2009.05.19. Casey Anthony Civil Hearing @ 10:00

[Chezhire]

It hasn't yet but potentially may due to the death penalty being back on the table. Expect a motion from Kasen soon. He brought it up at today's hearing.

I gotcha. That's what I thought you were thinking, but wanted to make sure to ask you first.

It will be a losing motion. Casey has no right, even facing the DP in a criminal trial, to "suspend" proceedings in the civil suit against her. Though Casey can, as a pratical matter, refuse to say a word on basis of the 5th Amendment, it will mean that ZG gets jury instructions that allow the jury to infer that evidence/testimony that Casey refused to give and/or to respond to are adverse to her position in the civil lawsuit. I've posted about this before, here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2959322&highlight=adverse+interest#post2959322.

Again, this is why there's no need for any separate suit against Cindy - best tactic is to amend the petition and add Cindy AND her insurance company as party defendants.

 

[NocturnalLady]

They should not be surprised that someone had the nerve to slap them down to reality. What they did in those depositions was outrageous. If I were on the civil jury I would award Miss Gonzales and her six children an obscene amount of money, so ensure that every penny of blood money made off of this murder would never remain in the Anthony family. I shudder to imagine the Anthonys moving into a big beautiful new home and living large off of media deals while Miss Gonzalez's children are being bullied and beat up at school over this.

:clap:

People like the A's always are surprised though aren't they?

And I still want to know where they are getting the money they live off of. I hope there is some way to pursue them over that...

 

[NocturnalLady]

Let me put the above in a bit of context: Morgan has offices in 3 states. It's difficult to get from point A to point B in Florida without passing a billboard or some other roadside advertising for Morgan and Morgan or to watch any local programming without seeing one of their commercials. He has billboards in Atlanta, for goodness sakes. He's not in this for the publicity. He's got more work and more publicity than he needs.

This is a relatively low dollar suit that even if it was taken solely out of sympathy for the plaintiff, would normally be relegated to a junior partner or associate. That Morgan himself and Mitnik himself are so hands on in this case speaks to a much bigger goal, imo. I don't think they're going to throw in the towel to collect a few thousand for ZFG. I think they want to get info for the criminal case and I also think they want to get to the bottom of the funding. I will be absolutely amazed if CA has a single supporter left when the funding issues see the light of day and I think Morgan will turn over every rock he possibly can to see to it that happens.

PREDICTION: Even those of us who already have a lower opinion of CA than we ever believed we could possibly have for anyone in her position will be shocked when/if the financial dealings come to light. We think we're appalled and disgusted now... just wait.

ITA - without a doubt I think we will find out things that will be absolutely repulsive. I really hope they do turn over every rock. I'm so sick of people getting away with the hide the money game.

 

[diz39]

I'm also 'getting' this time that Judge R has likely read & watched the earlier A depos.

Tater,
Wouldn't you have loved to have been a fly on the wall when he watched those depos? He seems very proper, follows the rules to the letter, and shows great respect and decorum from the bench. He must have been gobsmacked by what he saw, and probably very appalled that a legal proceeding could get so out of control.

 

[NocturnalLady]

Since the Anthony's new Foundation is an "INC", don't be too surprised to find them putting everything they own under that umbrella. It will be a separate entity - untouchable by creditors or
lawsuits.

I hope this isn't OT but - how is that so? I don't understand why the house, cars and other things that the A's owned before the Foundation can be protected by the Foundation. I understand that they can transfer ownership to the Foundation and try to hide assets that way but isn't that so transparent? Isn't it an obvious attempt at hiding assets and the court can go after them because it's not legal to do that?

Just trying to understand how this all will work...

 

[diz39]

I hope this isn't OT but - how is that so? I don't understand why the house, cars and other things that the A's owned before the Foundation can be protected by the Foundation. I understand that they can transfer ownership to the Foundation and try to hide assets that way but isn't that so transparent? Isn't it an obvious attempt at hiding assets and the court can go after them because it's not legal to do that?

Just trying to understand how this all will work...

I am so glad you asked that, because I was wondering, too. I may be wrong, but i was under the impression that if there was legal action going on that you could not hide assets or transfer them to another person.

 

[ThoughtElf]

Tater,
Wouldn't you have loved to have been a fly on the wall when he watched those depos? He seems very proper, follows the rules to the letter, and shows great respect and decorum from the bench. He must have been gobsmacked by what he saw, and probably very appalled that a legal proceeding could get so out of control.

Hey Diz :blowkiss:

You're so right.

I definitely get the feeling that Judge Rodriguez will be offended for the Court and Lady Justice if those type of antics begin in his courtroom. Somehow, I am picturing him with mouth agape?

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

I hope this isn't OT but - how is that so? I don't understand why the house, cars and other things that the A's owned before the Foundation can be protected by the Foundation. I understand that they can transfer ownership to the Foundation and try to hide assets that way but isn't that so transparent? Isn't it an obvious attempt at hiding assets and the court can go after them because it's not legal to do that?

Just trying to understand how this all will work...

I've been wondering the same thing. Perhaps I'm naive, but I would think BC would strongly caution the A's to be on the straight and narrow with all of their assets. Not only because of the pending defamation suit against their daughter, but also because they are attempting to fund their CMA foundation.

I would think any blanketing of their assets under the foundation would subject them to some type of fraud and the potential loss of the foundation.:waitasec:

 

[cecybeans]

Hey Diz :blowkiss:

You're so right.

I definitely get the feeling that Judge Rodriguez will be offended for the Court and Lady Justice if those type of antics begin in his courtroom. Somehow, I am picturing him with mouth agape?

He may have to be blindfolded, like Lady Justice herself, to avoid the assault on his sensibilities. Others present may need to cover their ears. (We, on the other hand, may need to be gagged...)

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

OMG! OMG! OMG!
Watched the video clear to the end and could not believe my eyes.
Go see for yourselves, what I see CA doing and I believe it is aimed at K. Belich, the reporter, and in a court of law, no less.
It is at 31:11-31:12 in the time frame of the video., it goes fast.(I'm so glad her "faith" is helping her through this ordeal)sarcasm and lots of it!
If I could do a screen shot without blowing the margins I would! If someone else could do it I would appreciate it!
http://www.wftv.com/video/19503363/index.html

 

[Mosby]

I disagree. It's called inappropriate anger and a refusal to accept responsibility, or have anyone in his family accept responsibility, for their behavior. With a good sized dose of paranoia thrown in. And a total disregard for the rights of others as well as the law.

ETA: :moo:

Long time lurker and my first post. Hope I'm doing everything right.

Just had thank you so much for expressing my exact feelings about this family. You nailed it so well.

 

[Chezhire]

Long time lurker and my first post. Hope I'm doing everything right.

Just had thank you so much for expressing my exact feelings about this family. You nailed it so well.

:Welcome-12-june:
Good to have you here, Mosby

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

OMG! OMG! OMG!
Watched the video clear to the end and could not believe my eyes.
Go see for yourselves, what I see CA doing and I believe it is aimed at K. Belich, the reporter, and in a court of law, no less.
It is at 31:11 in the time frame of the video.
(I'm so glad her "faith" is helping her through this ordeal)sarcasm and lots of it!
If I could do a screen shot without blowing the margins I would! If someone else could do it I would appreciate it!
http://www.wftv.com/video/19503363/index.html

Looks like she made some kind of hand gesture but it was just out of view of the camera for me. I can't get the timing right for a screen capture. It happens so quick. That face of what seems to be disgust isn't hard to miss though.

 

[ThoughtElf]

He may have to be blindfolded, like Lady Justice herself, to avoid the assault on his sensibilities. Others present may need to cover their ears. (We, on the other hand, may need to be gagged...)

We still get the Prozac and Ativan, too, right? RIGHT????

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

We still get the Prozac and Ativan, too, right? RIGHT????

A little Caaptain never hurts!

 

[cecybeans]

Long time lurker and my first post. Hope I'm doing everything right.

Just had thank you so much for expressing my exact feelings about this family. You nailed it so well.

Welcome Mosby! Be careful - WS is like eating potato chips - hard to stop.
:crazy:

 

[Chezhire]

SNIPPED: "... explain those differences between 'intentional tort' case, vs. 'negligence'.

I understand that they don't have to prove 'how negligent', which I took to mean that Morgan & Morgan might not have to show how deeply this has effected ZFG from a fiscal standpoint? i.e. the punitive damages won't be based on something like loss of income only?

Am I grokking that correctly?

What are the difference between an 'intentional tort' and 'negligent' cases?

TYIA"

Punitive damages are, in general, increases to the base damage award, usually by 2x's or 3x's, etc., (I haven't looked up FL's statute yet so...) Example: damages w/o punitives tacked on is $100,000, but with a statute allowing 2x's, it jumps to $200,000, 3x's to $300,000...you get the point.

Since a negligent action is generally one where there was no malicious intent on the part of the wrongdoer/tortfeasor, most states do not alloow punitive damage awards, as the wrongdoer didn't mean to harm the plaintiff.

However, most states do have statutes in place awarding punitive damages in certain, limited instances, including intentional torts, since the wrongdoer/tortfeasor intended to hurt the victim/plaintiff, and also in the areas of toxic waste (think Clean Air/Water Acts), other inherently dangerous things, etc.

In summation, it's a statutory difference that governs the level/degree of damages that are possible, and in FL, pursuant to FL Section 768.72, which I pulled from ZG's recently filed proffer, p. 4 of 8, here: http://www.forthepeople.com/Zenaida_Proffer_in_Support_of_Punitive_Damages.pdf, punitives are allowable for the intentional tort of libel/slander. The basic idea is to met out more severe punishment to those who intentionally cause harm to others than those who unintentionally cause harm to others.

 

[debs]

OMG! OMG! OMG!
Watched the video clear to the end and could not believe my eyes.
Go see for yourselves, what I see CA doing and I believe it is aimed at K. Belich, the reporter, and in a court of law, no less.
It is at 31:11-31:12 in the time frame of the video., it goes fast.(I'm so glad her "faith" is helping her through this ordeal)sarcasm and lots of it!
If I could do a screen shot without blowing the margins I would! If someone else could do it I would appreciate it!
http://www.wftv.com/video/19503363/index.html

She dinna do what you think she do. KB was already out the door and Cindy pointed (with her index finger ) at someone as she left.

 

[ThoughtElf]

OMG! OMG! OMG!
Watched the video clear to the end and could not believe my eyes.
Go see for yourselves, what I see CA doing and I believe it is aimed at K. Belich, the reporter, and in a court of law, no less.
It is at 31:11-31:12 in the time frame of the video., it goes fast.(I'm so glad her "faith" is helping her through this ordeal)sarcasm and lots of it!
If I could do a screen shot without blowing the margins I would! If someone else could do it I would appreciate it!
http://www.wftv.com/video/19503363/index.html

TRUTHY!!!!

OMELG! I even posted earlier that I thought she did a lil' wave at someone.

That wasn't a wave, that was a bird!

Good eye!

Note though, that KB had just walked out, so she's flipping off someone else. Mitnick?

 

[marla]

Before I even get started reading this thread, I just have to say, Cindy looked ready to kill ..
Brad and George didn't look much better ..

Now, I'll read the great reports I know you all gave! :blowkiss:

:seeya: