Casey Anthony Answers Questions In Civil Suit Or Did JB? Legal Implications

New Posts

LisaNY said:
No legal expertise here, but I feel she can't answer any of these questions because they still do not know what defense they are going with.

"Were you involved in the death of Caylee?" question 17 asks."The defendant would object to the question and would move to strike it. This question is being brought solely to embarrass, harass and brought in an attempt to implicate the Defendant in an on-going criminal prosecution for First (1st) Degree Murder," Casey responded.
The document was signed by Casey and dated February 25.

If KC answers Q17 with "No" then she cannot go back and say it was accidental.
If she answers "yes" we all know what that implies.

If they knew which way they were going to plead her defense in the criminal case, then I think these questions could possibly help her case, to some degree. Which is why I believe LE has so much more, and is releasing it ever so slowly. I am sure at trial time we will not be disappointed. SA's will have plenty of "bombshells" in their arsenal for a conviction.

Always, just my thoughts & opinions.
Click to expand...

Good points you make, LisaNY. Defending Casey is sort of like trying to hit a moving target, especially with all the different (and sometimes conflicting) stories she (and her family) has spun.
 
capoly said:
:waitasec: That's a yes/no question. Why the need for righteous indignation when a simple 'no' would suffice?

God bless, Caylee.
Click to expand...


She has to answer with objection or 5th otherwise the 5th goes out the window if you answer any other question besides your name.
 
MAMABEAR said:
Congrates! I was thinkin last night, I would like to see about posting 2 post. And here you pop with 3.
CUTE POST
Click to expand...


:Banane23::blushingsmiley:

Keep trying MamaBear, you'll get it.

:pcguru: I got it instantly. It took me only about 6 months.:blowkiss:
 
MiraclesHappen said:
Phew.:iamashamed0005:
I was going to get some bubble wrap to do an emergency repair.

Yup, there's still the rest of the family.:popcorn: Also waiting with baited breath.

Would somebody just ANSWER SOMETHING! Preview of coming attractions with the Lee Depo was sooooo enticing.

JMHO as always, :smiliescale:MH &:wolf:
I am taking a stand however, that I am very proud of my multi-quoting success.
Click to expand...

MAMABEAR said:
Congrates! I was thinkin last night, I would like to see about posting 2 post. And here you pop with 3.
CUTE POST
Click to expand...

It took me awhile to learn how to multi-post as well. And I would be embarrassed to tell you how long it was before I figured out what "Bump" meant.
 
I cannot see the legality of ZG's attorney asking Casey if she was involved in the murder of Caylee... that should not be allowed, it should be left to the criminal trial.
Neither Mr. Morgan or the other guy has any business asking her those questions, that goes beyond his scope of things, he's not a criminal lawyer anyway.
 
MiraclesHappen said:
The Rules of Procedure allow the Judge to order her to answer and provide sanctions against her if she still refuses.

She could be ordered to pay the attorney's fees for an amount reasonably charged for doing that motion to compel to begin with.

But really, how worried would Casey be?

If they impose the harshest penalty relative to refusal to obey an order to answer, she will be deemed in contempt of court. Oh, she could be jailed.
How worried is she about being sent to jail right now?

Of course, refusal to answer could affect her own rights to introduce evidence in her counter suit but that's basically Bull to begin with so again, not a huge loss.

Frustrating at best...

But her attorneys do need to be cautious, as they do have ethical obligations to comply and play fair to a certain degree.

:smiliescale: :wolf:
my opinion...
Click to expand...

The fact of the matter is that the Judge cannot make KC answer any question that may, in any way, implicate her in a crime.

That particular question can only be answered by KC taking the 5th. Because the question, "Were you involved in the death of Caylee?" would incriminate her, she would and could only take the 5th. Now, if her attorney was unaware of her involvment and she wanted to answer "No" she could. But we know that's not going to happen. Besides no one would believe anyway.

In my opinion, Baez wants the question to go away completely and then the jury will not hear her take the 5th which is just as good as saying "yeah, i did it but i won't say i did it"

It comes down to the fact that she either incriminates herself or takes the 5th and neither one of those scenarios is good. But if JB can convince the court that the question should be stricken then everyone will be happy......except KC 'cause she's NEVER gonna be happy AGAIN.....:woohoo:
 
lacey clementine said:
It took me awhile to learn how to multi-post as well. And I would be embarrassed to tell you how long it was before I figured out what "Bump" meant.
Click to expand...


LOL .... me too! At first I thought it was playing, you know like bumping someone, stupid me. It took me months before I found out that it actually served a purpose. :)
 
Wow. On pages 8 and 9 of 11 there is some very interesting info. In Lee's deposition he made it very clear that the Zenaida that had Caylee had NO children according to what Casey told them and her statement to the police, but according to HER countersuit against Zenaida she states plainly that the Zenaida who had Caylee has 2 children...

RUH ROH!
 
I think he asked her a few HARD questions like that for which an answer of the 5th ammendment would be MOST appropriate in order to HIGHLIGHT the other questions, for which there would be no logical or reasonable explanation TO plead the 5th. I mean, reading her own statement and then asking her if that is what she said...Well, duh-it's right there in her statement so what is the use to deny it when it is RECORDED that she in fact said that. Now some of the other parts, like, which part was true of that statement that you made and which parts were untrue...THEN a refusal on the grounds of the 5th is REASONABLE...but she should have answered some of those that were "Here's your sign" type questions. I think it was a tactic-for emphasis of her refusal to answer to even the most basic of truths.
 
Casey Anthony Answers Questions In Civil Suit

http://www.wftv.com/news/18853067/detail.html#-


Out of 29 questions, she answered two:

What is your name?
and
"Were you involved in the death of Caylee?" (#17)

Her answer?
"The defendant would object to the question and would move to strike it. This question is being brought solely to embarrass, harass and brought in an attempt to implicate the Defendant in an on-going criminal prosecution for First (1st) Degree Murder."

Yeah, sure, like those words came directly from Casey's head. Of course her attorney/s wrote it out for her so she could copy it. :bang:

What a mockery KC and her attorneys are making of the justice system! It's terrible how little Caylee matters to any of them. Who cares about the truth of what happened to Caylee as long as Casey is saved from prison and the death penalty.


Casey Anthony Pleads 5th On Caylee Questionnaire

http://www.wesh.com/caseyanthony/18854442/detail.html
 
I hope ZG's lawyers will get a smackdown by the judge. Was the question "Is this woman the ZG you claim took your child?" even ON the deposition questionnaire? Any other question is IRRELEVANT!
 
debs said:
I hope ZG's lawyers will get a smackdown by the judge. Was the question "Is this woman the ZG you claim took your child?" even ON the deposition questionnaire? Any other question is IRRELEVANT!
Click to expand...

What is it that ZG's lawyers are doing that would merit :trout:?


I kinda think they deserve :applause: and a community service award.


Humble Opinion is above :wolf:
 
What happened is the logical and expected result from the judge's original non-decision decision, I think. Casey is entitled to take the 5th in the civil case to protect her interests in the criminal case. That doesn't mean that her doing so won't or constitutionally can't have adverse consequences for her in the civil case.

She's probably overdone it here, given that she has discussed ZG with LE and her family at length. She could repeat it under oath in the civil case, no harm no foul. She's the one with firsthand knowledge who brought the name ZG into this and who can take it out, but she chooses not to.

It doesn't do much good to say there should be one little "is this THE ZG" question, then everyone packs it up and goes home, when KC won't even answer that question.

I can't see the judge, though maybe he will, parsing through the questions and answers, looking at her former testimony, ordering her to answer bits and pieces. It's too dangerous in regard to the 5th amendment, like KC or not. But we'll see if he does, lets it go on for a few more rounds, before being back where he started. Her counterclaim should go soon if she continues to provide no information. I won't be surprised if eventually he stays the plaintiff's claim, rather than impose sanctions on KC and enter a judgment against her.
 
magic-cat said:
Wow. On pages 8 and 9 of 11 there is some very interesting info. In Lee's deposition he made it very clear that the Zenaida that had Caylee had NO children according to what Casey told them and her statement to the police, but according to HER countersuit against Zenaida she states plainly that the Zenaida who had Caylee has 2 children...

RUH ROH!
Click to expand...

I knew there were conflicting stories regarding this out there, told by Miss Casey herself. Hopefully she has dug herself into a big hole.
 
amethyst221 said:
What happened is the logical and expected result from the judge's original non-decision decision, I think. Casey is entitled to take the 5th in the civil case to protect her interests in the criminal case. That doesn't mean that her doing so won't or constitutionally can't have adverse consequences for her in the civil case.

She's probably overdone it here, given that she has discussed ZG with LE and her family at length. She could repeat it under oath in the civil case, no harm no foul. She's the one with firsthand knowledge who brought the name ZG into this and who can take it out, but she chooses not to.

It doesn't do much good to say there should be one little "is this THE ZG" question, then everyone packs it up and goes home, when KC won't even answer that question.

I can't see the judge, though maybe he will, parsing through the questions and answers, looking at her former testimony, ordering her to answer bits and pieces. It's too dangerous in regard to the 5th amendment, like KC or not. But we'll see if he does, lets it go on for a few more rounds, before being back where he started. Her counterclaim should go soon if she continues to provide no information. I won't be surprised if eventually he stays the plaintiff's claim, rather than impose sanctions on KC and enter a judgment against her.
Click to expand...


Just wanted to say thank you kindly, Amethyst, for your clear, understandable explanations. They really help in explaining the legal matters.

One more quick question. What about the senior Anthonys? What will happen to them if the outright refuse to answer the deposition questions? Fines? Jail? What can the courts do to them?
 
magic-cat said:
I think he asked her a few HARD questions like that for which an answer of the 5th ammendment would be MOST appropriate in order to HIGHLIGHT the other questions, for which there would be no logical or reasonable explanation TO plead the 5th. I mean, reading her own statement and then asking her if that is what she said...Well, duh-it's right there in her statement so what is the use to deny it when it is RECORDED that she in fact said that. Now some of the other parts, like, which part was true of that statement that you made and which parts were untrue...THEN a refusal on the grounds of the 5th is REASONABLE...but she should have answered some of those that were "Here's your sign" type questions. I think it was a tactic-for emphasis of her refusal to answer to even the most basic of truths.
Click to expand...

Sounds logical, magic-cat. Yup, me thinks a BIG hole she dug this time!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 58 more.
Total: 3,531 (members: 59, guests: 3,472)

Online statistics

Members online
59
Guests online
3,472
Total visitors
3,531
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,847
Messages
17,993,905
Members
229,258
Latest member
momoxbunny
Back
Top