Nejame Files Motion to Strike for TES/Baez 7/16/09 Motion

[nancy botwin]

I've read this topic three times and savored each and every word.


Happy Days!!

Lol --me too--

For others who enjoy the moments when JB is so skillfully shot down-- the State has filed its response to JB's motion to have the prosecutors removed from the case.
It can be read here and discussed in this thread. :woohoo:

 

[Crabcake23]

Bravo, NeJame, Bravo.:clap:

 

[miabellamoure]

IMHO Nejame should not handle this case because he was counsel for the parents.

Tim's assertion that there is not proof that he searched in that area is wrong, he himself said he searched that area.

The statement that Baez had requested tip info then not picked it up is pretty poor. It is true that Baez requested that info, but Law Enforcement made up a disk with primarily psychis tips which caused a financial hardship on this defendent in my opinion. The family would have had to pay over $900 for the worthless psychic tips before having another disk made up of legitimate tips resulting in another $900 for a second disk.

Why so many games by LE? You would think that they would not want to do anything to mess up their case and cause any reason for a mistrial or an appeal! This "game" by the prosecution needs to stop!

It never fails to amaze me when someone seeking the truth doesn't even take the time to verify their own accusations & statements regarding TES...see post #25!

As for Nejame representing TES because he had formally been counsel for the A's...are you really serious?

 

[pirate]

Lol --me too--

For others who enjoy the moments when JB is so skillfully shot down-- the State has filed its response to JB's motion to have the prosecutors removed from the case.
It can be read here and discussed in this thread. :woohoo:

Priceless. Thank you.

 

[TruthSeeker]

I never understood this demand to begin with. I don't think anybody could say with certainty that they stood and looked at the exact spot the body was found and saw nothing in the first place, and then 2nd all the things Nejame said. This would be a big waste of time and money. Oh and you better believe anybody that thought they were near the spot her body found had their 15 minutes on the news already anyway, let JB check all those folks out.

Tim is very good at what he does. He has every place he searches laid out in a grid pattern and assigns people to those grids. It would not be hard to go and see if that spot was within a grid for the search in that area.

He searched some of the area in the first search. We and the defense do not know how far he got on that grid search. It sounds, because of the reports by the person who found the body and the psychic in the film, like it was not under water for at least a period of time.

Why the stalling over turning over valid information if that particular area was searched or not? Sounds like road blocks are being thrown up because Tim said (on NG) he would do NOTHING to aid the defense. My position is if he did not search this area it would not help the defense at all by turning over that info. What gives here?

 

[Friday]

that's not a motion - that's ART!

It's hard not to comment. LOL.

Instead, I would like to offer a toast--a salute, if you prefer--to excellence and integrity and to every individual who brings these two traits to their work, no matter how humble and menial, or how lofty, their work may be. You give us hope and restore our faith. If only there were a lot more of you!

:toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown:

 

[momtective]

It's hard not to comment. LOL.

Instead, I would like to offer a toast--a salute, if you prefer--to excellence and integrity and to every individual who brings these two traits to their work, no matter how humble and menial, or how lofty, their work may be. You give us hope and restore our faith. If only there were a lot more of you!

:toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown: :toast: :bowdown:

Salute!

 

[MOMto5]

I've read this topic three times and savored each and every word.


Happy Days!!

I had to read it twice myself, SallyLu! It was so good, once just wasn't enough.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

That is all well and good but Mark N is not a prosecutor and TES is not LE. TES is an independent non-profit search group residing in a different state that is being represented by its council.
Apples and Oranges.
Respectfully,
Shadow

I'm sorry, but I never said Mark N was a Prosecutor, nor did I say TES was LE. And I think you mean counsel, not council??

 

[terminatrixator]

Wow. I just read the document and almost had to give him a standing ovation in front of my monitor. He is six feet and bullet proof today. Not only did he kick JB in his legal cajones about seven times, he gave him a back handed yotch slap before walking away. If I ever need an attorney for so much as a parking ticket I am going to call him. This totally made my day.

I reckon the little feller made sure the doughy feller toted an azz whoopin home.

Nice Motion indeed, NeJame deserves cudo's.

BTW, your post really gave me quite the giggle, and I'm not a giggily kinda girl. Thank you!

 

[PoppyH]

Thats right, thanks for reminding us. And thinks for Audrey's picture, I can't help but smile and feel better every time I look at how pleased she is to see herself. LOL, adorable.

:blowkiss: Thank You, and yes it reminds us just how innocent these babies are, by the way, Audrey is my 4 month old grandbaby

 

[mitzi]

According to local news, this will be one of the issues at tomorrow's hearing (starting at 8:30 a.m. Eastern time and streamed live by several local news outlets if anyone wants to watch)

http://www.wesh.com/download/2009/0129/18597597.pdf

Oh yeah! I will definitely want to watch this hearing! JB better wear his padded underoos, cuz he is in for an A$$ whoopin' tomorrow! Go NeJames!:clap: What an eloquent motion!

 

[Ocean Lover]

It is very important to establish if any searcher had looked in that area to establish if the bag was there when they searched.

Why do you all want people to withold evidence or make it difficult to find out the truth? It is only your opinion whether or not Casey knew that body was there.

If it was seen but wasn't looked in, then so be it. At least it would prove it was there! I am sure there were bags people did not look in or see on the searches for one reason or another. You ALL should want to find out the truth!

Do you want the jury to have a doubt that the bag was there because Tim is mad and doesn't want to aid in the defense at all? If that comes out during the trial it will only help Casey. IMHO this is a game that may backfire on the prosecution.

Think about it!

The defense still doesn't have the right to all of those volunteers personal information. If they want details of where and when were searched then depose TM.

 

[chicagofa13]

I don't think TruthSeeker was saying it was about Tim being mad....I think TruthSeeker would recognize that he has a legitimate legal argument to run, and that their are good public policy reasons behind that argument.

But....what will the jury think?....will they think a part of the puzzle that may have helped Casey is missing? A good defence lawyer (and I'm not saying JB is one of those) can turn any lack of co-operation by authorities etc into an acquittal, no matter how strong the prosecution case. In fact, as a defence lawyer, the worst situation you can find yourself in, is before a Court with a prosecutor who comes across to the jury as bending over backwards to be fair and helpful to the defence. You might like the prosecutor because he makes your job easier and is a nice guy, but they give you little to work with if you don't have much of a defence. Jurors want to feel comfortable convicting people on serious charges, and if a prosecutor appears over zealous, it can really backfire.

I'm sorry, but I never said Mark N was a Prosecutor, nor did I say TES was LE. And I think you mean counsel, not council??

Bolded by me.

It sounds as if you are saying LE is causing a problem.

Off topic, are you originally from the UK? You use the British spelling of defence, so just curious.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

The defense still doesn't have the right to all of those volunteers personal information. If they want details of where and when were searched then depose TM.

TM can only give direct evidence about some facts....and hearsay evidence of what others did. The hearsay would probably be inadmissible at trial unless it formed a business document or fell within some other exception to the hearsay rule.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Bolded by me.

It sounds as if you are saying LE is causing a problem.

Off topic, are you originally from the UK? You use the British spelling of defence, so just curious.

I don't think LE is causing a problem...it sounds to me like they are giving what they've got to the SA, but the SA isn't promptly forwarding it to JB, but I may be wrong.

I do think that if the SA look to the jury like they are being unfair at all, that KC will have a far better chance of an acquittal than if the SA appear to the jury to have been fair in the proceedings. As they say, you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

It's not just the British spelling..also Canada, Australia and many other places!

 

[chicagofa13]

I don't think LE is causing a problem...it sounds to me like they are giving what they've got to the SA, but the SA isn't promptly forwarding it to JB, but I may be wrong.

I do think that if the SA look to the jury like they are being unfair at all, that KC will have a far better chance of an acquittal than if the SA appear to the jury to have been fair in the proceedings. As they say, you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

It's not just the British spelling..also Canada, Australia and many other places!

Oh I agree with flies and honey. I just think this is between TES and JB, not LE/SA and JB.

Of course, the Queen's English is used other places, I was just thinking Brits!

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

The defense still doesn't have the right to all of those volunteers personal information. If they want details of where and when were searched then depose TM.

I should add that I doubt very much they will get ALL of the volunteers personal information as they probably cannot establish any sort of probative value or relevance for most of that information.

 

[lawlady84]

I LOVE 1 & 3 - I didn't even think of 3. Its true, there are tons of rules regarding efficiency and waste -

But 2- the court would have subject matter jurisdiction, since TES did search in FL related to an incident that happened in FL. The witnesses are here, the crime occured here, etc.

TES could argue they weren't partaking in a murder investigation, only a missing child one? Or technically they were looking for Jennifer Kesse when they were in that area?

I'm not sure, but I bet MN comes up with a fantastic answer!

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Oh I agree with flies and honey. I just think this is between TES and JB, not LE/SA and JB.

Of course, the Queen's English is used other places, I was just thinking Brits!

I think it could be an interesting and long argument one day...perhaps not in this case, but in another and sadly it may make LE have to reconsider if they will "authorise" independent agencies to conduct searches...I am not saying that is the case here, but it would be sad if one day in the future, a search group does find a body but refuses to tell the defence who found it, where it was found etc. Am I making sense?

There are also strong public policy arguments for not handing the info over...including of course the obvious one, that it may discourage volunteers in the future...and that would be an important public policy consideration for the court to weigh up.

I don't know if the Judge has jurisdiction to hear anything but the jurisdiction argument tomorrow? But I would think it more likely that the Judge will try to resolve it without further adieu, insofar as I think he may try to get JB to narrow the documents he is asking for, and in turn perhaps TES would produce voluntarily. Or perhaps TES is determined to use this case as a test case so to speak so as to ensure (or attempt to ensure) their volunteers are guaranteed some sort of privacy in the future.

I'm just speculating of course.