Legal Q&A Thread for R Hornsby

[preciousbabies]

I've appointed myself the person searching for the nanny. Remember she is in her mid twenties. Long dark hair. And a perfect "10". If any of you on this site fit this description or know of someone who does, please contact the law offices of Baez and Company. They are trying to put together a line up to choose their next victim to throw under the bus.

 

[whats the punch line]

I've appointed myself the person searching for the nanny. Remember she is in her mid twenties. Long dark hair. And a perfect "10". If any of you on this site fit this description or know of someone who does, please contact the law offices of Baez and Company. They are trying to put together a line up to choose their next victim to throw under the bus.

I am 5'7" about 125 lbs, I straighten my hair, I do have duct tape in my garage, I am not hispanic, nor am I a 10. I do babysit grandkids. Also I drive a silver focus. AND I live in NY.

 

[JBean]

let's stay somewhat on topic please

 

[Bree0372]

A North Florida jury pool would be more akin to an Alabama or Mississippi mindset. A South Florida jury would be more likely to field an O.J.esque mindset.

Make no mistake about it, South Florida is their best chance at walking Casey. If a North Florida venue is chosen, she is cooked.

OUCH! :slap: (j/k) Come on now, we have minds of our own - even in rural NW Florida. I am a native of NW Florida and could sit on this jury and not be biased. Although, I have reviewed the material released, which IMO leans towards Casey's guilt, I'm still open-minded enough to hear both sides of the case. I say bring'em on...I'll volunteer for jury duty.

I do understand what you are saying though, and you are, for the most part, correct in your belief that if they come to N FL her goose is cooked. I still think that if they continue to portray a hispanic woman (Zanny the InvisiNanny) as the kidnapper when they go to trial, that they will have a hard time finding a sympathetic jury in S FL.

FWIW, I was in Criminal Investigations class when the OJ case was going on and I'm one of the very few who would NOT have convicted him based on the evidence presented by the prosecution.

I have a question regarding the Defense's ongoing claims that they have proof of Casey's innocence. If Casey was your client, and you had "proof" of her innocence, would you sit back and wait 2 years for a trial to begin or would you turn over said evidence and get your client off the charges and out of jail? As well, wouldn't the defense, or shouldn't they, be concerned about finding the real killer of Caylee? Why aren't they shouting from the rooftops about the real killer still being out there? They obviously have the media platform available to do so. Okay, that was more than one question.

O/T

Haha. I was just thinking that. But I do completely get what he is saying. Over here in Biloxi any time someone is even accused of a crime in the local papers (even theft, etc) half of the comments on our local paper's forum are "Hang 'em" "Get rid of them" "Lock them up for life" etc. (I don't fair well over there with my devil's advocate mindset. ) I can see a North Florida jury convicting her. You know what they say...the farther south you go in Florida, it's almost like going north.

I only lived in north Florida briefly- I worked at a bar on the strip in Panama City Beach for spring break/summer while I was out of college. (THAT certainly wasn't conservative. Haha.) But there are many surrounding North Florida cities that have a quiet, conservative, country feel. I used to pass signs warning me about the "devil" getting me when I was driving from Troy, AL to PCB.

<snipped for space>

Isn't PC Beach the best? :woohoo: We aren't too conservative here - a little, but not overly. If we were, we certainly couldn't deal with the spring breakers! (UGH - they'll soon be back.) [Club LaVela and Spinnaker] Cat, I know what you mean about the outlying areas (I'm from one of them, but I left) in this area - they are harmless, for the most part.

fftopic: for Atty Hornsby: GO NOLES!! :croceven if we got our butts kicked today) Now, I do hope Tebow wins the Heisman again. Oh, and CONGRATS on the win!

 

[wonders]

i think of this forum as pro-CAYLEE

it will be very interesting when we get to trial.....

do you think the trial will be next year still?

BBM
No I don't. The defense will keep filing motion after motion after motion until the end of time it seems like to me. Maybe in 2011. JMOOC.

 

[mitzi]

I have found Roy Kronk's next lawsuit: See Gamer Sues World of Warcraft Maker for Ruining his Life

p.s. I'm kidding... kind of.

LOL! My 30 yr. old son-in-law, daughter, and 27 yr. old son all play WOW...should I be worried? :crazy:

 

[nobull]

The duct tape was not wrapped around Caylee's head nor were her hands tied. The duct tape was layered in shorter strips as if to try and stop leakage, which might well occur after a drowning death. Moreover, placing hearts on the duct tape is anything but a sinister act.

I recall reading where the duct tape wrapped around the skull in such a way that it created a hair mat that needed to be cut from the tape. I also believe that it is reasonable to ascertain that a 2 year old would not have the fine motor dexterity or strength required to remove a piece of super sticky tape from their mouth.

Secondly, I work in psych, and believe me, there are any number of sinister reasons someone would place a red heart sticker on tape over the mouth of a dead toddler.

 

[mitzi]

Could something still be being tested at this point and can't be released because the state themselves have not gotten it back?

Another question along this line, Mr. Hornsby...Can the FBI hold back the "physical proof" of results from tests that they (FBI) did, from the State; and just give the state "verbal results", in order to not release it to Baez? At least for awhile? I'm thinking back to Judge Strickland telling Baez that if he wants discovery that the FBI has not given to the State, that it is up to him (Baez) to directly contact the FBI himself. Am I correct in this? Thank you!

 

[mitzi]

Geee..
I am so thankful she didn't take that plea...
Scary thought, Caylee's killer could have walked with only 8 years..

Bold mine.

Geesh! With ample time to bear more children! Unthinkable! :banghead:

 

[robotdog]

personally, I find killing a small child horrible and i do find it quite sinister putting heart stickers on the body. I think it could be sinister putting a bible with the body... because the actually killing and/or dumping her like trash supercedes putting a 3 cent sticker or a bible or a favorite stuffed animal with her body

see, to me they dont compute. its kind of like beating the heck out of someone and putting them in traction and then buying them a subway sandwich and then telling them and the world "well, im sorry i beat the heck out them but look what a good person i am i bought them a roast beef sandwich for $3.95 were even now"

...naw its kookie talk usually by someone like KC

and as far as most people on boards thinking the accused in high profile crimes are GUILTY
well thats because MOST of them are guilty
yea yea yea, i am fully aware of the ones that are innocent and are accused and then pay with time in prison and that is horrible but it doesnt change the fact that the overwhelming majority in high profile cases are guilty


they will get her... no worries from this poster that thinks she is as guilty as the day is long



:banghead:

 

[mitzi]

You gotta give her credit for calling Baez (and others) out.

ETA: RR's quote above is in regards to Kathi Belich. To clarify what I was referring to below.

I think we all loved her "Why are you strutting, KC?" :dance:

 

[mitzi]

Yes, for example Mr. Hornsby we know the land lines and the cell phones of the Anthonys were tapped and recorded, that is just one part of evidence we haven't seen yet,so one may infer there is more, correct?

Also results from vacuums and shop vacs are not back either.

 

[rhornsby]

Not being an entirely original thinker :idea:, it is likely I have missed this question already.

Team Baez recently filed motions kinda-sorta pointing fingers at Roy Kronk. Given that KC spent so much time up front with law enforcement pointing a direct and undeniable finger at a Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzales, how would you as an attorney bridge the two theories at trial? I assume you first attempt to completely prohibit any mention of ZFG at the criminal trial, but that seems a rather tall order. Or is it? :waitasec:

The only way I could see it happen is if Casey testified that she completely lied about the entire Nanny story - and then give some type of explanation consistent with Ugly Coping.

In law, once a person testifies they completely lied about a story, there is nothing to impeach them on anymore - because they have already admitted all the previous statements were a lie.

So the judge is unlikely to allow the State to ask over and over again that each individual statement was a lie; since she would have already unequivocally stated so.

At this point the State would have to be prepared to cross-examine her about her new story and it would be up the jury to decide how much weight to give to both her explanation for originally lying and her new story.

 

[Virtual Truth]

The only way I could see it happen is if Casey testified that she completely lied about the entire Nanny story - and then give some type of explanation consistent with Ugly Coping.

In law, once a person testifies they completely lied about a story, there is nothing to impeach them on anymore - because they have already admitted all the previous statements were a lie.

So the judge is unlikely to allow the State to ask over and over again that each individual statement was a lie; since she would have already unequivocally stated so.

At this point the State would have to be prepared to cross-examine her about her new story and it would be up the jury to decide how much weight to give to both her explanation for originally lying and her new story.

Actually, at least one part of her original statement was not a lie. She was very clear about the "31-days" --as if she had been counting! Would that create an opening for the state to pick apart the original story?

Also, if she is allowed to toss the story of ZFG completely as a big lie, how does this help ZG's lawsuit against KC? To me it would seem that ZG would win by default.

 

[rhornsby]

I believe serving 85% of the sentence imposed is mandatory..........

That is correct. A person has to serve at least 85% of any sentence imposed.

 

[rhornsby]

RH-
I know you get a gazillion questions, but when desiding what to respond to do you go for the profoundly off the mark, the profoundly on the mark, or you are so way off base I need to reel you in comments.
Thanks

The one that allows me to provide the most concise answer so whomever reads the answer does not have review multiple questions to figure out what I am referring to.

 

[rhornsby]

Another question along this line, Mr. Hornsby...Can the FBI hold back the "physical proof" of results from tests that they (FBI) did, from the State; and just give the state "verbal results", in order to not release it to Baez? At least for awhile? I'm thinking back to Judge Strickland telling Baez that if he wants discovery that the FBI has not given to the State, that it is up to him (Baez) to directly contact the FBI himself. Am I correct in this? Thank you!

Yes, the F.B.I. could tell the prosecutors over the phone their tentative results before they put them in writing or release the final results. Under Florida law, a LEO is only required to provide his final report to the defense, not notes, or tentative reports. (However, if the person is part of aen established science, they are held to their scientific field's own standards on report writing and not retention.)

However, the death penalty was put back on the table eight months ago in April. Whatever supports the State's justification for the death penalty has to have been released by now.

 

[rhornsby]

Actually, at least one part of her original statement was not a lie. She was very clear about the "31-days" --as if she had been counting! Would that create an opening for the state to pick apart the original story?

Also, if she is allowed to toss the story of ZFG completely as a big lie, how does this help ZG's lawsuit against KC? To me it would seem that ZG would win by default.

Please don't get me started on the civil lawsuit - IMO that suit is about nothing more than Mr. Morgan's ego.

Listen EVEN if a jury were to believe Casey really was accusing THIS specific ZFG AND even if we are to believe ZFG's reputation was damaged, the question boils down to a monetary one - what are her damages?

It appears that if anything, her value as a character in this case far outweighs any potential earning value she had before this case broke out.

Not to mention that when shown a picture of ZFG - Casey did not identify her as the nanny.

This civil case is as bogus - from a legal perspective - as the original ZFG lie itself.

 

[rhornsby]

On the other hand, I think LKB will not go over big in Orlando. Come to think of it, I think she would be abrasive anywhere (and I'm a native NYer!).

Amen!

 

[rhornsby]

Mr. Hornsby,

I have tried to get a response to this question from the other forums you are participating on (you have been a busy boy! LOL!) but seem to keep missing you...

Do you know, or are you aware of any other attorneys (defense or prosecutors) who have spoken out through the media (tv, print, web) with their interpretations of the newly filed motions? I would like to read a variety of opinions...

Thanks!

No, just the usual suspects - Pam Bondi prosecutor in Tampa and Mark Eiglarsh, a defense attorney in Miami. But they are always on tv.

Most other attorneys have to make a living and keeping up on a case of this magnitude is pretty hard. Which is why I am dedicating tomorrow to catching up on my own client's cases.