Legal Q&A Thread for R Hornsby

[whats the punch line]

Jury Selection in Central Florida and with Judge Strickland is directed to the entire panel. So it is more like a townhall, than a 1 on 1 questioning. This is onea area I am 100% correct on. So no more responses from me to how the selection process occurs.

Tell us if this will or will not work, and why.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/i....individually.sequestered.jury.voire.dire.pdf

Thanks

 

[darnudes]

I'm outside the US and it works for me.

Must just be my computer.

Read the email now due to a very kind WS'er. All the good chaps/chapettes come here.

Can't disagree with his advice. Seems sound to me.

 

[QB.]

I apologize, I missed that post, I thought it was asked about the "jail visits" and not this one in particular.
I'll go back and read..

Post #45 [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4492535&postcount=45"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Legal Q&A Thread for R Hornsby[/ame]

He also answers question about jail visitation videos in post #89

 

[citygirl]

Mr. Hornsby, if you've already commented on this, then just disregard. I noticed on your website you were interviewed inre to the bottle with the syringe and chloroform, coffin flies etc. You seemed to think, at the time, that this could be the smoking gun or at least point to cause of death. Do you still believe that?

 

[JBean]

Please read the thread before posting your question. thanks.

ETA: I forgot my disclaimer: As always where this post lands on the thread is not necessarily reflective of any immediately surrounding posts, unless I quoted you of course

Gracias.

 

[mydailyopinions]

Post #45 Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Legal Q&A Thread for R Hornsby

He also answers question about jail visitation videos in post #89

Thank you QB
Not exactly the answer I was hoping for.

 

[citygirl]

Please read the thread before posting your question. thanks.

I did read the thread but haven't found anything specific. This is great to have him here.

 

[believe09]

I have reviewed most of the discovery.

I believe that they they will pick a jury in another county and then try the case here in Orange County and sequester the jury during the trial.

The reason being is that there are over 275 listed witnesses for the state, all the physical evidence is here, etc.

So from a financial standpoint, what would be cheaper? Put 12 people up in a hotel for two months; or put hundreds of people up in a hotel in some other county for two months.

You can't.

GREAT point, and thank you for the perspective. Are you sure you are not consulting for the defense? :innocent:

 

[2goldfish]

Please find the email I posted on my blog where I conspire with Baez and offer my legal assistance in representing the wretched baby killer.

It will not only answer your question - it will tell you my exact feelings the month Casey was first arrested.

not done reading thread yet so if this is answered forgive - can you or anyone link - just spent 30 min seaching your blog on my rather slow friday night internet to no avail....halp...TIA


Edit! nm, found it...wish I kept reading instead of searching

 

[RR0004]

JB's ego or his client's?

I think he does infer both in one of his earlier posts.
HTH

 

[2goldfish]

Opening Statements is the single aspect of this case that I am truly looking forward to hearing.

Because that is the first moment that the speculation will end and all of our questions will be answered.

I cannot wait to hear from the State say how they will prove first degree murder.

I cannot wait to hear from the defense whether Casey Anthony will testify.

OMG! That will truly be the most exciting moment of the case aside from the verdict.

BBM

is it true that in order to change the nanny story and explain, KC must take the stand? TIA

(and I agree, seeing her on the stand would probably be better than any film on lifetime I ever had to suffer through)

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

The problem is your idea of ALL the evidence and my idea of ALL the evidence are two different things.

Please trust me, a lot of the evidence will not come in for a variety of reasons: evidentiary, overly-prejudicial, suppressible, redundant, not admissible, unreliable, repetitive.

And I am glad you asked that, because when the reporters asked me questions, it was always in a vacuum, as if that piece of evidence was the most important piece in the whole case. Take the jailhouse reaction video for example - that video WILL NOT COME INTO EVIDENCE.

Why? Because it is pure speculation as to what exactly her reaction means. State will argue it shows guilt, defense will argue that not only was it illegally obtained (trust me, it was) but that her reaction was as equally consistent with how an innocent mother would act.

Why? Because her daughter's story was the only one that was all over the TV, so it mattered not that no one told her what the report was about, a would know who was likely found the minute the reporter said they found a body of a young child.

But more importantly, they had nothing to compare it to. Take when Padilla said he found the body at the river. Now if they had taken her into the room when that newscast occurred and she did nothing, well you would have something to juxtapose the actual finding of Casey with.

But that would have required a smart detective, which this case lacked.

NOW, when you come on here using words such as , I personally take offense!!! I find THAT to be morally despicable and uncalled for!!!!!!!!!!

Obviously, time for me to stay off this thread....

 

[rhornsby]

Mr. Hornsby,

I was not asking to be sarcastic, attacking or disrespectful. I truly do appreciate your coming here and answering questions. I will be the first to say, your knowledge on ALL law, and processes are far greater than I would even pretend to know. I was asking to truly get an understanding. I just found it odd, that, as in my example, that one juror would state his opinion and other jurors would just follow suit and agree, which would disqualify him/her. Your example, to say one would be asked a question about Ms. Lyon's comments and then the others are asked who agrees she is a witch, or whatever, and disqualifying them, seemed to put jurors in a simple state of mind. And also I thought there were only so many each side could disqualify. I guess I will go back through the thread and look for your more in depth answers on jury selection. Maybe it was described more thoroughly and I missed it.

But thanks for sort of, addressing my real question.

There are two types of challenges to potential jurors. For Cause challenges allow you to remove a juror if they have exhibited a bias that would "likely" affect their ability to be fair and impartial until they hear all the evidence. These are unlimited, but the judge makes the decision once the objection is raised.

The second are Peremptory strikes. Both sides have 12 in a capital case. They can be used to strike a person for any reason except race or gender. But they are limited to 12. So their use needs to be limited.

 

[rhornsby]

NOW, when you come on here using words such as , I personally take offense!!! I find THAT to be morally despicable and uncalled for!!!!!!!!!!

Obviously, time for me to stay off this thread....

I apologize for not being politically correct: I will use the synonym "mentally challenged" if need be in the future.

 

[rhornsby]

BBM

is it true that in order to change the nanny story and explain, KC must take the stand? TIA

(and I agree, seeing her on the stand would probably be better than any film on lifetime I ever had to suffer through)

Unless the defense has listed another witness to explain away the nanny (they have not) I cannot conceive of any way to explain it away convincingly without her doing so.

 

[Wudge]

Count Three - Agg. Manslaughter because it only requires an intentional omission (not calling police ASAP); counts 1 and 2 require an intentional physical act.

With that said, if Caylee died accidentally and Casey somehow testifies, or defense alludes to that; calling police would not have have changed how Caylee died. Thus although the omission was intentional, it did not contribute to the death before the fact. And she could walk on that as well.

What bothers me is the State filed the Notice to Seek the Death Penalty on April 14 - and I still haven't seen something that just jumps out at me and says PREMEDITATED DEATH.

I agree.

As regards Casey commiting a premeditated murder, the evidence in the public domain is insufficient to prove murder one beyond a reasonable doubt. To find Casey guilty of 1st degree murder, the jury would necessarily be required to speculate, and we know jurors are instructed that they are not permitted to speculate.

My assessment of the evidence in the public domain holds the same to also be true for the aggravated child abuse charge and the manslaughter charge. As best we know, there's a void of inculpatory evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the required elements in any of these three charges (murder one, aggravated child abuse, manslaughter). To find Casey guilty of any of these charges would require jurors to speculate.

 

[Tricia]

I apologize for not being politically correct: I will use the synonym "mentally challenged" if need be in the future.

Mr. Hornsby,

I could give a ratsa$$ about political correctness but some words are mean and unnecessary. Like this one.

Thank you,
Tricia Griffith

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

Rhornsby, Just wanted to say thanks again for posting here and answering legal questions, it is appreciated by many.

As for the check fraud case, in other cases concerning check fraud without the circumstances of a murder charge involved, What is the usual procedure and outcome generally speaking, in Orlando?
I guess what I am really asking is would it be a usual occurance there, for someone with charges similar to KC's to be charged and convicted of a felony, or would it usually be they combine the charges take a plea less than a felony, enforce restitution, and jail time is not involved, since there were no priors?

 

[rhornsby]

Mr. Horsnby,
The video that the state alleges to have of Casey in the jail the day the remains were discovered, before the body was identified with Casey freaking out, do you think it will come in at trial?

I doubt it.

 

[whats the punch line]

Im still curious if Baez's motion regarding voire dire will be granted.

Will it benefit both sides of the case in light of all the jury pool statements?