Who Is Entitled To A Right To Privacy?

[Tichad3]

They hold that power. They can make themselves less interesting and less controversial by getting on with their lives. They can stop planning public memorials. They can stop fighting the law. They can start complying with court orders.

So they have to be deposed- then be deposed. If it is released to the public, so what? They need to learn to rise above the circus they have created.

They can not comment to the press. Their attorney can stop being on the news every day.

They can put one foot in front of the other, hopefully get back to work, begin healing, quietly support their daughter. But they and everyone who represents them needs to stop making them news.

:clap:

 

[MAMABEAR]

Initially the Anthonys were thrown into the media spotlight through no fault of their own. However, except for GA's medical condition which should remain private, what they did with that spotlight has led them to where they are now. Once in the spotlight they ran with it for their own purposes. They did not use it to focus on pleading for the safe return of Caylee or requesting anyone with knowledge to come forward. They used the spotlight for their own agenda of promoting their propaganda that KC was mother of the year, trashing LE and it's investigation, and poisoning the jury pool. CA in particular was begged by YM to get out of the spotlight because she was hurting the investigation as precious resources were being used by LE to counter the BS that CA was spouting to the media--yet, she put her own interests above those of finding her granddaughter and continued to give media interviews. The bottom line is she is reaping what she sowed. She has no right to pick and choose what the media hears from her now whether its on LK or in a deposition.

Now that's what I'm talkin about. Seems like lil boy cried "wolf" to many times. Let the wolf have em. The control freak has over loaded her britches and now wants to step into the shadows. I never felt that CA was asking the public for her grand baby but only for kc. CA put Caylee on the back burner long enough. Have the private memorial for "privacy", let the public morn in our own way. CA still wants to be out there in the public, she is doin it is a "BACKWARDS SORT OF WAY", now.

She wants privacy now when she has to go to court. Nope-------stand up and pop that mouth open as much as she did when she was trying to blame e-1 else for what her daughter did.

Oh! should I go to "rant". sorry.:steamed:

 

[MAMABEAR]

Those who do not actively seek the spotlight.

Those who do not break the law.

Those who do not make gigantic fools of themselves in public.

Those who do not lie to LE during an investigation.

Those who do not condone their daughter killing their granddaughter.

Those who do not try to make money off of a brutally murdered baby.

So who do I think is entitled to a right of privacy? Most everyone BUT the Anthony's.

Amen and Amen again!!!!!!!

 

[MAMABEAR]

I am so sick of the A's I could spit. It is a deposition not a medical test, and I think it is Morgans work product not the other lawyers, he can do what he wants with it, IMO. However I don't know the case law on that conclusion I have made.lol
I feel if they refuse to answer their subpoena, arrest them all for contempt and throw them in jail. Enough is enough!
If the witch is so innocent what are they afraid of? They wouldn't know the truth if it bit them. The civil suit is important and should be treated as such, if they don't like it, tough. It is time to move foward with all the cases, it is time to treat Caylee with the dignity she deserves, not protecting the adults in this sordid affair. :furious:

WOW! Amen! Gitter dun.

 

[Spangle]

Another great point, and I appreciate that this one is so specific to the depositions being taped, and yes, very likely released quickly to the public.

In this instance, I agree whole-heartedly with your point that they deserve to have their depositions taken in the same manner Morgan & Morgan takes other case depositions.

It is another example of the double-edged sword in this case. If I expect that KC will not be treated differently in jail, now will the A's be treated differently in the eyes of the law in regards to KC's homicide case, then I equally don't wish the pendulum to sway in the opposite direction and have the A's treated less equally when providing a deposition.

Great example. TY

They have a mock court room to help the clients get use to being in a court room. It would help to have those practice taped so the clients can view it. I would guess they have a camera ready for all their depos. Visual clues are wonderful. Stuff not noticed the first time, one can 'notice' later. So if one can afford it.. it would be stupid not to use it.

Another words, most likely they tape all their depos. A's would be no different. Except the media would want to also tape and many people would be wanting to watch. Like alot of folks here, just to name a few. Tee hee.. I doubt they have tha tissue with all their other cases.

 

[elementary]

the posts on this thread have been so well thought out and verbalized, especially Paintr's and Nancy Botwin's. I am going to focus on just one aspect of the the privacy question, if you will indulge me. I have been trying like crazy to find a civil case to compare with the ZFG lawsuit and KC's counter suit. The closest I can find is when OJ was sued in Civil Court. NOw that was a long time ago, and I am not sure OJ was deposed by the Plaintiff's attorney. I do not remember the attorney stating he was going to allow the media to record the deposition.

I really have a problem with John Morgan conducting the depositions in the manner he is proposing - a mock courtroom and while 'technically the media is not invited, it will be a public proceeding' - according to an article on MyFoxOrlando, this morning. I have NEVER heard of something like this before, and was curious to hear what any of our 'WS legal eagles' think of it.

As much as I like that John Morgan has taken on ZFG's case, he is doing his own part to make this even more circus like. Obviously, this is way outside the norm for depositions in a civil suit - and I have to say, I don't like that he is attempting to do things this way. I think this goes way beyond our right to know - we will find out the results of the depostions because John Morgan will make da*n sure we do. I don't think there is any need to humiliate GA, CA or even LA this way. Yes, humiliate because you know whoever deposes them is not going to do it in a kind or gentle way. I will not debate whether they are entitled to kindness based on their previous behavior - that debate could go on for pages and pages, I just think that in this particular arena, narrowly focused only on the depositions in this civil suit; they deserve to have their depositions taken in the same manner other depositions taken by the Morgan & Morgan law firm were handled - this is only my opinion. If this is, in fact, the way Morgan & Morgan handle ALL their depositions, then so be it - but somehow I don't think so.

What makes you presume that they will be humiliated? What does that humiliation consist of? That they are asked hard questions?

I presume it will be professionally done. Just because Morgan blusters on TV does not take away from the righteousness of the case. If they are deposed like anyone else is deposed, I don't see the problem.

It still comes down to the A's answers. Why can they not just answer the questions like any other person? What's the big deal? What is humiliating about that? Just tell the truth. Isn't that what all of this is about?

 

[Jay D]

Gosh there have been some fantastic presentations in this thread. I applaud everyone. :clap:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o4YsgbNSSs
In this Jan. 17 interview with Geraldo, Conway States about about RK:

Conway: Geraldo, we have a very good source that says that Mr K was there between Aug. 13 and Dec. 11 when he discovered the remains.
Geraldo: Do you think that there is more funky information to come out about him?
Conway replies: I'm sure that there is, I know there is.

When I saw this last month I became a bit emotional. Here I saw Geraldo and the Anthony's attorney, the same lawyer advocating for his clients "Right To Privacy" for an entire month, virtually baiting the public into looking more closely at RK. RK, as far as I can tell, is an innocent bystander and good servant in this fiasco. He doesn't deserve his right to privacy invaded more than it already has been.

One of my biggest peeves in this life is the "double standard". It certainly seems to me that the "double standard " game is being played by some in this tragedy.

I don't want to divert this thread into a discussion of RK. I am using this incident as a point of discussion of the Anthony's, Conway's and our own perceptions about Who is Entitled to The Right To Privacy.

 

[RevCrim]

If I valued my privacy I would appear circumspectly in public.

Swinging haammers, accusing anyone and everyone, vilifying anyone who offers aid and comfort, uttering outrageous statements, appearing on multiple talk shows, requesting donations for a very restricted search, manipulating facts, degrading LE, hiring a lawyer who appears daily to state your case in public, surrounding yourself with very public and dubious characters, destroying property,...none of these things seem to lend themselves to suggest a desire for privacy. If the Anthony family desired privace a simple 'No Comment' or' Please help in the search for our grand daughter' or a simple 'thank you kindly' would have worked wonders, attracted abundant assistance, and engendered sympathy.

You cannot demand attention at the top of your lungs one minute because it serves your purpose and then yell to be left alone the next and expect the whole world to follow your wishes.

If you choose to make a public spectacle of yourself than you must expect the public to comment. The Anthonys made their choices. It is what it is.

Do I have sympathy for their loss? Yes I do.

Do I hate the Anthonys? No I do not.

Do I wish them pain or more suffering? No I do not.

Do I believe they should be investigated for wrongdoing? Yes I do?

Do I believe they should be required to follow the laws of the land just as everyone must? Yes I do.

Do I believe they should be punished, if it is proven in a court of law, that they have broken said laws? Yes I do.

Do I think that they rate a 'free pass' because their daughter is accused of killing their grand daughter? No I do not.

Caylee had the right to a long and happy life.

As usual, the preceeding post is only my opinion.

I agree 100 %.:clap::clap::clap::clap:

 

[LCoastMom]

We have been told repeatedly ZG's atty is way up at the top in his profession, I think opening this deposition to the public shows us differently. This is exploitation plain and simple. The report and possibly the tape of the A's deposition may well be available to the public under the SunShine Act, but this doesn't mean any Tom, Dick or Harry should be allowed to view the deposition in progress. Everyone involved, except the accused should be allowed some small amount of privacy. This deposition is not a court of law and it doesn't imply the A's are being charged or implicated in any wrong doing. It is the opportunity for ZG's atty to find out what the family knows about the "nanny" as it relates to his client. There is no reason under the sun to open this to the public while in progress. After the proceedings are finished then the records can be requested, just like all the rest of the documents in this case.

Isn't the basis of ZG's lawsuit that KC invaded her privacy and opened her up to public ridicule unfairly? Does that in any way, shape or form make it right for her, through her atty, to turn around and do the same thing to KC's family? The legalities in this case I get, but it seems all morals and and just plain human decency are on the back burner for the duration.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Gosh there have been some fantastic presentations in this thread. I applaud everyone. :clap:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o4YsgbNSSs
In this Jan. 17 interview with Geraldo, Conway States about about RK:

Conway: Geraldo, we have a very good source that says that Mr K was there between Aug. 13 and Dec. 11 when he discovered the remains.
Geraldo: Do you think that there is more funky information to come out about him?
Conway replies: I'm sure that there is, I know there is.

When I saw this last month I became a bit emotional. Here I saw Geraldo and the Anthony's attorney, the same lawyer advocating for his clients "Right To Privacy" for an entire month, virtually baiting the public into looking more closely at RK. RK, as far as I can tell, is an innocent bystander and good servant in this fiasco. He doesn't deserve his right to privacy invaded more than it already has been.

One of my biggest peeves in this life is the "double standard". It certainly seems to me that the "double standard " game is being played by some in this tragedy.

I don't want to divert this thread into a discussion of RK. I am using this incident as a point of discussion of the Anthony's, Conway's and our own perceptions about Who is Entitled to The Right To Privacy.

I was disgusted when I saw him say that. I cannot fathom how he would considerate it appropriate to attack the person who found little Caylee.....isn't that what the gp's wanted? It seems not. In fact, it makes me even more suspicious that they did know she was down the road. Particularly when I think about BC originally saying that the DC video could prove Caylee wasn't there before. Poor RK, being victimised by the As, the very people he tried to bring some peace to.

 

[Pollywog]

If they wanted privacy they should have stayed off the TV circuit and out of the limelight EXCEPT to ask the so called kidnappers to return Caylee, which they never ever did. That told me they have known all along that nobody had the baby. That is usually the first thing folks do is beg for the return of their child. The A's did not.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

We have been told repeatedly ZG's atty is way up at the top in his profession, I think opening this deposition to the public shows us differently. This is exploitation plain and simple. The report and possibly the tape of the A's deposition may well be available to the public under the SunShine Act, but this doesn't mean any Tom, Dick or Harry should be allowed to view the deposition in progress. Everyone involved, except the accused should be allowed some small amount of privacy. This deposition is not a court of law and it doesn't imply the A's are being charged or implicated in any wrong doing. It is the opportunity for ZG's atty to find out what the family knows about the "nanny" as it relates to his client. There is no reason under the sun to open this to the public while in progress. After the proceedings are finished then the records can be requested, just like all the rest of the documents in this case.

Isn't the basis of ZG's lawsuit that KC invaded her privacy and opened her up to public ridicule unfairly? Does that in any way, shape or form make it right for her, through her atty, to turn around and do the same thing to KC's family? The legalities in this case I get, but it seems all morals and and just plain human decency are on the back burner for the duration.

Are you seriously suggesting ZG is exploiting the As? I think it was ZG that had the wrong thing done by her.

You think the defamation laws shouldn't apply to the As? Do you care at all about how ZG and her children suffered because of this?

The more posts I read here, the more I think KC will be acquitted.

 

[LCoastMom]

If they have forfeited their right to privacy ( I don't believe they have) then who decides when they get it back? Us?

When does concentual sex become rape? As soon as one of the parties utters "no more". This has been proven repeatedly in the court of law. No matter what went on prior to "stop" or "no more" once those words are spoken or implied, the act changes.

Maybe something for everyone who thinks the A's life should be open fodder because they invited the media in, to think about. So far, regardless of what we think of their actions the A's have not been accused of any crimes. What they did and how they behaved in front of camera's they invited in is open for public consumption. The rest of their life, is not and the sooner we all realize this, the sooner they will fade into the background where they belong.

IIRC initially following the declaration of the remains being those of their Gbaby, the A's said they were only interested in having a private service for Caylee. They were convinced by outsiders to hold a public memorial for this little baby, to allow all those who have been so intimately involved in the search a chance to say good bye, to gain a little closure. I really wish their every decision would stop being vilified by the very people who look for them first thing every morning and last thing every night. No one can have it both ways, not us and not them.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

When does concentual sex become rape? As soon as one of the parties utters "no more". This has been proven repeatedly in the court of law. No matter what went on prior to "stop" or "no more" once those words are spoken or implied, the act changes.

Maybe something for everyone who thinks the A's life should be open fodder because they invited the media in, to think about. So far, regardless of what we think of their actions the A's have not been accused of any crimes. What they did and how they behaved in front of camera's they invited in is open for public consumption. The rest of their life, is not and the sooner we all realize this, the sooner they will fade into the background where they belong.

IIRC initially following the declaration of the remains being those of their Gbaby, the A's said they were only interested in having a private service for Caylee. They were convinced by outsiders to hold a public memorial for this little baby, to allow all those who have been so intimately involved in the search a chance to say good bye, to gain a little closure. I really wish their every decision would stop being vilified by the very people who look for them first thing every morning and last thing every night. No one can have it both ways, not us and not them.

Are you suggesting that BC should go on tv every night saying things like there are more "funky" things to come out about RK and that they should get a free pass on that? Why, if they keep going to the media like they are, shouldn't we be allowed to question what they say? BC says "they want privacy", and in the same interview, tells the media he will have a presser on their front lawn that very day! And the presser went forever...and he seemed disappointed when the press ran out of questions. And within the 24 hours after that, did many more interviews.

As for them having the memorial for the searchers...are you serious?...the person who found her has not only not been thanked by them, but he has been villified by them. And the person who kept her name in the press every day was told he was not welcome. And they have not only never thanked TES, but rather, they attacked TM, who very obviously did not deserve it.

 

[Paintr]

Are you suggesting that BC should go on tv every night saying things like there are more "funky" things to come out about RK and that they should get a free pass on that? Why, if they keep going to the media like they are, shouldn't we be allowed to question what they say? BC says "they want privacy", and in the same interview, tells the media he will have a presser on their front lawn that very day! And the presser went forever...and he seemed disappointed when the press ran out of questions. And within the 24 hours after that, did many more interviews.

As for them having the memorial for the searchers...are you serious?...the person who found her has not only not been thanked by them, but he has been villified by them. And the person who kept her name in the press every day was told he was not welcome. And they have not only never thanked TES, but rather, they attacked TM, who very obviously did not deserve it.

Excellent post! This memorial may be held for many reasons but I'll wager the searchers are way down on the list.

Having said that, the reason for any memorial, private or public, large or small should be to honour Caylee and for no other consideration.

 

[LCoastMom]

Are you seriously suggesting ZG is exploiting the As? I think it was ZG that had the wrong thing done by her.

You think the defamation laws shouldn't apply to the As? Do you care at all about how ZG and her children suffered because of this?

The more posts I read here, the more I think KC will be acquitted.

No where in my post did I say defamation laws shouldn't apply to the A's. I simply feel this deposition should be done in private, just like the hundreds of other depositions this atty takes every year.

Depositions are recorded, they are done under oath with a court reporter present taking word for word what is said by all parties involved, just like most other legal proceedings. That doesn't mean the public needs to be invited to the deposition itself. Unless this atty informs the media of all the depositions he performs, unless he hold all depositions in a mock court room, I think this family has the same rights as everyone else and shouldn't be expected to perform for this circus event without putting their objection out there.

The reports will be available just like all the rest, I think the media and public can wait those few days to have have their appetite for all things Anthony to be fed.

I am sorry for any pain felt by ZG's family, but that pain was inflicted by KC, not her parents, not her brother. Her atty is entitled to question them by a deposition hearing. This does not give him carte blanche to turn the deposition into a media event. IMO

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Excellent post! This memorial may be held for many reasons but I'll wager the searchers are way down on the list.

Having said that, the reason for any memorial, private or public, large or small should be to honour Caylee and for no other consideration.

ITA. Which is why I won't be watching it. I think the As will make it about them, and about getting Casey off, and may even tell a few mis-truths and trash a few people from the pulpit.

 

[LCoastMom]

Are you suggesting that BC should go on tv every night saying things like there are more "funky" things to come out about RK and that they should get a free pass on that? Why, if they keep going to the media like they are, shouldn't we be allowed to question what they say? BC says "they want privacy", and in the same interview, tells the media he will have a presser on their front lawn that very day! And the presser went forever...and he seemed disappointed when the press ran out of questions. And within the 24 hours after that, did many more interviews.

As for them having the memorial for the searchers...are you serious?...the person who found her has not only not been thanked by them, but he has been villified by them. And the person who kept her name in the press every day was told he was not welcome. And they have not only never thanked TES, but rather, they attacked TM, who very obviously did not deserve it.

No where in my post do I mention BC or a press conference. Or how I feel about what BC has said.


IIRC initially following the declaration of the remains being those of their Gbaby, the A's said they were only interested in having a private service for Caylee. They were convinced by outsiders to hold a public memorial for this little baby, to allow all those who have been so intimately involved in the search a chance to say good bye, to gain a little closure. I really wish their every decision would stop being vilified by the very people who look for them first thing every morning and last thing every night. No one can have it both ways, not us and not them.

Those intimately involved in Caylee's search should certainly include TM, RK and TES. And since the A's have been unusually quiet since Caylee's remains were identified hopefully a public memorial would give them an opportunity to publicly thank them for all they have done. Without an atty acting as a mouth piece for what they may or may not have said themselves.

 

[MAMABEAR]

ITA. Which is why I won't be watching it. I think the As will make it about them, and about getting Casey off, and may even tell a few mis-truths and trash a few people from the pulpit.

Yes, this is the way I feel also. You peeps have a much better way with words than I will ever will. May I say that CA has raped several by the way she mouths others are at fault and not her daughter. I feel like the Ants knew early on that Caylee was dead and they knew by whose hands. They used the media to "rape" and I think anybody would stand up in public and fight for their rights also. Lets let the Ants keep "runnin the show"? NOT?

 

[Bev]

No, not.