Former Defense Attorney,Todd Macaluso *Merged*

[MiraclesHappen]

Thank you very much for this detailed explanation !!! I think I got it, lawyers do write checks on this account but not for personal expenses. I wonder what the bar will do about this, what they normally do in this circumstance.

Glad I could help! :blowkiss:


As to what they do?

It aint good for the lawyer.:wink: It depends on the level of wrongdoing.


Humble-Opinion:wolf:

 

[amethyst221]

Nothing is ever black and white, so past behavior, mitigating factors, etc. might be part of a decision. In my jurisdiction, if you couldn't clearly show clerical error at the heart of this sort of thing, it could very likely result in extremely serious discipline, even including disbarment. I don't know the California rules.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

Just figured out today what he will be used for on this team. He is a "manual and procedures" expert. In fact, he is known for his blistering cross-examination of experts re their own manuals and procedures and more specifically, not following their own manuals and procedures. They will use him for attacking LE and CSI and he will use their own manuals, guidelines and procedures against them. I'm sure of it.

 

[ThoughtElf]

Just figured out today what he will be used for on this team. He is a "manual and procedures" expert. In fact, he is known for his blistering cross-examination of experts re their own manuals and procedures and more specifically, not following their own manuals and procedures. They will use him for attacking LE and CSI and he will use their own manuals, guidelines and procedures against them. I'm sure of it.

I think you're correct. The assumptions that he's only there to portray this as an accident aren't as likely as what you've suggested, IMO.

Which would make sense as to why he was at this specific motion hearing and in part, why JB went down the path that he did in questioning CSI Bloise. I'm sure you guys can add to this list, but following your train of thought, defense did obtain some specific jumping off points for Macaluso to begin researching and targetting from OCSO manuals and required accreditations for CSI and computer technical experts:

1. manual/policy/procedure regarding entry of hand-written notes into electronic format
2. daily notes transfered/entered into summary report
3. from LKB: refered to a set of standards regarding the notes from the computer analyst - did the analyst follow procedure and are they accredited in a way that is required to follow those standards.

Interested in any others you think might be under the microscope - strictly as a direct results of this motion hearing.

 

[Drivenon]

Do I need to do something with my settings? I am not seeing the "quotes" that are quoted, help.

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

I'm not defending this guy, just re-posting the link and giving a bit of info mentioned for those that can't get the link to work.

http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFil...tion for Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice.pdf

In December, 2005 his only brother passed away. He was away from the office for approximately one year and three months consoling his family. During that time 2 checks were drafted that were returned by the bank due to an accounting error by office staff. The accounting error was immediately and swiftly corrected. No client complaint was ever filed to the State Bar. The only reason the matter was reported to the Bar was because the bank reports automatically by state law.

ETA: Only stating a bit of what is in the report. My own opinion is that if it happened "innocently" once, why weren't safeguards put in place so it wouldn't happen a second time.

Bolded by me

He left his office staff without supervision for 15 months ? I am sorry for his loss, but that was a heck of alot of bereavement time. Most people are lucky to get 1 week.

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

maybe they are just using him to make kc not look as bad. She didn't steal nearly the amount of money he did:woohoo:

LOL - great line !!

 

[ThoughtElf]

Do I need to do something with my settings? I am not seeing the "quotes" that are quoted, help.

Cyberborg assimilated you. We're invisible to you.

Try clearing your cache? Open/close browser? I'm not having any trouble, but I was the other day.

 

[okiedokietoo]

This Attorney is Top of the Heap - He doesn't need the publicity - He doesn't usually work on cases like KC's. Is it the game? What is the allure? There seems to be dots here that need to be connected. Why is he working on this case? Has he worked with any member of the Defense before? Is he connected to the person/persons with the money?

 

[ThoughtElf]

This Attorney is Top of the Heap - He doesn't need the publicity - He doesn't usually work on cases like KC's. Is it the game? What is the allure? There seems to be dots here that need to be connected. Why is he working on this case? Has he worked with any member of the Defense before? Is he connected to the person/persons with the money?

He has worked with Dr. Baden before (LKB's Hubby)

 

[okiedokietoo]

He has worked with Dr. Baden before (LKB's Hubby)

Really. Thank You for the info. It's all so odd.

 

[amethyst221]

I'm not sure how it was established he is or was "top of the heap." I know he said so, but ???? There were a couple of general statements when he first appeared that he was there as a good cross-examiner or something. So apparently he has experience in other technical areas using manuals and standards against the technicians and experts to make them look incompetent and non-complying. That isn't exactly a specialty, so I'm sure if he doesn't get admitted, JB and LKB can use their super cross-examination skills to fill the gap. It's what any good trial lawyer could do, with preparation.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

Bolded by me

He left his office staff without supervision for 15 months ? I am sorry for his loss, but that was a heck of alot of bereavement time. Most people are lucky to get 1 week.

I know as a fact that he made court appearances during this time period. That said, when my father was hospitalized and subsequently died in Florida I was down there for 6 months while still practicing in California. Once or twice I flew back to appear in court. Wasn't easy but with email, faxes, and electronic filings it can be done. I did the same with my mother in South Carolina.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

I'm not sure how it was established he is or was "top of the heap." I know he said so, but ???? There were a couple of general statements when he first appeared that he was there as a good cross-examiner or something. So apparently he has experience in other technical areas using manuals and standards against the technicians and experts to make them look incompetent and non-complying. That isn't exactly a specialty, so I'm sure if he doesn't get admitted, JB and LKB can use their super cross-examination skills to fill the gap. It's what any good trial lawyer could do, with preparation.

In California he is considered to be one of the best trial attorneys, his reputation is sterling. In aviation cases he is considered to be "The Prince of Darkness." His methods of cross-examination on technical manuals is considered the gold standard. Cross-examination is an art. Few trial attorneys master it. He knows how to work a jury, believe me, juries love the guy. Contrast JB--his cross of the CSI guy was an embarrassment to the profession. He violated every rule of cross-examination. LKB is also an excellent lawyer on forensic issues but has the ability to grate on people's nerves--not sure how well she'll play in Florida. Her writing skills leave a lot to be desired. I, for one, have a hard time following her motion papers.

In answer to another poster's post--my guess is that they will use him to cross-all the investigators and CSI people. Not sure of the rules in Florida or the particular trial judge. Some allow attorneys to share in cross and others don't permit it.

 

[Meemom]

I think you're correct. The assumptions that he's only there to portray this as an accident aren't as likely as what you've suggested, IMO.

Which would make sense as to why he was at this specific motion hearing and in part, why JB went down the path that he did in questioning CSI Bloise. I'm sure you guys can add to this list, but following your train of thought, defense did obtain some specific jumping off points for Macaluso to begin researching and targetting from OCSO manuals and required accreditations for CSI and computer technical experts:

1. manual/policy/procedure regarding entry of hand-written notes into electronic format
2. daily notes transfered/entered into summary report
3. from LKB: refered to a set of standards regarding the notes from the computer analyst - did the analyst follow procedure and are they accredited in a way that is required to follow those standards.

Interested in any others you think might be under the microscope - strictly as a direct results of this motion hearing.

ITA- I think he's there to cast doubt on the methods and procedures of CSI & LE, muddy the waters as much as possible. I think he will review, in court before the jury, every freaking forensic testing procedure with every state expert witness, hoping he can get them to slip up and acknowledge any minute error.

However, I also think this will be a waste of time and effort on the defense's part. Unless he can find some GLARING mistake that will stick with the jurors, they most likely will find this boring beyond endurance, ignore it, and concentrate on the meatier aspects of the case (just human nature- let's face it, the jury will not consist of WSers). Jurors will be only human, and as such, will mostly only connect with information that makes sense to them. There is a BIG difference between showing product liability due to a failure to follow procedures (ie- product was not tested correctly, and therefore dangerous item was put on the market, etc.) and proving evidence in a child's death should be ignored because a techie entered info into his computer system a day late or missed a tiny hair on a tv dinner plate in a garbage bag, found it later, and then tested it, or a lab guy who's done a type of test a thousand times can't articulate the steps he follows quoting word for word from the procedure manual. Jurors will find this tedious at best and ignore it completely, at worst, imo, especially if JB does any of the questioning, as shown by his ridiculous performance in the hearing with the CSI.

Just as the media feeds the most shocking details to the public (Hi, Nancy Grace!) and that's what they remember, the jury will hopefully hone in on the important and more pertinent facts that SA presents- not reported missing by mother AT ALL, reported after 31 days by CA with KC asking for 1 more day, smell of death in car, decomp hair, lies, lies, lies, etc. JMHO

 

[Hell's Belle]

I know as a fact that he made court appearances during this time period. That said, when my father was hospitalized and subsequently died in Florida I was down there for 6 months while still practicing in California. Once or twice I flew back to appear in court. Wasn't easy but with email, faxes, and electronic filings it can be done. I did the same with my mother in South Carolina.

What is notable is the discrepancy between his submission to the CA state bar which says that he wasn't paying attention to the details during that fifteen months (that's not the precise language but I've quoted it upthread), and his submission to the Florida court, which goes one giant step further and says he was away from his office for fifteen months. (ETA: The motion submitted in Florida claims that Macaluso was "away from the office for approximately one year and three months." (date: 3/12/2009). His submission to the California bar (which is actually attached to the Florida submission) claims only that he "was unable to focus and concentrate on some of the responsibilities he had previously performed in his office," but makes no claim that he was away from his office (signed by his lawyer on 2/11/2009). )

Cross-examination is an art. Few trial attorneys master it.

ITA, although Pozner and Dodd would argue with you that it's a science. Performing a cross would be impossible to delegate; if Macaluso isn't admitted PHV the team can't get the same effect by having him feed the questions to Baez or LKB. I'm pretty sure you can't split a cross between two lawyers in FL but I haven't double-checked this lately.

 

[amethyst221]

Cross-examination is absolutely an art. I've seen stunningly good and bad examples. I can't help it, but I just have an instinctive negative reaction to people who have the need to tell me they're great, so his comments so far in Florida aren't persuading me. He may be very good. I love nothing more than watching a great cross just beat the carp out of an evil corporate exec in a case brought by real, injured people. It's gonna be a little different defending the horrid mother charged with murdering a beautiful little two-year old by trying to eviscerate everyone who did anything to try to help or find or bring justice to her.

 

[twomanywords]

Let's not forget about this guy!
The press needs to be all over his his story, so the judge can get him off the case.
Look at how the emails to the judge helped to get the A's deposed.

 

[one_hooah_wife]

Mass tort litigators are a special breed of scum~

I can explain why I believe this, ad nauseum! Just ask!

 

[trixi491]

Saw him walking with JB into the deposition today. Guess that mean's he's back..grrrr