S.A. Concerned Defense will Sell Pics of Caylee's Remains

[cocowiley]

is this motion only concerning the photos that SA took? what's stopping the defense from taking their own pictures and selling them?

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

And here comes the defense team fighting the motion:

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony’s attorneys objected Wednesday morning to a state motion to withhold three discs that show Caylee Anthony’s remains.

A hearing is scheduled for Thursday at 1:30 p.m. before Circuit Court Judge Stan Strickland in the Orange County Courthouse.

~snip~

Baez calls the prosecution’s motion “without merit or precedent” and says it would create an “undue and unheard of burden” on the defense.

http://www.wesh.com/news/18422273/detail.html (Bolded by me)

Do we know when the Motion will be argued before the Court?

Do we know what has come of JB's motion for a master to be appointed re questioning DC?

I get the feeling there is a fair bit brewing in the background.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

It seems to me that the SA doesn't want JB to show them to any of the As...from their motion....

"The State also requests that counsel be prohibited from allowing anyone, except his expert witnesses and co-counsel, to view the images on the disc for any purpose..."

BTW, CW was right yesterday....the motion says it has been widely reported the images etc were sold, doesn't say it actually happened, though I think it's pretty clear it did happen and that the SA also think so.

 

[maur33]

is this motion only concerning the photos that SA took? what's stopping the defense from taking their own pictures and selling them?

I guess they could take pictures of her skeleton and sell that, but they don't have pictures of her body as it was found in the woods. Those are the photo's that would bring in the bucks and the defense can only get those from the SA's office.

Added: I can imagine as sick as it is that those photo's of Caylee's dead body in the woods could bring in 7 figures.

 

[Bev]

This is ridiculous. The state cannot withhold evidence from the defense. If the state is actually trying to set up grounds for an appeal, this is exactly the way to do it. There is no evidence whatsoever that the defense has been selling, leasing, licensing or in any way profiting from the dissemination of evidence and information in this case. The defense can designate anyone they choose as an "expert" in this case, it is up to the prosecution to question the credentials of that so called expert in a court of law. The prosecution cannot restrict the defense's right to examine all evidence, inculpatory and exculpatory and discuss this evidence with whomever they choose, with very few exceptions which are national defense secrets, protected witnesses and witnesses deemed in danger by the court after motions are heard and both sides have presented arguments and precedents.

How would you like it if you were accused of a crime and the state refused to turn over evidence to your defense without restrictions on whom the defense can designate as an expert or witness in your case?

 

[Amster]

All JB has to do is agree NOT to sell the pics. Why is that so difficult to understand? Seems like they have no interest in viewing the remains themselves.....they just want to use the info from Dr. G's findings......and, seemingly, to make big bucks from selling this info to the highest bidder.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Jose Baez wrote in a motion that restrictions will place an undue burden - both logistically and financially - on the defense. The issue will be addressed Thursday at a hearing before Orange Circuit Court Judge Stan Strickland, who had previously ordered the state to release the images to Baez by this week.

~snip~

Baez argued in his two-page motion that most of the defense experts who would review the images are out of state. And he points out that the state's experts were allowed to take samples out of the state, including labs in Indiana and Virginia.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/orl-bk-casey-anthony-010709,0,7673697.story (Bolded by me)

 

[tehcloser]

Why would this meeting involve Conway unless they ARE wanting to sell them?

 

[impatientredhead]

I was wrong....I thought she had to be convicted before she was held to this.

here is the statue in Florida.

(a) (1) Every person, firm, corporation, partnership, association, or other legal entity contracting with any person or with the representative or assignee of any person who has been accused or convicted of a crime in this state with respect to the reenactment of the crime by way of a movie, book, magazine article, tape recording, phonograph record, radio or television presentation, or live entertainment of any kind or with respect to the expression of the accused or convicted person's thoughts, feelings, opinions, or emotions regarding the crime shall submit a copy of the contract to the board and shall pay over to the board any moneys which would otherwise, by the terms of the contract, be owing to the accused or convicted person or to his representatives.
http://www.freedomforum.org/packages...ex.htm#Florida



Does representatives mean her attorneys and her parents???

The paragraph quoted is Delaware's law.

Florida's reads as follows:

Citation: FLA. STAT. Ch. 944.512 (2000)
History: Enacted in 1977.
TITLE XLVII CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND CORRECTIONS
CHAPTER 944 STATE CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM
Fla. Stat. § 944.512 (2000)
944.512 State lien on proceeds from literary or other type of account of crime for which convicted.
(1) A lien prior in dignity to all others shall exist in favor of the state upon royalties, commissions, proceeds of sale, or any other thing of value payable to or accruing to a convicted felon or a person on her or his behalf, including any person to whom the proceeds may be transferred or assigned by gift or otherwise, from any literary, cinematic, or other account of the crime for which she or he was convicted. A conviction shall be defined as a guilty verdict by a jury or judge, or a guilty or nolo contendere plea by the defendant, regardless of adjudication of guilt. The lien shall attach at the time of the conviction in county or circuit court. In the event of an appeal, the funds will be held in the Revolving Escrow Trust Fund of the Department of Legal Affairs until the appeal is resolved. Back to top

 

[Amster]

This is ridiculous. The state cannot withhold evidence from the defense. If the state is actually trying to set up grounds for an appeal, this is exactly the way to do it. There is no evidence whatsoever that the defense has been selling, leasing, licensing or in any way profiting from the dissemination of evidence and information in this case. The defense can designate anyone they choose as an "expert" in this case, it is up to the prosecution to question the credentials of that so called expert in a court of law. The prosecution cannot restrict the defense's right to examine all evidence, inculpatory and exculpatory and discuss this evidence with whomever they choose, with very few exceptions which are national defense secrets, protected witnesses and witnesses deemed in danger by the court after motions are heard and both sides have presented arguments and precedents.

How would you like it if you were accused of a crime and the state refused to turn over evidence to your defense without restrictions on whom the defense can designate as an expert or witness in your case?

How do you know there is "no evidence" that the defense hasn't been profiting off Caylee? Do you really believe the SA would just make this up?

 

[Devon]

This is ridiculous. The state cannot withhold evidence from the defense. If the state is actually trying to set up grounds for an appeal, this is exactly the way to do it. There is no evidence whatsoever that the defense has been selling, leasing, licensing or in any way profiting from the dissemination of evidence and information in this case. The defense can designate anyone they choose as an "expert" in this case, it is up to the prosecution to question the credentials of that so called expert in a court of law. The prosecution cannot restrict the defense's right to examine all evidence, inculpatory and exculpatory and discuss this evidence with whomever they choose, with very few exceptions which are national defense secrets, protected witnesses and witnesses deemed in danger by the court after motions are heard and both sides have presented arguments and precedents.

How would you like it if you were accused of a crime and the state refused to turn over evidence to your defense without restrictions on whom the defense can designate as an expert or witness in your case?

:clap::clap::clap: :clap:

 

[BonKai]

And here comes the defense team fighting the motion:

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony’s attorneys objected Wednesday morning to a state motion to withhold three discs that show Caylee Anthony’s remains.

A hearing is scheduled for Thursday at 1:30 p.m. before Circuit Court Judge Stan Strickland in the Orange County Courthouse.

~snip~

Baez calls the prosecution’s motion “without merit or precedent” and says it would create an “undue and unheard of burden” on the defense.

http://www.wesh.com/news/18422273/detail.html (Bolded by me)

Sigh...

So Baez is worried about his expert's expenses?
Does this also mean that the defense experts are going to have the remains mailed to them for their exam? Can they not come here to look at the ME's photos/x-rays and do their exam at the same time? What is the defense's problem? :waitasec:

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

This is ridiculous. The state cannot withhold evidence from the defense. If the state is actually trying to set up grounds for an appeal, this is exactly the way to do it. There is no evidence whatsoever that the defense has been selling, leasing, licensing or in any way profiting from the dissemination of evidence and information in this case. The defense can designate anyone they choose as an "expert" in this case, it is up to the prosecution to question the credentials of that so called expert in a court of law. The prosecution cannot restrict the defense's right to examine all evidence, inculpatory and exculpatory and discuss this evidence with whomever they choose, with very few exceptions which are national defense secrets, protected witnesses and witnesses deemed in danger by the court after motions are heard and both sides have presented arguments and precedents.

How would you like it if you were accused of a crime and the state refused to turn over evidence to your defense without restrictions on whom the defense can designate as an expert or witness in your case?

To begin with, they are not refusing to hand it over...they are asking for a Judge's ruling which would limit the use of that evidence, and limit it to the defence lawyers and their experts (as it should be). As per the THs, and in my experience, it is not at all unusual for a Court to make orders limiting the dissemination of sensitive materials.

Re the part of your post that I bolded, how do you come up with that? Who do you think sold the pics and videos if not the As???

 

[impatientredhead]

This is ridiculous. The state cannot withhold evidence from the defense. If the state is actually trying to set up grounds for an appeal, this is exactly the way to do it. There is no evidence whatsoever that the defense has been selling, leasing, licensing or in any way profiting from the dissemination of evidence and information in this case. The defense can designate anyone they choose as an "expert" in this case, it is up to the prosecution to question the credentials of that so called expert in a court of law. The prosecution cannot restrict the defense's right to examine all evidence, inculpatory and exculpatory and discuss this evidence with whomever they choose, with very few exceptions which are national defense secrets, protected witnesses and witnesses deemed in danger by the court after motions are heard and both sides have presented arguments and precedents.

How would you like it if you were accused of a crime and the state refused to turn over evidence to your defense without restrictions on whom the defense can designate as an expert or witness in your case?

I do agree with this, they are entitled to the evidence and can't really limit who consults with the defense in their interpretation. Baez should just agree that they won't be sold, not to mention they have the remains if they really want to sell a photo of her skull they could take a new one.

I asked yesterday but didn't see an answer, how did Jon Benet's autopsy photos get released? Sold? Public info? Leaked and no payment? Anyone know?

 

[Amster]

Why would this meeting involve Conway unless they ARE wanting to sell them?

Exactly....he's the attorney for G&C....right?

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Yet the defense team had the money to fly ALL of their highly paid experts into Orlando, pay for their time, food, lodging, and ammenities (travel expenses etc.) to stand at the active site knowing full well they would not be allowed in to be part of the ongoing investigation before the scene was cleared, but now they have the nerve to say it would be a financial burden to come for the autopsy?! GMAB!!!

 

[Devon]

To begin with, they are not refusing to hand it over...they are asking for a Judge's ruling which would limit the use of that evidence, and limit it to the defence lawyers and their experts (as it should be). As per the THs, and in my experience, it is not at all unusual for a Court to make orders limiting the dissemination of sensitive materials.

Re the part of your post that I bolded, how do you come up with that? Who do you think sold the pics and videos if not the As???

Bolded by me

But the A's are NOT the defense! The motion is directed at the defense - Baez and his team. What the A's do (or don't do) is not the responsibility of the defense and vice versa.

 

[tehcloser]

Exactly....he's the attorney for G&C....right?

RIGHT! So why in the world would he be attending any meeting on photos or evidence?????????

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Anthonys' Attorney Meets With Prosecutors, Investigators
Wednesday, January 7, 2009 – updated: 1:26 pm EST January 7, 2009

<snipped>
According to Conway, he was there to discuss Caylee's x-rays and autopsy photos that the prosecution does not yet want to release to the defense. On Tuesday, Casey Anthony's defense team filed a motion objecting to the state's refusal to turn them over.

VIDEO REPORT: Anthony Family Attorney Meets With Prosecutors
http://www.wftv.com/video/18429746/index.html

Article:
http://www.wftv.com/news/18430243/detail.html

Article:
http://www.wftv.com/news/18430243/detail.html

 

[MADJGNLAW]

Do we know when the Motion will be argued before the Court?

Do we know what has come of JB's motion for a master to be appointed re questioning DC?

I get the feeling there is a fair bit brewing in the background.

Baez Seeks Access To Images Of Caylee's Remains,A hearing is scheduled for Thursday at 1:30 p.m. - http://www.wesh.com/news/18422273/detail.html

PDF: Casey Anthony's Motion On Caylee's Remains http://www.wesh.com/download/2009/0107/18429795.pdf