Defense Witness List-where's the "full story"?

For awhile now JB has been spouting his closely-held secret "full story" of what really happened and how we will all be applauding KC as mother of the year when this "full story" is disclosed in court. I just read the defense's witness list and the only witnesses listed are three forensic scientists hired by the defense. In other words, no percipient witnesses are listed. (A percipient witness is a witness who saw, heard or otherwise observed something, an event or someone. For example, Tony and Amy are percipient witnesses to KC's actions and words during the relevant time period.) So how is JB intending on disclosing the true "full story" at trial if not through witnesses? Here are the only ways this can happen, if it happens at all:

1. KC testifies to the true "full story" which apparently involves no other witnesses to the event or events;
2. The computer forensics and physical forensics tell the true full story without the need for percipient witnesses;
3. Through cross-examination of the State's witnesses with possible corroboration via forensics.
I don't think number one is likely because even JB has to know that the prosecution will have a field day if KC takes the stand. I don't think number 2 is likely either because the forensics (released so far) don't tell us the cause of death. So we are left with option number 3--but I can't imagine how they could take the information known to date and twist it into a story that would implicate anyone or any other cause other than murder by KC. What am I missing here?

I dont see how they can even proceed with this storyline. Now that Caylee is known to be deceased, there is no reason that they cant disclose their "real story"... ridiculous.

So, do you think that "true other half of the story" is going to be the Casey was protecting her family? Or Zenaida? Or are they going to try and pin it on one of her friends, which has been prevalent throughout this whole case.

LancelotLink said:

So, do you think that "true other half of the story" is going to be the Casey was protecting her family? Or Zenaida? Or are they going to try and pin it on one of her friends, which has been prevalent throughout this whole case.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what the 'true story' is--coming from this camp it could be anything. I am trying to figure out how it is they intend to disclose this story in court as promised--whatever the story may be-- if not by testifying witnesses? Beats the heck out of me!

There's absolutely NO WAY she can testify, so I think they're going to abandon the "Mother of the Year" defense, and just attack the forensics.

I just don't see any other option, under the circumstances. Well, other than copping a plea, and JB and/or KC seem unwilling to tread that path.

I personally think that Baez will wait until he gets all the evidence to decide what "the story" will be.
:crazy:

Can the defense just make up a story?? LOL I thought they had to stick with what KC told LE at the getgo, Caylee supposedly being kidnapped

Casey will never be on the stand.

The defense will wait until the last moments to put their witness list on the table to minimize the time the state has to analyzed what JB is planning. The state does the same thing just in reverse. They list everyone and their brother as being on the eligible list to make their exact route from A to B harder to decipher.

SoCalSleuth said:

For awhile now JB has been spouting his closely-held secret "full story" of what really happened and how we will all be applauding KC as mother of the year when this "full story" is disclosed in court. I just read the defense's witness list and the only witnesses listed are three forensic scientists hired by the defense. In other words, no percipient witnesses are listed. (A percipient witness is a witness who saw, heard or otherwise observed something, an event or someone. For example, Tony and Amy are percipient witnesses to KC's actions and words during the relevant time period.) So how is JB intending on disclosing the true "full story" at trial if not through witnesses? Here are the only ways this can happen, if it happens at all:

1. KC testifies to the true "full story" which apparently involves no other witnesses to the event or events;
2. The computer forensics and physical forensics tell the true full story without the need for percipient witnesses;
3. Through cross-examination of the State's witnesses with possible corroboration via forensics.
I don't think number one is likely because even JB has to know that the prosecution will have a field day if KC takes the stand. I don't think number 2 is likely either because the forensics (released so far) don't tell us the cause of death. So we are left with option number 3--but I can't imagine how they could take the information known to date and twist it into a story that would implicate anyone or any other cause other than murder by KC. What am I missing here?

Click to expand...

See the doc dump and state's newest motion- JB listed his witnesses as duplicate of the state's witness list, without specifically naming individuals.....It's under the 3rd name on his witness list. The sate has filed a motion to make him name the individuals specifically that he plans to call, and cited precedent. Will try to find the link

eta- here's the link -

State of Florida's Motion to Strike Defense Witness List Jan 22, 2009

http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFil...a's Motion to Strike Defense Witness List.pdf

it's on the sticky for media, posted yesterday

Also, if TonE, Amy etc. are called to testify for the state, JB will be allowed to question them. He is not required to list them as witnesses for the defense. You know, like on Boston Legal. :crazy:
Legal eagles, please correct me if I'm wrong.

alwaysonmymind said:

Also, if TonE, Amy etc. are called to testify for the state, JB will be allowed to question them. He is not required to list them as witnesses for the defense. You know, like on Boston Legal. :crazy:
Legal eagles, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

He can x-examine them, but basically only about what the state has questioned them about. If he wants to go into other areas, he needs to call them himself as witnesses in his own case-in-chief.

I thought the law was that you could only cross examine about the testimony given on direct. If you want to examine them about something different, you have to call them yourself.

FWIW, the defense listed three witnesses by name and the rest by default based on the SA's witness list. The SA has file a request to deny this based on Florida law that demands witnesses be named individually. So in reality, Baez did file a witness list with more than three people, he just did not do it properly.

SuziQ said:

FWIW, the defense listed three witnesses by name and the rest by default based on the SA's witness list. The SA has file a request to deny this based on Florida law that demands witnesses be named individually. So in reality, Baez did file a witness list with more than three people, he just did not do it properly.

Click to expand...

Here's the link -

http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFil...a's Motion to Strike Defense Witness List.pdf

SoCalSleuth said:

I have no idea what the 'true story' is--coming from this camp it could be anything. I am trying to figure out how it is they intend to disclose this story in court as promised--whatever the story may be-- if not by testifying witnesses? Beats the heck out of me!

Click to expand...

Well, we know there is no way they will put Kc on the stand and we know they have to be very careful what gets introduced, so I am at a loss too.

After the State puts on the Zanny material from KC's mouth and statement regarding June 9th, I suppose JB could try the "Officer, you knew my client was lying, correct? Good, then we need not discuss any more of her lying. You do not know with 100% certainty that my client killed Caylee, do you? (No one can say yes to this, they all say 'based on the evidence, blah, blah, blah it is my belief that she did.) All you really know is that she lied BOTH times you spoke to her, correct? You do not know the truth, do you? And, am I safe to assume that you have not spoken to her since July 16, 2008? Therefore, would it be correct to assume that you do not know what she has said since that time regarding a terrible drowning accident in the family pool? Thank you."

9 million objections later, it would be striken, but the jury would have heard it. One thing that you can not do is make people forget; disregard it, yes. But they never forget it.

Harp on how no one has heard the accidental drowning story. Every witness gets a drowning story. It can't be disproven now. There is no cause of death. They have CA and GA with the ladder in the pool/gate open on June 17th, the neighbor who CA said heard someone in the pool during the day on the 16th, the swim suit that was first announced as having been found with the body, (where did the swimsuit go, btw?)

JB's best bet is to admit on KC's behalf that it was all an accident and a mentally disturbed mother whose own mother tried to choke her to death before throwing her out to the wolves to fend for herself and her baby, KNOWING she had no job or Nanny to help her and then both parents turning their backs to her, refusing to even take her calls when she needed them most. Completely dependant on her parents for all support, she was unable to figure out what to do on her own and became a person no one recognizes in order to cope with everything tumbling in at once. No money, no gas, no where to stay, she had to steal from her friends and mooch off of everyone for a spot to stay overnight. She was able to block the event so completely that she only remembered it recently, but is too afraid to speak after all her lies, because there is no reason for anyone to believe her now.

The sticking point for the Defense is that the Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.220(d)(1)(A) requires the defendant to furnish a written list of the names and adresses of all witnesses. The problem is that while the Defense has all of the names they have no addresses since none of them exist, i.e.,

ZFG, Juliette, Jeff MH, Raquel, Samantha, Thomas F, etc.

Lots of defense witnesses . . . . . still looking for them.

JB sure doesn’t like to do things the way that it's done. Even I know, not being an attorney that you have to state full names of all parties to be called at a trial. You can’t just ditto the other sides. Even if all he has ever done in the past is DUI and Drug Busts trials the proper procedure is the same. To me it smacks of someone never actually doing any of his own work.
He was at the Miami Dade Public Defenders office if IIRC. I wonder what he actually did in that office?

I also wonder how long the judge is going to give JB procedural lessons for free in the courtroom? I also wonder if all of JB incomplete, incorrect and not on time motions will or can be used to declare incompetent council resulting in an appeal?

shadow of my mind said:

JB sure doesn’t like to do things the way that it's done. Even I know, not being an attorney that you have to state full names of all parties to be called at a trial. You can’t just ditto the other sides. Even if all he has ever done in the past is DUI and Drug Busts trials the proper procedure is the same. To me it smacks of someone never actually doing any of his own work.
He was at the Miami Dade Public Defenders office if IIRC. I wonder what he actually did in that office?

I also wonder how long the judge is going to give JB procedural lessons for free in the courtroom? I also wonder if all of JB incomplete, incorrect and not on time motions will or can be used to declare incompetent council resulting in an appeal?

Click to expand...

What's scary is JB is now teaching prodecural lessons to law students. He's the least qualified I've seen to teach this. He has no clue as to jurisdictions (hello? FBI vs local LE) or legal protocol. You would think a witness list would be defense atty 101.

SuziQ said:

What's scary is JB is now teaching prodecural lessons to law students. He's the least qualified I've seen to teach this. He has no clue as to jurisdictions (hello? FBI vs local LE) or legal protocol. You would think a witness list would be defense atty 101.

Click to expand...

Horrifying, isn't it? I hope none of those law students of his move up to my neck of the woods. We have enough of a legal backlog around here!!!