2008.12.11 Lt. Tammy Uncer Interview "Jail worker who saw KC's reaction"

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tracey276

New Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
257
Reaction score
0
If there is another thread on this, please feel free to delete and move my post. I didn't see one. I had a couple of questions about this.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/18941559/detail.html#-

Why does Baez think there was some conspiracy here to get KC to reveal some big news?

Also, the statement by NeJame is confusing to me. What law is violated here by the state if they followed procedure and she was in a common reception area of the jail? She wasn't in a medical room talking to a medical professional.

"Can the state question a corrections officer about their observations? Yes. However, if the corrections officer was acting as an arm of law enforcement or the state attorney's office and it was done secretly, there's some real trouble with that," NeJame said.
 
Tracey276 said:
If there is another thread on this, please feel free to delete and move my post. I didn't see one. I had a couple of questions about this.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/18941559/detail.html#-

Why does Baez think there was some conspiracy here to get KC to reveal some big news?

Also, the statement by NeJame is confusing to me. What law is violated here by the state if they followed procedure and she was in a common reception area of the jail? She wasn't in a medical room talking to a medical professional.

"Can the state question a corrections officer about their observations? Yes. However, if the corrections officer was acting as an arm of law enforcement or the state attorney's office and it was done secretly, there's some real trouble with that," NeJame said.
Click to expand...


My italic-my interpretation of this is that if the Lt. was put into place intentionally as part of a set up to observe Casey's reactions and her meeting with Baez outside of normal procedure, then the SA stepped in it.
 
Oh boy, this situation is scaring me. Surely LE and SA thought this through first, but everything was happening so fast about that time. It's just too important to be thrown out. Please puleezzee let it be ok.
 
I don't understand the problem either. To me, it seems that NeJame is implying that the officer was doing his job covertly, but I don't believe that is the case here. Of course, I have no legal background, so that's just my opinion. Baez is just looking to stir up trouble as usual.
 
FWIW, I think that the SA is OK-I do firmly believe that viewing her reaction to remains of a child being found 1/8 th of a mile from her house prior to the remains being ID'd is a legitimate part of an ongoing investigation....even though they suspected it was Caylee because of the Winnie the Pooh blanket et al, they knew from her watching the BP search where she showed no reaction whatsoever that there was no connection to the park. JMHO.

I think if there is a paper trail for the set up and they in fact delayed Baez's access to his client while this was being done, then the SA certainly looks sneaky at a minimum. Which is why I think the tape may be suppressed from evidence in the long run...

I guess I do not get where any other issue would be-she was in an area that is regularly filmed, the camera was not set up to film her because it is fixed. The tape was copied before it was destroyed by being copied over-it certainly is harder to impeach a tape than a witness, which is why Baez is whining, I think.
 
As long as the officer was not told specifically to SPY on Casey by SA - it all should be fine as the officer would just then be a witness. How could the officer have Kc's medical history? Weird.
 
My concern is.. Why did they have Casey watching T.V news at this VERY MOMENT??:waitasec:
They had to take her to "see" the TV. This is not like Casey was watching TV and the news came on. This is like.... We found the body.. it is on the news.. take Casey to watch the news in a Video Survellianced area so we can catch her reaction. Kinda seems staged doesn't it??? :confused:

Meanwhile, we were being told that she was in her cell and a prision minister told her the news. :yes:

I am not for Casey by a long shot. But why why why.... did they have her watching tv at this very moment??? I thought that she was taken to a medical area.. told the news and video taped because that specific area is always video taped. Geez, why did they let her find out by watching the news? :tsktsk:

This is the only place I think the prison screwed up. I also think the prision guard yakked to much to family, friends and the news... just for a little attention. "sources say" and all that jazz. I also think this is the very reason that LE sent a strong message about leaks. They know Uncer... LEAKED.

Should the SA or LE question the guard about her reaction... YES. Could they have broke the news to her more professionally? YES.
Did they mean to "set this up"? It is questionable because... why was she let out to ge the news from the TV???? :tsktsk:
 
ibyoungr said:
My concern is.. Why did they have Casey watching T.V news at this VERY MOMENT??:waitasec:
They had to take her to "see" the TV. This is not like Casey was watching TV and the news came on. This is like.... We found the body.. it is on the news.. take Casey to watch the news in a Video Survellianced area so we can catch her reaction. Kinda seems staged doesn't it??? :confused:

Meanwhile, we were being told that she was in her cell and a prision minister told her the news. :yes:

I am not for Casey by a long shot. But why why why.... did they have her watching tv at this very moment??? I thought that she was taken to a medical area.. told the news and video taped because that specific area is always video taped. Geez, why did they let her find out by watching the news? :tsktsk:

This is the only place I think the prison screwed up. I also think the prision guard yakked to much to family, friends and the news... just for a little attention. "sources say" and all that jazz. I also think this is the very reason that LE sent a strong message about leaks. They know Uncer... LEAKED.

Should the SA or LE question the guard about her reaction... YES. Could they have broke the news to her more professionally? YES.
Did they mean to "set this up"? It is questionable because... why was she let out to ge the news from the TV???? :tsktsk:
Click to expand...

A prison minister delivered the news that the body had been ID'd as Caylee's...on 12/18 IIRC. The surveillance camera picked up Casey hearing about the initial discovery on 12/11.

I still do not have a problem with this technique. I do think she should have been in the medical area of the prison, because knowing her history like the personnel did, they needed to make sure that she had any treatment she needed....case in point, she needed drugs because she was hyperventilating.
 
Mendara said:
As long as the officer was not told specifically to SPY on Casey by SA - it all should be fine as the officer would just then be a witness. How could the officer have Kc's medical history? Weird.
Click to expand...

All facilities differ, but IF this officer was escorting KC to the infirmary for medical reasons prior to her viewing the coverage of the remains being found, it's possible that the officer had her inmate file which the officer may have had permission to read - thus knowing personal medical information/history regarding KC that is priviledged under privacy laws. Or the officer may have had information regarding her medical history because she was on her way to the infirmary....heck I'm just grabbin' straws here. Personally, if they need this evidence to convict, their case isn't very strong against her. Let's hope this is a red herring.
 
believe09 said:
A prison minister delivered the news that the body had been ID'd as Caylee's...on 12/18 IIRC. The surveillance camera picked up Casey hearing about the initial discovery on 12/11.

I still do not have a problem with this technique. I do think she should have been in the medical area of the prison, because knowing her history like the personnel did, they needed to make sure that she had any treatment she needed....case in point, she needed drugs because she was hyperventilating.
Click to expand...

thanks for clarifying. I went back to some old news articles and found that it was the minister that told her it was Caylee. However, I still think it was ODD that she was watching the news on 12/11 unless they were wanting to video her reaction.

I think they should have NOT let her watch the news... they should have told her in her cell or medical treatment area. I just do not want Team Casey having ANY reason to win anything.
 
I was thinking that they told her about finding remains and she then asked for medication, thus the trip to the medical area ?
 
Searchfortruth said:
I was thinking that they told her about finding remains and she then asked for medication, thus the trip to the medical area ?
Click to expand...

Better for the State if word had already come in (before it hit the media) and they were moving her to the medical area as a precaution (without telling her why.) Then, she might have seen it on the tv while passing through the common area, which is filmed constantly anyway, and the tapes caught her reaction at that time.

Lt. Tammy Uncer would then have seen the reaction in the normal course of escorting KC from one area to another, and the tapes would have been running regardless, as they've already reported they do in the common areas.

That would be a more defensible position for the jail that could not be misconstrued as 'spying' for the State.
 
believe09 said:
My italic-my interpretation of this is that if the Lt. was put into place intentionally as part of a set up to observe Casey's reactions and her meeting with Baez outside of normal procedure, then the SA stepped in it.
Click to expand...

But I don't understand the issue. The whole point of the cameras and talking to the jail mates, is to gather information from the inmate about the crime they commited. It might not be used in the courtroom, but the information would be used to find evidnece, witnesses, etc. What i"m hearing, sounds like that was the intent. By watching her reaction, it's like playing a game of "hot/cold.' The JBP search was cold, based upon her reported reactions. The find near her home was really, really 'hot' based upon her reactions.

The 'set up' might have only been for looking for clues to see if they are on the right track and need to keep searching by her home. Not execting it to be used in the courtroom.

What I would like to know, is if it's considered wrong, what does it effect? That it just wouldn't be allowed in the courtroom?
 
On 12/11/08 all of the local t.v. stations were carrying the live coverage of the discovery of "remains of a child".......just 15 houses from KC's house.......so unless the jail has cable or satellite service, the news was all you would see on local channels. I think that the decision to have her taken to the medical area where no doubt a t.v. was installed and playing was a stroke of genius.......until and unless the supposed "leak" of information was made public........."LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS"
 
PotatoHead said:
Better for the State if word had already come in (before it hit the media) and they were moving her to the medical area as a precaution (without telling her why.) Then, she might have seen it on the tv while passing through the common area, which is filmed constantly anyway, and the tapes caught her reaction at that time.

Lt. Tammy Uncer would then have seen the reaction in the normal course of escorting KC from one area to another, and the tapes would have been running regardless, as they've already reported they do in the common areas.

That would be a more defensible position for the jail that could not be misconstrued as 'spying' for the State.
Click to expand...
I agree, much better if the move was for a reason and they can back that up. I remember the atty for the jail, county, saying that they always take inmates to medical when a loved one has passed or other tragic circumstances. If they can prove that it was SOP and not specific to THIS situation I think it may be admissable.
 
Tracey276 said:
If there is another thread on this, please feel free to delete and move my post. I didn't see one. I had a couple of questions about this.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/18941559/detail.html#-

Why does Baez think there was some conspiracy here to get KC to reveal some big news?

Also, the statement by NeJame is confusing to me. What law is violated here by the state if they followed procedure and she was in a common reception area of the jail? She wasn't in a medical room talking to a medical professional.

"Can the state question a corrections officer about their observations? Yes. However, if the corrections officer was acting as an arm of law enforcement or the state attorney's office and it was done secretly, there's some real trouble with that," NeJame said.
Click to expand...

He doesn't!
But it is his job to try and find every loophole, precident, crack, and crevice that can save his client's scrawny behind. Therefore, he will try (even when chances are slim) to bombard the court with motions and requests that can weed out as much damage as possible.
 
Searchfortruth said:
I agree, much better if the move was for a reason and they can back that up. I remember the atty for the jail, county, saying that they always take inmates to medical when a loved one has passed or other tragic circumstances. If they can prove that it was SOP and not specific to THIS situation I think it may be admissable.
Click to expand...

I agree. The representative for the jail did indeed state that they had followed standard policy and procedure. I also believe it may be admissible if it does not conflict with any HIPPA laws.
 
Clock's Tickin said:
He doesn't!
But it is his job to try and find every loophole, precident, crack, and crevice that can save his client's scrawny behind. Therefore, he will try (even when chances are slim) to bombard the court with motions and requests that can weed out as much damage as possible.
Click to expand...


And for that, I'm thankful ..
Shows us just how desperate team Casey really is! :D
 
"Can the state question a corrections officer about their observations? Yes. However, if the corrections officer was acting as an arm of law enforcement or the state attorney's office and it was done secretly, there's some real trouble with that," NeJame said. (Bold by me)

This is very confusing. Of course a corrections officer is an arm of law enforcement. I don't understand his point. He may be getting at the fact that they are eliciting some kind of “testimony” in a sense without the presence of her attorney, however, jail inmates are always under video surveillance so it may have been just sneaky enough for the state to get away with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 204 more.
Total: 3,719 (members: 205, guests: 3,514)

Online statistics

Members online
205
Guests online
3,514
Total visitors
3,719
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,812
Messages
17,959,283
Members
228,612
Latest member
boymom0304
Back
Top