Motion to stop jail recordings: denied Thurdsay

[amethyst221]

We need Themis or one of the lawyers to help us, I can't see any reason any of the attorney/client visits would ever be released to the media, but obviously I have a poor understanding of how far reaching the sunshine laws are. I thought those visits were pretty much sacrosanct ( save for the jail needing to ensure safety, etc, which of course is necessary). None of Baez's meetings with her have been released yet that I know of. I know some of our members are pretty good friends with local media members there. Perhaps one could ask them if indeed that is something media has requested to see.

The visitation tapes are fair game, of course, but I have no need or desire to see the attorney/client meetings. WOW. This is news to me. If I were a local lawyer I would be opposed to this from my head down to my feet.... not the monitoring, or even the taping.....but the release. I trust the judge knows best, but I am for the first time in this case shocked. I bet Baez wishes he never brought this up, this could not have gone worse for him, imo. Now the judge has to review Baez's behavior, and let us not forget he already found something he did to be unethical enough to report him to the bar. Now he has to babysit in a way. Yikes.

I'm assuming from the court's discussion and all the history of this case that these are within the Fla. definition of public records. ?? It's true they haven't been routinely sought or discussed, until the whole issue of Casey's reactions on the day Caylee's remains were found, part of which occurred after Baez showed up at the jail. I don't think the judge is going to review all existing tapes of A/C visits since the beginning of this case IF this order should inspire some media person to request them. :waitasec:

 

[logicalgirl]

I'm assuming from the court's discussion and all the history of this case that these are within the Fla. definition of public records. ?? It's true they haven't been routinely sought or discussed, until the whole issue of Casey's reactions on the day Caylee's remains were found, part of which occurred after Baez showed up at the jail. I don't think the judge is going to review all existing tapes of A/C visits since the beginning of this case IF this order should inspire some media person to request them. :waitasec:

Yes, that's my understanding also. It was the reaction tape that started this, and it was sealed. I think JS is saying in this motion that any tape the media or anyone requests must first be viewed and approved by him before it is released, not that he will routinely review all tapes.

 

[eaglemom]

:woohoo:Yes, it is perfectly normal. :woohoo: I feel the same way! I'm dying to know how JS rules on the DP motion. I'm starting to get nervous.

BTW, it was my understanding the judge's viewing of the videotapes only concerned visits with her attorneys. Does he mean it for all?

This order specifically related to the "motion for protective order prohibiting orange countyjail from taping attorney visits" and specifically states "Miss Anthony's meetings with her attorney's" and goes on to state "the Court is ordering that no video of the defendant and her counsel be released without an incamera viewing by the undersigned".

Therefore it is my understanding (but I am not an attorney) that yes it is for her visits with the attorney. That would mean ANY visit could be requested and have to be reviewed to my understanding - but perhaps that would better be answered by rhornsby on his thread....

MOO

 

[zoomom]

okay. I read it three times. No where does the word "family' or "visit" appear.

It does say -

"no videos of the Defendant and her counsel be released without an in camera...."



ooops. someone beat me to it!

 

[travelgal]

We need Themis or one of the lawyers to help us, I can't see any reason any of the attorney/client visits would ever be released to the media, but obviously I have a poor understanding of how far reaching the sunshine laws are. I thought those visits were pretty much sacrosanct ( save for the jail needing to ensure safety, etc, which of course is necessary). None of Baez's meetings with her have been released yet that I know of. I know some of our members are pretty good friends with local media members there. Perhaps one could ask them if indeed that is something media has requested to see.

The visitation tapes are fair game, of course, but I have no need or desire to see the attorney/client meetings. WOW. This is news to me. If I were a local lawyer I would be opposed to this from my head down to my feet.... not the monitoring, or even the taping.....but the release. I trust the judge knows best, but I am for the first time in this case shocked. I bet Baez wishes he never brought this up, this could not have gone worse for him, imo. Now the judge has to review Baez's behavior, and let us not forget he already found something he did to be unethical enough to report him to the bar. Now he has to babysit in a way. Yikes.

Wonder what RHornsby has to say about all this??? I hope he logs on soon.

 

[momtective]

Wonder if we'll see the video of Jose et al. breaking this news to KC. I can see the tantrum from here...lol..
The outbursts, the tantrums, the sheer anger...that's the reason they wanted the recording of visits stopped...they're scared to death KC is going to flip out and show the world just how psycho she really is.

 

[AZlawyer]

We need Themis or one of the lawyers to help us, I can't see any reason any of the attorney/client visits would ever be released to the media, but obviously I have a poor understanding of how far reaching the sunshine laws are. I thought those visits were pretty much sacrosanct ( save for the jail needing to ensure safety, etc, which of course is necessary). None of Baez's meetings with her have been released yet that I know of. I know some of our members are pretty good friends with local media members there. Perhaps one could ask them if indeed that is something media has requested to see.

The visitation tapes are fair game, of course, but I have no need or desire to see the attorney/client meetings. WOW. This is news to me. If I were a local lawyer I would be opposed to this from my head down to my feet.... not the monitoring, or even the taping.....but the release. I trust the judge knows best, but I am for the first time in this case shocked. I bet Baez wishes he never brought this up, this could not have gone worse for him, imo. Now the judge has to review Baez's behavior, and let us not forget he already found something he did to be unethical enough to report him to the bar. Now he has to babysit in a way. Yikes.

I didn't watch the hearing--was the release of these videos discussed?? I thought the only issue was whether they would be recorded at all; I didn't think anyone had ever suggested releasing them!

IMO these would be records subject to the Sunshine Laws, but if I were JB/AL (God forbid), I would have kicked up a GIANT fuss about A/C privilege and "communications" between lawyer and client including silent communications such as hand motions, lip movements, etc. (Get your minds out of the gutter --I just mean that lip readers could read lips in a silent video, or, e.g., Casey in the process of confessing might have acted out tearing off pieces of duct tape.)

 

[manatee]

Wonder if we'll see the video of Jose et al. breaking this news to KC. I can see the tantrum from here...lol..
The outbursts, the tantrums, the sheer anger...that's the reason they wanted the recording of visits stopped...they're scared to death KC is going to flip out and show the world just how psycho she really is.

I'm pretty sure we won't see any of these videos until after the trial :-(

 

[momtective]

I'm pretty sure we won't see any of these videos until after the trial :-(

I'll wait! :smile:

 

[Themis]

So, they are going to make tapes. Then the media will request them under the public records act. Judge S's opinion said he saw a video that raised concerns about the possibility it might interfere with her right to due process -- can't remember exact language -- access to counsel, fair trial and jury pool issues perhaps. Delay in release was a balancing of the public records rights vs the protection of the trial process. So, what exactly are the records going to be screened for? KC's reactions like the anger she displayed towards her parents? Improper behavior of JB towards his client -- like slipping contraband communications from her parents? I don't have a problem with the delay to preserve the criminal trial process, but I'm not clear what is being screened during the delay.

 

[AZlawyer]

So, they are going to make tapes. Then the media will request them under the public records act. Judge S's opinion said he saw a video that raised concerns about the possibility it might interfere with her right to due process -- can't remember exact language -- access to counsel, fair trial and jury pool issues perhaps. Delay in release was a balancing of the public records rights vs the protection of the trial process. So, what exactly are the records going to be screened for? KC's reactions like the anger she displayed towards her parents? Improper behavior of JB towards his client -- like slipping contraband communications from her parents? I don't have a problem with the delay to preserve the criminal trial process, but I'm not clear what is being screened during the delay.

The video he's talking about that raised fair trial concerns was the one where she reacted to the discovery of the remains--not any of the A/C visits. I don't believe he's seen any of those yet.

And he's going to be sorry he suggested an in camera review once the media requests all these videos.

 

[kushka]

I can’t help wondering that the judge was confused by the defendant’s lawyers and there badly written motions and lengthily arguments and thus believed they were arguing that the lawyers visits should not be released instead of the A’s visits?

 

[sleutherontheside]

I'll wait! :smile:

Patience is a virtue that shall be richly rewarded. HEE HEE

 

[zoomom]

The video he's talking about that raised fair trial concerns was the one where she reacted to the discovery of the remains--not any of the A/C visits. I don't believe he's seen any of those yet.

And he's going to be sorry he suggested an in camera review once the media requests all these videos.

BBM

Do you think there are more family or friend visit videos out there that we haven't seen??? :dance:

 

[AZlawyer]

[/B]

BBM

Do you think there are more family or friend visit videos out there that we haven't seen??? :dance:

I don't think so--I think JB put an end to all the visits after they started getting released to the media and it was clear that KC couldn't prevent herself from behaving in a sociopathic manner, regardless of whether or not she knew she was being recorded.

But I don't think he ever contemplated that his own visits with her might be released, even if it is video only (no audio). I suspect that there is a lot we could figure out about their communications without hearing the audio.

 

[logicalgirl]

I didn't watch the hearing--was the release of these videos discussed?? I thought the only issue was whether they would be recorded at all; I didn't think anyone had ever suggested releasing them!

IMO these would be records subject to the Sunshine Laws, but if I were JB/AL (God forbid), I would have kicked up a GIANT fuss about A/C privilege and "communications" between lawyer and client including silent communications such as hand motions, lip movements, etc. (Get your minds out of the gutter --I just mean that lip readers could read lips in a silent video, or, e.g., Casey in the process of confessing might have acted out tearing off pieces of duct tape.)

I think it was BeanE who said no one even realized these videos could be released under the Sunshine laws until Baez made this motion to withhold them from release. Good one Baez, can you walk on that foot you just shot?

 

[logicalgirl]

I can’t help wondering that the judge was confused by the defendant’s lawyers and there badly written motions and lengthily arguments and thus believed they were arguing that the lawyers visits should not be released instead of the A’s visits?

I think it was pretty clear it was two separate motions - one for the family visit videos and one for the lawyer/client videos. The OC lawyer was up there saying it was video, not voice for the lawyer/client videos.

 

[TorisMom003]

I'd gladly watch the tapes and report any lip readings that I could come across. Baez and co really need to be carefull about them wasting the courts time. Stupid motions that make no sense just to delay the trial will come back to bite them in the arse.

OT~When my younger brother played baseball the other teams coaches would get ticked at me for reading their lips and reporting to my brothers team what was said. I told them they should hide their mouths if they wanted it kept private.

 

[mysteriew]

Yes, that's my understanding also. It was the reaction tape that started this, and it was sealed. I think JS is saying in this motion that any tape the media or anyone requests must first be viewed and approved by him before it is released, not that he will routinely review all tapes.

That is my understanding too. But it brings up this issue. Under the old circumstances, JS wouldn't normally see any jail video. But now if the media or someone requests the jail vids (and presumably they would only request them if they suspected that something had or was going on.) Now all it takes is for someone to request them, and then not only is there a chance that the media or someone will get them, but it also means that the Judge will definately see them. Kinda puts JB on notice doesn't it?

I would really really like to see the vids from the touching incident and/or the candy incident! Please, please someone request it!

ETA: I just did a happy dance! JB went from videoed interviews with no audio but relative privacy to videoed interviews with no audio that are subject to release to the public! He'd have been better off not to have requested special treatment!

While I am thrilled that the judge is doing this, I have to confess that it worries me, because of later appeal rights. How the higher court might consider this to be prejudicial. And that would be a big problem.

 

[Kentjbkent]

I will be happy to see just ONE of these videos showing the interactions between Baez-KC, AL-KC.

Not because I think I will be able to figure out what they are saying....(I leave that in ToriMom's capable hands...)

Not because I think it will help me further deem her guilty (or innocent if you are so inclined)...

But just because I am damn NOSY!

I want to see if their behavior towards each other is similar to what we have seen in court (meaningful exchange of smiles, KC batting her eyes, AL's sypathetic posturing) or the rage, fidgeting, puckered face that CA/GA got to see.

MM, I request you start with the video from the Thursday before last week's hearing. Bet that was a doozy of a meeting...!!