Casey Anthony Answers Questions In Civil Suit Or Did JB? Legal Implications

Oakley

New Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
3,990
Reaction score
0
So instead of pleading the 5th amendment, Casey (or her attorney) chose to answer the question. What, if anything, will this mean for the pending criminal case?


Casey Anthony Answers Questions In Civil Suit
Posted: 12:35 pm EST March 4, 2009
Updated: 12:44 pm EST March 4, 2009
<snipped>
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- Eyewitness News has learned Casey Anthony did answer questions under oath and in writing in a civil lawsuit she's facing.
Zenaida Gonzalez's attorney, John Morgan, submitted 17 different topics, some with multiple related questions, for Casey to answer as part of her deposition in the case.
Of the 29 total questions, Casey answered to only two. Casey wrote her name to answer the question asking for it, but had a much stronger response to another question.
"Were you involved in the death of Caylee?" question 17 asks.
"The defendant would object to the question and would move to strike it. This question is being brought solely to embarrass, harass and brought in an attempt to implicate the Defendant in an on-going criminal prosecution for First (1st) Degree Murder," Casey responded.
The document was signed by Casey and dated February 25.

A court hearing is scheduled for May 19 when Casey's attorney will attempt to get the lawsuit thrown out.
 
So instead of pleading the 5th amendment, Casey (or Jose) chose to answer the question. What, if anything, will this mean for the pending criminal case?


Casey Anthony Answers Questions In Civil Suit
Posted: 12:35 pm EST March 4, 2009
Updated: 12:44 pm EST March 4, 2009
<snipped>
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- Eyewitness News has learned Casey Anthony did answer questions under oath and in writing in a civil lawsuit she's facing.
Zenaida Gonzalez's attorney, John Morgan, submitted 17 different topics, some with multiple related questions, for Casey to answer as part of her deposition in the case.
Of the 29 total questions, Casey answered to only two. Casey wrote her name to answer the question asking for it, but had a much stronger response to another question.
"Were you involved in the death of Caylee?" question 17 asks.
"The defendant would object to the question and would move to strike it. This question is being brought solely to embarrass, harass and brought in an attempt to implicate the Defendant in an on-going criminal prosecution for First (1st) Degree Murder," Casey responded.
The document was signed by Casey and dated February 25.

A court hearing is scheduled for May 19 when Casey's attorney will attempt to get the lawsuit thrown out.


Sounds like JB- as he used the defendant instead of I.......
But he does speak KC-nese
 
I thought she had a civil attny handling that case??
 
I thought she had a civil attny handling that case??

I believe you are correct. Heading is probably wrong - my first thread - sorry! I was wondering what implications this response would have (as opposed to pleading the fifth) on the criminal case. Any ideas anyone?
 
Having worked for attorneys most of my life - her attorney would have standard objections to those interrogatory questions. KC would have just signed the prepared document.
 
Having worked for attorneys most of my life - her attorney would have standard objections to those interrogatory questions. KC would have just signed the prepared document.

Why not just plead the fifth? This is an answer so I am thinking it might mean something. I have no legal background, am simply trying to understand the difference between answering and pleading the fifth. Perhaps there is no difference.

ETA: Thanks, EmMomma!
 
JB didn't object to the question "Do you know who killed Caylee", just the one asking if she did it. To me, JB's actions all show he knows KC killed Caylee, he just won't say how or why. That's a big surprise for the trial. :waitasec:
 
Why not just plead the fifth? This is an answer so I am thinking it might mean something. I have no legal background, am simply trying to understand the difference between answering and pleading the fifth. Perhaps there is no difference.

ETA: Thanks, EmMomma!

You're welcome. :)

If you read the PDF (first link) she did invoke her 5th amendment rights for every question except "state your name". :rolleyes:
 
You're welcome. :)

If you read the PDF (first link) she did invoke her 5th amendment rights for every question except "state your name". :rolleyes:

And this one: Were you involved in the death of Caylee?
 
Exactly. I'm surprised the terms "overly broad, burdensome and ambiguous" didn't come in there.
 
JB didn't object to the question "Do you know who killed Caylee", just the one asking if she did it. To me, JB's actions all show he knows KC killed Caylee, he just won't say how or why. That's a big surprise for the trial. :waitasec:

This is the sort of information I was wondering about, thank you.
 
That's lawyer talk, not something Casey would know to say. Obviously, there is a PR purpose to this, since she could have just asserted her 5th amendment rights in answer, as she did elsewhere. She's sending the message that she's innocent through this different objection, but isn't "answering" (admitting or denying, saying yes or no) and waiving her rights. I'd be careful about getting too cute in making a sort of "speaking" objection, though. A person could end up waiving their rights. But you could see this coming when the court ruled the way it did.
 
That's lawyer talk, not something Casey would know to say. Obviously, there is a PR purpose to this, since she could have just asserted her 5th amendment rights in answer, as she did elsewhere. She's sending the message that she's innocent through this different objection, but isn't "answering" (admitting or denying, saying yes or no) and waiving her rights. I'd be careful about getting too cute in making a sort of "speaking" objection, though. A person could end up waiving their rights. But you could see this coming when the court ruled the way it did.

I wonder if this "innocent" response will open a can of worms. Kind of like, anything you say may be used against you?
 
Below is a snippet of the Orlando Sentinel report on the written deposition.I wonder if the Judge will make Casey answer these questions ? Any legal eagles out there willing to give their opinion's on what the Judge is likely to do ?

"Now, the lawyers for Zenaida Gonzalez, 38-year-old mother of six, are going to ask a judge to force Anthony to answer the questions."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...-zenaida-gonzalez-suit-030409,0,7376494.story
 
Well, one way to know FOR SURE that JB is responsible is that the document is in PDF format, not handwritten. No computer in the pokey for the perp...:boohoo:
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
79
Guests online
2,411
Total visitors
2,490

Forum statistics

Threads
590,013
Messages
17,928,987
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top