LYONS AUDIO TAPES and BS VIDEO GONE? Discussion with R HORNSBY here

[JBean]

Even though there is a little more latitude on this thread, please keep TOS in mind and police yourselves , especially with name calling.

Happy Thanksgiving

 

[BeanE]

It is my understanding he wanted to put it up, but did not because of how it would be perceived.

Thank you for confirming that Roy Kronk did *not* put the stick up on ebay.

As for whether he wanted to, or why he did not, you seem, from your posts on this, to have no direct knowledge of either, so I'll note it as idle gossip with no discernible constructive purpose.

*goes back to wondering if Kronk's attorney is reading here*

 

[patty437]

I've always wondered how criminal def attys make money. Their clients are far from big money types like phil spector or Robert Blake or OJ.

 

[LambChop]

Thank you for confirming that Roy Kronk did *not* put the stick up on ebay.

As for whether he wanted to, or why he did not, you seem, from your posts on this, to have no direct knowledge of either, so I'll note it as idle gossip with no discernible constructive purpose.

*goes back to wondering if Kronk's attorney is reading here*

Just wondering here. Isn't equipment provided to county workers county property????

 

[doogiesgirl]

Speaking of money....I'd like to know RH's theory on how the defense is getting paid. If you watch the court preceding where the prosecution brings this concern before Judge SS,, and you see JB's face while the judge is questioning KC...he is nervous, concerned she will say something that will put him in jeopardy IMO. They then go to in camera proceedings. So why does JB want his financial handiwork hidden so badly if it is on the up and up? Is it because it may be legal but abhorrent to the public in regards to Caylee's dignity? MOO

I'll try to find it on youtube so you all can see what I'm talking about but I think I've searched before and not been able to locate it. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Found a link, beginning around the 6:00 minute mark. My hinky meter goes off when I watch this...tells me JB/KC are not being forthright. moo

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkex-4tJp9Q&NR=1[/ame]

 

[Snaz]

Killers on the jury?

I used to be a nurse. Let's say I am working in the ER and a terrorist is brought in. I've seen this man on tv along with indisputable evidence that he has murdered thousands of people. I have to give him 2cc of iv medication to save his life. I can give him 1.5 ccs and he will die. There's no doubt in my mind that I would give him the full 2ccs because that is my moral and ethical duty. It is not my right as a nurse to impose judgment on this man. But, let's say I am on the jury and I have a choice of sentencing him to life or giving him the dp. I can promise you that I would be the first person to give him the dp, not only to prevent other innocent people from dying but to provide justice to the families of the victims he killed. Am I "level headed" because I saved his life or am I a killer (cowboy) because I gave him the dp?

This is the problem I have with AL. It is her job to give the best defense she morally and ethically can. It is not her job to impose judgment on innocent people or victims of rape. When she spoke of automatically claiming her clients innocence because the victim knew him and therefore the rape was consensual she was doing just that. Don't get me wrong, if I were charged with a crime, I would want a shark. But I would want an honest shark who doesn't use lies, guilt and intimidation to win a case at all cost.

This really deserved more than just the thanks button. I admire your ethics ... and I agree wholeheartedly with your remarks!!

 

[doogiesgirl]

One other thing. RH says that he thinks the accident quotient will present problems for the prosecution. I disagree. If you have parents on that jury...any parent will not understand not calling in an accident. Ever. If it were an accident, at some point down the line you would give it up and tell what happened. KC never reported her daughter missing on her own. Her mother forced her to do it--30 DAYS LATER! If it were an accident parents on the jury will not understand her not speaking up at some point to tell what happened. They also will not take kindly to her calm demeanor if she believes her child abducted by a sitter that NO ONE can verify. Parents are frantic within minutes when their child goes missing. They do not party and go on with their life as if nothing has happened. This will never fly with a jury. Where is her panic, concern, out of her mind worry for her child??? She doesn't possess it and it shows. BIG problem IMO. moo

 

[doogiesgirl]

Richard H must be eating his turkey. [email protected] back RH....leave that turkey--it'll only make you sleepy. moo

 

[cecybeans]

One other thing. RH says that he thinks the accident quotient will present problems for the prosecution. I disagree. If you have parents on that jury...any parent will not understand not calling in an accident. Ever. If it were an accident, at some point down the line you would give it up and tell what happened. KC never reported her daughter missing on her own. Her mother forced her to do it--30 DAYS LATER! If it were an accident parents on the jury will not understand her not speaking up at some point to tell what happened. They also will not take kindly to her calm demeanor if she believes her child abducted by a sitter that NO ONE can verify. Parents are frantic within minutes when their child goes missing. They do not party and go on with their life as if nothing has happened. This will never fly with a jury. Where is her panic, concern, out of her mind worry for her child??? She doesn't possess it and it shows. BIG problem IMO. moo

ITA. Even if she didn't care, she is not a doctor or a coroner and would have no right to pronounce the fact that death had occurred, or if resuscitation was useless. This isn't like a little ding she would put in her parents' car and try to hide. Caylee was a human being with all of the rights to medical attention as an adult. Adults are getting into big-time trouble for trying to keep kids from medical treatment for chronic conditions or illnesses like cancer to begin with, much less some kind of horrific accident. Being "petrified of mommy" is no excuse for her to sweep it under the rug; she's a freaking adult and mother no matter how juvenile she acted or her parents treated her. And it's not for them to decide either unless they had custody.

If she was this cold and unconcerned before her child died, and did not change, then she had no business being in charge of Caylee to begin with. If she changed to this demeanor afterward, then all it says to a jury is that she is glad Caylee's gone and she would have partied forever until somebody pulled the plug. Either way, you're right - no parent will look at this and be sympathetic. They will see what they would be expected to do under the law to insure the safety of their own children, and this just doesn't cut it.

Isn't it a felony to be in a car accident and leave? Don't we have laws for hit and run that can interpret that as murder sometimes? This is conceptually the same, imo. If KC failed to report an "accident" and left the scene, particularly with a child that could not ask for assistance, it's the same as murder, imo. It wasn't for her to make a life or death decision regarding medical treatment or lack thereof, even if Caylee was already dead.

 

[JBean]

we had a local case here where the murderer dumped the body, never to be found, covered his tracks by taking off plates, scrubbing car etc. and he moved away. The evidence pointed to him and him alone as the last person with her , even text messages from the victim saying he was freaking her out. But months and months later he was able to claim it was an accident and that he panicked because he was an RSO and dumped the body in the ocean. He pled gulity to manslaughter and got 5 years. this family is devastated. I know this is CA and I know it did not involve a minor, but jiminy it is frightening that he could claim accident so far after that fact and get a slap on the wrist.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3760562&highlight=jou#post3760562

 

[whats the punch line]

RH-
None of the defense attorneys have peer ratings on Martindale-Hubbell.

were I the client, I can't say that I wouldn't be looking for a new defense team.

What do you think?

 

[BeanE]

Just wondering here. Isn't equipment provided to county workers county property????

I would imagine so. In any case, a few pages back, a poster posted documentation showing that Kronk turned in the stick to LE.

I'm not sure why the stick gossip was posted here. :waitasec:

 

[BeanE]

Speaking of money....I'd like to know RH's theory on how the defense is getting paid. If you watch the court preceding where the prosecution brings this concern before Judge SS,, and you see JB's face while the judge is questioning KC...he is nervous, concerned she will say something that will put him in jeopardy IMO. They then go to in camera proceedings. So why does JB want his financial handiwork hidden so badly if it is on the up and up? Is it because it may be legal but abhorrent to the public in regards to Caylee's dignity? MOO

I'll try to find it on youtube so you all can see what I'm talking about but I think I've searched before and not been able to locate it. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I know you're asking for RH's theory. Please forgive me for interjecting myself.

We have documented proof that the defense team is being paid via Casey Anthony selling images and videos of her dead baby, Caylee. I wrote this up a while back. I'll carry it forward here:

Relevant pages of Cindy's depo: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/13348352/Cindy_BaezObjections_SealedStuff

Note: n/n = page/line

- 503/1 SA asks if Cindy saw Casey take anything from the garage out of the house (SA does not specify to Baez)

- Important! 503/7 SA asks if Cindy observed Casey "gathering up photographs or videos, anything like that, images of Caylee?". Cindy says yes.

- 503/11 Baez interrupts Cindy's 'yes', objects, and asks to go off record. SAs Burdick and Ashton say it should be on record.

Finally SAs and Baez agree to go off record only for Baez to talk to his "co-counsel" (Lyon, I assume?)

- 506/1 Back on record and Baez: "It's our position that this is an area that's going to be in violation of a court order.

We're asking if you guys would like to discuss it off the record. If you don't, and you want to continue and proceed, we're going to ask that we suspend the deposition until we can get guidance from the Court."

- Discussion continues.

- 507/6 SA and Baez agree Baez' concern is not that SA will discover something they don't know, but that the public will discover something they don't know. hmmmmmm.

- 507/16 SA states therefore there's no reason to suspend the depo, and 507/23 Lyon disagrees.

- Important! 508/1 Lyon: "this information will make its way into the public wheel some kind of way once the question is answered."

Okay, let's go back and look at the question again: 503/7 SA asks if Cindy observed Casey "gathering up photographs or videos, anything like that, images of Caylee?". Cindy says yes. ("Yeah. She --")

Hmmmm... There's the question. And there's the answer.

- Finally, after more discussion, Baez states he will take it to the Court for a ruling. There is agreement that Cindy will come back if the Court says the question is appropriate.

- 511/4 SA moves on with the depo to duct tape question, and the issue is not brought up again.

Conclusion:
- Baez' objection was based on a court order to seal.
- The only court order to seal that is pertinent to the question asked and objected is regarding how the defense is getting paid.
- The question was asked, and answered. The information is now "in the public wheel".
- The defense team is getting paid by Casey selling photos, videos, and/or images of her murdered daughter, Caylee.

MOO

 

[twomanywords]

How did Caylee get her face duct taped if it was an accident
I see no way around that if a caring mother's child dies as an accidental drowning.
She ( normal human being) would be sad, devastated....not thinking of further making a situation worse.

 

[doogiesgirl]

ITA. Even if she didn't care, she is not a doctor or a coroner and would have no right to pronounce the fact that death had occurred, or if resuscitation was useless. This isn't like a little ding she would put in her parents' car and try to hide. Caylee was a human being with all of the rights to medical attention as an adult. Adults are getting into big-time trouble for trying to keep kids from medical treatment for chronic conditions or illnesses like cancer to begin with, much less some kind of horrific accident. Being "petrified of mommy" is no excuse for her to sweep it under the rug; she's a freaking adult and mother no matter how juvenile she acted or her parents treated her. And it's not for them to decide either unless they had custody.

If she was this cold and unconcerned before her child died, and did not change, then she had no business being in charge of Caylee to begin with. If she changed to this demeanor afterward, then all it says to a jury is that she is glad Caylee's gone and she would have partied forever until somebody pulled the plug. Either way, you're right - no parent will look at this and be sympathetic. They will see what they would be expected to do under the law to insure the safety of their own children, and this just doesn't cut it.

Isn't it a felony to be in a car accident and leave? Don't we have laws for hit and run that can interpret that as murder sometimes? This is conceptually the same, imo. If KC failed to report an "accident" and left the scene, particularly with a child that could not ask for assistance, it's the same as murder, imo. It wasn't for her to make a life or death decision regarding medical treatment or lack thereof, even if Caylee was already dead.

So agree. And even if she panicked at first....once you are charged with murder one and the DP imposed, any parent would tell if it was an accident. Her silence is a negative in my book. moo

 

[doogiesgirl]

I know you're asking for RH's theory. Please forgive me for interjecting myself.

We have documented proof that the defense team is being paid via Casey Anthony selling images and videos of her dead baby, Caylee. I wrote this up a while back. I'll carry it forward here:

Relevant pages of Cindy's depo: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/13348352/Cindy_BaezObjections_SealedStuff

Note: n/n = page/line

- 503/1 SA asks if Cindy saw Casey take anything from the garage out of the house (SA does not specify to Baez)

- Important! 503/7 SA asks if Cindy observed Casey "gathering up photographs or videos, anything like that, images of Caylee?". Cindy says yes.

- 503/11 Baez interrupts Cindy's 'yes', objects, and asks to go off record. SAs Burdick and Ashton say it should be on record.

Finally SAs and Baez agree to go off record only for Baez to talk to his "co-counsel" (Lyon, I assume?)

- 506/1 Back on record and Baez: "It's our position that this is an area that's going to be in violation of a court order.

We're asking if you guys would like to discuss it off the record. If you don't, and you want to continue and proceed, we're going to ask that we suspend the deposition until we can get guidance from the Court."

- Discussion continues.

- 507/6 SA and Baez agree Baez' concern is not that SA will discover something they don't know, but that the public will discover something they don't know. hmmmmmm.

- 507/16 SA states therefore there's no reason to suspend the depo, and 507/23 Lyon disagrees.

- Important! 508/1 Lyon: "this information will make its way into the public wheel some kind of way once the question is answered."

Okay, let's go back and look at the question again: 503/7 SA asks if Cindy observed Casey "gathering up photographs or videos, anything like that, images of Caylee?". Cindy says yes. ("Yeah. She --")

Hmmmm... There's the question. And there's the answer.

- Finally, after more discussion, Baez states he will take it to the Court for a ruling. There is agreement that Cindy will come back if the Court says the question is appropriate.

- 511/4 SA moves on with the depo to duct tape question, and the issue is not brought up again.

Conclusion:
- Baez' objection was based on a court order to seal.
- The only court order to seal that is pertinent to the question asked and objected is regarding how the defense is getting paid.
- The question was asked, and answered. The information is now "in the public wheel".
- The defense team is getting paid by Casey selling photos, videos, and/or images of her murdered daughter, Caylee.

MOO

Thank you BeanE. I used the right word then...abhorrent. What mother would do this? Answer: KC. moo

 

[doogiesgirl]

BeanE

I am wondering what deals JB has brokered lately or for release in the future as the money made from the pictures/video in the past has surely been drained. I don't see why this info should be sealed. If a mother can defend herself with money made from the death of her daughter, ah, I mean murder of her daughter, by her hands IMO, why shouldn't the public and the jury know about it. It goes to her(and JB's) character I'd think. Mighty unfair that that info is sealed and kept from the public's knowledge. moo

 

[Rlaub44]

So agree. And even if she panicked at first....once you are charged with murder one and the DP imposed, any parent would tell if it was an accident. Her silence is a negative in my book. moo

You're right, and to top it off ... I hate how innocent people are being thrown under the bus to try to free a murderer, but nobody could be evil enough to suggest someone murdered an innocent child just so her mother could cover up an accident.

 

[Searchfortruth]

Just the thought that Casey was carrying photos, videos of Caylee in those backpacks to Jose's office to fund her defense (for killing that same daughter), is enough to send me into a blood pressure crisis. Really, what nerve this girl has, it's amazing.

 

[whats the punch line]

Just the thought that Casey was carrying photos, videos of Caylee in those backpacks to Jose's office to fund her defense (for killing that same daughter), is enough to send me into a blood pressure crisis. Really, what nerve this girl has, it's amazing.

I guess I could be confused, but weren't George and Cindy getting the royalties, not Baez? He never released any new photos/videos during his interviews. Are they channeling the money to him?

If so that would mean he was feeding them the photos/videos to release.