Page 25 of 25 FirstFirst ... 1516171819202122232425
Results 601 to 618 of 618

Thread: Post-Verdict:Jose Baez-Sanctions? Florida Bar Investigation!

  1. #601
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,007
    Quote Originally Posted by rossva View Post
    BBM IIRC The sale of the pictures and videos to ABC for $200,000 happened in August, 2008. Casey Anthony was not indicted for muder until October, 2008. At that time, Baez was only representing her for charges of child neglect, lying to investigators and interfering with a criminal investigation.
    hmmmmm... Baez needed two hundred thousand plus to defend OCA against bad check charges and lying to LE?

    Hate to see what JB charges for a speeding ticket.
    Last edited by zippitydoda; 02-29-2012 at 05:25 PM.
    Judgment is not about destruction, but about setting things right.

  2. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to zippitydoda For This Useful Post:


  3. #602
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16,017
    Quote Originally Posted by zippitydoda View Post
    hmmmmm... Baez needed two hundred thousand plus to defend OCA against bad check charges and lying to LE?

    Hate to see what JB charges for a speeding ticket.
    Well the weird thing is that's what she was convicted on so clearly paying him isn't the way to go....
    When there is Justice - there is Peace.

  4. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:


  5. #603
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,110
    Well, what we HAVE NEVER SEEN, and what we WILL NEVER SEE is JB's time records accounting for exactly how (and when) he racked up the billable hours for that money he received as a result of that blood money brokered sale. If he did not (which I strongly believe) keep any time records, and had a flat fee, he had to at least show an accounting to Judge Perry at the hearing they had on this. IIRC, he stated then that he did not have those records, but would provide Judge with them later. Did he? We will never know. We should though. Or at least, the Citizens of the State of Florida should know, as they ultimately ended up footing the bill for the circus.

    Of the $200k - JB got what, approximately $80,000. Where oh where did Ms. Anthony hide the rest? Or did JB eventually bill out the remaining $120k leaving his poor client, indeed, indigent?

    IOW, what was the timing on eating up $200k and being declared indigent? Eating up $200K before or after being charged with capital murder?

  6. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to TotallyObsessed For This Useful Post:


  7. #604
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    932
    I think he probably kept records of all those hours she spent at his office, feeding him brownies and avoiding her parents, and then billed her for them.

  8. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to miss plum For This Useful Post:


  9. #605
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bytown
    Posts
    9,857
    Quote Originally Posted by TotallyObsessed View Post
    Well, what we HAVE NEVER SEEN, and what we WILL NEVER SEE is JB's time records accounting for exactly how (and when) he racked up the billable hours for that money he received as a result of that blood money brokered sale. If he did not (which I strongly believe) keep any time records, and had a flat fee, he had to at least show an accounting to Judge Perry at the hearing they had on this. IIRC, he stated then that he did not have those records, but would provide Judge with them later. Did he? We will never know. We should though. Or at least, the Citizens of the State of Florida should know, as they ultimately ended up footing the bill for the circus.

    Of the $200k - JB got what, approximately $80,000. Where oh where did Ms. Anthony hide the rest? Or did JB eventually bill out the remaining $120k leaving his poor client, indeed, indigent?

    IOW, what was the timing on eating up $200k and being declared indigent? Eating up $200K before or after being charged with capital murder?
    BBM

    It was more than $200K

    Money Received
    ABC $200,000
    Todd Macaluso $70,000
    Anonymous $5,000 ( IMO it could be the money River C "gave" to George)
    IIRC Andrea Lyons also donated $50,000 from her DePaul law center/legal aid clinic or something like that..
    TOTAL Received $330,000

    Baez received payment of $89,000
    Andrea Lyons received payment of,iirc, $22,500
    TOTAL Paid (that we know of) $111,500

    Leftover was $221,500K to pay for Casey's Defense..and was, I assume, used up by March 2010 when she was declared Indigent when myself and other Floridians began to pay for her expenses...

    I remember Baez said the rest was used for Casey's defense...
    LKB never received money, she said in an interview she probably would not be paid her retainer fee..

    Looks like Baez went thru a TOTAL of $330,000 between Aug/Sept 2008 to March 2010
    Last edited by Intermezzo; 02-29-2012 at 07:46 PM.
    ----------------------------------------------------



    --------------------------------------------------
    "There are three kinds of intelligence: one kind understands things for itself, the other appreciates what others can understand, the third understands neither for itself nor through others. This first is excellent, the second good, and the third useless.

    --Niccolo Machiavelli"

  10. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to Intermezzo For This Useful Post:


  11. #606
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,110
    I guess my point on the dates of what portion of blood money went for what charges? is that, to me, there is a HUGE conflict of interest when your attorney - if he knew the "truth" from Casey pretty early on, was out making deals with you sitting in a prison cell, all the time planning on using the State of Florida's money to defend you while pocketing blood money SHOULD be a charge that could and SHOULD have been looked into by the Bar. Not just the discovery violations, which were pretty serious in this case. They were not just your every day run of the mill "late filed interrogatory or request for production" violations.
    Ah well, not worth getting worked up over, because the Florida Bar Association seems to be falling all over themselves trying to get into JB's good graces. He's such an ass-et, you know?


  12. #607
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,662
    Quote Originally Posted by Intermezzo View Post
    BBM

    It was more than $200K

    Money Received
    ABC $200,000
    Todd Macaluso $70,000
    Anonymous $5,000 ( IMO it could be the money River C "gave" to George)
    IIRC Andrea Lyons also donated $50,000 from her DePaul law center/legal aid clinic or something like that..
    TOTAL Received $330,000

    Baez received payment of $89,000
    Andrea Lyons received payment of,iirc, $22,500
    TOTAL Paid (that we know of) $111,500

    Leftover was $221,500K to pay for Casey's Defense..and was, I assume, used up by March 2010 when she was declared Indigent when myself and other Floridians began to pay for her expenses...

    I remember Baez said the rest was used for Casey's defense...
    LKB never received money, she said in an interview she probably would not be paid her retainer fee..

    Looks like Baez went thru a TOTAL of $330,000 between Aug/Sept 2008 to March 2010
    Oh yes I forgot about Ms. Lyon's claims that some 22k went to "computers" and "research"...
    Justice for GEORGE!

  13. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Horace Finklestein For This Useful Post:


  14. #608
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,830
    Quote Originally Posted by Horace Finklestein View Post
    Oh yes I forgot about Ms. Lyon's claims that some 22k went to "computers" and "research"...
    Research covers trying to find someone else to blame.
    As far as I remember Baez never did pay their D Casey for his attempts to dig up dirt on some hapless person...

  15. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to ZsaZsa For This Useful Post:


  16. #609
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    18,198
    Quote Originally Posted by Horace Finklestein View Post
    Oh yes I forgot about Ms. Lyon's claims that some 22k went to "computers" and "research"...
    Don't forget, too, JB represented her for the fraud case and charged her for that. Bet a good portion of the money went for fees to represent her. JB also said the remainer of the money went to pay for experts but we heard most of them were never paid. My guess is Dr. Spitz got his fee but the rest claim not to have been paid. Even Dr. Lee was complaining he was owed money. He wanted $8,000 from the State even after CM claimed Dr. Lee would probably work for a crate of oranges. lol jmo
    A lie will go round the world before the truth gets its pants on - Charles Spurgeon

  17. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


  18. #610
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    5,572
    Quote Originally Posted by ZsaZsa View Post
    Research covers trying to find someone else to blame.
    As far as I remember Baez never did pay their D Casey for his attempts to dig up dirt on some hapless person...
    -------------------
    Isnt he one of the reasons Judge Perry allowed him 300.00 a couple times to pay for investigating? Not worded right but I am so tired.LOL
    Lord~please give me a break~Love, Noreen.

  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nore For This Useful Post:


  20. #611
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bytown
    Posts
    9,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Nore View Post
    -------------------
    Isnt he one of the reasons Judge Perry allowed him 300.00 a couple times to pay for investigating? Not worded right but I am so tired.LOL
    That was PI Jeremy Lyons

    Domenic Casey was a PI early on in the case, he filed Bar complaints against Baez about not being paid and he stated Baez told him if he found Caylee not to call LE.

    After he stopped working for Baez in, iirc, October 2008 he was the PI for George and Cindy
    ----------------------------------------------------



    --------------------------------------------------
    "There are three kinds of intelligence: one kind understands things for itself, the other appreciates what others can understand, the third understands neither for itself nor through others. This first is excellent, the second good, and the third useless.

    --Niccolo Machiavelli"

  21. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Intermezzo For This Useful Post:


  22. #612
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,662
    Quote Originally Posted by ZsaZsa View Post
    Research covers trying to find someone else to blame.
    As far as I remember Baez never did pay their D Casey for his attempts to dig up dirt on some hapless person...
    Still can't believe Perry let him get away with the "let us search for Caylee - but with no law enforcement following us" and the fact that he was actively trying to frame any TES volunteer that he possibly could. If it was a drowning, why investigate TES people and Roy Kronk?
    Justice for GEORGE!

  23. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Horace Finklestein For This Useful Post:


  24. #613
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,110
    Quote Originally Posted by Horace Finklestein View Post
    Still can't believe Perry let him get away with the "let us search for Caylee - but with no law enforcement following us" and the fact that he was actively trying to frame any TES volunteer that he possibly could. If it was a drowning, why investigate TES people and Roy Kronk?
    I guess because a judge can’t tell a defense lawyer “pick a card, any card, and stick with it”.

  25. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TotallyObsessed For This Useful Post:


  26. #614
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,110
    Quote Originally Posted by TotallyObsessed View Post
    I guess because a judge can’t tell a defense lawyer “pick a card, any card, and stick with it”.
    Or...... pick one strand of pasta to see if it sticks to the wall, instead of throwing the entire package.

  27. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TotallyObsessed For This Useful Post:


  28. #615
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,662
    Quote Originally Posted by TotallyObsessed View Post
    I guess because a judge can’t tell a defense lawyer “pick a card, any card, and stick with it”.
    But when he is obviously trying to frame an innocent person, the judge needs to put a stop to it. Baez had no problem with ruining an innocent person's life and depriving them of their freedom as long as he benefited from it. He should be in jail, blessings of the Bar notwithstanding.
    Justice for GEORGE!

  29. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Horace Finklestein For This Useful Post:


  30. #616
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,110
    Quote Originally Posted by Horace Finklestein View Post
    But when he is obviously trying to frame an innocent person, the judge needs to put a stop to it. Baez had no problem with ruining an innocent person's life and depriving them of their freedom as long as he benefited from it. He should be in jail, blessings of the Bar notwithstanding.
    Oh I totally agree. However, judges don't work that way.
    Granted there were absolutely no facts whatsoever to support JB’s opening statement. HHJP did instruct the jury to disregard it...but you cannot unring a bell. But legally, that is all that could be done. It stinks. It really does.
    I read a fantastic Law Review article the other day....I’ll try to find it and link to it...where a fantastic argument was made for being able to redress acquittals when it was an obvious and egregious error. Which I believe 90%+ believe this verdict to have been. While it was arguing federal law (vs. state) it still made some very good points about double jeopardy and how that law came about and how the meaning as applied by today’s standards is far, far, far from the initial intent of preventing double jeopardy.
    I can’t find my exact link, but you can get it off of Lexis (how iornic is that? JB?). It was written by Thomas DiBiagio and it appeared in The Catholic University Law Review. Among other things it states: “A judgment of acquittal obtained in such a manner ... calls into question the legitimacy and integrity of the criminal process and denies the public a fair opportunity to enforce its criminal laws”. DiBiagio maintains that limited judicial review and retrial of, what he calls a faulty judgment of acquittal would not violate the guarantee against double jeopardy because an appeal and retrial in such circumstances would not infringe upon the policies underlying the guarantee. Rather it would merely be affording the government and the public an opportunity to convict the accused in and error-free trial.

    It is well worth the read. And for those who start screaming “then the government would never stop - they would keep on going until they got the guilty verdict they were after”....not so. Why is the state or government not afforded the same rights the defendant is? Why was HHJP bending over backwards to make sure there were not appealable errors on behalf of FCA. But - IMHO - there were appealable errors made on behalf of the state. Namely, striking down the juror selection challenge that the state made on THAT juror - due to race when that WAS NOT why they were challenging that juror??? That was an error. There were others.

    Sorry this is sooooo long, but I wanted to start a thread the other day on this....it would be a whopper of a debate. But I was busy. And tired. And now that I think of it, I’m sure there would be many MANY timeouts to be had if we did have a thread on this subject!

    That’s all.

  31. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to TotallyObsessed For This Useful Post:


  32. #617
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,662
    Quote Originally Posted by TotallyObsessed View Post
    Oh I totally agree. However, judges don't work that way.
    Granted there were absolutely no facts whatsoever to support JB’s opening statement. HHJP did instruct the jury to disregard it...but you cannot unring a bell. But legally, that is all that could be done. It stinks. It really does.
    I read a fantastic Law Review article the other day....I’ll try to find it and link to it...where a fantastic argument was made for being able to redress acquittals when it was an obvious and egregious error. Which I believe 90%+ believe this verdict to have been. While it was arguing federal law (vs. state) it still made some very good points about double jeopardy and how that law came about and how the meaning as applied by today’s standards is far, far, far from the initial intent of preventing double jeopardy.
    I can’t find my exact link, but you can get it off of Lexis (how iornic is that? JB?). It was written by Thomas DiBiagio and it appeared in The Catholic University Law Review. Among other things it states: “A judgment of acquittal obtained in such a manner ... calls into question the legitimacy and integrity of the criminal process and denies the public a fair opportunity to enforce its criminal laws”. DiBiagio maintains that limited judicial review and retrial of, what he calls a faulty judgment of acquittal would not violate the guarantee against double jeopardy because an appeal and retrial in such circumstances would not infringe upon the policies underlying the guarantee. Rather it would merely be affording the government and the public an opportunity to convict the accused in and error-free trial.

    It is well worth the read. And for those who start screaming “then the government would never stop - they would keep on going until they got the guilty verdict they were after”....not so. Why is the state or government not afforded the same rights the defendant is? Why was HHJP bending over backwards to make sure there were not appealable errors on behalf of FCA. But - IMHO - there were appealable errors made on behalf of the state. Namely, striking down the juror selection challenge that the state made on THAT juror - due to race when that WAS NOT why they were challenging that juror??? That was an error. There were others.

    Sorry this is sooooo long, but I wanted to start a thread the other day on this....it would be a whopper of a debate. But I was busy. And tired. And now that I think of it, I’m sure there would be many MANY timeouts to be had if we did have a thread on this subject!

    That’s all.
    Brilliantly put. People seem to buy into the concern of prosecution and not the more rational concern of having a freshly/wrongly acquitted Jeffrey Dahmer type move in next door.
    Justice for GEORGE!

  33. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Horace Finklestein For This Useful Post:


  34. #618
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,503

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by TotallyObsessed View Post
    Oh I totally agree. However, judges don't work that way.
    Granted there were absolutely no facts whatsoever to support JB’s opening statement. HHJP did instruct the jury to disregard it...but you cannot unring a bell. But legally, that is all that could be done. It stinks. It really does.
    I read a fantastic Law Review article the other day....I’ll try to find it and link to it...where a fantastic argument was made for being able to redress acquittals when it was an obvious and egregious error. Which I believe 90%+ believe this verdict to have been. While it was arguing federal law (vs. state) it still made some very good points about double jeopardy and how that law came about and how the meaning as applied by today’s standards is far, far, far from the initial intent of preventing double jeopardy.
    I can’t find my exact link, but you can get it off of Lexis (how iornic is that? JB?). It was written by Thomas DiBiagio and it appeared in The Catholic University Law Review. Among other things it states: “A judgment of acquittal obtained in such a manner ... calls into question the legitimacy and integrity of the criminal process and denies the public a fair opportunity to enforce its criminal laws”. DiBiagio maintains that limited judicial review and retrial of, what he calls a faulty judgment of acquittal would not violate the guarantee against double jeopardy because an appeal and retrial in such circumstances would not infringe upon the policies underlying the guarantee. Rather it would merely be affording the government and the public an opportunity to convict the accused in and error-free trial.

    It is well worth the read. And for those who start screaming “then the government would never stop - they would keep on going until they got the guilty verdict they were after”....not so. Why is the state or government not afforded the same rights the defendant is? Why was HHJP bending over backwards to make sure there were not appealable errors on behalf of FCA. But - IMHO - there were appealable errors made on behalf of the state. Namely, striking down the juror selection challenge that the state made on THAT juror - due to race when that WAS NOT why they were challenging that juror??? That was an error. There were others.

    Sorry this is sooooo long, but I wanted to start a thread the other day on this....it would be a whopper of a debate. But I was busy. And tired. And now that I think of it, I’m sure there would be many MANY timeouts to be had if we did have a thread on this subject!

    That’s all.
    Bumping this excellent post I just read this morning!

  35. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to bayouland For This Useful Post:


Page 25 of 25 FirstFirst ... 1516171819202122232425

Similar Threads

  1. Florida Bar Allegedly Prepares Case against Baez
    By tangerinemoon in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 664
    Last Post: 02-27-2011, 09:45 PM
  2. 2009.04.07 Baez Under Investigation Again By Florida Bar
    By Secretsolver in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 194
    Last Post: 06-17-2009, 07:07 PM
  3. Jose Baez rejected by Florida Bar on first try (Orlando & Miami News Articles)
    By KeysBreeze in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 361
    Last Post: 05-07-2009, 09:38 AM
  4. Jose Baez
    By olive in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 539
    Last Post: 10-31-2008, 12:13 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •