Defense wants prosecutor Jeff Ashton held in contempt

[Niner]

Well, if that's the case, they why the need to even post anything or comment here at all? if OCA won, she and her DT and and all of her supporters should be happy and ride off into the sunset with her and celebrate her bella vita, and not worry about what anyone else is saying or thinking, or even writing. Why worry about JA's book if the truth prevailed at the trial? OCA and her DT should be living the High Life then, Wonder why she is not, unless their whole defense was built on lie upon lie upon lie upon another lie.

Why the need to keep insisting the truth prevailed and OCA won?????? why the need to keep telling all of us other folk that OCA won???

IMO, MOO, etc.

:goodpost: :tyou:

 

[LambChop]

How would he have known, win or lose, this case would be a cash cow for his retirement? It was called "the trial of the century"; I think even Jeff Ashton realized that post verdict he would be able to make money off the trial.

True, during the trial, the SA didn't hold press conferences, go on GR, NG and other media outlets, but since he announced his intent to write the book, and since it's been published, Jeff Ashton has sure made up for lost time.

When he made the decision to stay whenever she was arrested not a year later when the media described it as the trial of the century. Unless he had a crystal ball there was no way he could have of knowing. JB is the one who kept this case front and center.

I'm glad JA could write the book as I'm sure it was good therapy for him. LE, SA, ME all have a difficult time when a death involves a child and certainly not an easy task for them to investigate and prosecute. Even CA was told to journal to get her through this so why should JA be held to a high standard. Certainly if JB could sell a book tomorrow on this case he would do so as he has tried every other way to profit off of Caylee's death. Problem is once a book he has written is published then we would all know who was and wasn't the real brains behind the defense.

Not sure what would be the remedy for prosecutors doing their job in prosecuting someone because that is all they were doing. The post sounds like JA has had a personal affect on the poster. Why, when he is paid by the State to do his job. We can all agree he did do his job, they all did. It's not the State's job to change the facts but that would be the job of the defense. So not sure why anyone would feel personally offended by a public servant doing their job? And if they hadn't done their job you would have heard more negative comments coming from posts here to be sure. jmo

 

[Krisy]

How can you slam someone who was looking for justice for a 2 year old who was murdered and then thrown out like trash in a swamp? This isn't about FCA. This is about Caylee! Remember her?? FCA is happy as a clam doing what she does best, NOTHING. I would think you would be happy. You won so what's with all the negative posts about Ashton? Is it because everyone loves him??

Thanks! I couldn't care any less about FCA, it was about that little girl!

 

[Well Done 99]

As it did July 5, 2011.

Little Caylee is dead.
OCA is a liar.
Mr Ashton is a champion for Caylee.
Mr Mason is showing signs of envy.
1+1=2.
The definition of 'verdict' is not 'truth' (I looked it up)

 

[giatocj]

Can't wait to see what happens after Dr G's show in Jan ...

:great:

Is there a link to more info on Dr. G's show? I hadn't heard about that and would REALLY not want to miss it!!

Thanks.

 

[LambChop]

I think what we forget, too, is that SA was ready to go to trial pretty early on. It was defense that kept moving the date forward to it's actual date after 3 years. For an accidential drowning defense, three years and the mucho pro bono high profile attorneys was a little too much, don't we think. Why delay? Oh, yes.....the $200,000 plus had to be justified. By the time the money was spent it was a runaway train wreck. It was defense that had and kept the media attention not SA. So if there were complaints about people making money off Caylee I think they are now banging on the wrong doors. jmo

 

[JSR]

As it did July 5, 2011.

And "not guilty" doesn't equal innocent. Just saying .....

Truth is always in the eye of the beholder. What apparently 13 people now in this country believe to the the "truth" is not what 99.9 percent of the country believe to be the truth.

It is what it is, luckily there is a higher power who IS capable of seeing what is REALLY the truth and will be able to hand out the just punishment.

 

[TorisMom003]

Sure we want to go there? If I recall, Mr. Ashton had announced his retirement prior to the Anthony case, thought about it, realized win or lose, it would be a cash cow case for his retirement, and changed his mind. At 54, I am sure he could have had a few more good years putting away the bad people of Florida.

Ashton explains why he took this case in Chapter 1 of his book. Linda wanted him on the team since he knows and has dealt with new forensic information to be brought up in court. Like him or not it doesn't help to make up lies and false information about his motives.

MOO

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Sure we want to go there? If I recall, Mr. Ashton had announced his retirement prior to the Anthony case, thought about it, realized win or lose, it would be a cash cow case for his retirement, and changed his mind. At 54, I am sure he could have had a few more good years putting away the bad people of Florida.

Please stop lying about Ashton.

 

[Tulessa]

I don't understand what you mean . . . but the contempt motion is 2-fold

1) Ashton using sealed documents (which we know he did not; he used his noted & recollections of those documents), and

2) Ashton is making a profit from the case

so my question above is in the earlier motion submitted to the Court, was the stipulation on the DT specifically or on anyone (DT, FKC, Anthonys, Ashton, Padilla, etc.)?

I see where I was confusing you. Let me clarify. The DT said Ashton was breaking rules by using sealed reports. He used his notes and his recollection to add to his book. He broke NO rules. HTH's )

 

[otto]

How would he have known, win or lose, this case would be a cash cow for his retirement? It was called "the trial of the century"; I think even Jeff Ashton realized that post verdict he would be able to make money off the trial.

True, during the trial, the SA didn't hold press conferences, go on GR, NG and other media outlets, but since he announced his intent to write the book, and since it's been published, Jeff Ashton has sure made up for lost time.

Not another trial of the century ... again ... and so early in the century, at that. I would like to know who actually believed that a trial about a murdered two year old would be the trial of the century.

I'm curious why you are so unhappy about the book written by Ashton. Many people write books with a co-author ... how is that problematic? His book provides an insightful glimpse into the inner working of a prosecution, which interests many people. Is it problematic that he has an income based on his career?

 

[Dells]

And "not guilty" doesn't equal innocent. Just saying .....

Truth is always in the eye of the beholder. What apparently 13 people now in this country believe to the the "truth" is not what 99.9 percent of the country believe to be the truth.

It is what it is, luckily there is a higher power who IS capable of seeing what is REALLY the truth and will be able to hand out the just punishment.

Mark Eiglarsh, who is a TH that has commented many times on this case (especially on HLN) has always said time and time again that the purpose of a trial is not finding the truth. Well, ain't that the truth! I so agree w/you that not guilty DOES NOT equal innocent. I totally disagreed w/their verdict, but the few jurors that have spoken out even said that they did not feel casey was innocent. casey was not exonerated for this crime. The majority of the general public does not view her as the innocent mother that was falsely accused of murder. They view her as the woman that murdered her baby and got away w/it. She got lucky because Caylee's body was not found sooner, she got lucky because her parent's were willing to protect her, she got lucky because this case turned into such a circus, and she got lucky that she got the jury that she did. casey anthony may be many things, but innocent is not one of them, imo.

 

[Tulessa]

Sure we want to go there? If I recall, Mr. Ashton had announced his retirement prior to the Anthony case, thought about it, realized win or lose, it would be a cash cow case for his retirement, and changed his mind. At 54, I am sure he could have had a few more good years putting away the bad people of Florida.

Why aren't you mentioning Caylee in your posts? For us here at WS this was ABOUT CAYLEE ONLY!!

FCA can take a flying leap. She literally murdered her daughter, duct taped her, threw her in the swamp for the dogs to feed off of and never looked back. She WILL and I repeat, SHE WILL re offend. And I shall be here to watch it happen . )

 

[Justin Tyme]

I would really like to know the real motivation behind filing this motion. Is it because of the OS asking for the unsealing of the depos? Is it because it creates yet another hurdle in their appeal on the lying charges? Does it create a problem for one of the civil suits? There is a real issue, at least in their minds, that they are asking for this. I would love to know what it is. The DT always had a self-serving reason for every motion they filed. What is the reason for this? :waitasec:

I think that you're giving Mason way too much credit. I don't think the reason for filing is as thought provoking as one might imagine. I think it's simply because he's being a whining 'ittle baby. Really, how much thought would one have to put into it, I mean, with someone's ***cough*** "mature" ***cough*** response was to shoot a bird at someone on the other side of a window??? :floorlaugh:

 

[Tulessa]

Am I the only one giggling over CM losing 600 grand? :crazy:

 

[Dells]

Why aren't you mentioning Caylee in your posts? For us here at WS this was ABOUT CAYLEE ONLY!!

FCA can take a flying leap. She literally murdered her daughter, duct taped her, threw her in the swamp for the dogs to feed off of and never looked back. She WILL and I repeat, SHE WILL re offend. And I shall be here to watch it happen . )

I was listening to one of the interviews that JA did from his book tour and he said something along the lines that he thinks the real danger w/casey would be if she ever has another child. I so agree w/that. That child would be in real and imminent danger, imo. I just scares me that when she likely does re-offends, it could be against a child.

 

[TorisMom003]

Not another trial of the century ... again ... and so soon in the century, at that. I would like to know who actually believed that a trial about a murdered two year old would be the trial of the century.

I'm curious why you are so unhappy about the book written by Ashton. Many people write books with a co-author ... how is that problematic? His book provides an insightful glimpse into the inner working of a prosecution, which interests many people. Is it problematic that he has an income based on his career?

The book is very problematic for Jose, Casey, Mason and the rest of the defense team. It points out all of their mistakes, lies and attempts at tampering with the jury pool. I'm sure it burns their collective butts that it is out there for the world to see just how unethical they really were. Perhaps those that have such a major problem with Ashton and his book are the ones that are sympathetic to those that have been exposed.

MOO

 

[Dells]

Am I the only one giggling over CM losing 600 grand? :crazy:

I think that figure is very inflated, but maybe he is considering part of the $600,000 coming from a future book deal that will never materialize for him?:crazy:

 

[LolaMoon08]

Am I the only one giggling over CM losing 600 grand? :crazy:

Nope! :floorlaugh:

Why he expects for anyone to care how much money he lost taking on a pro-bono case is beyond me? I always thought pro-bono meant free anyways? Must be one of those backward kinda things that only him and the Anthony family understand?

 

[TorisMom003]

I was listening to one of the interviews that JA did from his book tour and he said something along the lines that he thinks the real danger w/casey would be if she ever has another child. I so agree w/that. That child would be in real and imminent danger, imo. I just scares me that when she likely does re-offends, it could be against a child.

A "mother" like Casey that will kill her own child will not hesitate to kill again. They will not hesitate to kill anyone, related to them or not. Those type of people are not and will never be a productive member of society and should be regarded as always armed and dangerous. It is only a matter of time before Casey kills again, the question is who will be her next victim.

MOO