01-29-2009, 04:17 PM #1
State of Florida's Motion to Strike Defense Witness List
I have not seen this discussed as of yet.
Taken from the doc:
On November 20, 2008, the defendant filed a doc title Defense Witness List listing three witnessess under Category A and otherwise incorperating "the entire State's Witness List by refernece."
The defendant's 'incorporation by reference" is an even less conscientous effort to name only those witnesses she expects to call at trail as is makes no reference to any particular filing and makes no accounting for amended or supplemental witness lists filed by the state.
Looks like Beaz made another booboo!!
Can't wait till the trial tomorrow.
01-29-2009, 04:29 PM #2
What a dope. Is he trying to be sneaky, or just lazy?
01-29-2009, 04:34 PM #3
Maybe has pays by the word for documents to be typed. LOL
01-29-2009, 04:50 PM #4
Is he just plain lazy or just plain dumb?
He is always trying to get someone to do his work for him, isn't he?
Jose seems to have his own issues with "feelings of entitlement". It's most bizarre. I'm surprised that some of those high powered members of the defense team want to put their name on the line by associating with him frankly.
01-29-2009, 04:52 PM #5
So let me get this straight...instead of listing witnesses...he said...
"yeah, whoever they are going to have share, me too" ?
Is this normal?
I feel like I am taking a law course here...
01-29-2009, 04:56 PM #6Neighborhood Watch is...
NOT the Vigilante Police
01-29-2009, 05:22 PM #7
01-29-2009, 06:44 PM #8
From my reading, the real issue is this:
From the state's motion:
"As noted in Dufour v. State. 495 So.2d 154 (Fla. 1986), the listing of witnesses by the defendant limits the prosecution's plenary power to subpoena witnesses and take ex parte testimony as to any violation of the criminal law within its jurisdiction (citing AbleBuilders Sanitation Co. v. State. 368 So.2d 1340 (Fla. 3d DCA), dismissed 373 So.2d 461(1979) and Florida Statute 27.04.)"
Apparently, after the defense provides a witness list to the state the state can't interview anyone on it without giving the defense notice and allowing them to attend the interview and examine the witness. If the state does so without notifying the defense and allowing attendence, the witness testimony can be excluded from trial or the whole indictment thrown out.
By listing the entire state's witness list, the state can't talk to any of their own witnesses without Baez breathing down their neck and questioning them as well. And, as noted in the motion, there is no accounting for ammended or supplemental witness lists filed by the state. In effect, the state can't speak to anyone without Baez present.
The original intent of the rule of law "serves the protective purpose of preventing the state from driving an unfair wedge between defense counsel and its key witnesses, through ex parte examination, during sensitive pretrial stages." Baez is attempting to use this rule as a "sword" instead of the "shield" it was meant to be.
Link to case cited in the state's motion:
(bottom of page 10 to page 12 for relevant part)
The judge will approve the state's motion and strike that part of the state's witness list, imo. It's a dirty trick. Baez should have known the state wouldn't let that witness list go unchallenged. He really is stupid.
01-29-2009, 06:44 PM #9Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
Did JB really pass a bar? Or/did he stumble into one?
Seriously, is it customary for a defense attorney, especially in a murder case, sit back and wait for the prosecution do all the work for him? I followed the OL trial closely and never saw the likes of such.
01-29-2009, 06:57 PM #10Registered User
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
Jose says he's doing the best he knows how.
I don't have confidence in him, and I think Casey is very much ignorant of the law and doesn't know any better. JB to her is a lawyer (impressive) and he is one of the few people she sees. He is her savior.
Jose. He's preparing for a major murder trial, and yet he's teaching a class, which means he has to prepare for that. All these bogus vanity (his) motions he's filing. How does he, or his firm, have time to take care of his paying customers?As I received information, and relayed it to the defendant after her arrest, she continued to claim ignorance and at times, laughed at the situation. She still failed to show any outward signs of remorse or concern for her missing two year old daughter.
--Yuri Melich, arrest warrant, July 16, 2008
01-29-2009, 07:21 PM #11
I thought Baez had brought in more experienced attorneys to help with this case because he was not qualified. What happened to them? Did they disappear when the death penalty was taken off the table?
01-29-2009, 07:24 PM #12
01-29-2009, 07:39 PM #13Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
01-29-2009, 07:46 PM #14
01-29-2009, 07:47 PM #15Former Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
I know people will hate me for saying this, but I have to say it!....
In my opinion, this is ridiculous. Sure, JB is inexperienced, and perhaps not very clever. But there is no way the Judge is not going to allow JB to rectify this, and IMO, it's a waste of court time and money for it to be argued. Why wouldn't the SA just pick up the phone and say "hey, I noticed you haven't amended your witness list to take into account our new witness list...I think you ought to get that done." Thousands of dollars and court time saved.
A good prosecutor doesn't take advantage of a defence lawyer's inexperience...they should be just as concerned that the accused gets a fair trial, after all, they work for the State.
By Celt1997 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years oldReplies: 727Last Post: 06-13-2011, 02:58 AM
By SoCalSleuth in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years oldReplies: 54Last Post: 01-25-2009, 03:34 PM
By JayBee1940 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years oldReplies: 1Last Post: 11-19-2008, 02:21 PM