Defense Motion to Seal Penalty Phase Discovery Documents

[Intermezzo]

$50 says Baez hasn't told her 1/16th of the whole story. Or 1/50th of the truth.

Well we know she was not 100% up to speed as we saw in the First hearing she attended.
IIRC..There was a moment in that hearing Finnell was caught off guard, was unprepared and had to look back at the Defense table for what?? guidance?
Also, Judge Perry thought it best to make sure she was notified, incase the Defense failed to, about the deadline of Nov. 30, 2010.

In regards to the April 28th Motion on Protective Order for Penalty Phase Discovery and its Denial on May 11, 2010,
It seems Finnel either:
1) did not read the past Motion,
2)was not aware of the past Motion or
3)wanted a 2nd bite at the apple

 

[Intermezzo]

Maybe Ms Finnell, is not aware of the Florida Sunshine Law? The others on the team do not seem to be acquainted with it, or try to overturn it at every opportunity...

bbm
I disagree ZsaZsa and here is why..
Finnell is an experienced trial lawyer in Florida...31 years worth.
In 2000 She was one of 2 Public Defenders on the Brenton Butler case and she, I've read, has handled many high-profile cases in Jacksonville.
IMO...she is aware of the Sunshine Laws.

Happy Thanksgiving!

 

[logicalgirl]

$50 says Baez hasn't told her 1/16th of the whole story. Or 1/50th of the truth.

I agree but who could live in Florida or be in the legal profession and not know what has gone on in this case. I don't think she has any excuses at all for being unprepared. Surely she reviewed the motions on the case before accepting the position?

 

[Numbers]

I agree but who could live in Florida or be in the legal profession and not know what has gone on in this case. I don't think she has any excuses at all for being unprepared. Surely she reviewed the motions on the case before accepting the position?

I'm sure Baez sent them right over promptly, as he is wont to do.

Oh, wait.....

 

[logicalgirl]

I'm sure Baez sent them right over promptly, as he is wont to do.

Oh, wait.....

Of course he did - silly me! :slap:

 

[NSS]

I'm sure Baez sent them right over promptly, as he is wont to do.

Oh, wait.....

She didn't need to wait for Baez, she just had to visit here, where all the motions are filed in a neat thread at the top of this page.
Most have been discussed and dissected, and she could have been 'up to speed' in a few days.

Someone needs to tell the defense about Google. :angel:

 

[faefrost]

Is this something she would file, expecting it to be shot down, but filing to preserve an issue for appeal? Such as an appeal to challenge the Sunshine Laws and claim that KC's rights were unduly impacted by pre trial publicity and freedom of information? Or wouldn't that have already been established by prior motions?

 

[watcher9]

She didn't need to wait for Baez, she just had to visit here, where all the motions are filed in a neat thread at the top of this page.
Most have been discussed and dissected, and she could have been 'up to speed' in a few days.

Someone needs to tell the defense about Google. :angel:

Ms Finnell could also check the web site of the Orange County Clerk of Courts who very graciously added a link on her page to all of ICA's court records, listed by category.

I wondered if she made that link just for us?

 

[Katprint]

Yeah, it will be a HUGE can of worms. They will be challenging the FL constitution and/or the FL Supreme Court. Basically, they are going to argue that the FL Sunshine Laws are a violation of her rights under the U.S. Constitution. I don't work in FL and haven't researched the case law, but I have a hunch this isn't the first time they have been challenged. So far they still stand.

I try to look at it this way - the defense is doing their job by covering their bases and insuring the record is clear that they don't like the Sunshine Laws. Another nail in the coffin of the ineffective counsel argument.

The problem is, the defense actually opposed the prosecution's initial effort to seek a gag order which would have relieved the prosecution of their statutory duty to disclose public records per the FL sunshine laws. The FL sunshine laws actually contain a provision permitting judges to make such gag orders.

The situation would be different if the defense had filed a motion for a gag order, including sealing of all investigation/discovery documents, to protect Casey's due process rights including her right to a trial by a fair and impartial jury but the prosecution opposed the gag order and the judge denied it. That might create a reversible issue on appeal because a new trial couldn't fix the problem because "the bell cannot be unrung" as they say.

Baez asserted Casey's First Amendment freedom of speech rights and opposed the gag order because he and the Anthonys were enjoying their new-found notoriety. A gag order also might have prevented Casey and him from selling the photos of Casey and Caylee for a big pile of money, and who knows how much money was made from all those talk show appearances? IMO Casey has effectively waived her due process rights to the extent the potential jury pool was biased by continued releases of information concerning the case.

Katprint
Always only my own opinions

 

[kaRN]

You are right CM...Finnell would have been better off, (IF she read the May 11, 2010 Order by Judge Perry) filing the a Motion for that specific witness...just like the Order states..

IMO there is NO specific witness being addressed and the Defense is trying again to with hold all Penalty Phase Discovery from being released.

Which tells me they have discovered nothing uselful for the penalty phase. If they had witnesses to ICA being beaten or berated or she had a long psychiatric history, it would have been on the front page of People IMO. Boohooo, even after this and that they want to kill our client.

 

[beach]

The problem is, the defense actually opposed the prosecution's initial effort to seek a gag order which would have relieved the prosecution of their statutory duty to disclose public records per the FL sunshine laws. The FL sunshine laws actually contain a provision permitting judges to make such gag orders.

The situation would be different if the defense had filed a motion for a gag order, including sealing of all investigation/discovery documents, to protect Casey's due process rights including her right to a trial by a fair and impartial jury but the prosecution opposed the gag order and the judge denied it. That might create a reversible issue on appeal because a new trial couldn't fix the problem because "the bell cannot be unrung" as they say.

Baez asserted Casey's First Amendment freedom of speech rights and opposed the gag order because he and the Anthonys were enjoying their new-found notoriety. A gag order also might have prevented Casey and him from selling the photos of Casey and Caylee for a big pile of money, and who knows how much money was made from all those talk show appearances? IMO Casey has effectively waived her due process rights to the extent the potential jury pool was biased by continued releases of information concerning the case.

Katprint
Always only my own opinions

Oh, I totally agree with you! I don't think it has a chance in hades of helping them on appeal, for the very reasons you stated. They don't have anything else though. Judge Perry has made sure of that. He has been absolutely remarkable! If you're the defense I guess you just put in the record any shot you can pray to have, iykwim. It is desperation, but I guess they figure 'what the heck...gotta put something in the record to cite for appeal.'

 

[The World According]

If anyone has this entire gag order hearing please post it for me!
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6STZLhSTSzU[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPjyy63UHzA[/ame]

 

[Intermezzo]

The problem is, the defense actually opposed the prosecution's initial effort to seek a gag order which would have relieved the prosecution of their statutory duty to disclose public records per the FL sunshine laws. The FL sunshine laws actually contain a provision permitting judges to make such gag orders.

The situation would be different if the defense had filed a motion for a gag order, including sealing of all investigation/discovery documents, to protect Casey's due process rights including her right to a trial by a fair and impartial jury but the prosecution opposed the gag order and the judge denied it. That might create a reversible issue on appeal because a new trial couldn't fix the problem because "the bell cannot be unrung" as they say.

Baez asserted Casey's First Amendment freedom of speech rights and opposed the gag order because he and the Anthonys were enjoying their new-found notoriety. A gag order also might have prevented Casey and him from selling the photos of Casey and Caylee for a big pile of money, and who knows how much money was made from all those talk show appearances? IMO Casey has effectively waived her due process rights to the extent the potential jury pool was biased by continued releases of information concerning the case.

Katprint
Always only my own opinions

So true Katprint...and we should never forget Baez fought the Gag order and one of his arguements was that he would always side with the First Amendment.

In November of 2008 the Prosecution filed a Gag Order Motion which included All Attorneys and LE from speaking to the Media...Baez argued AGAINST the Gag Motion

http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/Judge_denies_gag_order_in_Anthony_case

Baez, along with lawyers representing the Orlando Sentinel newspaper and various Orlando television stations, challenged the gag order. "When this case started, I expected to be on the eleven o'clock news," said Baez. Citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent, Baez said the gag order wasn't necessary. "It's a whole lot of hot air and not a whole lot of law," he said, adding "when push comes to shove, I'm going to err on the First Amendment every time."
Baez said that the standard which the court must look at is "whether there is a substantial likelihood that comments would effect a fair trial." "I think counsel is falling far short," he said.

Baez said the First Amendment prohibits the government from ordering people what to say except in the case of "clear and present danger." In his rebuttal, Ashton cited a Florida Supreme Court ruling that says a judge could impose the order for good cause, not just danger."

-----------------------------------

Now an about face by the Defense...here is a July 12 2010 Motion by the Defense Objecting to the Release of Documents related to Defense review of evidence

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/24241592/detail.html

Point 8.
"Defense submits that at some point this Court must recognize the superior rights and entitlements under Constitutional Amendments other that the First Amendment..."

Point 11
"Your undersigned submits that at some point a balancing of First Amendment rights to report must be had against the eminently more important rights of the defense to effective assistance of counsel, due process, and equal protection...."

-----------------------------

 

[ynotdivein]

http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/Judge_denies_gag_order_in_Anthony_case

"It's a whole lot of hot air and not a whole lot of law," he said, adding "when push comes to shove, I'm going to err on the First Amendment every time."

Muuuuaaaaaah-hahahaaaaa... Why JB, how prescient you were. You sure did err on the First Amendment, buddy!

:loser:

 

[Gma Kat]

The problem is, the defense actually opposed the prosecution's initial effort to seek a gag order which would have relieved the prosecution of their statutory duty to disclose public records per the FL sunshine laws. The FL sunshine laws actually contain a provision permitting judges to make such gag orders.

The situation would be different if the defense had filed a motion for a gag order, including sealing of all investigation/discovery documents, to protect Casey's due process rights including her right to a trial by a fair and impartial jury but the prosecution opposed the gag order and the judge denied it. That might create a reversible issue on appeal because a new trial couldn't fix the problem because "the bell cannot be unrung" as they say.

Baez asserted Casey's First Amendment freedom of speech rights and opposed the gag order because he and the Anthonys were enjoying their new-found notoriety. A gag order also might have prevented Casey and him from selling the photos of Casey and Caylee for a big pile of money, and who knows how much money was made from all those talk show appearances? IMO Casey has effectively waived her due process rights to the extent the potential jury pool was biased by continued releases of information concerning the case.

Katprint
Always only my own opinions

For only posting 31 times in the past year you sure have something good to post when you do!

Not that I expect less from someone with Kat in their name......just sayin :blushing:

here is my :twocents:

I don't think Ohio/whomever is willing to cooperate unless their identities are kept secret not because of harrassment - OUT OF SHAME!

 

[The World According]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG2UEkEHYpg[/ame]

O/T

I REALLY need the entire bond hearing too , if anyone has that please post it.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcapEHwzZHo[/ame]

 

[The World According]

(I put this in the wrong thread). Caffiene, Julia, get some caffiene!!!


Remember this little exchange, with Baez under oath?
ADA George: "We had a meeting in chambers and an amount of money the defense had was dicussed. How much money was that?
JB: That information is under seal.
ADA George: You are under oath now.
Judge Stickland: Yes, you can answer. It believe it needs to be on the record, the amount and frankly the source too.
ADA George: What was that amount of money discussed?
Baez: Two hundred thousand dollars.
ADA George, loud and clear for the reporters in the back row to hear, asked Two hundred thousand dollars?
JB: Yes.
What was the source of that money?
JB: Can you repeat the question?
ADA George, loud enough to be mistaken for a politician giving a speech at a podium asking for votes: Where did the money come from?
JB: "American Broadcast Company" he said under his breath.
ADA George: "Who?"
JB: "ABC".
Although he already knew the answer, ADA George adding emphasis: "ABC News?"
JB, after swallowing hard: "Yes"

It was Linda Kenney Baden's demeanor in this hearing that made me say to myself that was her goodbye scene. That is the biggest and possibly the only time I have even seen her so warm and smiling. She is doing something I had never seen her do, playing to the camera. Andrea seemed to be saying goodbye to Casey as well, even then.

Losing these two on the defense team was HUGE, imo!

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnkhUbRbwBU[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaZnZ50R5m0[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brCKA_FTB6g[/ame]

Thttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVxt_F_-V78
This was the first hearing of Mason on the case. He started showing off before the hearing even began by being quite rude to the folks who were court personnell , basically ordering them around about what HE wants done regarding the microphone needing to be removed, iho, right damn now, from the defense table. Good for the gentleman, he showed him no mind at all about it. Funny.

He called the Judge's staff member, Kathy, "Doll".
Mason literally called Jeff Ashton "Ignorant" on the record, in open court.

He was very patronizing to Judge Strickland with his "I bet you'll trust ME" mantra, and saying he had experts lining up to work for free, that indeed Henry Lee had worked for a crate of oranges once".

After the hearing he emerged with his it's going to be fun nonsense.


Here is the hearing. A must see

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54JbOxl30U0[/ame]
The person video taping chimes in briefly as she looks up who is this man, full of hubris, on the internet. Funny.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzy83OX_t3A[/ame]
Here we go they are back from their little pow wow (the defense). This is where Baez testifies ( best ever)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-HhNWPqINI[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kYb9DfPq6E[/ame]
Here Baez admits to receiving 70K from Todd, and the Judge literally asked him, if Todd paid contingent upon him joining the defense team.
ADA George: "Besides Mrs. Lyon and Mrs. Badem, are there other lawyers involved in this case?"
"Other attorneys have consulted, none have been paid."
ADA George:" How about experts?"
JB: "Some have been paid"
ADA George: "Any promise of future payment?"
JB: "None."
ADA George, " Who has been paid?"

wait for it....
Cheney:" I am going to object to disclosing names, it invades the privileldge in preparation of our trial strategy."
Judge Strickland "I will sustain the objection as to their names, the amounts we need".
ADA George: "Can you give us the amounts?"
JB: "I would be guessing".
Judge Strickland "I will sustain the objection as to their names, the amounts we need".
ADA George: "How many experts are there that have been paid so far?"
Stutering JB: " Umm, umm, I didn't bring that with me. I would be guessing."
Baez offered to bring that to the court, he did not bring those things with him but he could supply them to the court. THe judge agreed to that.
Me: What the hell? How do you come to a hearing about how you spent the money, and not bring your file?

ADA George: "What about investigators?"
ADA:" How much have they been paid this far?"
JB: "They have been paid through the clinic. ( Andrea's clinic ) I have paid them , the amount would be um,very little".
Me: Richard Hornsby sure called that one. Baez had been pinching pennies rather than , getting the work done. For example we recently learned that Jeremy Lyons has billed the taxpayers eight thousand dollars for talking to TES searchers. Those TES documents had been sitting, available, for so long and Baez chose not to begin work on them. Now with the state paying, suddenly it is getting done.
go to the four minute mark
ADA George: What about Mrs. Baden. Is she being paid?"
JB: "She is not being paid. Correcting himself it seemed, he added, "She has been paid nothing."
Mrs. Baden does she have a promise of future payment?

After a long pause, JB: "You know.... I haven't read that document in awhile. I wouldn't be able to testify to any degree of certainty".
ADA George: "In March, in our in camera meeting with the judge, Mrs. Baden was to bring that document to the court. Do you have any idea why it hasn't been filed?"
JB: "It has been dropped off to the court."

ADA George asks the judge if that is true, and he answers he isn't sure, "It may be here, it may not be here,I have no idea".
Immediately after this, Mrs. Baden stands up to interrupt. Baden claims she tore up her retainer contract. In the words of The Church Lady on Saturday Night Live,
"Well isn't that special?"
She did manage to get in a little bit about her self tauting her work , pro bono with The Innocence Project, how she donated her services then too. She explained that she rescinded her agreement with Casey Anthony since she had never been paid and there clearly was no expectation of future payment.
Me: Loose translation....NO THE COURT WAS NEVER GIVEN TO THE COURT. THAT'S MY GUESS!
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KC0Xtr917ZY[/ame]
Cheney tried to chime in that the JAC would need to pay for travel expenses. No one responded. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_12H80h6wL4[/ame]
Mason was very rude saying Linda and Jeffrey approach the bench with me. Mrs. Drane-Burdick said "We have last names".
2:09 mark is where it seemed to me Andrea was telling Casey goodbye. I thought this because all of the lawyers would have went to the bench normally, and Andrea and Linda did not.
The lady recording the video briefly opines.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpjZ1bL1eIg[/ame]

They had a ora tenis motion heard at the bench, Baez wanted more time to read all the jailhouse letters. The judge agreed, but told the defense whatever objections they file they must notice the media.


I believe, iirc, that this indeed is the time they went in camera after the hearing and let Judge Strickland know they were filing notice asking him to step aside.
If they haven't been kicking themselves already, bet when they see the difference between Judge Strickland letting them promise to drop stuff off to him later, and how Judge Perry is going to demand to see the documents for payment, now, not on their honor......they are going to see asking to swich judges was very, very misguided.
In the words of Mark Nejame, "I am being overly generous in my characterization!"

 

[The World According]

The World According to Julia
You just can't make this stuff up! Join Date: Mar 2009


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last December I asked..
Will the jury respect the experts opinions or see them as hired guns?"Why don't we make a list for the Prosecution of all the books currently out by the defense lawyers/experts?
We know Professor Lyons just released a book.

Dr. Badden and his wife Linda Kenny Badden released a book this year.

Kathy Reichs the forensic anthropologist released a book, 206 Bones.

Dr. Werner Spitz is the author and editor of the textbook, Medicolegal Investigation of Death, now in its third edition and considered to be the authoritative textbook in this specialty, worldwide.

Dr. Lee has a book out currently too.

Do we really wonder how and why being involved in a high profile case that is covered nationally and internationally helps them? Pro bono? How about free advertising?

We see them often on news and cable shows giving commentary, even about this case. So they clearly enjoy the limelight. Do you think it will effect their credibility with the jury when the prosecutor asks them if they are currently peddling a book? Even Dominic is rumored to be co authoring a book with Brad, mom and pop! What do you think?

From Bean E "*Very* interesting comment from Richard Hornsby on his blog in regards to the experts:


Richard Hornsby says:
December 29, 2009 at 10:38 am

snippet

...the problem an expert witness list creates for Baez is two-fold.

1. It requires your experts to finally give their opinion – and an opinion is no good unless is supports your theory. If their opinion does not support your theory, you don’t list them.

2. It allows the State to inquire into how they are getting paid, by whom, and financial arrangements they have made, and media rights they have negotiated, etc. And if the experts are doing this “pro bono” the State can then go into ulterior reasons they agreed to work on the case – books that are coming out, etc.

3. Finally, when the State deposes an expert (or any attorney deposes the other sides’ expert) the opponent has to pay the expert what the expert charges the hiring attorney. So if these experts are not charging Baez, they are not allowed to charge the State.

Basically the witness list opens Pandora’s Financial Box for Mr. Baez."
http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2009/...time/#comments

_____________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

This is what I have been waiting for, the finances to be truly examined!!!
Richard Horsby was calling for a thorough investigation from jump! I am glad the judge is holding a hearing, at least on the experts and the money!! Here is what Mr. Hornsby opined many, many months ago in an interview with Steph.------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Hornsby: "Let me correct you Steph, the media has reported that Jose Baez will be paid 15K by the state. He will not.Regarding her being declared indigent for costs. Jose Baez will not be paid ANY MONEY, he is not court appointed. A private, retained attorney that tries to have his client declared indigent does not get paid for representation. The state will pick up costs for expenses such as investigations, expert witnesses, things other than attorney fees."

Host: What about the money that has already been paid out, over a hundred thousand?

RH: "There are two Affidavits have to be filled out to request your client be declared indigent, an affidavit for status of finances right now, second is an affidavit regarding the lawyer to say how much they have been paid and where that money came from.

If Baez has a financial conflict of interest, if he was somehow deceptive, if he made a profit off of the money and brokered all these deals, and meanwhile has pinched pennies on handling her expenses, if he somehow was deceptive about how he handled her money,it is a problem. He could absolutely be disbarred.It is very clear how he drafted the affidavit he had Casey sign was CLEARLY prepared to protect himself and protect the third party. Baez did not want to declare her indigent because it would have let the cat out of the bag, of who had paid that money. If Baez has mismanaged her money,if there is a conflict of interest, that is the real issue. Jose Baez may have to step down in this case."
__________________

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RH "Andrea Lyon knows that she cannot properly defend Casey while they are pinching pennies, so she likely forced his hand to declare her indigent."

"Jose has brokered all the deals and that creates a conflict of interest. He wasn't let in by the Florida bar for several years because he couldn't manage his money". He makes a profit off of how much he doesn't spend on other people, and if you notice he had all these people on the case pro bono,that is more he can keep for himself, it just seems so blatant! If this information comes to light, it could be a big problem. Understand, the only person who can complain about this is Casey Anthony, unless it comes out in the hearing.

RH" The concern is Casey will bring up this money mismanagement on appeal, for sure , she will say he pinched pennies, he tried to save money for himself, he delayed my trial, he did a bad job,because he was trying to cover his own butt."
Host : You lose a lot of business when you have a high profile client?

RH: " If Jose Baez would have handled this case right, it could have been the most lucrative case for him. When it first came out I had clients s coming to me, because he was quoting them astronomical fees. This could have been a gold mine for him. What has hurt him is he has become a clown, legal clown. He can't even get the margins right on his documents."


__________________

RH: "He could be disbarred, if he wasn't using this money in Casey's best interest, if he didn't have her money in a trust account, if he was co-mingling the money, if he brokered these deals and managed her money yes, he absolutely could be disbarred."


RH " You cannot sell your clients rights, you cannot sell even yours, you cannot sell her media publication rights. It would be a conflict of interest. He cannot broker the deal and then manage the money. The only way it would have been anywhere close to ethical and within the rules would be if he got a sep. lawyer to come in and broker the deal and manage her money."

Host " The grandparents could get paid and then give the money to the defense, right?"

RH " That did not happen. The grandparents did not get paid these amounts. They have been deposed. They have been asked under oath how Jose Baez is being paid. They said they do not know. They denied it under oath. It was Casey Anthony or Jose Baez. If he brokered these deals it is unethical, it is against the rules.

The March 25th hearing was sealed. SOME MEDIA OUTLET NEEDS FILE A MOTION TO REQUEST THAT BE UNSEALED BECAUSE NOW THAT THE STATE IS GOING TO PAY, THE PUBLIC HAS THE RIGHT TO KNOW. (Mr. Hornsby is speaking of the time they all went into a side room with the judge for five minutes where Casey and Baez explained the source of the money.) That was sealed because they didn't want to disclose to the public how he was being paid.

Jose Baez hasn't spent money doing many depositions or anything else in the case. He has totally mismanaged this case from day one. Nothing at all was getting done until Andrea Lyon came into the case, nothing. Think about it, the less money he spends, the more money he makes."

RH "She was only in three places, jail ,home confinement and his office, so it had to happen on his watch. We do not have to speculate.



THE J A C , they manage all the state funds, they attend all the hearings, are going to look into this in a perfunctory way, as usual, normally they appear by phone .They are not going to know the background of this case. So, unless someone brings them up to speed, they are not going to be well informed about these issues, they wont know that Baez had a secret hearing that was sealed. They aren't going to know Jose Baez has all of these financial problems. Unless Judge Strickland wants to take the bull by its horn and bust this open for them, all they will see is the paperwork and maybe it will get past them."

RH "As a taxpayer it really makes me mad."
__________________
In the hearing in video ( below) Mr. Ashton alerts the court that the witness that the defense had flown in, he objected to; because, of a number of things, first of all her name was not even on the witness list, until a couple of days before the hearing!!! Of course they had not had time to look at her work or depose her. Is this what they are going to try by not listing the experts until the very last minute, or after the drop dead date the judge ordered? [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5840483&postcount=2"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Defense Files Motion to Seal Penalty Phase Discovery Documents[/ame]
You just can't make this stuff up!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[krisskross]

IIRC at the budget hearing, Baez agreed H Lee would be working for JAC rates. I guess Lee changed his mind about working pro-bono or for oranges as soon as the State agreed to pick up the tab.

Baez gave Judge Perry an estimate for Lee's total projected time and travel as $6950.00 which included work to be done, travel and guestimated testimony at trial.

J Perry reminded Baez H Dr Lee had to keep time records.

So pre-trial testimony, we hear H Lee has billed the JAC for approx $8000.00 :waitasec:, Baez not very good at guessing?

 

[The World According]

Paragraph 3 of that motion -

"To date witnesses in this case, especially defense witnesses, have already been subjected to intense media pressure and harassment by the media and the public at large. This has resulted in a chilling effect with some witnesses becoming reluctant to come forward with information for fear of harassment and stalking."

I declare this is the biggest crock of hyprocrisy I have yet to read in any motion filed in this case. Harassment?...Stalking? I had to read it a couple of times to make sure they weren't referring to themselves. WTH do they call what they are doing to the TES volunteers??? Nope, they are talking about the media...the media who receives INVITATIONS from the defense to press conferences THEY summon. The media who the Anthonys have courted ad nauseum for 2+ years. Let's not forget their BFF media mogul Jim Lichenstein who accompanies the Anthonys to EVERY hearing.

WTH? What a joke. lol

EXCELLENT!!
She better come to court with a revised docement that details SPECIFIC examples of stalking, harassment of witnesses for the defense. The prosecutors are going to make VERY short order of this!!!