Dominic Casey: Motion to Strike Notice of Deposition & Motion for Protective Order#2

[LambChop]

I believe the contact was with CA and a male psychic, not GL. CA sent the bear to the man and he handed the bear over to GL. CA claims not to have spoken to GL. I could be wrong but that is how I remember it. jmo

 

[BeanE]

This question was basically answered by AZlawyer already I believe.

Yes, I'd seen AZlawyer's answer. Thanks though.

 

[BeanE]

What you are remembering ( I believe ) was Brad on the Geraldo show saying that the tape of Dominic in the woods was the Anthony's work product, that he worked for them at the time it was taped.

This scene that NTS theorized on, is irrelevant because it did not happen. Never, ever in any document, or hearing did Dom ever state their was any relationship between he and Brad, save for the time Brad sat in with him for the LE questioning. IMO, Ms. Tennis tried to hint to him to claim that there was, in the civil pre trial hearing when she kept referring to them all as joint defense attorneys, Brad and Jose. The trouble with that is a long list. No matter, he never did claim that, Brad never did claim that. It is too late. He testified under oath to LE the people he had a relationship with and letters of engagement with. Jose, up until that terminated in October 2008, mom and pop and Casey that is ongoing, he never mentioned one with Brad.

So, NTS proposing a what if may be interesting for first year law students, but is not relevant to this case, number one because it never happened and number two, the lawyers here have already opined ..if it had happened the answer would be no..no privilege.

Do not worry. He has no where to hide with this imaginary privilege.

Definitely wasn't an interview on a show. What I'm remembering, when Brad said it, is that he was outside, on a sidewalk, by a big cement-like building, wheeling along with a reporter beside him asking questions, then he stopped - I think he was getting ready to cross the street - and that's when he said it. I remember nothing whatever useful for finding the video LMAO. Just can't remember what the occasion was, where Brad was coming from. Which is why I ain't searchin' for the video

I'm not a first year law student - just an old lady who had a distinctly different profession - and I find NTS' question interesting, as well as relevant to this case, in that the whole back and forth (and up and down) shenanigans regarding DC and privilege are both interesting and relevant. I don't ask that anyone agree with my opinion.

 

[faefrost]

But my fear is he simply stuck to "the psychic made me do it" story, and without real proof that he is lying, there will be no repercussions for him or anyone else. And to me, as an observer, that does not just mean one less thing absolutely linking Casey to the crime scene. It means that perhaps a criminally punishable cover up by George and Cindy Anthony flies out the window.

Yeah but getting him to say that in front of the jury. That he... KC's PI! (remember that he supposedly worked directly for KC herself) was in those woods searching for pavers and a black trash bag... because a psychic told him? Uh huh! While it may not be enough to charge him, putting that in front of the jury for KC's trial will be a rather damning nail in her coffin. Juries are not stupid. They will not believe that some third party psychic someone managed to send ICA's direct employee PI and odd job man into the woods. They will draw their own conclusions and come to the reasonable explanation that he knew exactly what he was looking for because he had information from his employer. His presence in those woods and only in those woods links KC to the crime scene.

Regardless of what he actually says. The more absurd of a story he spits out the better it is for the prosecution. I can forsee that they actually want him to say the psychic told him. Because if he opens up and says "JB told me it opens up some appellate cans of worms over rearguing what may or may not be privilege and whether the defendant was properly served by unethical defense actions. A completely absurd and unbelievable answer is better. All teh SA will want is to put him in those woods and highlight that it is the only physical location that agents of the defense and the family ever actually looked.

 

[LambChop]

This is totally a "what if". We know KC was writing letters to the family and JB was passing them back and forth. And you know JB read them to protect KC. What if KC gave another clue to her family and JB never delivered the letter but told DC about it and to go look there. After the remains were found and LE searched the house it is possible they found some of those letters from KC to the A's. It sounds to me as if SA already knows the answer to what they need DC to admit. jmo

 

[logicalgirl]

Evidence Alert Muzikman!

Please please please can we have Dom's testimony released in the 500 Pages that will be released by Friday.

The Friday release makes me think the SA is "funning" the Defense and their 4:45pm Friday motions.

 

[AZlawyer]

I will say it again. The defense should be present if he is deposed. There is no need for the defense to be present if he is just interviewed. There is no argument, there is no confusion. It is simply deposition vs interview. I have read RH blog many times and he explains this same thing. I think some may be trying to interpret my understanding. Heck we can't read minds. lol

[IMO

I can't believe we've been talking in circles for so long. :banghead: No one on this forum or anywhere else I have seen, least of all the SA, has ever suggested that the defense would not be present if an actual deposition of DC took place.

Well, I will look for it and I am sure it is in TWA's youtube stuff, but I do believe that LDB made a reference to deposing without the defense present and that is when Jb said well then we will just put him on our list. Then the Judge said just do an investigative subpoena. But I do believe LDB did make reference to it. I may be wrong, but there is something in reference to it by the state. IMO

You are correct, NTS. I remember it as well.

See TWA's hearing video above.

After the hearing, a reporter, I believe Kathy B, asked Baez what he was going to do, if he would put DC on the defense witness list. Baez was wetting his pants at that point because he knew it was either he put DC on his witness list, or there would be the special subpoena where the defense could not be there, and Baez responded to the reporter that he would, after all, put DC on the witness list.

This whole thing was discussed extensively in this forum. I'm surprised more people don't remember it as you and I do.

If you can't find the video of the interview outside the courthouse afterwards, holler at me and I'll help you find it. It was as interesting as the hearing itself, and well worth taking another peek.

Take care -
BeanE

OK, this was driving me crazy so I watched the hearing video again, which I hadn't watched since the hearing actually took place. Here's what happened:

Investigative interview v. deposition:

DC's attorney pointed out (correctly) that the State could not take a DEPOSITION of DC because he did not appear on any witness list.

SA agreed and said we will just do an INVESTIGATIVE SUBPOENA then, instead of a deposition. But in that case Baez will not be there. (She also pointed out that the DEFENSE could take a deposition of DC even if he was not on any witness list--only the State was precluded from doing so--which makes you wonder why Baez didn't just offer to notice the deposition for the same time and moot the whole issue. Unless his real goal was to prevent the questioning from happening, rather than to be present for the questioning. :waitasec

DC's attorney said the SA was absolutely and clearly correct and could issue an investigative subpoena.

Judge S said, ok, do your subpoena.

JB said well, we'd like to be there for this "whatever it's called", although I realize I am NOT ENTITLED to be there pursuant to the statute. :waitasec: But I could just put him on my witness list and then I could be there.

Judge S said, yep, true.

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

Privilege:

DC's attorney was talking about "privilege" arising out of (1) a confidentiality agreement among the parties, and (2) DC's ethical obligations as a PI. (These are both clearly incorrect legal arguments.) DC's attorney explained that her concern was that DC continued to have what he (incorrectly) considered "privileged" conversations with the "defense team" even after his contract with JB ended in October 2008. woohoo: I can't wait to read them!)

The SA pointed out that these arguments were clearly incorrect.

Both times that DC's attorney brought up the bogus "privilege" arguments, Judge S turned to the SA and confirmed that the SA wasn't going to ask anything about the period prior to October 2008, when DC was working for JB (when there would have been an ACTUAL privilege). The SA confirmed that was the case, and Judge S seemed completely satisfied at that point. Judge S either didn't understand that DC's attorney was making the other wacko privilege arguments or considered them unworthy of a response.

 

[notthatsmart]

So what kind of information could they possibly get out of him? I mean he already said why he was down there. Why would he change his story? Didn't the phone records confirm that he was on the phone to the phsycic? I could see him claiming privilege, but to change his story? I don't know. Doesn't make sense. That would be to say he made up that whole story about going that way to check up on a tip from kio and on his way down he gets a phone call from a physcic. Why not just claim privilege and not give any story?

I think it is a completely innocent thing for him to be down there. It is the most obvious spot to check since it was the closest woods via car. I am surprised more people weren't down there checking. Or were there?

 

[Soju]

So what kind of information could they possibly get out of him? I mean he already said why he was down there. Why would he change his story? Didn't the phone records confirm that he was on the phone to the phsycic? I could see him claiming privilege, but to change his story? I don't know. Doesn't make sense. That would be to say he made up that whole story about going that way to check up on a tip from kio and on his way down he gets a phone call from a physcic. Why not just claim privilege and not give any story?

BBM

why would he change his story?

being under oath.

 

[notthatsmart]

BBM

why would he change his story?

being under oath.

Do people do that often? I mean lie during interview and then tell the truth under oath? would they not get in trouble for lieing to the police? I wonder what the likelyhood is that this happened. I think they were looking for new information. Moo

 

[logicalgirl]

Maybe they wanted Dom to explain why he searched that area only - no other place, when Caylee's body was found just a short three weeks later? If he was working for Baez, Cindy and George, Brad and ICA - did any of them suggest he search there. And the psychic Dom was supposively talking to was someone Cindy had been talking to very recently. So just who sent you to look there, Dom?

 

[LambChop]

Do people do that often? I mean lie during interview and then tell the truth under oath? would they not get in trouble for lieing to the police? I wonder what the likelyhood is that this happened. I think they were looking for new information. Moo

Apparently DC had something to hide or lied about something as he did not want to give a statement. As a PI he knows what he can or can not say.

 

[zoey]

Do people do that often? I mean lie during interview and then tell the truth under oath? would they not get in trouble for lieing to the police? I wonder what the likelyhood is that this happened. I think they were looking for new information. Moo

in this case....there have been lots of lies ---- early on ca was constantly changing her story...kc---YEP....why do you think people are worried about getting immunity?????

 

[LambChop]

So what kind of information could they possibly get out of him? I mean he already said why he was down there. Why would he change his story? Didn't the phone records confirm that he was on the phone to the phsycic? I could see him claiming privilege, but to change his story? I don't know. Doesn't make sense. That would be to say he made up that whole story about going that way to check up on a tip from kio and on his way down he gets a phone call from a physcic. Why not just claim privilege and not give any story?

I think it is a completely innocent thing for him to be down there. It is the most obvious spot to check since it was the closest woods via car. I am surprised more people weren't down there checking. Or were there?

Only problem with this is at the time he was supposed to be working for the A's looking for a LIVE Caylee. So why would CA tell LE she had her people look in that area and they found nothing. jmo

 

[marspiter]

So what kind of information could they possibly get out of him? I mean he already said why he was down there. Why would he change his story? Didn't the phone records confirm that he was on the phone to the phsycic? I could see him claiming privilege, but to change his story? I don't know. Doesn't make sense. That would be to say he made up that whole story about going that way to check up on a tip from kio and on his way down he gets a phone call from a physcic. Why not just claim privilege and not give any story?

I think it is a completely innocent thing for him to be down there. It is the most obvious spot to check since it was the closest woods via car. I am surprised more people weren't down there checking. Or were there?

For starters DC did lie about who he was talking to at first. First he was talking to his sick daughter....then the psychic story. Plus there is that cryptic comment by Cindy about them already sending someone to that location. Also there is DC making comments to the other PI (Hoover?).

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but have we seen the phone records from an official LE source? I know DC posted them on his website and such but I thought those had been edited. Is DC's phone records in an official LE doc dump? Honestly I may have missed it or forgot.

Lets also keep in mind that many of the players in the case have changed their stories. Personally myself I'm curious to see GA's grand jury testimony so we can compare it to his others interviews and media comments.

I believe the reason he didn't just claim privilege is because DC knew he didn't have any. moo

 

[marspiter]

Maybe they wanted Dom to explain why he searched that area only - no other place, when Caylee's body was found just a short three weeks later? If he was working for Baez, Cindy and George, Brad and ICA - did any of them suggest he search there. And the psychic Dom was supposively talking to was someone Cindy had been talking to very recently. So just who sent you to look there, Dom?

Only problem with this is at the time he was supposed to be working for the A's looking for a LIVE Caylee. So why would CA tell LE she had her people look in that area and they found nothing. jmo

*bold by me*

Two very good points. DC was very adamant about Caylee's "body" being there. When the A's and everyone on that side were adamant that Caylee was alive.

Also what other areas did DC search as vehemently as this location?

 

[joypath]

Do people do that often? I mean lie during interview and then tell the truth under oath? would they not get in trouble for lieing to the police? I wonder what the likelyhood is that this happened. I think they were looking for new information.
Moo

I really HAD to bold out that entire statement as it caused me to gasp audibly and then shake my head, muttering, nah my leg's being pulled...we're being "punked"!.:banghead:

OF COURSE people LIE during interviews and then the heavy reality of speaking UNDER OATH hits MOST/MANY of them like a lead balloon and the truth of the situation comes out! :sick: Good heavens, that's been the mainstay of many a fictional novel/thriller BUT more importantly, it's the basis of the judicial system of our country! HECK, take a gander thru the Dewey decimal systematized library where "TRUE CRIME" books abound and you'll discover a treasure trove! (and even in the biography and autobiography section also!). Would one get in trouble for presenting fabrications of the truth to the members of law enforcement, well, perhaps one might recheck the counts against a certain:loser: CMA in Florida! IIRC she has a "few" charges against her for just such behavior, now other members of society might "skate" depending on the level of their "mis-truths" and how the falsehoods articulated hindered LE and the ramifications toward society's safety!


BTW: This is just my :twocents:, but following the rules seems to make life a heck of a lot easier in the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness without spending $$ and time in court or in jail! :truce:

 

[LambChop]

[/B]
BTW: This is just my :twocents:, but following the rules seems to make life a heck of a lot easier in the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness without spending $$ and time in court or in jail! :truce:

Hey, you know, this has worked for me so far. I like it because it's not complicated, and oh yes.....easy to remember. jmo

 

[mountaintime]

Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive!
Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, Canto vi. Stanza 17.
Scottish author & novelist (1771 - 1832)

 

[The World According]

[/B]


I really HAD to bold out that entire statement as it caused me to gasp audibly and then shake my head, muttering, nah my leg's being pulled...we're being "punked"!.:banghead:

OF COURSE people LIE during interviews and then the heavy reality of speaking UNDER OATH hits MOST/MANY of them like a lead balloon and the truth of the situation comes out! :sick: Good heavens, that's been the mainstay of many a fictional novel/thriller BUT more importantly, it's the basis of the judicial system of our country! HECK, take a gander thru the Dewey decimal systematized library where "TRUE CRIME" books abound and you'll discover a treasure trove! (and even in the biography and autobiography section also!). Would one get in trouble for presenting fabrications of the truth to the members of law enforcement, well, perhaps one might recheck the counts against a certain:loser: CMA in Florida! IIRC she has a "few" charges against her for just such behavior, now other members of society might "skate" depending on the level of their "mis-truths" and how the falsehoods articulated hindered LE and the ramifications toward society's safety!


BTW: This is just my :twocents:, but following the rules seems to make life a heck of a lot easier in the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness without spending $$ and time in court or in jail! :truce:

:clap::clap::clap::clap: