Legal Questions for our VERIFIED Lawyers #3

[BChand]

Checked back a few pages and didn't see anyone ask this question.

Baez said he was going to call Dr. Vass in his CIC. Jeff Ashton was just about laughing and shaking his head .

Does Dr. Vass HAVE to testify as an expert in their CIC? If he doesn't want to accept JAC rates, what then?

Thank you for any info.

 

[AZlawyer]

Checked back a few pages and didn't see anyone ask this question.

Baez said he was going to call Dr. Vass in his CIC. Jeff Ashton was just about laughing and shaking his head .

Does Dr. Vass HAVE to testify as an expert in their CIC? If he doesn't want to accept JAC rates, what then?

Thank you for any info.

I don't think a paid expert would be forced to testify for the other side, no. You'll note that the defense withdrew its subpoena.

 

[BChand]

I don't think a paid expert would be forced to testify for the other side, no. You'll note that the defense withdrew its subpoena.

I did, thanks AZlawyer. Someone said he threatened to issue a new one in the morning? He really wants that database. lol

 

[sophie01]

I don't know if I am asking this question in the correct place or not, but I am wondering if Jesse Grund has testified and if not, will he and when? It seems he would have testified at the same time he other friends did.

 

[AZlawyer]

I don't know if I am asking this question in the correct place or not, but I am wondering if Jesse Grund has testified and if not, will he and when? It seems he would have testified at the same time he other friends did.

Not yet. He will probably testify at some point. He was not part of the group of friends hanging out with Casey during June 16-July 15, so I am not surprised he did not testify with that group.

 

[MissJames]

No, that's not the kind of thing that would result in an attorney being held in contempt. I suppose it could happen, technically, but it won't.

Are there any remedies available to the judge to stop an attorney who continues to ignore his rulings?
"Mr. Baez,don't go down that path"

 

[AZlawyer]

Are there any remedies available to the judge to stop an attorney who continues to ignore his rulings?
"Mr. Baez,don't go down that path"

Yes, he can say "Mr. Baez, don't go down that path." Or he can send the jury out and tear Mr. Baez to pieces (verbally!).

I think HHJP is attempting to be patient because JB is not "ignoring" his rulings. He simply doesn't understand them.

 

[twomanywords]

Will JB automatically be a death qualified atty. after this case?
Thx

 

[dani]

In Yuri's "OCSO Supplemental Report" (last paragraph of page 8) http://files.realitychatter.com/CA/Docs/OCSO Supplemental 13306-13319.pdf it says:

"Robyn Adams spoke with Casey Anthony the day Caylee Anthony's remains were found (December 11 th, 2008). After a chaplain informed Casey Anthony of the recovery, Casey Anthony told Robyn Adams law enforcement had found the body of a small child with a baby blanket inside a black garbage bag. As a note, the information regarding the baby blanket and black garbage bag was not made known to the jail chaplain so Casey Anthony had knowledge of items only the suspect, certain law enforcement personnel and the certain medical examiner's personnel knew."


BBM
Is it possible the jury will hear/see this information?

 

[beachbumming]

In Yuri's "OCSO Supplemental Report" (last paragraph of page 8) http://files.realitychatter.com/CA/Docs/OCSO Supplemental 13306-13319.pdf it says:

"Robyn Adams spoke with Casey Anthony the day Caylee Anthony's remains were found (December 11 th, 2008). After a chaplain informed Casey Anthony of the recovery, Casey Anthony told Robyn Adams law enforcement had found the body of a small child with a baby blanket inside a black garbage bag. As a note, the information regarding the baby blanket and black garbage bag was not made known to the jail chaplain so Casey Anthony had knowledge of items only the suspect, certain law enforcement personnel and the certain medical examiner's personnel knew."


BBM
Is it possible the jury will hear/see this information?

I have no idea if that is actually true. Putting jail house snitches on the stand can be tricky. They immediately come with a credibility problem. IMO unless their testimony is vital to prove the state's case the state might not want to use them. I just don't know enough about this person.

 

[AZlawyer]

Will JB automatically be a death qualified atty. after this case?
Thx

IIRC he would have to be involved in trying multiple death penalty cases, so no.

In Yuri's "OCSO Supplemental Report" (last paragraph of page 8) http://files.realitychatter.com/CA/Docs/OCSO Supplemental 13306-13319.pdf it says:

"Robyn Adams spoke with Casey Anthony the day Caylee Anthony's remains were found (December 11 th, 2008). After a chaplain informed Casey Anthony of the recovery, Casey Anthony told Robyn Adams law enforcement had found the body of a small child with a baby blanket inside a black garbage bag. As a note, the information regarding the baby blanket and black garbage bag was not made known to the jail chaplain so Casey Anthony had knowledge of items only the suspect, certain law enforcement personnel and the certain medical examiner's personnel knew."


BBM
Is it possible the jury will hear/see this information?

I think this was an erroneous conclusion. IIRC the information was included in the search warrant application taken to the A. home on Dec 11, and after that Jose met with Casey, and after that Casey spoke to Robyn--so she could have known about the evidence through Jose by the time she spoke to Robyn. (Although of course she already knew because she dumped the body....)

I'm not sure of the exact times any more, but I know we worked out a timeline way back when this was first mentioned and the conclusion was that Casey's knowledge of the evidence found at the scene could have come from the search warrant affidavit.

 

[nssherlock]

Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions, I learn so much from you.
Today when Vass had to revisit his testimony re evidence identification (he'd previously authenticated the wrong piece of evidence) - from my civilian standpoint it seemed like no big deal...from a legal and trial standpoint how damaging was it?

 

[beachbumming]

Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions, I learn so much from you.
Today when Vass had to revisit his testimony re evidence identification (he'd previously authenticated the wrong piece of evidence) - from my civilian standpoint it seemed like no big deal...from a legal and trial standpoint how damaging was it?

There is so much evidence laid out on the tables, IMO the jury completely understands how that might happen. Its not great, but all in all no big deal. Prosecution was very deft in handling the situation.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

If KC takes the stand, can they ASK her why she stayed in jail so long when she could have been out?

No they can't.

IF she does take the stand and JB introduces it, laying the foundation, then can the SA ask about it? I don't see this happening at all. No way can ICA continue to compartmentalize people and the stories she has told.

If ICA takes the stand the SA can definitely ask why she never reported Caylee's death as an accident. They can go into why it has taken 3 years to claim it was an accident. Why didn't she tell LE back in 2008,2009, 2010, so on and so forth.They can also use the jail-house tapes to impeach her. SA can't discuss with her plea deals or issues dealing with bond, etc.

Didn't you just contradict your first answers to wallflowers question - with your last answer?

Please explain? TIA

 

[Sleuth5]

I would like to thank learned counsel in advance for their kind responses to all of these questions.

Are there restrictions on the use of technology imposed on incarcerated defendants under Florida law? That is, are there any limits to what a defendant can and cannot do regarding cell phones, laptop or tablet devices, etc., while in open court? May the defendant have unlimited access to the internet, or are there monitoring requirements or other restrictions?

Thank you all again.

 

[beachbumming]

Didn't you just contradict your first answers to wallflowers question - with your last answer?

Please explain? TIA

In general, the state can get into problems, even grounds for mistrial, commenting on if or why or for how long a defendant has been in jail. In this trial, JB has referred to ICA being in jail and the jail tapes are in evidence, but I still don't know if the state would comment on that fact or the fact she could have gotten out of jail. If ICA takes the stand, you can bet the state will grill her on why, over the past three years, she didn't tell LE about the accidental drowning. I was simply referring to the state commenting on ICA's jail status.

 

[beachbumming]

I would like to thank learned counsel in advance for their kind responses to all of these questions.

Are there restrictions on the use of technology imposed on incarcerated defendants under Florida law? That is, are there any limits to what a defendant can and cannot do regarding cell phones, laptop or tablet devices, etc., while in open court? May the defendant have unlimited access to the internet, or are there monitoring requirements or other restrictions?

Thank you all again.

During trial ICA is allowed to assist in her defense. Because of technological advances and how they are used in court, there would be no reason why ICA couldn't use the computers, iPads, etc.

 

[cluciano63]

If the state feels they need the Anthonys admit to things they previously lied about, can they offer perjury and put them back on the stand to testify to things that may have happened, such as the possible fight on June 15th?

 

[beachbumming]

If the state feels they need the Anthonys admit to things they previously lied about, can they offer perjury and put them back on the stand to testify to things that may have happened, such as the possible fight on June 15th?

I'm sure the SA asked the As about that, but there is no way to no at this point if the fight actually happened, what it was about, the relevancy to the trial, etc. Also the State has got to be relieved that the As were not hostile on direct. SA might just be leaving this one alone.

 

[cluciano63]

I'm sure the SA asked the As about that, but there is no way to no at this point if the fight actually happened, what it was about, the relevancy to the trial, etc. Also the State has got to be relieved that the As were not hostile on direct. SA might just be leaving this one alone.

If Lee or one of them admits to it as a defense witness, how would state get around that if they had denied it under oath previously?