708 users online (72 members and 636 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 55 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 825
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney Australia
    Posts
    3,594

    Procedure and legal questions

    I dont know about anyone else but I have a lot of questions about law and procedure.Can our legal eagles help?

    1. Why are there so many interviews where LE has spoken off tape first, and metioned things that they dont want on tape. Shouldnt it all be recorded? Is it normal procedure to have a casual chat detailing all events, and only recording certain parts of that info?

    2.Would the issues discussed in the chat, and not recorded be included in a statement that we havent yet seen? would there be any official record of the statements made, or is it good enough that the officer heard it?

    3. Are the FBI and OSCO seperate entities? I kept hearing about the hairbrush issue and people saying CA lied to a fedral officier, but from what i understand she gave the items to OSCO, not FBI. so does this mean that once FBI are involved anything said to OSCO becomes a fedral issue?

    4. Does OSCO share all of their information regarding the case with FBI, and vice versa? For example if a witness contacted FBI and spoke with them, would they share that with OSCO?
    5. I know that LE can legally lie to a suspect to try to get to the truth, but can they legally do the same with a witness? what are the boundaries of this?

    6.If a statement or other document is not signed, or has errors is it admissable in court?
    (ETA) 7. why would the case have been referred to the sex crimes unit?

    OK, i have heaps of other questions, but thats probably enough for now.
    TIA to anyone answering my questions.
    Last edited by butwhatif?; 11-27-2008 at 05:50 PM. Reason: add # 7

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney Australia
    Posts
    3,594
    I've got another one that might sound dumb....but who cares, right?

    Are the documents that have been released, copies of the actual originals? Is what we are seeing the same as what the jury will see at trial?
    Last edited by butwhatif?; 11-27-2008 at 11:44 PM. Reason: typo

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Pa, Macungie
    Posts
    594
    I have a question also. Since Cindy and george told different sotires on some things, can they be forced to come in and shown the lies and make them tell the truth or say why they lied? One example, cindy lied when she said they went to a lawyer about getting custody of caylee if something happend to casey and the father Erice wouldnt have custody. When LE checked with the lawyer he had no clue what they were talking about. Could they force cindy to show them the paperwork or have her there with the lawyer and then say "ok Cindy now what do yo have to say"?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3,716
    Quote Originally Posted by shelbar53 View Post
    I have a question also. Since Cindy and george told different sotires on some things, can they be forced to come in and shown the lies and make them tell the truth or say why they lied? One example, cindy lied when she said they went to a lawyer about getting custody of caylee if something happend to casey and the father Erice wouldnt have custody. When LE checked with the lawyer he had no clue what they were talking about. Could they force cindy to show them the paperwork or have her there with the lawyer and then say "ok Cindy now what do yo have to say"?
    If they are witnesses and say something totally different to wht they said in taped intrview, their credibility can be called into account in the form of perjury. If the witness lies about material evidence, the jury is free to ignore anything they say - which could make Cindy's testimony useless for the defense. People forget things, but whene they say something totally opposite of their original official statements, that's considered perjury IF they are called on it. Anyathing they say in any TV interview can also be used against them. The lies that Scott Peterson told to the media helped convict him.
    I have a constitutional right to my opinion and I am stating it!!!!!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,806

    OC District Attorney Office

    I tried a search and couldn't find anything. If there is a thread please link it for me. tia

    I want to know more about the DA's office. What is there experience with murder charges and their win/loss ratio.

    Also the jury selection; will JB have a jury selection specialist on his defense team.

    What type of juror will both sides be looking to select.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    1,180
    IIRC, in Florida, they are State Attorney's, not District Attorney's.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    270
    I have a couple of questions about the trial - I guess I will include them here.

    1. Is the trial actually set to begin on January 5? I keep hearing that date but then I hear people speculate as to why JB didnt ask for a speedy trial. That seems pretty speedy to me.

    2. Do we know yet if it will be televised?

  8. #8
    Coley's Avatar
    Coley is offline You are damned if you do and damned if you don't
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    War Eagle
    Posts
    1,728
    Quote Originally Posted by butwhatif? View Post
    I've got another one that might sound dumb....but who cares, right?

    Are the documents that have been released, copies of the actual originals? Is what we are seeing the same as what the jury will see at trial?
    Yes.

    Moo
    Baez Anthony Law Firm 1.888.URA.FOOL

    If you don't like someone or something they are doing why not lend an opinion before making one?


    "I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong." -Bertrand Russell

  9. #9
    Coley's Avatar
    Coley is offline You are damned if you do and damned if you don't
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    War Eagle
    Posts
    1,728
    Quote Originally Posted by CentralFLMama View Post
    I have a couple of questions about the trial - I guess I will include them here.

    1. Is the trial actually set to begin on January 5? I keep hearing that date but then I hear people speculate as to why JB didnt ask for a speedy trial. That seems pretty speedy to me.

    2. Do we know yet if it will be televised?
    1. That is what it is scheduled for now. But JB is asking for a continuance. The date will be moved back. Stupid on JB's part.

    2. No we will not know that. I'm assuming Yes but we all know what happens when we ASSume.
    Baez Anthony Law Firm 1.888.URA.FOOL

    If you don't like someone or something they are doing why not lend an opinion before making one?


    "I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong." -Bertrand Russell

  10. #10
    Coley's Avatar
    Coley is offline You are damned if you do and damned if you don't
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    War Eagle
    Posts
    1,728
    Quote Originally Posted by countzero View Post
    I tried a search and couldn't find anything. If there is a thread please link it for me. tia

    I want to know more about the DA's office. What is there experience with murder charges and their win/loss ratio.

    Also the jury selection; will JB have a jury selection specialist on his defense team.

    What type of juror will both sides be looking to select.
    Just like LLL stated they are SA instead of DA's.

    If JB is smart (insert joke here lol) he will have a specialist.
    Baez Anthony Law Firm 1.888.URA.FOOL

    If you don't like someone or something they are doing why not lend an opinion before making one?


    "I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong." -Bertrand Russell


  11. #11
    Coley's Avatar
    Coley is offline You are damned if you do and damned if you don't
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    War Eagle
    Posts
    1,728
    Quote Originally Posted by shelbar53 View Post
    I have a question also. Since Cindy and george told different sotires on some things, can they be forced to come in and shown the lies and make them tell the truth or say why they lied? One example, cindy lied when she said they went to a lawyer about getting custody of caylee if something happend to casey and the father Erice wouldnt have custody. When LE checked with the lawyer he had no clue what they were talking about. Could they force cindy to show them the paperwork or have her there with the lawyer and then say "ok Cindy now what do yo have to say"?
    They will def not be able to be character witness'. IMO, Cindy will be in spin class during the trial. Nothing will change with the A's.
    Baez Anthony Law Firm 1.888.URA.FOOL

    If you don't like someone or something they are doing why not lend an opinion before making one?


    "I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong." -Bertrand Russell

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,492
    Quote Originally Posted by shelbar53 View Post
    I have a question also. Since Cindy and george told different sotires on some things, can they be forced to come in and shown the lies and make them tell the truth or say why they lied? One example, cindy lied when she said they went to a lawyer about getting custody of caylee if something happend to casey and the father Erice wouldnt have custody. When LE checked with the lawyer he had no clue what they were talking about. Could they force cindy to show them the paperwork or have her there with the lawyer and then say "ok Cindy now what do yo have to say"?
    I have been wondering if that is why they keep putting off the additional FBI interviews they agreed to do.

  13. #13
    Coley's Avatar
    Coley is offline You are damned if you do and damned if you don't
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    War Eagle
    Posts
    1,728
    Quote Originally Posted by TURBOTHINK View Post
    I have been wondering if that is why they keep putting off the additional FBI interviews they agreed to do.

    IMO, The A's believe they can bull***** local LE. Maybe they figured they can't bull***** FBI?
    Baez Anthony Law Firm 1.888.URA.FOOL

    If you don't like someone or something they are doing why not lend an opinion before making one?


    "I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong." -Bertrand Russell

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney Australia
    Posts
    3,594
    Quote Originally Posted by Coley View Post
    Yes.

    Moo
    Thanks coley. I thought they were but I was hoping they weren't.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In a bubble.
    Posts
    2,258
    1. Why are there so many interviews where LE has spoken off tape first, and metioned things that they dont want on tape. Shouldnt it all be recorded? Is it normal procedure to have a casual chat detailing all events, and only recording certain parts of that info?

    LE talked to most of the witnesses over the phone or in person before they were asked to come into the station to give a recorded statement. The officers interviewing these folks would write a report about the conversations and the reports become part of the investigation file. And yes, there may have been times when they talked off the record about their previous conversations and then began recording when they reached discussions on new information. You will see in the official report that there are many summarizations of LE's conversations with witnesses and not all of the oringinal reports are included in the doc. dump. (Annie Dowlling for example).

    2.Would the issues discussed in the chat, and not recorded be included in a statement that we havent yet seen? would there be any official record of the statements made, or is it good enough that the officer heard it?

    He or she would have to have included it in a report somewhere. Otherwise it is not considered reliable.

    3. Are the FBI and OSCO seperate entities? I kept hearing about the hairbrush issue and people saying CA lied to a fedral officier, but from what i understand she gave the items to OSCO, not FBI. so does this mean that once FBI are involved anything said to OSCO becomes a fedral issue?

    Yes FBI aned OSCO are completely seperate entities. I heard the same thing, that OSCO obtained the hairbrush, not the FBI. Seems this was talking head nonsenss. No, just because OSCO is getting assistance from the FBI, lies to OSCO do not become Federal offenses.

    4. Does OSCO share all of their information regarding the case with FBI, and vice versa? For example if a witness contacted FBI and spoke with them, would they share that with OSCO?

    The FBI would share any and all information they obtained with OSCO. OSCO would share information pertinent to the FBI's part in the investigation.

    6.If a statement or other document is not signed, or has errors is it admissable in court?

    If the witness did not sign the statement, it is not reliable and the witness can deny saying it. Errors like typos have no effect on admissability. Errors in the information in the statement likewise have no effect on admissability.

    (ETA) 7. why would the case have been referred to the sex crimes unit?

    I didn't know it was.

    Are the documents that have been released, copies of the actual originals? Is what we are seeing the same as what the jury will see at trial?

    They may be copies of originals or copies of copies, or just prints from a computer. But, the jury will see the originals, not copies of copies. If it goes into evidence, the jury is entitled to see it.

    1. Is the trial actually set to begin on January 5? I keep hearing that date but then I hear people speculate as to why JB didnt ask for a speedy trial. That seems pretty speedy to me.

    Yes this is still the trial date. Since the court gave the parties such a quick trial date, there was no need to demand a speedy trial. It seems amazingly speedy to me as well.

    2. Do we know yet if it will be televised?

    It has not been stated yet, but since the hearings have been live, I think we can expect the trial to be as well.

    IMHOO I think they do not want to tangle with the FBI again because lying to a Federal Agent is prison time. They also think that the FBI ambushed them. If the FBI wants to talk to them again, all they have to do is request the meeting or go to the house. The A's can refuse to talk to them and apparently have already by not doing follow up interviews. They don't want to see their interviews on tv.

    Any statements made by any witness which they then later contradict can and will be used against them at trial. You have all heard the old "were you lying then or are you lying now?" kinda thing on tv. Stories which can not be corroborated at all (fabrications) are used to simply decapitate the witness on the stand. Jurors do not like liars and once caught in a lie, they tend to disregard everything that witness has stated. In fact the judge will instruct them that if they find that any statement made by a witness was shown to be a lie, that they may disregard all of that witness's statements, if they want. (They do not have to decipher when the witness is telling the truth once they are caught in a lie - but they can if they want. Example: witness lies about their own criminal background because it is embarassing, but it has no relevance to the case at hand, so the jury can disregard the lie and believe the rest.)

Page 1 of 55 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Legal and Law Questions - * No Discussion *
    By NewMommy09 in forum Gabriel Johnson
    Replies: 171
    Last Post: 04-25-2011, 02:39 PM
  2. Legal Questions
    By daisy7 in forum Byrd and Melanie Billings
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 09:18 PM
  3. Post Legal Questions Here
    By Littledeer in forum Stacy Peterson
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 01-28-2008, 10:29 AM

Tags for this Thread