ZG Hires Attorney - Lawsuit Against Casey Anthony Part 2

Frivolous?

  • Yes, it is frivolous/pointless/stupid/etc

    Votes: 33 21.4%
  • No, it is not, it is reasonable to ask the family these things

    Votes: 117 76.0%
  • Other/explain/dont really care

    Votes: 4 2.6%

  • Total voters
    154
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #341
I can't comment about a lawyer I don't know, but a defamation claim is just a tort claim involving injuries that aren't physical. It isn't a simple car crash, but a competent lawyer can do research and learn and be creative within the bounds of the law. Or seek help from someone who is expert in the area.

Obviously, when you allow a person to protect their good name by means of a tort claim for money damages, which the law does, there will be some clash with the right to "free speech." That's why so many defamation cases have made their way from state courts to the US Supreme Court. That's where a lot of the law comes from. I don't see any danger that the filing of this particular case will do some horrible damage to our first amendment rights. If one of us goes out tomorrow to report a crime to LE, and to name names, we'll be free to do so, if we act in good faith -- even if we're mistaken. That isn't what happened with Ca here. Criminal defendants will still be able to go to court and blame third parties, to try to create reasonable doubt, with a privilege to do so. We aren't in some sensitive area where important public issues are being discussed or debated and that will be impeded. One total loser in trouble has borrowed the name of another innocent person to exonerate herself and blame the other for a serious crime against a small child. If she does this in a context where the privilege is absolute, she can do it with impunity. If the privilege is only partial and can be lost because of bad faith, so be it. It would be the same for anyone in a similar situation.

I cannot really disagree with that. I just feel that:
1. Her lawyer will base his case on her freedom of spech and the factt hat She was not the one that made these claims in the media.
2. I hold concerns for how this will affect our freedom od speech rights in the future . I just hope it is all well worded that she acted on bad faith so those of us who make claims in police reports on good faith don't get sued by others with a similar name to that which we may claim.

I just think the key will come down in her defense that she was not speaking about this woman, even though as I believe she got this woamns info my nefarious means and used it in her fake story.

two items to note on this:
1. She said her nanny was 25. This woman is not 25.
2. She said to others prior to the dissapearance of her daughter that Zani was watching her. We have no mention of this womans actual name prior to the dissapearance. Further claims that can be made that she was not mentioning her.

I still feel she indeed used this persons name I just think using a Libel statute is the wrong approach, it gives her too much oppertunity for defense.
 
  • #342
Freedom of speech. Would you make a comment to a police officer in the future (lie or truth) if that comment could be turned over to the media to find the culprit and then someone they think might match becomes a POI and they interview them and then they clear them but then the media decides to not let go and persues them and they start blaming her anyway, etc etc etc.....

I would fear a lawsuit just like this even if I was an innocent victim reporting a crime and some other person with a similar name was approached by the police and this all happened, thus my freedom of speech just became jepordized. That is the right you will loose. Freedom of Speech. This is why they won't touch the media they know every paper and broadcaster will stomp them into the ground for trying to trounce on this right. And that is exactly what they are trying to do, hoping nobody cares about Casey's freedom of speech, but if we do not protect hers we will loose ours.

Again I believe she is guilty of something here but I am not willing to loose my rights to watch her go down. I want the lawyers to find another statute to charge her with.

JM is a personal Injury lawyer not a civil liberties lawyer, he could care less about civil liberties. He is in the crude definition an abbulance chaser. If you or anyone you know have been injured.... are some of the frist words in his commercials here ;-) Personal Injury lawyers need to keep their buts away from civil liberties cases....

You wouldn't lose any civil liberties. You may not malign a living person with statements that you know to be provably untrue, thus causing losses. That's it! That's already illegal. :)
 
  • #343
You wouldn't lose any civil liberties. You may not malign a living person with statements that you know to be provably untrue, thus causing losses. That's it! That's already illegal. :)

Of course not, but someone who may think I was talking about them instead may get it in his or her head now and try and sue me! Even though I was doing something perfectly legal nad that person perhaps got cought up in the fray by being mistaken as the culprit by the police.

That's all I'm sayin :) Jbean asked me for a comparison story to debate but I had no time today as I was working on something more important, maybe later this week if I can find some time :)
 
  • #344
  • #345
ZG still caught up in this mess.
As per this article...http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/orl-casey0708oct07,0,4785438.story

One of the motion filed yesterday asks for-
Release of all records about the state's investigation into Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez.


They are still dragging her into this mess.

I was concerned when I read the news report, but that's news drama for you, the way I read it in the disclosure request in meerly asking for the evidence the police gathered regarding the names and interviews they documented etc. The news media makes it sound like they are targeting her specific information but when I read the disclosure request it does not appear that way. I was a little pissed and WTF'd at first though. Thinking to my self about how stupic can he be now that there is this new civil case hanging over her head about this as it is, lol. I guess the news reported felt if he/she did not spice it up you may not want to read it.

Here is a direct link to the legal motions by Baez:
http://www.wesh.com/download/2008/1006/17633458.pdf
 
  • #346
119.07 Inspection and copying of records; photographing public records; fees; exemptions.--
(1)(a) Every person who has custody of a public record shall permit the record to be inspected and copied by any person desiring to do so, at any reasonable time, under reasonable conditions, and under supervision by the custodian of the public records.
(b) A custodian of public records or a person having custody of public records may designate another officer or employee of the agency to permit the inspection and copying of public records, but must disclose the identity of the designee to the person requesting to inspect or copy public records.
(c) A custodian of public records and his or her designee must acknowledge requests to inspect or copy records promptly and respond to such requests in good faith. A good faith response includes making reasonable efforts to determine from other officers or employees within the agency whether such a record exists and, if so, the location at which the record can be accessed.
(d) A person who has custody of a public record who asserts that an exemption applies to a part of such record shall redact that portion of the record to which an exemption has been asserted and validly applies, and such person shall produce the remainder of such record for inspection and copying.
(e) If the person who has custody of a public record contends that all or part of the record is exempt from inspection and copying, he or she shall state the basis of the exemption that he or she contends is applicable to the record, including the statutory citation to an exemption created or afforded by statute.
(f) If requested by the person seeking to inspect or copy the record, the custodian of public records shall state in writing and with particularity the reasons for the conclusion that the record is exempt or confidential.
(g) In any civil action in which an exemption to this section is asserted, if the exemption is alleged to exist under or by virtue of s. 119.071(1)(d) or (f), (2)(d),(e), or (f), or (4)(c), the public record or part thereof in question shall be submitted to the court for an inspection in camera. If an exemption is alleged to exist under or by virtue of s. 119.071(2)(c), an inspection in camera is discretionary with the court. If the court finds that the asserted exemption is not applicable, it shall order the public record or part thereof in question to be immediately produced for inspection or copying as requested by the person seeking such access.
(h) Even if an assertion is made by the custodian of public records that a requested record is not a public record subject to public inspection or copying under this subsection, the requested record shall, nevertheless, not be disposed of for a period of 30 days after the date on which a written request to inspect or copy the record was served on or otherwise made to the custodian of public records by the person seeking access to the record. If a civil action is instituted within the 30-day period to enforce the provisions of this section with respect to the requested record, the custodian of public records may not dispose of the record except by order of a court of competent jurisdiction after notice to all affected parties.
(i) The absence of a civil action instituted for the purpose stated in paragraph (g) does not relieve the custodian of public records of the duty to maintain the record as a public record if the record is in fact a public record subject to public inspection and copying under this subsection and does not otherwise excuse or exonerate the custodian of public records from any unauthorized or unlawful disposition of such record.
(2)(a) As an additional means of inspecting or copying public records, a custodian of public records may provide access to public records by remote electronic means, provided exempt or confidential information is not disclosed.
(b) The custodian of public records shall provide safeguards to protect the contents of public records from unauthorized remote electronic access or alteration and to prevent the disclosure or modification of those portions of public records which are exempt or confidential from subsection (1) or s. 24, Art. I of the State Constitution.
(c) Unless otherwise required by law, the custodian of public records may charge a fee for remote electronic access, granted under a contractual arrangement with a user, which fee may include the direct and indirect costs of providing such access. Fees for remote electronic access provided to the general public shall be in accordance with the provisions of this section.
(3)(a) Any person shall have the right of access to public records for the purpose of making photographs of the record while such record is in the possession, custody, and control of the custodian of public records.
(b) This subsection applies to the making of photographs in the conventional sense by use of a camera device to capture images of public records but excludes the duplication of microfilm in the possession of the clerk of the circuit court where a copy of the microfilm may be made available by the clerk.
(c) Photographing public records shall be done under the supervision of the custodian of public records, who may adopt and enforce reasonable rules governing the photographing of such records.
(d) Photographing of public records shall be done in the room where the public records are kept. If, in the judgment of the custodian of public records, this is impossible or impracticable, photographing shall be done in another room or place, as nearly adjacent as possible to the room where the public records are kept, to be determined by the custodian of public records. Where provision of another room or place for photographing is required, the expense of providing the same shall be paid by the person desiring to photograph the public record pursuant to paragraph (4)(e).
(4) The custodian of public records shall furnish a copy or a certified copy of the record upon payment of the fee prescribed by law. If a fee is not prescribed by law, the following fees are authorized:
(a)1. Up to 15 cents per one-sided copy for duplicated copies of not more than 14 inches by 81/2 inches;
2. No more than an additional 5 cents for each two-sided copy; and
3. For all other copies, the actual cost of duplication of the public record.
(b) The charge for copies of county maps or aerial photographs supplied by county constitutional officers may also include a reasonable charge for the labor and overhead associated with their duplication.
(c) An agency may charge up to $1 per copy for a certified copy of a public record.
(d) If the nature or volume of public records requested to be inspected or copied pursuant to this subsection is such as to require extensive use of information technology resources or extensive clerical or supervisory assistance by personnel of the agency involved, or both, the agency may charge, in addition to the actual cost of duplication, a special service charge, which shall be reasonable and shall be based on the cost incurred for such extensive use of information technology resources or the labor cost of the personnel providing the service that is actually incurred by the agency or attributable to the agency for the clerical and supervisory assistance required, or both.
(e)1. Where provision of another room or place is necessary to photograph public records, the expense of providing the same shall be paid by the person desiring to photograph the public records.
2. The custodian of public records may charge the person making the photographs for supervision services at a rate of compensation to be agreed upon by the person desiring to make the photographs and the custodian of public records. If they fail to agree as to the appropriate charge, the charge shall be determined by the custodian of public records.
(5) When ballots are produced under this section for inspection or examination, no persons other than the supervisor of elections or the supervisor's employees shall touch the ballots. If the ballots are being examined before the end of the contest period in s. 102.168, the supervisor of elections shall make a reasonable effort to notify all candidates by telephone or otherwise of the time and place of the inspection or examination. All such candidates, or their representatives, shall be allowed to be present during the inspection or examination.
(6) An exemption contained in this chapter or in any other general or special law shall not limit the access of the Auditor General, the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, or any state, county, municipal, university, board of community college, school district, or special district internal auditor to public records when such person states in writing that such records are needed for a properly authorized audit, examination, or investigation. Such person shall maintain the exempt or confidential status of that public record and shall be subject to the same penalties as the custodian of that record for public disclosure of such record.
(7) An exemption from this section does not imply an exemption from s. 286.011. The exemption from s. 286.011 must be expressly provided.
(8) The provisions of this section are not intended to expand or limit the provisions of Rule 3.220, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, regarding the right and extent of discovery by the state or by a defendant in a criminal prosecution or in collateral postconviction proceedings. This section may not be used by any inmate as the basis for failing to timely litigate any postconviction action.

I am looking for Rule 3.220 atm
 
  • #347
  • #348
No, i would not necessarily make a difference She was also the ZG at the Sawgrass, with the white car, and the specific ethnicity, and the specfics of hair.

If you read back a couple pages, you'll see that Hispanics often use their mother's and father's surnames. That's part of the name. But, they often just use the first and last in the US.

Yes, my best friend in college- Mexican, not Mexican-American, legal name was S. P-G, but she went by S.P. (her father's surname)
 
  • #349
June 16th - Caylee is not seen after this date. I believe this is the day she died.
Ping records:
show Casey's movement after 4 PM is showing her going to TL
Video surveillance has her with Tony
Ping record show she was at Tony's overnite until 11:49 on June 17th


June 17th
11:49 - Ping record shows her at TL until
2:18 - Ping record shows she is leaving TL "indicates movement to the south" where it pinged at her parents area until
2:45 - Ping record shows it pinged briefly to the west of the home at Lee Vista Blvd and TPC Drive..
4:36 - Moving NE at 4:36 PM Remained in area of Alfalfa Trail, Research Dr and E Colonial Dr (Chris Stutz' reportedly visited her - had Tony's jeep??)
5:20 Cell activity moved west to TL apt and stayed there until 0031 hours on June 18th.

Where did she have time to sit around SG? What time of day did ZG go to Sawgrass? Why did ZG not fill out her own visitor card and why did she not sign it?
HG filled out her card and did not have her sign it.

If ZG was at SG in the afternoon.. then I believe Casey was not there.
If ZG was at SG in the AM.. then Casey probably was not there.

Casey already had friends that lived at Sawgrass.... she did not need to scope out the layout.
 
  • #350
Thanks for looking at how the ping maps work with the possibility of her staking out Sawgrass on the day ZG visited!

This will always intrigue me! I hope we get the answer during the trial!!
 
  • #351
Thanks for looking at how the ping maps work with the possibility of her staking out Sawgrass on the day ZG visited!

This will always intrigue me! I hope we get the answer during the trial!!

During the ZG civil trial I am sure Kassen is going to want to bring this up. However, the SA may only bring it up to show that she was not as SG to drop Caylee off.

If the SA shows that Casey was never there during that first to drop off Caylee or to "go back and look" for her using ping records.. then doesn't that work against the real ZG claims that Casey got her car, tag and name from SG on the 17th?
 
  • #352
June 16th - Caylee is not seen after this date. I believe this is the day she died.
Ping records:
show Casey's movement after 4 PM is showing her going to TL
Video surveillance has her with Tony
Ping record show she was at Tony's overnite until 11:49 on June 17th


June 17th
11:49 - Ping record shows her at TL until
2:18 - Ping record shows she is leaving TL "indicates movement to the south" where it pinged at her parents area until
2:45 - Ping record shows it pinged briefly to the west of the home at Lee Vista Blvd and TPC Drive..
4:36 - Moving NE at 4:36 PM Remained in area of Alfalfa Trail, Research Dr and E Colonial Dr (Chris Stutz' reportedly visited her - had Tony's jeep??)
5:20 Cell activity moved west to TL apt and stayed there until 0031 hours on June 18th.

Where did she have time to sit around SG? What time of day did ZG go to Sawgrass? Why did ZG not fill out her own visitor card and why did she not sign it?
HG filled out her card and did not have her sign it.

If ZG was at SG in the afternoon.. then I believe Casey was not there.
If ZG was at SG in the AM.. then Casey probably was not there.

Casey already had friends that lived at Sawgrass.... she did not need to scope out the layout.

What no takers?


This theory of Casey seeing ZG I believe may have started here at WS. LP went on NG with it. Now it is cemented in everyone's mind that this is how she heard the name ZG.
I would like to find out using the ping records and police interviews regarding the 17th... what time ZG was at SG and what time do you think Casey was there do survelliance... why do you think Casey was doing survelliance (backed up by evidence) and how long she was there based upon ping records.

Can anyone that thinks Casey seen ZG at Sawgrass show me EVIDENCE that proves that she was there. I do not care about how big a coinky dinky this is.
 
  • #353
So-----------(trying to understand here). Did KC get the info about ZG from watchng her or did she get the info off the card ZG filled out?
 
  • #354
So-----------(trying to understand here). Did KC get the info about ZG from watchng her or did she get the info off the card ZG filled out?

Neither.
Due to ping records for June 17th it appears that she was not watching her at Sawgrass or highly unlikely.

2 people from the SG office did not ever recall seeing Casey as a resident or a VISITOR. The office has survelliance video. Office people do not recognize her.. how would she have gotten in to read the card? There is no evidence of break in of that office.

1 of the 2 people from SG was able to recognize ZG. His initials are HG.

In his statement to police, is he was the one that filled out the card regarding her visit.

Transcripts found here
http://www.acandyrose.com/caylee_anthony_transcript_H.GarciaStatement080608.htm (THANKS CANDYROSE!!)

quoted from the transcript...
"... At some point during their conversation Amanda called for me to join them in her office and a showed me a guest card bearing the name of Zenaida Gonzalez. I looked at the card and recognized my handwriting on the visitation card. ......" I told him I filled out the guest card for Ms. Gonzalez."



There are other sources that Casey could have gotten the name ZG. I am only pointing out here that I do not believe that Casey got the name ZG from Sawgrass.

1. I believe Kio has an aunt with the name Zenaida.(same person as ZG?? IDK) Casey was friends with Kio all the way through school. I am sure she heard her aunts name before.
2. The real ZG has relatives that have used Cast Iron Tattoos same place that Casey got her tat, something that was sleuthed her at WS (she could have overheard a conversation)
3. There was a ZG that lived down the street.. could have used that name.
4. Popular name in that area of Florida
5. There is/was a 20 something year old ZG that did work in childcare.
6. There is a ZG that had her office broken into..


Casey said her ZG was 26 years old, no kids, with a 2008 Ford Focus..
Does the real ZG have a 2008 Ford Focus? REALLY?? How does one afford to live in a motel room, no job and drive a new 2008 car... and previously worked as a maid? Just sleuthing here.. nothing against ZG. Not for Casey either. But there definitely something here to sleuth.
 
  • #355
Gotcha! Guess I just can't wrap my brain around this rat now. Thanks.
 
  • #356
http://www.wftv.com/news/19064502/detail.html

"A protective order, filed by Casey's defamation lawyer Thursday, says Casey could incriminate herself in the murder case if she's forced to answer oral or written questions.

But Zenaida's lawyers say Casey already answered the questions for investigators and made conflicting statements about the Zenaida she blamed for taking Caylee.

A hearing is set for May. "

So no answers from KC till after the hearing, if then. Does this pospone the senior A's depositions or does this not affect them? Doesn't the 5th only apply to incriminating themselves and not what they say about KC's involvement?
 
  • #357
http://www.wftv.com/news/19064502/detail.html

"A protective order, filed by Casey's defamation lawyer Thursday, says Casey could incriminate herself in the murder case if she's forced to answer oral or written questions.

But Zenaida's lawyers say Casey already answered the questions for investigators and made conflicting statements about the Zenaida she blamed for taking Caylee.

A hearing is set for May. "

So no answers from KC till after the hearing, if then. Does this pospone the senior A's depositions or does this not affect them? Doesn't the 5th only apply to incriminating themselves and not what they say about KC's involvement?

The delay on KC's deposition does not have to delay CA and GA's deposition. Whether or not CA and GA's depositions will be delayed is a discretionary choice for the attorney who scheduled the depositions.

The 5th Amendment is about incriminating themselves, and not about incriminating a family member.
 
  • #358
The delay on KC's deposition does not have to delay CA and GA's deposition. Whether or not CA and GA's depositions will be delayed is a discretionary choice for the attorney who scheduled the depositions.

The 5th Amendment is about incriminating themselves, and not about incriminating a family member.

Thank you kindly! I still think the A's (and BC) will try to wiggle out of answering questions somehow but I guess we'll see.
 
  • #359
I actually feel kinda out of touch with you all regarding this, I feel the questions in the depo's are stupid considering their source...

...or I could rephrase, I dont feel it is ZG or her lawyer's business to ask questions of the family about the death of Caylee. I think all they needed to do was ask KC yes or no, do you know this woman? and kc did say no. so shouldnt that be the end of it?

I do feel for ZG getting dragged into the mess for no reason at all but that has naught to do with lawyers asking family members who killed caylee :/ I know we all want to hear them admit it but they arent going to, sure not to these guys..

I dont blame the A's for anger, I would be mad too. I think ZG's lawyers are doing it for their own publicity and no other reason. What do others think?
 
  • #360
I can understand the need to ask the questions that were being asked especially after the attorney explained why it was necessary. George may not have liked the questions that were asked but I'll say one thing...in my opinion...George went to that depo with a tree...not a chip...on his shoulder and he lied most of the way through the depo. He either was left totally out of any conversations within the family or he is dumb as a post and didn't ask a single question of anyone....I don't believe he was left out and I believe that he asked plenty of questions of the PI that was working for them. George denied knowing a lot of things and then turned around and said that him and Cindy talk every day about everything...talk about shooting himself in the foot!

His arrogance and snotty attitude really changed my mind about him. There were times that I wanted to reach into the computer and just slap him. I noticed that his attitude was much better after the break. I guess he didn't want to go before the judge and get his butt chewed and neither did his attorney but they sure thought they were running the show for awhile. I wonder if George and Cindy fight over who has control in the home or if he just acts that way out of the home because he can and he can't at home. No wonder Casey and Lee turned out the way they did. Their parents are something else:furious:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
2,484
Total visitors
2,588

Forum statistics

Threads
632,727
Messages
18,631,001
Members
243,275
Latest member
twinmomming
Back
Top