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

[The World According]

Well, not so quick. First of all, I do not believe any of Casey's friends have said anything that leads to premditated murder. The evidence does not prove premeditated murder. As far as impeaching Le, Fbi, Dr g, it can happen and it will happen if they try to speculate and not have back up evidence. It is very important that the state present their trial with facts and not speculation. The jury will pick up on it immediatley. The state does not get a free pass to the truth.

Most of the things talked about in this thread is speculation, we do not know that Dominic was deposed. We do not know if he tried to hide anything. Anata wa nipongo wakarimaska?
ps I think that means: do you speak japanese?

I post the actual hearings and depositions, etc to post so that you will see these things are on the record, forever. They are not speculation. What in the world would give you the idea that the medical examiner, and or federal agents have lied before, or would not testify to facts, these are not mom and pop, they are trained professionals who testify within the rules ,likely for years. Don't worry about them. They are not the ones caught in lies here. If I could not prove that the Anthonys lied, I would not venture a guess. I recognize that it is a strong accusation and I try very very much to be mindful to never post anything I cannot prove. If you have watched the hearings it will be obvious it is not the prosecutors speculating. I could make you a list if it would help of the many, many times the defense has been wrong on the facts and wrong on the law, and that is putting it kindly. If you have some examples of the prosecution making unfounded allegations please share them with us. If you have some case in which the ME was caught not testifying truthfully, please let us see that. Respectfully, we most certainly do know that Dominic already was caught lying to a federal officer and LE detectives, and since he fought being deposed for over a year one may fairly infer he indeed is wanting to secrete something. I don't speak Japanese, but I do speak the truth with proof. If you go back and review some of the hearings it will help you feel confident, these prosecutors have got this!


If I were a friend of Cindy's, I would advise her in a very serious fashion to prepare herself, George too for that matter, it is NOT beyond Casey to have them be the next would be suspects in the SODDI defense game. Not by a long shot. I would be much much more concerned about , after the molestation accusations, what is next.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrBMDWNmEzw[/ame]

 

[LambChop]

The truth and Mr. Casey are strangers.....sound familiar?? If you are telling the truth you have no reason to clam up. When LE catches you in a lie you ARE fair game. Just think of how much of the taxpayer's money could be saved if everyone told the truth. People who tell the truth don't have to ask for immunity, they don't hide behind an imaginary privilege, they don't avoid talking with LE for a year, they just tell the truth. DC has more than his integrity on the line I would think they are looking at his license as well. Since KC is not talking I would say everything that comes from defense is speculation. It's hard to prove someone innocent when they do not cooperate. Constantly changing her stories will not pass the "sniff" test for KC. And what exactly was DC's complaint against JB to the Bar other than the money? Did it have to do with finding the remains? He's already put it in writing. No backing out now. jmo

 

[logicalgirl]

Well I think what JJ and Lb did 3 months earlier may not have anything to do with what Dc did in November. I am not trying to have it both ways. Obviously the body was there for some time," but how long, is the question". And when I say prolly, you can bet that I am just speculating. We still do not have Rk's time sheets or route logs, we still do not have police records of who in Le searched that area. There are many things left out. And I doubt I actually said that. I think maybe the defense said that. I have no idea because I was not there. I can only go by what others have said. So could you kindly point me to the post where I actually said those words?

Do you think there is any chance that Jh will come up with the rest of the video at some point?

I think, nts, when we see or rather hear the soil sample experts at trial, who took layers of decomp from underneath where they believe little Caylee's body was laying, plus the plant life and root development experts, we will have a very clear indisputable picture of how long the remains had been in that location.

Plus unfortunately there may some development on the type of animal scavenging done also over the area the bones were scattered.

Unless something incredible comes to light regarding R. Kronk, how he could be considered other than a stubborn man with an idea of where Caylee was located, even talking about him being involved in this case other than the information we now know seems at this point to be redundant, don't you think?

 

[Dignity4Victims]

I post the actual hearings and depositions, etc to post so that you will see these things are on the record, forever. They are not speculation. What in the world would give you the idea that the medical examiner, and or federal agents have lied before, or would not testify to facts, these are not mom and pop, they are trained professionals who testify within the rules ,likely for years. Don't worry about them. They are not the ones caught in lies here. If I could not prove that the Anthonys lied, I would not venture a guess. I recognize that it is a strong accusation and I try very very much to be mindful to never post anything I cannot prove. If you have watched the hearings it will be obvious it is not the prosecutors speculating. I could make you a list if it would help of the many, many times the defense has been wrong on the facts and wrong on the law, and that is putting it kindly. If you have some examples of the prosecution making unfounded allegations please share them with us. If you have some case in which the ME was caught not testifying truthfully, please let us see that. Respectfully, we most certainly do know that Dominic already was caught lying to a federal officer and LE detectives, and since he fought being deposed for over a year one may fairly infer he indeed is wanting to secrete something. I don't speak Japanese, but I do speak the truth with proof. If you go back and review some of the hearings it will help you feel confident, these prosecutors have got this!


If I were a friend of Cindy's, I would advise her in a very serious fashion to prepare herself, George too for that matter, it is NOT beyond Casey to have them be the next would be suspects in the SODDI defense game. Not by a long shot. I would be much much more concerned about , after the molestation accusations, what is next.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrBMDWNmEzw

TWA, you never cease to amaze me! You're like a walking youtube reference book.

Do you have the date on that particular video, please? If so, I'd like to have it for someone else who is working on something. TIA!

 

[The World According]

Lol, if they actually show their notes, that will help. There was nothing new in this post. We can't change the definition of speculation. We can pick and choose things that were said during the course of the investigation and try to apply them to now, but do not know if that will work in an actual trial. It is difficult for me to speculate about what someone else was speculating about a long time ago. There will have to be some sort of evidence that shows Dc was lieing during his interviews. When he said that he did not know he was being video taped, the Le jumped in and tried to impeach him on the spot. I really wish they would just do the interview and let these witnesses speak. So, it appears to me that immediatley Dc picks up on this and clams up. Why would you trust someone that says they want to ask you some questions, when you find out what they are really trying to do is accuse you of doing something sinister. Yeah, I might clam up to and force it to trial where I can get on the stand and tell the jury what happened.

When I said notes I meant reports. Very often in trials LEO refer to their reports because often months or years have passed since the person was arrested. I posted for you the entire LE interviews so you could hear him lying. It seems to me that you, no offense, may have the same misunderstanding Dominic did as to the nature of federal officers and detectives parameters and practices that are well within the law. He had Brad right there with him, he felt uncomfortable , he could surely have asked for a break. If something outside of the rules was going on Brad could have spoken up. If you listen carefully, Brad does speak up once or twice. I respectfully am going to have to agree to disagree.
Your description of that interview is very is not the same interview I have listened to. Have you had an opportunity to watch the pre trial civil hearings? He lies there too. Perhaps Mr. Casey was explained what obstruction of justice and lying by ommission is by Baez, who clearly, has a HUGE misunderstanding of the rules. Here is just one tiny example: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GUw0PIjI5E[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7VCuGvP69I[/ame] This is a perfect example that these prosecutors have got this!!! I could post a whole bunch, but I trust those that agree already know, and I cannot convince those that don't want to perceive it that way. I could sooner sell ice to Eskimos , and indeed have them licking their chops, wow, Julia....this is no ordinary ice...
Kidding, I am kidding

 

[MissJames]

With all due respect I don't think this is the SA's first rodeo. DC, however, is hiding for a reason.

Jinx !! That's exactly what I was going to say !
Time and time ,again,the SA's prove they know how to do their job.

 

[The World According]

TWA, you never cease to amaze me! You're like a walking youtube reference book.

Do you have the date on that particular video, please? If so, I'd like to have it for someone else who is working on something. TIA!

Thank you, here you go friend!

hornsbylaw — August 05, 2009 — http://www.RichardHornsby.com/ Orlando criminal lawyer Richard Hornsby is interviewed by NBC-WESH reporter Bob Kealing on the significance of Cindy Anthony's deposition to the State Attorney and why the deposition is taking so long.
Category: News & Politics
Tags:

I am sorry about all the videos guys, but if someone is misunderstanding that we have wild imaginations, or maybe a poor memory, I try to offer the words right out the horse's mouth to end that concern. It is entirely possible to forget things for sure, earlier Reagan reminded me about the ill fated Officer Caine. I went to youtube and who pops up? It was Kathi Belich with the just moments ago....Officer Caine was terminated.

 

[notthatsmart]

I wonder if there is anything wrong with a witness just not wanting to be deposed but is willing to get on the stand in front of the jury. Has it ever happened? I think a controlled deposition with both sides there would be the safe route. I think his attorney agreed to that. It appears to me that he thinks he is being accused of obstruction of justice here. He has to protect himself in anyway possible. I am not sure why police go from interview mode to intterogation mode, but when they do, the witness clams up. It is better to do it in an deposition style with both sides there. The intterogation mode yields more questions than answers. IMO

 

[notthatsmart]

When I said notes I meant reports. Very often in trials LEO refer to their reports because often months or years have passed since the person was arrested. I posted for you the entire LE interviews so you could hear him lying. It seems to me that you, no offense, may have the same misunderstanding Dominic did as to the nature of federal officers and detectives parameters and practices that are well within the law. He had Brad right there with him, he felt uncomfortable , he could surely have asked for a break. If something outside of the rules was going on Brad could have spoken up. If you listen carefully, Brad does speak up once or twice. I respectfully am going to have to agree to disagree.
Your description of that interview is very is not the same interview I have listened to. Perhaps Mr. Casey was explained what obstruction of justice and lying by ommission is by Baez, who clearly, has a HUGE misunderstanding of the rules. Here is just one tiny example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GUw0PIjI5E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7VCuGvP69I This is a perfect example that these prosecutors have got this!!! I could post a whole bunch, but I trust those that agree already know, and I cannot convince those that don't want to perceive it that way. I could sooner sell ice to Eskimos , and indeed have them licking their chops, wow, Julia....this is no ordinary ice...
Kidding, I am kidding

Yeah lets just agree to disagree. We interpret things differently. I really don't need any help. I have read and listened to all these interviews several times. Moo

 

[TorisMom003]

During an investigation, in this case a missing 2 1/2 year old baby girl, if a possible witness comes across the desk of the investigators then it is well within their right and in fact is their job to question that possible witness. If during that interview the possible witness begins to tell lies, hem haw around avoiding answering questions and in general gives the investigators a hard time then I fully expect the investigators to try and get to not only the truth but to try and understand why the possible witness is being so difficult. If the only way possible to get to the truth, to find out what actually happend, to find out what role (if any) that possible witness plays in the crime is for the investigators to turn the interview into an interrigation then that is simply the way it must be. When we have a world filled with people killing people, people abusing and killing children, people doing harm to one another instead of treating others in the way that they themselves would like to be treated it is nice to know that the police, states attorneys and our government will do their best and do whatever it takes to get to the truth and provide justice for those victims.

D. Casey was told that he would be forced to give a deposition. Period, end of story. If Baez or any of the other defense lawyers wanted to be in the room for that deposition they were told what they needed to do........place him on their witness list. There must be a reason for D. Casey to not want to be deposed. In a case such as this it seems that only the ones with something to hide try their damndest to keep from telling what they know. A small innocent child was killed and the killer needs to be punished. It is past time for those that try to stay silent to remember that.

 

[The World According]

Privacy laws are to protect private citizens records. Medical records, employment records, etc. No one is entitled to see them, least of all us. RK is not considered a suspect so his records are private and no one will see them. If defense felt those records were important THEY would have them and be right in Kathy B's face flaunting them, see, see we told you. RK is not suspect, has never been a suspect only another victim of the Princess of Lies. I can't understand why someone would believe otherwise because it just does not fit. We all know from discovery released documents that the estimate of when the body was placed in the spot the remains were recovered was mid June thru the 1st week in July. We know that RK first reported seeing the remains August 11th and had Ofc. Cain done his job Caylee would have been found at that time. There is no evidence pointing to RK. None, zip. KC, mountains...... JH's testimony will hurt DC. It's not a coincidence that all the lying is coming from the defense's side. jmo

:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
I sure do hope what has been done to Mr. Kronk will not be done to any of the TES volunteers, God help them all if they have a bitter ex spouse!!!!!!!!:furious:

 

[logicalgirl]

I wonder if there is anything wrong with a witness just not wanting to be deposed but is willing to get on the stand in front of the jury. Has it ever happened? I think a controlled deposition with both sides there would be the safe route. I think his attorney agreed to that. It appears to me that he thinks he is being accused of obstruction of justice here. He has to protect himself in anyway possible. I am not sure why police go from interview mode to intterogation mode, but when they do, the witness clams up. It is better to do it in an deposition style with both sides there. The intterogation mode yields more questions than answers. IMO

I can't say legally and I think we can ask AZLawyer that question, but I'm pretty sure a deposition must be done before a witness can testify in court, at a death penalty trial.

And it would be a very foolish lawyer indeed, whether the prosecution or defense who put a witness on the stand without being very sure what their testimony is going to be. Since a deposition is a legal statement, a perjury charge which can mean a jail sentence applies for lying during one. As you often say, what you want to find is the truth, and a deposition and witness testimony at trial is the fastest, most sure way of getting to that truth. The only time during a trial we would want to hear an opinion, is from an expert witness, who is there to give their opinion, and has been educated and certified as an expert to give it.

 

[21merc7]

I'm kind of lost as to what the question is here.

If DC is told to go to a deposition, he can take his attorney for any client protection. If DC is asked to go talk with police, he knows it is being recorded, everyone knows that especially DC, and he can have his attorney present. If he chooses to go alone to either, he knows both scenarios are recorded.

If DC is called as a witness at any kind of trial, it will be recorded.

DC knows this, DC can bring his attorney. His attorney cannot advise once he is on the witness stand though. His attorney can advise before and after witness stand.

So, whatever is going on with DC, and his past stop the tape conversation does not make it sound like just nothing, he needs his attorney.

If the Court orders depositions or subpoenas him as a witness, he needs to get with his attorney asap.

 

[Aedrys]

Jinx !! That's exactly what I was going to say !
Time and time ,again,the SA's prove they know how to do their job.

Exactly. In no way, shape, or form, and no matter how much Cindy wants to believe it, is this trial going to be controlled by the A's. It's not going to hinge on their testimony whether or not Casey gets convicted and it is sheer ego and ignorance to think that what they say is the ONLY thing that is going convict Casey or set her free. It's also ridiculous to say that jury has to acquit Casey if they don't believe her parents, or DC, or anyone else close to the case.

The SA are pros, they have a pile of yes, circumstantial evidence, but more than enough that when it's put together professionally in front of a jury, they are going to be able to come to a definite conclusion. I think seeing it altogether is what it's going to take for some people who stubbornly want to believe that Casey didn't do it to finally see that she did do it. It's hard to for some people to see things clearly when only pieces are presented one document dump at a time. And there's just so much evidence, it's hard to see it for what it is when it's not lined up and presented as a whole picture rather than a picture in it's parts.

So I, for one, am not worried. The SA is going to do it's job well, and if Baez can't learn to speak without uhhhhs and ummms, and can't learn to not drop his notes or not know what's being talked about at the moment, Casey will completely be sunk by her own defense. I think some people need to worry more about that than whether the SA is going to be able to do it's job.

People like the A's and DC need to be more worried about the SA doing so good of a job that Casey gets the needle. DC especially needs to tell the truth and get himself away from the circus he involved himself in. There are no superior investigative skills here - I mean please, getting maps and graphs, bringing along someone with a video camera, poking evidence on the ground - ANYONE could do that. And if he was so superior, why didn't he find the body before Kronk did?

That's the crux of it for me. Kronk did not do this, but he was someone like a lot of us at WS. He was someone suspicious of what was going on, put clues together about the area where Caylee was, and decided to actually go and look there. I don't know if he actually expected to find a body, but he did. That does not mean he murdered her, or hurt another child to make them scream. It means he cared about Caylee as much as we did, and to keep harping on him as the murderer at this point is sheer desperation. No, he's not perfect and has a problematic past, but that does NOT make him a murderer!

To say that he is the murderer is slap to the face of anyone that cares about missing and murdered children, that we shouldn't talk about these cases and care enough to try and help out when help is needed. He didn't have to go looking in those woods. He could have just let it go, and who knows what would happened to Caylee's remains. The fact that he followed his suspicions and his heart to find the remains of a murdered child is something to look up to, not look down upon. I hope I someday have the same guts to do what he did if a child goes missing in my area.

I am not worried about the SA, not worried about what the A's or DC will say. I know justice is coming no matter what the naysayers say. The jury will be intelligent enough to put this together and convict Casey, that I am sure of. And they won't believe a thing the A's say, that I am also sure of. The only thing the A's will bring to light is what liars the whole family is and that will just convict Casey all the faster.

 

[BondJamesBond]

Alright, then.

Thanks to posters that were being respectful. I appreciate your patience while we cleaned things up a bit.

Please continue w/ constructive discussion. TIA.

 

[okiedokietoo]

IMO DC needs an attorney

IMO there is no reason on the face of the earth for LE to frame KC - she is a nobody, wasn't famous before June 15, 2008 although now she is infamous

 

[Trapshooter]

I can't say legally and I think we can ask AZLawyer that question, but I'm pretty sure a deposition must be done before a witness can testify in court, at a death penalty trial.

And it would be a very foolish lawyer indeed, whether the prosecution or defense who put a witness on the stand without being very sure what their testimony is going to be. Since a deposition is a legal statement, a perjury charge which can mean a jail sentence applies for lying during one. As you often say, what you want to find is the truth, and a deposition and witness testimony at trial is the fastest, most sure way of getting to that truth. The only time during a trial we would want to hear an opinion, is from an expert witness, who is there to give their opinion, and has been educated and certified as an expert to give it.

I would "prolly" bet my life that a lawyer does not ask a witness a question without knowing the answer already!!!! It just doesn't happen that way. This isn't going to be a Perry Mason court room drama where the witness walks in at the end saying ICA is innocent and they have proof because there is NOT one person that can prove she is innocent. Dominic is just another fly in the ointment for Cindy!!!

 

[beach]

I can't say legally and I think we can ask AZLawyer that question, but I'm pretty sure a deposition must be done before a witness can testify in court, at a death penalty trial.

And it would be a very foolish lawyer indeed, whether the prosecution or defense who put a witness on the stand without being very sure what their testimony is going to be. Since a deposition is a legal statement, a perjury charge which can mean a jail sentence applies for lying during one. As you often say, what you want to find is the truth, and a deposition and witness testimony at trial is the fastest, most sure way of getting to that truth. The only time during a trial we would want to hear an opinion, is from an expert witness, who is there to give their opinion, and has been educated and certified as an expert to give it.

BBM

I'm not AZ, but I can tell you that a depo is NOT a legal requirement before a witness may testify at trial, even considering the DP. Rarely, but sometimes, it happens that a witness is discovered through testimony elicited during a trial. (one that immediately comes to mind is Mark Furman and the lady who had to authenticate the recorded tapes). However, your second sentence I bolded is very, very true. That is one of the most important advantages to depos. A good attorney avoids at all costs opening a door w/o knowing exactly what is behind it.

 

[notthatsmart]

I can't say legally and I think we can ask AZLawyer that question, but I'm pretty sure a deposition must be done before a witness can testify in court, at a death penalty trial.

And it would be a very foolish lawyer indeed, whether the prosecution or defense who put a witness on the stand without being very sure what their testimony is going to be. Since a deposition is a legal statement, a perjury charge which can mean a jail sentence applies for lying during one. As you often say, what you want to find is the truth, and a deposition and witness testimony at trial is the fastest, most sure way of getting to that truth. The only time during a trial we would want to hear an opinion, is from an expert witness, who is there to give their opinion, and has been educated and certified as an expert to give it.

Yeah but they wanted to depose without the defense present and that is something of a different color. I can the concern from the witness. As long as both sides are there, everything is on the up and up. I agree, but if only one side is there and the other side is not allowed, I think a witness could hold out until trial... Moo

 

[beach]

Yeah but they wanted to depose without the defense present and that is something of a different color. I can the concern from the witness. As long as both sides are there, everything is on the up and up. I agree, but if only one side is there and the other side is not allowed, I think a witness could hold out until trial... Moo

BBM

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.

Bumping AZ's answer to this from wayyyy back on PAGE 4!

That was 9 pages ago!!!

:banghead: