Tampering Investigation Who? What? When? Where? We already know why!

[Kentjbkent]

Wasn't this the stuff related to the guard Sylvia Hernandez investigation? (Robyn Adams, et al.)

We never really knew as I recall...just speculated due to what we KNEW was going on at the time...

As I recall, though, one thing that had us all stumped was why SA was insistent that they did NOT want defense present for ex parte hearing...and we couldn't figure out WHY (especially in regards to the carefulness in regards to possible future appeals or verdict overturning)...

THIS would make sense why the SA did NOT want the defense catching wind of this new "parallel investigation"....IT INVOLVED ALL OF THEM!

 

[Sooner Fan#1]

OH MY WORD!!! Sunday is supposed to be a slow news day....Wow! Brad was HOT in that interview!

 

[Kentjbkent]

From the second link KJBK provided above (thank you), we have Leila predicting this on 2/6/10:

"There's a lot of good information in thread 1, in particular from our verified member attorneys.

At this point I'm inclined to believe that the reason for this ex-parte motion made by the prosecution, in which they requested that the defense not be present, is because it's about the defense. It may also include other individuals.

It sounds like LE is in the process of investigating something that involves a member or members of the defense team, and want a delay in the release of the evidence, until LE concludes their investigation.

I also believe that this investigation could prove to be a major bombshell once the investigation is concluded and the information is released as discovery and made public.

My guess is that it involves JB, but may also involve other individuals, such as a member or members of the Anthony family, and/or DC. "

(Sorry, couldn't quote from that thread anymore.)

ETA: OK, so maybe that hearing was about the jail guards. But my final question stands:

My question--does the fact that this has been released mean that LE has wrapped up their investigation? Are charges pending?

But if it were in regards to the jail guards, what convincing argument could be made where KC's rights would NOT be violated for not allowing defense to be present, and why would a judge be inclined to agree? That doesn't make sense to me...

I believe the fact it was just released is because they ARE done with the investigation and time is running out for them to release all discovery to the defense (as required). Strickland allowed them leeway in holding this from release through discovery, but the clock is ticking quickly...

Will be interesting to see what, if any, ramifications come out of investigation....

 

[nums24]

I remember that there was some speculation that it had to do with jail calls between JB and inmates??? Was that around the same time???

That was Robin Lunceford and July 2010, the ex-parte was in February 2010:

http://www.cfnews13.com/article/news/2010/july/124522

 

[LambChop]

We never really knew as I recall...just speculated due to what we KNEW was going on at the time...

As I recall, though, one thing that had us all stumped was why SA was insistent that they did NOT want defense present for ex parte hearing...and we couldn't figure out WHY (especially in regards to the carefulness in regards to possible future appeals or verdict overturning)...

THIS would make sense why the SA did NOT want the defense catching wind of this new "parallel investigation"....IT INVOLVED ALL OF THEM!

So if this hearing was held in front of HHJP then he is has been fully aware of the situation and would explain his statement, "I would not want to get caught breaking the law." jmo

 

[sumbunny]

How long ago would Baez have rec'd this information RE-parallel investigation and BC's interview with LE?

(could it have been at the hearing where we saw LDB hand over some c.d's at the defense table?)

 

[sleutherontheside]

So if this hearing was held in front of HHJP then he is has been fully aware of the situation and would explain his statement, "I would not want to get caught breaking the law." jmo

YES it does!!!!!!!!!!

And also his comment about JAC recovering funds that were misused....as in fishing for more TES members to "replace" Joe and Laura.

 

[Numbers]

YES it does!!!!!!!!!!

And also his comment about JAC recovering funds that were misused....as in fishing for more TES members to "replace" Joe and Laura.

:floorlaugh:

I am loving this.

A whole lot.

 

[cyberborg]

And then JB complains that potential witnesses are unwilling to come forward given the media and blog scrutiny ... Not the fact that the Defense manipulates them into mis-representation or else puts them ahead of a speeding bus. Enter at your own risk!!!

 

[ynotdivein]

Numbers I am loving watching the evolution of your signature line!

Have we lit the Lawyers Beacon yet? Sent up a flare or two? Halp!

And did JB really think none of this stuff would ever come out?

 

[strawberry]

Political upheaval in Egypt.

And it's Sunday.

And the media lawyers are probably all in a giant conference room right about now.

And the Challenger anniversary was Friday. That took top spot away from the doc dump in the Orlando news sites. As it should.

 

[Kentjbkent]

:floorlaugh:

I am loving this.

A whole lot.

Not only that, but everything today is moving so fast, but sure seems like some "loose ends" of :waitasec::waitasec: from the past are starting to come together and make sense...

Think I will play with a little timeline....hmmm...

 

[beach]

But if it were in regards to the jail guards, what convincing argument could be made where KC's rights would NOT be violated for not allowing defense to be present, and why would a judge be inclined to agree? That doesn't make sense to me...

<snip>

IIRC, HHJP finally granted the request after the SA proffered in "good faith" it was a part of an on-going investigation and could have interfered.

 

[nums24]

Gee I wonder who will represent Baez?

Sarcasm Alert:

Todd Macaluso has been reactivated, but can JB afford to pay him?

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6013116&postcount=601"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Todd Macaluso-Casey's Newest Attorney UNDER Investigation UPDATED INFO[/ame]

 

[nums24]

How long ago would Baez have rec'd this information RE-parallel investigation and BC's interview with LE?

(could it have been at the hearing where we saw LDB hand over some c.d's at the defense table?)

Baez turned over emails for THIS investigation in October 2010. It's in the doc dump.

 

[sleutherontheside]

And recall that William Slabaugh had to sign an affidavit that he searched their office email records for any contact with LAURA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He said he found none.

 

[Numbers]

Todd Macaluso has been reactivated, but can JB afford to pay him? :maddening:

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Todd Macaluso-Casey's Newest Attorney UNDER Investigation UPDATED INFO

Are you kidding me? Don't you remember that TM paid Baez. I'm sure he'd be welcomed back for..... oh, say, another $70K.

 

[sumbunny]

Hmm Baez's home in foreclosure. Possible parallel investigation into his shenanigans. Unavailable to the court next month for a week. (yet so far behind on his case)

Do you think he's taking his passport with him? ~L~ He might be pulling a runner! LOL

 

[Numbers]

And recall that William Slabaugh had to sign an affidavit that he searched their office email records for any contact with LAURA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He said he found none.

Welcome to the Florida Bar Assoc..... Bye!

 

[Soju]

And recall that William Slabaugh had to sign an affidavit that he searched their office email records for any contact with LAURA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He said he found none.

which would also partly explain why JB was plying Conway so hard to get in touch with Laura B.

what a mess!