Mitigation: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

[Aedrys]

I think she can try to appeal, but it won't work.

One, Strickland right out, in court, asked Casey if she was happy with her counsel and she said yes. Strickland is doing everything in his power to make sure there won't be an appeal. Casey is painting herself into a corner cell. Honestly, she could fire Baez and get somebody better, but she hasn't and she won't. She still thinks he's going to be her knight in shining armor and get her out of her this. And apparently no one is advising her to get rid him and get somebody else, which is very telling in my opinion of her family. If they really wanted her out of jail, they'd get her a better defense lawyer.

Two, Baez not only has been making bungling mistakes since the beginning, I think he's not working well with AL, who I think is trying to rein him but won't be successful. He's too caught up in being a celebrity lawyer to see how stupid he looks and how bad this case is really going, which is why I don't think he's faking any of this stuff. In his eyes, he's doing a great job and probably thinks he can get an appeal or get Casey out of jail. I think AL is doing everything she can to try and save this case, but it won't work. I think if he was really faking it or really trying to get an appeal, he'd work WITH AL to do that, not against her like we saw in the last hearing. This trial is going to be a circus in the courtroom between Baez's antics, Casey's antics, and AL trying to rein in them both so Casey won't die. In essence, having AL there negates ineffective assistance of counsel because it's not just bungling Baez anymore. Without her, I'd definitely think automatic appeal for ineffective counsel had Casey not said in court she was satisfied with her defense.

Third, I'm hoping now that's there a schedule, maybe AL will get Baez to start deposing people and possibly get some experts on board. They can't possibly go to trial without either of those and not expect her to get a needle in her arm. I can't imagine, if she really wants to save Casey's life, that AL is just going to sit there and not try to get some experts or try to get some depositions going. You can't go into court with nothing and then beg for someone's life, or say, "We know she did it, and here's a half assed not so good reason, but please don't kill her." If AL wants to save Casey's life, she's got to light a fire under Baez's , right?

Fourth, AL has a reputation she wants to maintain. So does Baez. Having an appeal based on ineffective counsel would destroy Baez's career, and I don't think he wants that. I don't think AL wants a black mark on her record either, so it makes no sense that they either of them would want an appeal based on that. I think AL is gone once Casey is in jail for life anyway. And unless Baez thinks his career is over anyway, I'm thinking he doesn't want his livelihood taken away from him because of one case.

All that being said, Casey still could appeal and claim ineffective counsel, but I don't think it will fly, and I don't think she could afford it anyway. It looks like the money train is finally coming to a halt, so I think she's up a creek without a paddle at this point.

 

[kaRN]

ITA.....Yep.........and that could contribute as well. Once penalty phase is entered.......all bets are off and it's nothing but a race to save her life.

JS seems to really make sure KC has been prepped and consulted for whatever motion seems to be on the docket and always asks how satisfied she is with her council, and she always states yes sir.
I don't question that a client isn't the best judge of the efficacy of their lawyer. If the client knew all the steps from A-Z they could be their own lawyer or at least co-council. What I find strange, is that AL could sit back as lead council, watching JB fumble and look foolish in his complete ineffectiveness and not put the brakes on now rather than after the taxpayer has thrown multiple millions into the mix.
I'm just thinking of professional obligation and ethics. As an RN, if my partner just prepped my 85 yo male prostate patient and gave him pre-operative teaching and meds for a c-section and blood transfusion- I'm pulling that RN's plug right there and then. I wouldn't be planning and prepping for litigation later, hoping the patient survived so I could testify about what is now shared incompetance between my partner and I. I guess my convoluted point is..
Doesn't AL have an obligation to maintain the integrity of her profession at all times?

 

[LambChop]

JS seems to really make sure KC has been prepped and consulted for whatever motion seems to be on the docket and always asks how satisfied she is with her council, and she always states yes sir.
I don't question that a client isn't the best judge of the efficacy of their lawyer. If the client knew all the steps from A-Z they could be their own lawyer or at least co-council. What I find strange, is that AL could sit back as lead council, watching JB fumble and look foolish in his complete ineffectiveness and not put the brakes on now rather than after the taxpayer has thrown multiple millions into the mix.
I'm just thinking of professional obligation and ethics. As an RN, if my partner just prepped my 85 yo male prostate patient and gave him pre-operative teaching and meds for a c-section and blood transfusion- I'm pulling that RN's plug right there and then. I wouldn't be planning and prepping for litigation later, hoping the patient survived so I could testify about what is now shared incompetance between my partner and I. I guess my convoluted point is..
Doesn't AL have an obligation to maintain the integrity of her profession at all times?

LOL. They're lawyers.

 

[Aedrys]

JS seems to really make sure KC has been prepped and consulted for whatever motion seems to be on the docket and always asks how satisfied she is with her council, and she always states yes sir.
I don't question that a client isn't the best judge of the efficacy of their lawyer. If the client knew all the steps from A-Z they could be their own lawyer or at least co-council. What I find strange, is that AL could sit back as lead council, watching JB fumble and look foolish in his complete ineffectiveness and not put the brakes on now rather than after the taxpayer has thrown multiple millions into the mix.
I'm just thinking of professional obligation and ethics. As an RN, if my partner just prepped my 85 yo male prostate patient and gave him pre-operative teaching and meds for a c-section and blood transfusion- I'm pulling that RN's plug right there and then. I wouldn't be planning and prepping for litigation later, hoping the patient survived so I could testify about what is now shared incompetance between my partner and I. I guess my convoluted point is..
Doesn't AL have an obligation to maintain the integrity of her profession at all times?

Thank you, KARN! I've been wondering the exact same thing! Is what she's seemingly doing something that makes any sense to any of you lawyer types? Or should she be doing more? Can she do more, even?

 

[Kentjbkent]

I think she can try to appeal, but it won't work.

(CLIPPED FOR BREVITY)

Fourth, AL has a reputation she wants to maintain. So does Baez. Having an appeal based on ineffective counsel would destroy Baez's career, and I don't think he wants that. I don't think AL wants a black mark on her record either, so it makes no sense that they either of them would want an appeal based on that. I think AL is gone once Casey is in jail for life anyway. And unless Baez thinks his career is over anyway, I'm thinking he doesn't want his livelihood taken away from him because of one case.

All that being said, Casey still could appeal and claim ineffective counsel, but I don't think it will fly, and I don't think she could afford it anyway. It looks like the money train is finally coming to a halt, so I think she's up a creek without a paddle at this point.

Just an FYI....don't forget that there IS a pending Appeal Case against Baez' defense tactics as "ineffective counsel" right now, so an appeal by KC would be his SECOND!!

 

[Kentjbkent]

Thank you, KARN! I've been wondering the exact same thing! Is what she's seemingly doing something that makes any sense to any of you lawyer types? Or should she be doing more? Can she do more, even?

From all I have read on Andrea Lyon in reference to her participation in this case, her role is strictly to prepare for the penalty phase going under the presumption that KC is going to be convicted. Referring to the visitor logs, the person spending the most time with KC is Lyons' mitigation specialist.

While Florida law requires a DP qualified attorney as lead in DP cases, I think Al is only technically serving that role, but is not actively pursuing defending KC against the charges, but merely "signing off" as lead counsel when necessary, and utilizing her time in this case towards penalty phase. I think she and Baez have come to an agreement that HE will handle any defense case work.

I think when the death penalty was brought back into the case and Baez was forced to bring a DP qualified attorney on board, it is interesting who he chose...I believe Andrea Lyon IS the defense for this case. I think Baez has no doubt that KC is going to be convicted and his goal is to try to insure LOP as opposed to DP....enter Andrea Lyon, Angel of Death Row.

So to answer your questions, YES, it would appear she should be doing more, but I suspect she is doing exactly what she agreed to do when she took on this case. Should KC be convicted, I don't think AL will view it as a "loss" on her side. It will only be a "loss" to her should she be unable to keep KC from receiving the death penalty, and I think with or without AL, there is a slim chance KC is going to get death penalty (based on history of cases in state of Florida)

It appears she deems her wins and losses based on whether she successfully keeps a CONVICTED person off death row.


jmo

 

[Reagan]

Well this answered my question as to where Todd M was. Posted by QB in the news thread.

Lawyer On Casey Anthony Team Leaves Case

http://www.wesh.com/news/22563647/detail.html

"Attorney Todd Macaluso is dealing with disciplinary action with the California Bar Association"

 

[denjet]

JS seems to really make sure KC has been prepped and consulted for whatever motion seems to be on the docket and always asks how satisfied she is with her council, and she always states yes sir.
I don't question that a client isn't the best judge of the efficacy of their lawyer. If the client knew all the steps from A-Z they could be their own lawyer or at least co-council. What I find strange, is that AL could sit back as lead council, watching JB fumble and look foolish in his complete ineffectiveness and not put the brakes on now rather than after the taxpayer has thrown multiple millions into the mix.
I'm just thinking of professional obligation and ethics. As an RN, if my partner just prepped my 85 yo male prostate patient and gave him pre-operative teaching and meds for a c-section and blood transfusion- I'm pulling that RN's plug right there and then. I wouldn't be planning and prepping for litigation later, hoping the patient survived so I could testify about what is now shared incompetance between my partner and I. I guess my convoluted point is..
Doesn't AL have an obligation to maintain the integrity of her profession at all times?

bbm
I find it strange too that we haven't seen more professionalism out of Lyon ... more of a lead role in the defense team ... isn't SHE supposed to be first chair? I thought she was brought on board because she was qualified to try a DP case and Baez wasn't ... But she doesn't appear to be running the show ... Regardless of what we've seen, I think it's a stretch to think ineffective counsel would come into play, at least not because of Baez's actions ... It just seems to me if you add up the caliber of experts, Lyon's expertise, the SA's expertise, the caution of Judge Strickland and the public exposure and scrutiny, there doesn't seem to be much grounds for ineffective counsel .... most clients would be thrilled to have a team and exposure like KC does

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Thank you for this article it helps to understand the role Jeanene plays into KC's defense. She will be gathering all of the "psycho-social history" on KC and provide information that may play into any mitigating factors. This is of particular importance to me, as she will be looking for patterns of behaviors in KC as well as indicators of mental illness and/or substance abuse within the entire biological family. Furthermore, she will look for opportunitites that were missed for appropriate diagnosis and treatment (ie: one of KC's friends [kio?] mentioned a conversation where KC stated she thought she was going crazy and needed help but later stated she talked to her Mom and things were all ok). One of the things she will be doing is a genogram (like a family tree).

wenwe4 posted Jeanene's name on December 29, 2009.
Any specific info posted about her earlier?

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Does it seem that the defense is going to go full tilt until the last possible second and then try to plea out (if they can)? It seems to me they're holding out hope for a miracle (TES records, or some other nonsense) but with Judge Perry and their lack of a real defense, but they have to know they can't gamble with her life if they will obviously lose. They were hoping for an easy judge and they didn't get it. imo

 

[countzero]

Does it seem that the defense is going to go full tilt until the last possible second and then try to plea out (if they can)? It seems to me they're holding out hope for a miracle (TES records, or some other nonsense) but with Judge Perry and their lack of a real defense, but they have to know they can't gamble with her life if they will obviously lose. They were hoping for an easy judge and they didn't get it. imo

After the part of the hearing yesterday when HHJP denied the motion and allowed the DP, during that 10 minutes of a break, ICA was irritated with her team. She may have been briefed that the motion would be denied, but when she actually heard the words from HHJP's mouth, she knew she was in trouble. Those tears she shed were in anger.

I have thought for awhile, that once these motions were heard and more and more were denied, ICA would see the seriousness of this trial and there wasn't anything MsL(s) could do. I don't think she has had much belief in JB since CM came on board. JB is more the "guy" she can have a good laugh with, but he isn't the one to get her out of this mess CA made her get into.

So, yeppers ....... I believe that once JB milks the Orange Co folks out of as much $$$$ as he can, there will be a guilty plea made and she will get LWOP. And she will continue to dream about her travelin' RV show.

 

[gibby207]

Does it seem that the defense is going to go full tilt until the last possible second and then try to plea out (if they can)? It seems to me they're holding out hope for a miracle (TES records, or some other nonsense) but with Judge Perry and their lack of a real defense, but they have to know they can't gamble with her life if they will obviously lose. They were hoping for an easy judge and they didn't get it. imo

Yes, especially in light of the defense wanting to know the aggravating factors SA was looking at and possibly what angle they will take. I DO wonder about a plea as they don't want their client to die...

 

[eaglemom]

Well as of the budget hearing we all know that JB has experts and all of them are at least 60% complete in examining their areas. Of course this directly negates what he said earlier about some of them not having access to the evidence yet at OCSO - but HHJP bought it so who am I....

MOO

 

[TrialAddict]

This may have already been asked, but has JB paid anything to these experts he has hired or is the state expected to pick the whole tab, not just the 40% left?

 

[MD MOMMY]

This may have already been asked, but has JB paid anything to these experts he has hired or is the state expected to pick the whole tab, not just the 40% left?

From my understanding, they are being paid from here forward. JB didn't specify to my knowledge who has been paid what prior to the hearing. HL did state he WAS pro bono, but apparently that has changed since the state is now picking up the tab.

 

[Macushla]

From my understanding, they are being paid from here forward. JB didn't specify to my knowledge who has been paid what prior to the hearing. HL did state he WAS pro bono, but apparently that has changed since the state is now picking up the tab.

I am a little confused about what HL means when he says he is doing this work Pro Bono. Does this mean that HE pays for all his own expenses too? I can see him waiving his fees but asking to be reimbursed for expenses - planes, train, automobiles, lab costs, meals, etc. Just because he gets reimbursed doesn't mean he is not doing the case Pro Bono.

I guess I would like to know if Pro Bono means he pays everything connected with the case or whether he is just waiving his usual fees?

 

[Woe.be.gone]

After the part of the hearing yesterday when HHJP denied the motion and allowed the DP, during that 10 minutes of a break, ICA was irritated with her team. She may have been briefed that the motion would be denied, but when she actually heard the words from HHJP's mouth, she knew she was in trouble. Those tears she shed were in anger.

I have thought for awhile, that once these motions were heard and more and more were denied, ICA would see the seriousness of this trial and there wasn't anything MsL(s) could do. I don't think she has had much belief in JB since CM came on board. JB is more the "guy" she can have a good laugh with, but he isn't the one to get her out of this mess CA made her get into.

So, yeppers ....... I believe that once JB milks the Orange Co folks out of as much $$$$ as he can, there will be a guilty plea made and she will get LWOP. And she will continue to dream about her travelin' RV show.

If this becomes the true story, it'll be interesting to know if KC refuses visits for life. Once convicted, can the public still view an inmate's visitor list?

If so, that'll be telling indeed.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

At this point I can't imagine there being an appeal for ineffective counsel. JP even complemented the expertise of cheney mason.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Yes, especially in light of the defense wanting to know the aggravating factors SA was looking at and possibly what angle they will take. I DO wonder about a plea as they don't want their client to die...

My interpretation of what's going on is that the Defense knows what the aggravating factors are, but they want to know what the DIRECT evidence is (like KC's footprint where Caylee was found, fingerprint on duct tape, etc.) the State has that links KC to the unthinkable parts of the crime.

Noone knows exactly how Caylee died or who placed the tape over her nose and mouth. We think we know but where is the concrete proof?
The Defense wants to know if the State has forensic evidence that shows it is KC who put Caylee in the place that allowed her remains to be tossed about by nature.

 

[Anais]

I get the impression that the defense is anticipating a likely conviction and preparring for the sentencing phase. Thats just a feeling though.

I have pondered on this thought as well. The SODDI defense will not fly imo and there isn't a whole lot else available either. Every time the defense opens their mouths it's as if they stick their foots right in! I do think that CM coming on has helped to a degree but they still seem to be overwhelmed IMO and inconsistent in not only their spoken words but also their actions.