Million Dollar Dream Team. Discuss the Players Here and UPDATE INFO

[Maya Love]

High profile experts and attys take cases pro bono b/c of the possibility that the case and research, publicity, accolades make it worth it. For example, a blood spatter expert may take a henious case b/c it gives them the opportunity to write their findings that later other experts will refer to, or profit from their research in some way, etc.

LKB isn't going to jump ship, this is too tempting for her- the Spector case really was eye opening for me regarding experts and high profile attys.

 

[TURBOTHINK]

Something to keep in mind about the 'xxxxx team'. the only one committed to the trial is LKB, as she has been signed on as co counsel. Baden, Lee, Spitzer, Reich have all been called in to give their expert opinions AFTER examining the evidence. Granted they have all testified for the defense in various cases - well I don't know about Kathy Reich - but the others have. There is NOTHING that prevents them from examining all the evidence and saying to JB - oh man, she is toast!!! This girl is as guilty as you can get. Get your butt down to the State Attorney's office and try to get a plea bargain NOW!

Do I think that is realistic - maybe on Kathy Reichs part, I think she will be forthright in her comments/opinion no matter which way she sees whatever it is they want her to look at.

There have been numerous times an expert has been called upon by a defense lawyer only to have that expert tell them 'my examination was thorough and in my opinion, you don't have a chance in HE** of getting your client off on the charges.' I would dearly love to see this happen in this case, especially since if the expert does give an expert opinion and it is not one JB wants to hear - he MUST still turn this info over to the prosecution due to discovery.

Let's keep our fingers crossed that these guys have some shred of ethics left and this is how it goes down. Wouldn't that be just soooooooooooo sweet?

I do believe we will see some of them coming off this case.

 

[TURBOTHINK]

I think it is possible that KC actually smooth talked JB so well that he was able to convince these people to jump on the case BEFORE they realized what was going on. Have we heard of any of the dream team visiting KC? Or just JB? At this point all they have to go on is her word (lol) and what JB tells them. That's not much, IMO.

Jose Baez went to a bottom-tier law school (St. Thomas), but you'd think the school would at least have required their graduates to be able to read, write & speak English at a the 8th grade level before granting them a degree!

 

[Gma Kat]

I think it is possible that KC actually smooth talked JB so well that he was able to convince these people to jump on the case BEFORE they realized what was going on. Have we heard of any of the dream team visiting KC? Or just JB? At this point all they have to go on is her word (lol) and what JB tells them. That's not much, IMO.

I think the "****** Team" ,as I like to call them, so far are technical experts, so they wouldn't need to speak to KC, yet. LKB only spoke at the P Spector trial when it pertained to the blood spatter, etc., except when her husband testified on behalf of the defense. Another laywer questioned him. so I expect the same MO in this case. Perhaps JB will put on the main case and LKB will step in when experts are testifying. LKB has excellent presence in the courtroom and her personal appearance is much better since the Spector trial. She's hollywooded up since then so no matter how uphill her battle, I see her keeping this case for the publicity. Remember, for those who like the limelight there is no such thing as bad publicity.

 

[Gma Kat]

Mods, if this is in the wrong place, please move it, thank-you.

If her defense experts were to discover in their investigations something damaging to Casey, are they obligated to report it?
Do you think they would continue to work for her or would they resign? If they did resign, could the LE question them about their findings?

They have to comply with mutual discovery requests; however, I don't think you HAVE to turn in evidence of your client being culpable - that would be nice though wouldn't it! It would be a moral issue to resign, but client confidentiality would prevail over LE questioning them for withdrawing from the case. If the atty withdrew then if it was by motion they have to give the court a reason for withdrawing - but not one that would hurt your client's case. You just tell the court that your client and you can not agree on the defense etc. We're not of course talking about defense experts finding a written confession from Caylee in the garage....we are talking about forensics...

 

[YellowDog]

The more notorius the crime, the more high level legal experts want to be a part of it.
The reasons-------------exposure, publicity, intrigue. Their pay will come down the road from rich clients who can afford their services. They become famous by taking on cases like this one.

 

[Bluebelle]

HA HA - these old expert dinosaurs will hang Casey for sure & should be called the nightmare team!

Henry Lee was caught stealing evidence at the Spector crime scene; this will be used to impeach any testimony he tries to give, he has zero credibility any more & thickens his accent to dodge questions. It's actually funny to watch him because you know what he's going to do when the tough questions come!

Werner Spitz is an 82 yr old retired pathologist who answers questions with babbling & his accent also becomes heavier when avoiding issues. The Spector jury completely & laughingly discounted his testimony.

Linda Kenney Baden is very difficult to understand and she says UHHH UHHH every three words, she will lose the jury right out of the gate. Kenney Baden was on the Spector defense team too, but it wasn't her skill that hung the jury - it was Spector's neighbor that was on the jury who voted for acquittal, causing the mistrial!

Last but not least is lead counsel & rookie trial lawyer Jose Baez. Hope his inexperience and blunders do not overturn the conviction upon appeal.

The only success this awful defense crew will have will be to send Casey to prison for life w/o parole while separating the Anthonys from most of their money.

 

[chicagofa13]

I don't think the A's are going to spend a dime! JB on his own is grounds for inadequate counsel, lol, but the others aren't. Maybe he should rethink all this!

 

[Boston]

I've always understood that all lawyer's are essentially 'officers of the court'. Doesn't that mean they are bound by some oath to uphold justice? I've also always heard that the defense never asks their client 'did you do this', if the client maintains they are innocent.

On the other hand if their client admits the crime to them it seems like they would be obliged to get their client the lightest sentance allowed under the law.

Does anyone know? Also isn't it really difficult for a lawyer to 'quit' a case? Easy to be fired, but hard to quit?

I'm not sure if I'm reading your post correctly & please forgive me if I'm not but a defense attorney's only obligation is to his or her client.

Anything an attorney's client says to him is privileged information & can not be used against him even if that attorney were to report it to LE or the court.Which would probably also get that attorney disbarred.

Wether or not an Attorney decides to continue defending a client even if they know he or she is guilty is a "Moral" issue not a legal one.

There was a recent well known case in California were a man was accused of kidnapping & murdering a little girl who lived next door to him.

He told his attorney that he would tell LE where he buried the body if LE would not seek the death penalty.

Before the attorney & LE finished discussing the plea deal the body was found & LE refused to continue the negotiations & went ahead with the death penalty .

During the trial the attorney still went ahead & vigorously defended his client & argued that he was not the man responsible for the little girls murder even though he knew otherwise.

After the trial the public learned that the man convicted had admitted his guilt to his attorney & there was a huge backlash against him because he knew his client was guilty but the bottom line was that he was only doing his job & he did nothing illegal.

Like I said, it's not a legal issue for an attorney it's a moral one.

 

[Wudge]

Has anyone thought about emailing these experts and asking them not assist KC?

I had been perusing the posts in this thread when I came upon your post. Not that it matters, but there are not a lot of posts in this thread that I do not think speak well of posters.

Still, your post struck my sensibilities particularly hard, because it suggests, to me at least, that posters here might want to consider taking an activist role against Casey having the best possible defense -- a defense she is entitled to have.

For some reason, the Golden Rule immediately flashed into my mind's eye; i.e., "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

(All would have the best defense for themselves, but when it comes to others ...............................)

 

[nums24]

‘Bones’ bolstered by Kathy Reichs, David Boreanaz fans, says Emily Deschanel

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...david-boreanaz-fans-says-emily-deschanel.html

 

[Horace Finklestein]

‘Bones’ bolstered by Kathy Reichs, David Boreanaz fans, says Emily Deschanel

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...david-boreanaz-fans-says-emily-deschanel.html

Oh goody another fame/money seeker. I bet the SA are going to love this. Hiw utterly disgusting. I'm sure there won't be an episode of Bones resembling this case!

 

[Macushla]

Oh goody another fame/money seeker. I bet the SA are going to love this. Hiw utterly disgusting. I'm sure there won't be an episode of Bones resembling this case!

While the article in the Sentinel might have come up because Kathy Reichs name is on the defence list - this TV show started in 2005, long before this case. When the show first aired there were numerous articles about it and about the books that it is based on. So I don't think this article or the actors involved can be said to be fame and/or money seekers. In fact, the actress is saying that people will like to show because people like Kathy Reich's books. I seriously doubt those comments had anything to do with this case, in fact I would be very surprised if Emily Deschanel is even vaguely aware of this case.

 

[drip~drop]

ICA has no "Dream Team".

OJ did......not ICA.
IMO, more like a nightmare team.
:cow:

 

[Horace Finklestein]

While the article in the Sentinel might have come up because Kathy Reichs name is on the defence list - this TV show started in 2005, long before this case. When the show first aired there were numerous articles about it and about the books that it is based on. So I don't think this article or the actors involved can be said to be fame and/or money seekers. In fact, the actress is saying that people will like to show because people like Kathy Reich's books. I seriously doubt those comments had anything to do with this case, in fact I would be very surprised if Emily Deschanel is even vaguely aware of this case.

I'm talking about author Kathy Reichs. There is no doubt she was chosen and is in this for more celebrity and hopes to increase her profile imo. I didn't say anything about Emily Deschanel, but I doubt she knows or cares about any of this.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Just remember in the illustrious "words" of AL........

We found 100% of time whoever hired him got his opinion.
I would send guy $100 to consult each case and it would keep him off the stand. For pros.

With Pros witnesses….follow the money. Some psych will find a table fit for trial. See how often they are hired by state. Correlate their opinion with who hires them.

If we find inconsistencies in stories we think we will win. I was brilliant in exposing inconsistencies.

I will be ready for trial when I have to and not one minute before.

Links in the AL thread.

 

[drip~drop]

Isn't that just the cats meow.
:cow:

 

[logicalgirl]

Just remember in the illustrious "words" of AL........

We found 100% of time whoever hired him got his opinion.
I would send guy $100 to consult each case and it would keep him off the stand. For pros.

With Pros witnesses….follow the money. Some psych will find a table fit for trial. See how often they are hired by state. Correlate their opinion with who hires them.

If we find inconsistencies in stories we think we will win. I was brilliant in exposing inconsistencies.

I will be ready for trial when I have to and not one minute before.

Links in the AL thread.

Yes, but AL isn't here anymore and I don't think Baez has a hundred bucks left to send to anyone - does he? Geez - I hope no one is taking IOU's from him!

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Just remember in the illustrious "words" of AL........

We found 100% of time whoever hired him got his opinion.
I would send guy $100 to consult each case and it would keep him off the stand. For pros.

With Pros witnesses….follow the money. Some psych will find a table fit for trial. See how often they are hired by state. Correlate their opinion with who hires them.

If we find inconsistencies in stories we think we will win. I was brilliant in exposing inconsistencies.

I will be ready for trial when I have to and not one minute before.

Links in the AL thread.

Interesting she implies she detects dishonesty and instead of being repulsed by this person, she jumps on the chance to perpetuate his dishonesty for her own gain. Why is she allowed to practice law? Unbelievable.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Yes, but AL isn't here anymore and I don't think Baez has a hundred bucks left to send to anyone - does he? Geez - I hope no one is taking IOU's from him!

My point being........that this would have been handled BEFORE!