Defense Witness List-where's the "full story"?

[SuziQ]

Well, we know there is no way they will put Kc on the stand and we know they have to be very careful what gets introduced, so I am at a loss too.

Geragos did the same thing in the SP trial. Specifically the traveling van of hippies. He even spoke of them in his opening remarks. But the hippies were never mentioned again because you can't argue a fantasy. You have to have a real person. The defense can raise reasonable doubt, but the jury, like you and I are going to want to know if not KC, then WHO? So who is Baez and Casey going to throw under the bus?

 

[DotsEyes]

The requirement for names, addresses etc. may be a local rule - but he should brush up on the local rules, for pete's sake.

The form of the Motion is never more important than it's substance. Having to re-do filings is not indicative of the litigator's skills, knowledge or competence in court or whether the defendant got effective assistance of counsel. The point of submitting a list of witnesses is to let the court know how many witnesses to expect. "All persons listed on the State's witness list" is sufficient for it's purpose. It just isn't in the proper format (which is really to make it easier on the courthouse staff), so he has to get someone to type it up again, with specific names and addresses, taken right off of the form filed by the State. Form over function, it makes no sense. It is just easier for the clerks so they do not have to cross reference the 2 documents.

 

[SuziQ]

Horrifying, isn't it? I hope none of those law students of his move up to my neck of the woods. We have enough of a legal backlog around here!!!

I can't imagine who's brilliant idea it was to hire Baez.

 

[shadow of my mind]

What's scary is JB is now teaching prodecural lessons to law students. He's the least qualified I've seen to teach this. He has no clue as to jurisdictions (hello? FBI vs local LE) or legal protocol. You would think a witness list would be defense atty 101.

I saw the thread. JB is not there to teach. It's to get free clerical help in putting his case together. It is obvious from what we have seen so far that he doesn't even site past case in his motions. He wants everyone else to do his work for him. To me that says Laziness veiled in Arrogance

 

[SuziQ]

I saw the thread. JB is not there to teach. It's to get free clerical help in putting his case together. It is obvious from what we have seen so far that he doesn't even site past case in his motions. He wants everyone else to do his work for him. To me that says Laziness veiled in Arrogance

Ahhhh, that makes more sense, given what we know of JB. lol.

 

[PGWodehouse]

I saw the thread. JB is not there to teach. It's to get free clerical help in putting his case together. It is obvious from what we have seen so far that he doesn't even site past case in his motions. He wants everyone else to do his work for him. To me that says Laziness veiled in Arrogance

Oh good god. I should have realized it would be something like that.

 

[mysteriew]

After the State puts on the Zanny material from KC's mouth and statement regarding June 9th, I suppose JB could try the "Officer, you knew my client was lying, correct? Good, then we need not discuss any more of her lying. You do not know with 100% certainty that my client killed Caylee, do you? (No one can say yes to this, they all say 'based on the evidence, blah, blah, blah it is my belief that she did.) All you really know is that she lied BOTH times you spoke to her, correct? You do not know the truth, do you? And, am I safe to assume that you have not spoken to her since July 16, 2008? Therefore, would it be correct to assume that you do not know what she has said since that time regarding a terrible drowning accident in the family pool? Thank you."

9 million objections later, it would be striken, but the jury would have heard it. One thing that you can not do is make people forget; disregard it, yes. But they never forget it.

Harp on how no one has heard the accidental drowning story. Every witness gets a drowning story. It can't be disproven now. There is no cause of death. They have CA and GA with the ladder in the pool/gate open on June 17th, the neighbor who CA said heard someone in the pool during the day on the 16th, the swim suit that was first announced as having been found with the body, (where did the swimsuit go, btw?)

JB's best bet is to admit on KC's behalf that it was all an accident and a mentally disturbed mother whose own mother tried to choke her to death before throwing her out to the wolves to fend for herself and her baby, KNOWING she had no job or Nanny to help her and then both parents turning their backs to her, refusing to even take her calls when she needed them most. Completely dependant on her parents for all support, she was unable to figure out what to do on her own and became a person no one recognizes in order to cope with everything tumbling in at once. No money, no gas, no where to stay, she had to steal from her friends and mooch off of everyone for a spot to stay overnight. She was able to block the event so completely that she only remembered it recently, but is too afraid to speak after all her lies, because there is no reason for anyone to believe her now.

I think you may have hit it on the head. All of it, but esp. the bolded part. And it will be hard for the state to disprove, unless they have real good evidence that it was premeditated.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

See the doc dump and state's newest motion- JB listed his witnesses as duplicate of the state's witness list, without specifically naming individuals.....It's under the 3rd name on his witness list. The sate has filed a motion to make him name the individuals specifically that he plans to call, and cited precedent. Will try to find the link

eta- here's the link -

State of Florida's Motion to Strike Defense Witness List Jan 22, 2009

http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFil...a's Motion to Strike Defense Witness List.pdf

it's on the sticky for media, posted yesterday

I was aware of this and read this motion before my post. That is not part of the defense's witness list in reality. Both criminal and civil defense attorneys do this alot just to cover all bases--and when they do not know yet who they will call as witnesses. Before trial it is always stricken for one simple reason: the purpose of the witness list is to actually let the opposing side know who your witnesses are so that they can determine whether or not to depose them or investigate them more throughly or question them on certain issues before trial. That is not feasible when you incorporate the opposing side's entire witness list into your own. So, in actuality, from a legal standpoint, the defense has only listed three witnesses.

 

[shadow of my mind]

After the State puts on the Zanny material from KC's mouth and statement regarding June 9th, I suppose JB could try the "Officer, you knew my client was lying, correct? Good, then we need not discuss any more of her lying. You do not know with 100% certainty that my client killed Caylee, do you? (No one can say yes to this, they all say 'based on the evidence, blah, blah, blah it is my belief that she did.) All you really know is that she lied BOTH times you spoke to her, correct? You do not know the truth, do you? And, am I safe to assume that you have not spoken to her since July 16, 2008? Therefore, would it be correct to assume that you do not know what she has said since that time regarding a terrible drowning accident in the family pool? Thank you."

9 million objections later, it would be striken, but the jury would have heard it. One thing that you can not do is make people forget; disregard it, yes. But they never forget it.

Harp on how no one has heard the accidental drowning story. Every witness gets a drowning story. It can't be disproven now. There is no cause of death. They have CA and GA with the ladder in the pool/gate open on June 17th, the neighbor who CA said heard someone in the pool during the day on the 16th, the swim suit that was first announced as having been found with the body, (where did the swimsuit go, btw?)

JB's best bet is to admit on KC's behalf that it was all an accident and a mentally disturbed mother whose own mother tried to choke her to death before throwing her out to the wolves to fend for herself and her baby, KNOWING she had no job or Nanny to help her and then both parents turning their backs to her, refusing to even take her calls when she needed them most. Completely dependant on her parents for all support, she was unable to figure out what to do on her own and became a person no one recognizes in order to cope with everything tumbling in at once. No money, no gas, no where to stay, she had to steal from her friends and mooch off of everyone for a spot to stay overnight. She was able to block the event so completely that she only remembered it recently, but is too afraid to speak after all her lies, because there is no reason for anyone to believe her now.

I think you may have hit it on the head. All of it, but esp. the bolded part. And it will be hard for the state to disprove, unless they have real good evidence that it was premeditated.

Bolded by me and Mysteriew

Then why not plead her out. I would think that the SA office would be happy to consider that. It puts Casey in jail, less than life, but is does insure them of getting a reasonable sentence minus the cost of a trial.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

The requirement for names, addresses etc. may be a local rule - but he should brush up on the local rules, for pete's sake.

The form of the Motion is never more important than it's substance. Having to re-do filings is not indicative of the litigator's skills, knowledge or competence in court or whether the defendant got effective assistance of counsel. The point of submitting a list of witnesses is to let the court know how many witnesses to expect. "All persons listed on the State's witness list" is sufficient for it's purpose. It just isn't in the proper format (which is really to make it easier on the courthouse staff), so he has to get someone to type it up again, with specific names and addresses, taken right off of the form filed by the State. Form over function, it makes no sense. It is just easier for the clerks so they do not have to cross reference the 2 documents.

Loved your post on what to expect the defense to be. However, it is incorrect that the purpose of the witness list is so it is known how many witnesses will be testifying. The judge doesn't rely on the witness list at all for that purpose because it doesn't matter to the judge how many witnesses are called. At pre-trial the judge will simply ask each side how long they think it will take them to put on their case. The judge will also use the final witness list to show to the jury in order to ascertain whether any potential jurors know anyone on the witness lists. Other thatn that the witness list is a very important substantive procedure. See my prior post re the reason for the witness list. A witness not included on a witness list is generally not permitted to testify unless there was a very compelling reason for not including them on the list, i.e. you just found out about them.

 

[mysteriew]

Bolded by me and Mysteriew

Then why not plead her out. I would think that the SA office would be happy to consider that. It puts Casey in jail, less than life, but is does insure them of getting a reasonable sentence minus the cost of a trial.

First she only needs one juror to block a conviction. She is young white and reasonably good looking which means the jury will be somewhat predisposed to offer her some doubt or lienency. So the defense will offer up an alternate story, one that is most likely to gain some sympathy for KC, and maybe be less likely to convict if they thought that it wasn't something done on purpose. An accident of some type + KC blocking it out might be enough to convince a juror to lessen the charge or even outright deadlock the jury.

And a plea is final, there is no chance at aquittal. Also the right to appeal is lost. Besides I know JB was asking for a plea deal before Caylee's remains were found, but I never heard that the state ever offered a deal to her. So it could very well be that she was never given an opportunity to plead out.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

First she only needs one juror to block a conviction. She is young white and reasonably good looking which means the jury will be somewhat predisposed to offer her some doubt or lienency. So the defense will offer up an alternate story, one that is most likely to gain some sympathy for KC, and maybe be less likely to convict if they thought that it wasn't something done on purpose. An accident of some type + KC blocking it out might be enough to convince a juror to lessen the charge or even outright deadlock the jury.

And a plea is final, there is no chance at aquittal. Also the right to appeal is lost. Besides I know JB was asking for a plea deal before Caylee's remains were found, but I never heard that the state ever offered a deal to her. So it could very well be that she was never given an opportunity to plead out.

How do you know JB was looking for a plea? I don't recall hearing that--but then again it's almost impossible to keep up with everything!

 

[mysteriew]

How do you know JB was looking for a plea? I don't recall hearing that--but then again it's almost impossible to keep up with everything!

It's in this mess somewhere, maybe about Nov. but I know it was before the remains were found. He wrote an email to the state's attorney requesting the DP be taken off the table and hinted about an accidental death. IMO he was testing the waters for a plea. It wasn't long after that the state took the DP off the table. And a little while after that Caylee's remains were found.

 

[cocoamom]

First she only needs one juror to block a conviction. She is young white and reasonably good looking which means the jury will be somewhat predisposed to offer her some doubt or lienency. So the defense will offer up an alternate story, one that is most likely to gain some sympathy for KC, and maybe be less likely to convict if they thought that it wasn't something done on purpose. An accident of some type + KC blocking it out might be enough to convince a juror to lessen the charge or even outright deadlock the jury.

And a plea is final, there is no chance at aquittal. Also the right to appeal is lost. Besides I know JB was asking for a plea deal before Caylee's remains were found, but I never heard that the state ever offered a deal to her. So it could very well be that she was never given an opportunity to plead out.

Not great on legal-eze here - so if she pleads "not guilty" and one juror "blocks the conviction", what happens? Hung jury? Sorry if I sound stupid here...

 

[TakeNote]

After the State puts on the Zanny material from KC's mouth and statement regarding June 9th, I suppose JB could try the "Officer, you knew my client was lying, correct? Good, then we need not discuss any more of her lying. You do not know with 100% certainty that my client killed Caylee, do you? (No one can say yes to this, they all say 'based on the evidence, blah, blah, blah it is my belief that she did.) All you really know is that she lied BOTH times you spoke to her, correct? You do not know the truth, do you? And, am I safe to assume that you have not spoken to her since July 16, 2008? Therefore, would it be correct to assume that you do not know what she has said since that time regarding a terrible drowning accident in the family pool? Thank you."

9 million objections later, it would be striken, but the jury would have heard it. One thing that you can not do is make people forget; disregard it, yes. But they never forget it.

Harp on how no one has heard the accidental drowning story. Every witness gets a drowning story. It can't be disproven now. There is no cause of death. They have CA and GA with the ladder in the pool/gate open on June 17th, the neighbor who CA said heard someone in the pool during the day on the 16th, the swim suit that was first announced as having been found with the body, (where did the swimsuit go, btw?)

JB's best bet is to admit on KC's behalf that it was all an accident and a mentally disturbed mother whose own mother tried to choke her to death before throwing her out to the wolves to fend for herself and her baby, KNOWING she had no job or Nanny to help her and then both parents turning their backs to her, refusing to even take her calls when she needed them most. Completely dependant on her parents for all support, she was unable to figure out what to do on her own and became a person no one recognizes in order to cope with everything tumbling in at once. No money, no gas, no where to stay, she had to steal from her friends and mooch off of everyone for a spot to stay overnight. She was able to block the event so completely that she only remembered it recently, but is too afraid to speak after all her lies, because there is no reason for anyone to believe her now.

so JB can throw these ideas out there, just by asking those type of questions to the state witnesses? wow that maybe just what he does...makes since why he hasnt done a plea...and hasnt let KC have any visitors....he only needs one jurior to have sympathy towards KC.....

:clap: NICE POST really gets me thinking on what could go down, and what the state needs to prepare for

 

[SoCalSleuth]

Not great on legal-eze here - so if she pleads "not guilty" and one juror "blocks the conviction", what happens? Hung jury? Sorry if I sound stupid here...

If the jury "hangs" then the court declares a mistrial and the jury is dismissed from service. The Prosecution has the choice of either putting a plea on the table or re-trying the case. Convictions on second trials are very high because the prosecution learns from its mistakes.

 

[Voice4theSilent]

After the State puts on the Zanny material from KC's mouth and statement regarding June 9th, I suppose JB could try the "Officer, you knew my client was lying, correct? Good, then we need not discuss any more of her lying. You do not know with 100% certainty that my client killed Caylee, do you? (No one can say yes to this, they all say 'based on the evidence, blah, blah, blah it is my belief that she did.) All you really know is that she lied BOTH times you spoke to her, correct? You do not know the truth, do you? And, am I safe to assume that you have not spoken to her since July 16, 2008? Therefore, would it be correct to assume that you do not know what she has said since that time regarding a terrible drowning accident in the family pool? Thank you."

9 million objections later, it would be striken, but the jury would have heard it. One thing that you can not do is make people forget; disregard it, yes. But they never forget it.

Harp on how no one has heard the accidental drowning story. Every witness gets a drowning story. It can't be disproven now. There is no cause of death. They have CA and GA with the ladder in the pool/gate open on June 17th, the neighbor who CA said heard someone in the pool during the day on the 16th, the swim suit that was first announced as having been found with the body, (where did the swimsuit go, btw?)

JB's best bet is to admit on KC's behalf that it was all an accident and a mentally disturbed mother whose own mother tried to choke her to death before throwing her out to the wolves to fend for herself and her baby, KNOWING she had no job or Nanny to help her and then both parents turning their backs to her, refusing to even take her calls when she needed them most. Completely dependant on her parents for all support, she was unable to figure out what to do on her own and became a person no one recognizes in order to cope with everything tumbling in at once. No money, no gas, no where to stay, she had to steal from her friends and mooch off of everyone for a spot to stay overnight. She was able to block the event so completely that she only remembered it recently, but is too afraid to speak after all her lies, because there is no reason for anyone to believe her now.

...except her attorneys will have to defend why she then placed duct tape over her daughter's mouth, but a heart sticker over the tape, put her in a garbage bag and threw her in the woods by the side of the road. Further, she is not insane and they will have an impossible time proving she "blocked" anything from her memory (especially without any psychologists listed as witnesses for the Defense.) No jury will buy it. IMHO.

 

[mysteriew]

...except her attorneys will have to defend why she then placed duct tape over her daughter's mouth, but a heart sticker over the tape, put her in a garbage bag and threw her in the woods by the side of the road. Further, she is not insane and they will have an impossible time proving she "blocked" anything from her memory (especially without any psychologists listed as witnesses for the Defense.) No jury will buy it. IMHO.

Very true. But remember the defense will be aiming at the "poor girl lost it" she didn't know what to do, she was afraid she would be blamed, she was confused, she tried to make it look like someone else did it.

Most juror's won't fall for it. But if even one does then it's a problem.

Yes, if it is a hung jury the state has the options of either a plea deal or a retrial. But when you factor in the cost of a new trial, it is a burden on the state and one they take seriously. That is why in a lost cause guilty client case, the defense will often take this tactic. And there is always the possibility that they will convince the jury that the state didn't make their case and that there is some reasonable doubt as to what happened. Which is something to take seriously in a case where the state cannot prove a cause of death.

 

[Voice4theSilent]

Very true. But remember the defense will be aiming at the "poor girl lost it" she didn't know what to do, she was afraid she would be blamed, she was confused, she tried to make it look like someone else did it.

Most juror's won't fall for it. But if even one does then it's a problem.

Yes, if it is a hung jury the state has the options of either a plea deal or a retrial. But when you factor in the cost of a new trial, it is a burden on the state and one they take seriously. That is why in a lost cause guilty client case, the defense will often take this tactic. And there is always the possibility that they will convince the jury that the state didn't make their case and that there is some reasonable doubt as to what happened. Which is something to take seriously in a case where the state cannot prove a cause of death.

No way it will happen. If the Defense admits she did it for whatever reason, she is cooked. Again, the Defense would have to prove she "lost it", which they can't. The best bet JB has is to defend his client like Geragos defended Scott P...and we all know how well that worked out (with even less evidence against him!) Motive, opportunity, means, etc....the Prosecutor's case is solid. No way she will walk. IMHO.

 

[Macushla]

Very true. But remember the defense will be aiming at the "poor girl lost it" she didn't know what to do, she was afraid she would be blamed, she was confused, she tried to make it look like someone else did it.

Most juror's won't fall for it. But if even one does then it's a problem.

Yes, if it is a hung jury the state has the options of either a plea deal or a retrial. But when you factor in the cost of a new trial, it is a burden on the state and one they take seriously. That is why in a lost cause guilty client case, the defense will often take this tactic. And there is always the possibility that they will convince the jury that the state didn't make their case and that there is some reasonable doubt as to what happened. Which is something to take seriously in a case where the state cannot prove a cause of death.

If JB is looking for a mistrial and a plea offer from the state in lieu of a second trial - I think he is making a huge mistake.

He has REALLY annoyed just about everyone on the other side, and this case has incensed, inflamed, and just plain angered so many people. IF the state even considered a plea to anything less than murder, rather than a second trial, I think you will hear the howls of outrage even if you are on the moon!

I think the state has a good case and I am confident they will get a conviction. I am also confident that in the unlikely event there is a mistrial - the State will turn around a set a date for the second trial within minutes of dismissal of the first jury.