protect Ms. Anthony's rights during this case. I also feel that JS has done a wonderful job in making sure there are no appellate issues in this case thus far.

However this situation with MD is some what unusual and I feel that JS may have put himself in a tight spot. It does not matter what his relationship or conversation with MD was about or even if there was or wasn't a relationship or contact. The point is there is a speculation that there is one and under Florida's guidelines and such I think the best thing for JS to do is to take a step back from this case which is sad because I feel he is still a magnificent judge and one that could continue to rule over this case and come down on the side of law and not base his decisions on any perceived bias or media attention as the defense so claims.

I do think that this does show the amount of desperation in the defenses case though. They are taking a huge....and I mean huge gamble on this motion. This is all part of the defense trying to stall this case. In my opinion the defense wouldn't be doing this if they felt they had a strong case for Casey. The defense in my opinion is making this huge gamble in the hopes that they will have a judge that they can more easily manipulate, doesn't have prior experience working with JB, one that will make appellate mistakes, or the trifecta a judge that is all 3....then again they could get a true "hanging judge" and the defense would be up a creek imho.

As to the judges comments about Ms. Anthony and the truth. That comment needs to remain in the context of JS explaining his ruling at that particular hearing. Judges when making a ruling often give cometary as to why they made that ruling. There is one judge in our district here that gives advice and commentary to the offender after everyone of his rulings most of it positive but some of it basically telling them how much of a screw up they are and that they are a burden to society as a whole. It's actually fairly common practice.

 

[Aedrys]

Thanks. It looks like MD is driving himself up to the SA's office this morning o admitting I just read his blog ) What good could come of that?

And they're going to tell him, sorry, this has nothing to do with us. And then they'll roll their eyes behind his back as he leaves. Okay, that last part was JMO.

I mean, there's not a thing the SA can do here. It's a defense motion that only JS can consider! If I am wrong, someone please correct me!

 

[beach]

Okay.....let's think this through.

The original motion is drawn up and "someone" visits the jail to get Casey to sign off on the document. She reads....she signs.....Cheney notarizes.....under this theory....BOTH COPIES.

They leave the jail.

Channel 13 is given one copy......but alas, they are not finished....

So they add an additional 17 pages to the original motion, then rush off to courthouse, jjjjjjjjjuuuuuusssssttttt making it in time!

PROBLEM:

Casey's signature is reflected on a document that now includes 17 pages that she has NOT read.....

Unless, of course, the defense pooled pennies to make more than one round trip to jail....

(Edit: OH, and Cheney forgot the correct stamp BOTH TIMES! )

They simply didn't attach the exhibits supporting the motion in the copy they gave to the media. In a hurry, ya know?

And, actually, Casey didn't legally have to have those supporting docs made available for her review before she signed, imo. She trusts her 'boys' so I guess she just signed on the dotted line like a good girl should.

 

[notthatsmart]

The blog isn't unfair though, Not, that's the very thing. It is biased on the part of the defense if anything. It may have begun as a more biased blog way back when he first started blogging it, but he soon changed course and started with a middle of the road (more like veering onto the side of the defense) stance, and since then, has often times been accused of being a defense sympathizer and an Anthony lover. Jose HAD his business card before the date of that hearing, he handed it to him in another hearing. What stopped Jose from grabbing that card and calling Dave up and asking him why the Judge called him to the bench if he was wondering? He may have done just that very thing, we have no way of knowing...unless, perhaps Marinades phone records could be supoenaed all the back to that time and just have a little look at who called whom and when. Also this was heavily blogged about, and since Jose and company have people combing the blogs continually, it is HIGHLY doubtful that they JUST found this information out on April 10th. That is what they say...but then again they also said they had ironclad proof that Caylee was put in the woods while KC was in jail, and THAT never did materialize...so one has to doubt their word as it has been shown not to be dependable. Perhaps the state should supoena some records from ole Dave and clear this all right up. ???:waitasec:

I find Dm's blog to be very unfair to Kc, and that is what it is about. Just because he sits with CA and GA does not matter. What matters is his opinions and slant toward Kc. She is the one on trial here. This last video of the crime scene was obvious to me.

We must take the defense seriously here. How do you find it highly doubtful that they just found out this information about the Judge making this statement to Dm? I truly believe they learned it in this interview.

Moo

 

[tlcya]

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/court-illustrated/downloads/CIVol3-2005.pdf
Pg 19 of 27 about Judge Strickland and how he is regarded by his fellow professionals.

EXCELLENT for perspective!

Thanks for the link, I agree, interesting to read what his peers think of him and at the same time, perhaps give us insight as to why he seems to some of us to bend over backwards putting up JB and his antics.

 

[magic-cat]

"If I were a brand new judge and I was looking around for a judge to fashion myself after Judge Strickland is the one I would most like to be like", said Orange County Judge Jerry Brewer. "There isn't a judge in this building who couldn't learn something about judging from Stan Strickland. He is the whole package."

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/court-illustrated/downloads/CIVol3-2005.pdf

 

[magic-cat]

BBM

While this is true, the attorney is ultimately responsible for reading, reviewing, approving and signing the document. So that's no excuse for a poorly written document, IMO.

ABSOLUTELY correct!

 

[LambChop]

Thanks. It looks like MD is driving himself up to the SA's office this morning o admitting I just read his blog ) What good could come of that?

So does this mean we will see another motion tomorrow asking that the prosecuters be removed from the case? JMO

 

[sleutherontheside]

So does this mean we will see another motion tomorrow asking that the prosecuters be removed from the case? JMO

They already asked for that a while ago did they not??

 

[beach]

Dear Dave,

Please step away from the keyboard. The microphone too, while you're at it.

One of the most wonderful features of the internet is that you can disappear and reinvent yourself.

You might want to consider a vacation. I hear Antarctica is nice in the spring.

Sincerely,
Beach

 

[tlcya]

Maybe big "daddy" will file the next motion requesting his little angel be immediately released cause she couldn'ta done it.

 

[Aedrys]

Okay.....let's think this through.

The original motion is drawn up and "someone" visits the jail to get Casey to sign off on the document. She reads....she signs.....Cheney notarizes.....under this theory....BOTH COPIES.

They leave the jail.

Channel 13 is given one copy......but alas, they are not finished....

So they add an additional 17 pages to the original motion, then rush off to courthouse, jjjjjjjjjuuuuuusssssttttt making it in time!

PROBLEM:

Casey's signature is reflected on a document that now includes 17 pages that she has NOT read.....

Unless, of course, the defense pooled pennies to make more than one round trip to jail....

(Edit: OH, and Cheney forgot the correct stamp BOTH TIMES! )

I'm just shocked multiple copies were made in the first place. Haven't they always whined about making copies? And now they made copies
but can't keep track of them or the stamps apparently? How inept can you get? I see an itemized statement for copies and stamps that the state will have to pay for...

 

[LambChop]

BBM

While this is true, the attorney is ultimately responsible for reading, reviewing, approving and signing the document. So that's no excuse for a poorly written document, IMO.

This could explain why a paralegal who previously worked for JB was trying to sell JB's shirt he had on while KC was out on bail on EBay.

Attorneys usually get rid of staff who have poor job performance specifically if making money for the firm is an issue and what attorney does not want to make money. JMO

 

[sleutherontheside]

This could explain why a paralegal who previously worked for JB was trying to sell JB's shirt he had on while KC was out on bail on EBay.

Attorneys usually get rid of staff who have poor job performance specifically if making money for the firm is an issue and what attorney does not want to make money. JMO

Actually....the guy that was trying to sell the shirt was listed I believe as an "investigator" according to Baez' website. EdP

 

[Muzikman]

Okay.....let's think this through.

The original motion is drawn up and "someone" visits the jail to get Casey to sign off on the document. She reads....she signs.....Cheney notarizes.....under this theory....BOTH COPIES.

They leave the jail.

Channel 13 is given one copy......but alas, they are not finished....

So they add an additional 17 pages to the original motion, then rush off to courthouse, jjjjjjjjjuuuuuusssssttttt making it in time!

PROBLEM:

Casey's signature is reflected on a document that now includes 17 pages that she has NOT read.....

Unless, of course, the defense pooled pennies to make more than one round trip to jail....

(Edit: OH, and Cheney forgot the correct stamp BOTH TIMES! )

Let me see if I can clear this up:

First: CFN 13 has the whole motion, they just broke it up into 2 parts. The Memo of Law is a separate file. Maybe to keep the download size smaller. It's on their site, right below the main motion.

Second: I can see the defense having Casey sign 2-3 copies. One for Baez's files, one for Cheney's files, one for the Clerk to file.


Obviously, CFN 13 was given a COPY of either Baez's or Cheney's copy. Early, before the Clerk and/or other media outlets. So they would have the "scoop."

Based on Adam doing a Baez puff piece a few months ago, I would guess that Baez gave Adam a copy, early.

 

[LambChop]

Dear Dave,

Please step away from the keyboard. The microphone too, while you're at it.

One of the most wonderful features of the internet is that you can disappear and reinvent yourself.

You might want to consider a vacation. I hear Antarctica is nice in the spring.

Sincerely,
Beach

How about we give him a break? Just don't blog about KC's case MD. Go back to what you do best. He is obviously not being very professional about this. And what will this do to his health. If this is not his income he should just walk away. Or take a break. JMO

 

[Astraea]

BBM

While this is true, the attorney is ultimately responsible for reading, reviewing, approving and signing the document. So that's no excuse for a poorly written document, IMO.

I in no way disagree with you here suzihawk. Sometimes though in the "real world" things do not always work according to our expectations of how they should. I was not offering an "excuse" to the poorly written documents in this case. I was only pointing out how this is much more common in courts then one may expect

I also think that JB should pay alot more attention to these small details, given the exposure of this case. One would think, that by now, he would have learned to carefully go over each document (like the motion being discussed here)!

 

[notthatsmart]

I guess writing well is important. Lol but is it a requirment by law? Many have complained about the poorly written motions in this case. I am just curious. Is it required by law? If the point gets across, does the Judge acknowledge it? Of course he does. If he cant understand it, he will send it back and ask for clarification. People should be able to represent themselves even without a lawyer or good writing skills. IMO

 

[ZsaZsa]

I'm just shocked multiple copies were made in the first place. Haven't they always whined about making copies? And now they made copies
but can't keep track of them or the stamps apparently? How inept can you get? I see an itemized statement for copies and stamps that the state will have to pay for...

If my life were in their hands I would be concerned. Cross the T's and dot the I's was never more important. There is no excuse for their feeble record with filing inaccurate motions.

 

[Harmony 2]

According to the statute the info discovered that causes the bias must be complained about within 10 days of the discovery. The statement about KC and the truth was WAY more than 10 days before this complaint was made, and also the blog compliment was WAY more than ten days before as was the Bar Complaint that was passed on by his honor. NONE of those things meet the LEGAL REQUIREMENTS of reporting it within 10 days. So all they have is a phone call wishing a blogger to feel better? They don't have a thing!!!

MOTION PLEASE BE DENIED!!! It is completely legally insufficient as far as I can see. These things are all WAY back in the past-not ten days.

On page 2 the following is cited as meeting the 10 day stipulation:

This relationship was not disclosed to counsel for the Defendant until said journalist was interviewed by an investigator working for the defense on Sunday, April 11, 2010. Said revelations made by "Marinade Dave", confirmed the truth of various statements made be the judge to said journalist and blogs posted by the journalist. This discovery was within ten days of the filing of this Motion for Disqualification, required by the aforesaid Rules of Judicial Administration.

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/23176762/detail.html