wundermommy76
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2011
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 0
Oh this is so painful.....SO painful to watch.....someone needs to arrest Baez for posing as a lawyer....
2011.06.21 TRIAL Day Twenty-four (Morning Session)
- Thread starter beach
- Start date
- Status
Soulmagent
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 9,200
- Reaction score
- 9,839
JB:
the opinion for the computer useage on this day was not included on the report. thus violating the order.
the opinion for the computer useage on this day was not included on the report. thus violating the order.
Stella5
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 2,104
- Reaction score
- -19
How can this be new evidence when this was given to you? What you chose to do with it is your bidness! I <3 HHJP!!!
Jose: "But, but... I was too busy making thousands of media appearances, hanging with Geraldo on his boat, and getting pocket squares to actually do my job judge"
Jose: "But, but... I was too busy making thousands of media appearances, hanging with Geraldo on his boat, and getting pocket squares to actually do my job judge"
waltzingmatilda
Verified Insider-Roy Moore
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,718
- Reaction score
- 712
HHJP: ya'll can go on as long as you want to , but remember we are starting back at 1:30, LOL!!!!
wm
wm
mombomb
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
- Messages
- 1,437
- Reaction score
- -3
ARGUMENT BY JB
Today they received discovery by the State. In a rough review, it appears many of the documents were items that have just recently come up and certainly beyond the state's control. With the exception of one CD dealing with material from the A's home computer 6/16/08. Report was competed on 4/16/08 (?) after computer experts have already testified. He also noted photos of internet searches of shot girls which may have been viewed on the computer. He found it interesting because during FG he referred to ICA's advice on clothing of shot girls which leads him to believe they had prior knowledge. They had the computer since July 16, 2008 and now he receives the report. JB objects to any presentation relating to these items - computer items - and requests a Richardson hearing.
LDB: The first several items deal with a brief investigation that was conducted at the end of last week. A citizen called the OCSO about an inmate may have had contact with ICA in the jail. That was investigated last week, a report was generated, a phone statement was taken and she received this info yesterday.
Ms. Wayland's son drown, CPR -911 - Ms. Wayland indicates she did not talk to Ms. Anthony at the time. As soon as she received info that Ms. Wayland's son did pass away in the incident, this info was provided to JB.
Next item - filtered copy of data from hard drive that JB has had for years to be used in rebuttal if ICA or another witness were to testify about certain activities on June 16. A lot would rebut JB's OS. If they are going to use a demonstrative aid in rebuttal or ICA's cross examination, she wanted to give this to JB>
HHJB: This is contained in 6/21 notice of additional discovery? Items 1-6 have to do with Ms. April Wayland?
LDB: Yes, provided to her last Thursday, Friday or Saturday and she received the written reports on Saturday.
HHJB: Then delivered to JB?
LDB: Yes
HHJB: #7 is a demonstrative aid of an item previously given to defense?
LDB: Defendant's expert examined hard drive over 2 years ago. She provided this so as not to suffer consequences.
April Wayland - probably not use her as a witness, but there may be something suitable for rebuttal. They continue to get additional information on a regular basis.
HHJBP: Items #1-6 additional comments JB? JB: No. Court finds this is not a discovery violation.
JB - Item #7. We received copy of hard drive. This is a filtered version. The only expert witness was Sandra Kahn (sp) report regarding times of inactivity. So much data that it now appears that the State has decided to focus in on for their rebuttal for which they had before the trial started. Also, they retain someone to verify the work of the prosecution. If they now decide to go to another area, that is the area they tell their witnesses to focus on. They have withdrawn their computer expert from their witness list.
LDB: The disk contains all of the computer activity on the desk top.
JB: It is scribbly data, some with photos.
LDB: Items created and accessed on the desk top on 6/16/08. Data that was available if JB chose to filter it. JB's OS focused on activity on the morning hours of 6/16. The data negate that timeline.
HHJBP: Was info provided to the defense by the State of Florida on computer activity on 6/16/08?
JB: No sir.
HHJBP: They gave you the hard drive correct? JB: That contains billions of pieces of info.
JB: My OS said the exact hour is unknown.
HHJBP: It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?
JB: Yes, sir.
HHJBP: Didn't the State's expert talk about various events on the 16th?
JB: He did not.
HHJBP: But, all that info came off the hard drive? If the hard drive was provided to you, it was left up to you to decide what searches you wanted to do on that hard drive. You were not denied access. I'm trying to wonder how could it be the state of Florida that you chose not to look at any particular date.
HHJBP: What are the experts going to tell us? All they are going to do is bring it up on the screen. Experts opinions are based on whether someone tried to hide or doctor something.
JB: The issue is the State has rested and we have withdrawn our computer experts. If the Court is even considering this, we want the opportunity for our experts to review the material.
HHJBP: It is not new evidence when it was given to you. What you choose to do with it, is your business.
JB: I disagree. I would like more time.
HHJBP: You are free to do that.
See you at 1:30.
Today they received discovery by the State. In a rough review, it appears many of the documents were items that have just recently come up and certainly beyond the state's control. With the exception of one CD dealing with material from the A's home computer 6/16/08. Report was competed on 4/16/08 (?) after computer experts have already testified. He also noted photos of internet searches of shot girls which may have been viewed on the computer. He found it interesting because during FG he referred to ICA's advice on clothing of shot girls which leads him to believe they had prior knowledge. They had the computer since July 16, 2008 and now he receives the report. JB objects to any presentation relating to these items - computer items - and requests a Richardson hearing.
LDB: The first several items deal with a brief investigation that was conducted at the end of last week. A citizen called the OCSO about an inmate may have had contact with ICA in the jail. That was investigated last week, a report was generated, a phone statement was taken and she received this info yesterday.
Ms. Wayland's son drown, CPR -911 - Ms. Wayland indicates she did not talk to Ms. Anthony at the time. As soon as she received info that Ms. Wayland's son did pass away in the incident, this info was provided to JB.
Next item - filtered copy of data from hard drive that JB has had for years to be used in rebuttal if ICA or another witness were to testify about certain activities on June 16. A lot would rebut JB's OS. If they are going to use a demonstrative aid in rebuttal or ICA's cross examination, she wanted to give this to JB>
HHJB: This is contained in 6/21 notice of additional discovery? Items 1-6 have to do with Ms. April Wayland?
LDB: Yes, provided to her last Thursday, Friday or Saturday and she received the written reports on Saturday.
HHJB: Then delivered to JB?
LDB: Yes
HHJB: #7 is a demonstrative aid of an item previously given to defense?
LDB: Defendant's expert examined hard drive over 2 years ago. She provided this so as not to suffer consequences.
April Wayland - probably not use her as a witness, but there may be something suitable for rebuttal. They continue to get additional information on a regular basis.
HHJBP: Items #1-6 additional comments JB? JB: No. Court finds this is not a discovery violation.
JB - Item #7. We received copy of hard drive. This is a filtered version. The only expert witness was Sandra Kahn (sp) report regarding times of inactivity. So much data that it now appears that the State has decided to focus in on for their rebuttal for which they had before the trial started. Also, they retain someone to verify the work of the prosecution. If they now decide to go to another area, that is the area they tell their witnesses to focus on. They have withdrawn their computer expert from their witness list.
LDB: The disk contains all of the computer activity on the desk top.
JB: It is scribbly data, some with photos.
LDB: Items created and accessed on the desk top on 6/16/08. Data that was available if JB chose to filter it. JB's OS focused on activity on the morning hours of 6/16. The data negate that timeline.
HHJBP: Was info provided to the defense by the State of Florida on computer activity on 6/16/08?
JB: No sir.
HHJBP: They gave you the hard drive correct? JB: That contains billions of pieces of info.
JB: My OS said the exact hour is unknown.
HHJBP: It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?
JB: Yes, sir.
HHJBP: Didn't the State's expert talk about various events on the 16th?
JB: He did not.
HHJBP: But, all that info came off the hard drive? If the hard drive was provided to you, it was left up to you to decide what searches you wanted to do on that hard drive. You were not denied access. I'm trying to wonder how could it be the state of Florida that you chose not to look at any particular date.
HHJBP: What are the experts going to tell us? All they are going to do is bring it up on the screen. Experts opinions are based on whether someone tried to hide or doctor something.
JB: The issue is the State has rested and we have withdrawn our computer experts. If the Court is even considering this, we want the opportunity for our experts to review the material.
HHJBP: It is not new evidence when it was given to you. What you choose to do with it, is your business.
JB: I disagree. I would like more time.
HHJBP: You are free to do that.
See you at 1:30.
whiteangora
I'm on the right track baby. I was "Born This Way"
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 5,748
- Reaction score
- -3
Anyone catch Casey stomp out? omg......she is so busted!!
But wouldn't you think he would have checked the computer in February then?
Stella5
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 2,104
- Reaction score
- -19
So he can text LKB and get his new argument from her!
strach304
New Member
Man he looks like a fool!
YellowSubmarine
If we couldn't laugh, we would all go insane!
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,369
- Reaction score
- 4
I'm poking in from a meeting . . . anyone willing to give a quick recap so far?
Cubby
fly the W!
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2007
- Messages
- 77,225
- Reaction score
- 13,528
I have my bottle of aspirin within reaching distance from the computer and it has been here for days!
Passing some!
LMax
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2007
- Messages
- 15,128
- Reaction score
- 18
Did you notice her birthdate?Google "April Whalen Mugshot"
- Status