Tony Padilla Q&A

[Spangle]

The Judge could have asked for a recess and JB could have had the documents transported to the court. It is done all the time. I do not understand why it wasn't done? I just dont get it at all. It was not late in the day or anything?

It seemed to me that the Judge didn't need the document to make is call on the motion. So he didn't care if it was fake or not. As he said, what did it have to do with him?

As it stands, JB has to turn the original over to the SA. IF the SA still thinks there is something fishy, then it's to be reported to the Judge. I'm guessing that the only reason the Judge would want to know at that point, is because of fraud against the court.

The Judge doesn't feel the document (fake or not) is important enough to effect his ruling and will not hold up everyone's time for something he doesn't need. The document it's self is an issue to be resolved, separate from the motion.

That is the way I am seeing it.

 

[magic-cat]

In my opinion ..... one might think they could get away with this type of fraud especially when there is no copy of any other agreement to refute the document which was submitted with the Motion. The keeper of the Original separate agreement might think they can destroy it and nobody can prove it ever existed.

But if their is no original then the keeper of the original is going to have heap big trouble trying to explain all of this away. The original is going to have to have the notary seal on BOTH signatures on that same page for it to be legit, so I guess we will have to see what JB comes up with.

Forgive me I haven't read this whole thread. I know the important question is whether or not JB forged this agreement, But is the notory's name really "Gonzelez"? Geesh!!

MOO

Jose probably did that on purpose just to cause more of a stir...what are the odds of that anyway?

Is it possible that JB had the contracts made up ahead of time, with the signature pages looking the way the do now. Everyone signed, except TP, leaving his part blank. Then a new set was made for TP, which he did sign.

That would mean that only the section where he was suppose to sign, was covered with what he did sign. That would be the only section that would need to be 'copy and paste'. The numbers would all match, etc.

It would be what The others did sign, he just didn't sign it. IF they have a copy, it wouldn't include his signature, but it would include everyone elses. Showing, he didn't sign that agreement.

If that is what he did, then the orginal might be damaged from cutting and pasting.

I have had to do some of that when making layout, blue prints, etc. His signature section would have to be folded, or cut off of the paper, and taped onto a different paper. One that all ready has LP's signature on. Then the edges would have to be taped down, so it wouldn't show when it's photo copied.

IF that is what he did, then it would seem that he made the original contract void, by destroying the original. Leaving him and KC unprotected from LP, Tracy, etc.

Actually he could scan the document in and then make a copy and cut the signature from the copy to paste into his handiwork, thereby not damaging the original in any way.

He should come here and read more often. LOL

ETA: why didn't the prosecutor get in touch with him before Friday's hearing? (Perhaps, they did.) You would think they would have wanted to verify the contents with him. Also, news about the intent to bar the Padilla's and Tracy's testimony made national news. Even if the media hadn't made him aware before the hearing, they most certainly would have afterwards. Wasn't the motion just filed anyway?

The motion was dated July 16th.

 

[CuriousTwo]

It seemed to me that the Judge didn't need the document to make is call on the motion. So he didn't care if it was fake or not. As he said, what did it have to do with him?

As it stands, JB has to turn the original over to the SA. IF the SA still thinks there is something fishy, then it's to be reported to the Judge. I'm guessing that the only reason the Judge would want to know at that point, is because of fraud against the court.

The Judge doesn't feel the document (fake or not) is important enough to effect his ruling and will not hold up everyone's time for something he doesn't need. The document it's self is an issue to be resolved, separate from the motion.

That is the way I am seeing it.

Makes sense to me. Hopefully, this is all irrelevant.

 

[whiteangora]

When the handler is in Chicago and the dog is in Orlando, he's bound to slip his collar every now and then.

Methinks Jose needs constant supervision. Or a nanny.

You're funny!

 

[Marina2]

It seemed to me that the Judge didn't need the document to make is call on the motion. So he didn't care if it was fake or not. As he said, what did it have to do with him?

As it stands, JB has to turn the original over to the SA. IF the SA still thinks there is something fishy, then it's to be reported to the Judge. I'm guessing that the only reason the Judge would want to know at that point, is because of fraud against the court.

The Judge doesn't feel the document (fake or not) is important enough to effect his ruling and will not hold up everyone's time for something he doesn't need. The document it's self is an issue to be resolved, separate from the motion.

That is the way I am seeing it.

And if that's the case, the judge is going to rule in favor of the state. If his ruling were going JB's way, it would be because of the document JB produced and the judge would be interested in it's credibility.

 

[Spangle]

But if their is no original then the keeper of the original is going to have heap big trouble trying to explain all of this away. The original is going to have to have the notary seal on BOTH signatures on that same page for it to be legit, so I guess we will have to see what JB comes up with.

Jose probably did that on purpose just to cause more of a stir...what are the odds of that anyway?

Actually he could scan the document in and then make a copy and cut the signature from the copy to paste into his handiwork, thereby not damaging the original in any way.


The motion was dated July 16th.

It's a very common name in Florida. More commen the Smith, Jones, Brown, etc.

High School Home rooms which normally would be a-c in one room, d-g in another.. would have at least 1 whole room with that last name. Maybe 2 rooms.. I'm serious.

ETA: "the notory's name really "Gonzelez"?" I just noticed that my response didn't really explain what I was talking about.

 

[Marina2]

Makes sense to me. Hopefully, this is all irrelevant.

Maybe irrelevant to the motion but I think it should be investigated. If the document was forged and he's guilty of fraud it should be pursued and he should be disbarred.

 

[Spangle]

And if that's the case, the judge is going to rule in favor of the state. If his ruling were going JB's way, it would be because of the document JB produced and the judge would be interested in it's credibility.

IF JB was able to make his point, without the paper, then the Judge will rule for him.

But I don't think JB was able to prove that LP, TP, etc.. was preforming a LEGAL service. And I don't think the paper proved it either (which would be the only reason it would be needed)

I think the Judge is going to rule against JB on this one.

I just wonder if the Judge will wait until after JB has turned the original over to SA, to make sure all that plays out. Or if he will rule, and then JB will say it's a mute point to show the originals.. Then claim harassment if he is forced to show originals at that point.

 

[Spangle]

Maybe irrelevant to the motion but I think it should be investigated. If the document was forged and he's guilty of fraud it should be pursued and he should be disbarred.

Bingo!

My gosh! Just think, folks locked up and needing a real lawyer, this is the kind of trash they could end up with. He is like a scam artist. That guy in Polk county didn't have a chance with JB as his lawyer. Now he has to appeal and do it again with a different lawyer.

 

[lin]

Hi,

I've seen you ask this question a couple of times now. I think that the difference is that Tracy has not been in the public eye at all, spouting off what she knew or any kind of nonsense, etc. (and I'm neutral on LP). I don't even know what she looks like. I only recall Rob on TV at the beginning of things and don't know Tony at all until I read this thread, and these latter two seem credible to me.

Just because one of them is a media *advertiser censored*, IMO, does not taint the rest with credibility issues. They don't roam in a pack. If they were all spouting off at the mouth at every turn then I would have a problem with it. But ultimately, I still imagine that under oath they would all tell the truth and nothing but the truth. Unlike the As, who have proven themselves a pack of liars consistently, even under oath.

 

[Marina2]

IF JB was able to make his point, without the paper, then the Judge will rule for him.

But I don't think JB was able to prove that LP, TP, etc.. was preforming a LEGAL service. And I don't think the paper proved it either (which would be the only reason it would be needed)

I think the Judge is going to rule against JB on this one.

I just wonder if the Judge will wait until after JB has turned the original over to SA, to make sure all that plays out. Or if he will rule, and then JB will say it's a mute point to show the originals.. Then claim harassment if he is forced to show originals at that point.

You have JB pegged. He, no doubt, will wait for the judge's ruling before turning over any "originals". Then, they'll be a moot point. I hope the judge see's this coming and holds out on his ruling until the originals can be produced.

No worries though. I expect there will come a time when the FBA will want to see the original documents. I hope so anyway.

 

[magic-cat]

Thanks! That is GREAT information. Never knew how to do multi=quotes.

Another thing that will not help JB is that ther Padilla team has been on TV, spoken to the press, and has never been held to stringent confidentiality.

Judge S has already brought that up. JB's response,
"I was busy." For months and months and months, apparently.

Yep. The judge was pretty clear about this. It has not been addressed previously and IF the privacy agreement "held water" so to speak, then JB would have been kicking up his heels LONG before now...Horse is already out of the stall...is that the euphanism the judge used? And he also said something to the effect of why should HE be bound by that document, it was a matter for CIVIL COURT...

hey that's me with my Charger's contacts in and I was NOT wasted.

You are very pale and you have no eyelashes!


Tony, if you come back, we apologize for the bombardment...we needed to stretch our minds and you provided the equipment!:blowkiss:

 

[Friday]

Tony's favorable remarks about Casey show a lack of ill will toward her--which, in turn, lends some further credibility to his claim that JB has not produced the document TP signed. In other words, it somewhat proves that Tony is not anti-Defense or pro-prosecution.

I'm not saying this is the reason for his favorable remarks re KC, I'm just passing along an observation.

 

[pferrin]

Tony, when you arrive here again..

Welcome back.

As far as baez accusations that you worked for the defense..I think of it like this...when I borrowed money for the purchase of my home, I have never felt that I could boss around the folks at the bank ..they dont work for me...instead just grateful they loaned me the money. You loaned money.. they are not your bosses..instead should be grateful you loaned kc money to get out of jail.


That being said I have a couple of questions..thanks


I read that you said you give folks one chance..one shot and that is all you give..with that in mind...who would you not bond out if they ever needed....I mean from this case?

When you see them causing pain to others or obstruction of justice..how does this make you feel about folks that haven't done you wrong but have wronged others?

Would you take this case again given the chance?

 

[Friday]

I've followed mp cases for only a short time here. Haven't made it to the trial process yet in any of them (unfortunately...and it's been a year and a half). Is there always this much "drama"? I understand that Casey's life is it at stake here (not that I think they'll give her the dp), but then wouldn't you think that the last thing her attorney should be doing is calling so much negative attention to himself? How does his lack of credibility serve his client? They (the defense) repeatedly state that if it wasn't for the fact that the State brought back the dp they could have x,y, and z(d). Enough! They truly need to start taking this VERY seriously and quit all this BS. JMHO

Re my bold: Everytime the defense says that I think of KC who said she couldn't cooperate with LE in their search for her missing daughter because KC was in jail. LOL

 

[DotsEyes]

I have never and still do not keep any log or any copies of anything I notarize. Why? Because 1) I never notarize a signature that does not happen in front of me; 2) I never notarize a document that is not fully identitifed on each and every page with Page 1 of__, etc and initialed on each page (if not fully signed) and 3) never notarize just a signature on a page. I am fully confident that if my signature and seal appear on the page, all parties signed before me and the pages on the document are easily identifiable as belonging to the same document.

I never submit an original attached to a Motion. I keep the originals in my file at the office. Originals are submitted at trial. I always make a duplicate original for each party signing the document, marked "Duplicate Original", or at the very least a "True Copy" for them to keep in their personal file at home.

If JB has the original, he will be able to produce it.

In any event it isn't worth the ink to print it as far as keeping anyone from testifying in this matter.

Tracy ran up against this agreement earlier when LP leaked the "they haven't even found her clothes yet" statement. I assume that JB reminded her of her contract with him and that is why she needed legal advice at that time.

IF and I repeat IF JB fabricated this document, then he deserves whatever the Supreme Court of Florida throws at him for he has disgraced the most honorable of professions.

Unlike other professions, we will go after each other to weed out the unworthy.

Let's just sit back and see what JB does or does not produce. OK?

 

[CuriousTwo]

Makes sense to me. Hopefully, this is all irrelevant.

I should clarify ... I meant that I hope it's all irrelevant to the outcome of the case. Sorry - didn't mean to leave it so open-ended.

 

[ZsaZsa]

ZsaZsa,

When first meeting KC, do you think Tony should have known immediately that KC was a sociopath, and she was just acting or do you think when confronted with the particular question of what KC was like, he should've provided a composite of all the thoughts he was to later acquire?

Usually when LE questions someone about a particular moment in time, they're seeking exactly that person's impression of that moment in time, not some response from out in that person's future.

For Tony to characterize KC as being something other than what she revealed to him during that initial time period would technically be lying about that moment in time.

If that's the way KC presented herself, then that's the truth whether any of us like it or not.

It sounds to me like Tony came to see the real KC, so for me, I don't have a beef with that.

Well his first clue on meeting Casey, might have been that because he was bailing her out on a charge of Child Neglect and filing false statements in the investigation of her child's "disappearance" there was a good chance that she was not a very nice person! You think? . She was the only suspect in the Police investigation, video of her lying to Police was all over the news and talk shows, to saturation point, and it seems everyone but Tony and Lenny had at that stage made a fairly accurate assessment of the character of not only Casey but the entire family. Soon after release, Lenny saw this girl for the sociopath she was and started to regret the bond. Now TP says she was just a charming girl who made him dinner and pleasantries... Oh, you mean to say she was not distressed? - not desperate to find her child? -not grieving for her? - not sending out searchers for her? not contacting Equusearch to mount a search?- what she was doing was making mac n cheese and chit chatting. What would that tell ANY reasonable person about the personality of this girl?

 

[angeleleven]

Well his first clue on meeting Casey, might have been that because he was bailing her out on a charge of Child Neglect and filing false statements in the investigation of her child's "disappearance" there was a good chance that she was not a very nice person! You think? . She was the only suspect in the Police investigation, video of her lying to Police was all over the news and talk shows, to saturation point, and it seems everyone but Tony and Lenny had at that stage made a fairly accurate assessment of the character of not only Casey but the entire family. Soon after release, Lenny saw this girl for the sociopath she was and started to regret the bond. Now TP says she was just a charming girl who made him dinner and pleasantries... Oh, you mean to say she was not distressed? - not desperate to find her child? -not grieving for her? - not sending out searchers for her? not contacting Equusearch to mount a search?- what she was doing was making mac n cheese and chit chatting. What would that tell ANY reasonable person about the personality of this girl?

That's the way I see it, too....thank you for a great post.

 

[Spangle]

I have never and still do not keep any log or any copies of anything I notarize. Why? Because 1) I never notarize a signature that does not happen in front of me; 2) I never notarize a document that is not fully identitifed on each and every page with Page 1 of__, etc and initialed on each page (if not fully signed) and 3) never notarize just a signature on a page. I am fully confident that if my signature and seal appear on the page, all parties signed before me and the pages on the document are easily identifiable as belonging to the same document.

I never submit an original attached to a Motion. I keep the originals in my file at the office. Originals are submitted at trial. I always make a duplicate original for each party signing the document, marked "Duplicate Original", or at the very least a "True Copy" for them to keep in their personal file at home.

If JB has the original, he will be able to produce it.

In any event it isn't worth the ink to print it as far as keeping anyone from testifying in this matter.

Tracy ran up against this agreement earlier when LP leaked the "they haven't even found her clothes yet" statement. I assume that JB reminded her of her contract with him and that is why she needed legal advice at that time.

IF and I repeat IF JB fabricated this document, then he deserves whatever the Supreme Court of Florida throws at him for he has disgraced the most honorable of professions.

Unlike other professions, we will go after each other to weed out the unworthy.

Let's just sit back and see what JB does or does not produce. OK?

What I don't understand is how this document is suppose to prevent talking to the LE.

Such documents prevent persons from going out and talking. But if point blank asked by LE, that document doesn't allow them to avoid talking to the LE.

The Secret Service was once believed to be relieved of such questioning, but Clinton's detail was required to set for Questioning. The SS fought it. Not to protect the Clintons, but because of the nature of their job. they always have problems getting the 'new President' use to the idea of having them around full time, no matter what. Same with the wives and families. No privacy, etc. The SS wanted to continue to ensure first familys that their privacy was kept, even if they were around. This would prevent the familys from trying to sneak away from their SS detail.

The SS was forced to be questioned.

my point is, even if they signed privacy documents, they can still be force to testify. The only persons the court can not force, is the lawyer. Which is why JB was trying to show 'legal' service. So the court couldn't force Tracy to testify.