2009.05.19. Casey Anthony Civil Hearing @ 10:00

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
seagull65 said:
it's called grief
Click to expand...

For once they actually looked kinda like you would think they should. Not defending them for their actions but this process has to be very emotionally and physically exhausting for them, and frankly they look as if this is finally taking its toll.
 
I had to take my daughter to school and missed most of the hearing. Is it over? I went to the link and nothing is coming up. Can someone give me a quick recap and judges decision on the motions heard? Or a link to the video of the hearing if it has been released. Please and Thank You. :blowkiss:
 
lin said:
Not one of the smart ones here but I'll try to explain: "Splitting the baby" is a very commonly used expression in legal circles. One may use it to describe a judge, for example, 'that judge always wants to split the baby.' I think the roots are Solomon's clever way of determining the real mother to settle a dispute between two women but in present day, it means the judge likes to give each side a little bit. When this judge used the expression, I inferred he meant that he was not that type of judge and that his rulings would be clear, based on the merits and he would not 'split the baby' by "giving" away something to the losing side. Hope that helps.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, my question wasn't very clear. I understood that part....but I didn't understand any of the legal stuff that was going on. What was the point of them being there, what was the outcome, etc. I AM glad that you went ahead and explained what the "splitting the baby" meant for others who weren't familiar with the story about Solomon and wanting to cut the child in half (one half for each of the women claiming the child) in order to see who the real mother was. Thanks, too, for putting it into the context of this case :)
 
lin said:
Then CA isn't giving her daughter credit for being as smart as the average rock, is she? rofl. Even KC recognized that as a scrivener's error.
Click to expand...

:waitasec: What? The point is, this ZG's lawyers have suggested that KC obtained this woman's name from that document. Why would KC then change the name, spelling, family details etc from those used on the document? What would be the point of choosing this woman to 'frame' in some way but then changing her name, spelling, and other details?
 
Since I live in California an missed the video, 3 hrs behind. is there anyplace I can watch it? I went to WFTV..but no luck
and is Leonard going to be live ?

Thank You..I have to set my clock earlier I guess..
 
BeanE said:
I disagree. It's called inappropriate anger and a refusal to accept responsibility, or have anyone in his family accept responsibility, for their behavior. With a good sized dose of paranoia thrown in. And a total disregard for the rights of others as well as the law.
Click to expand...

Excellent, as always, BeanE. I'd add 'shock and disbelief' as well because they always seem dumbfounded when slapped with reality.
 
MADJGNLAW said:
I had to take my daughter to school and missed most of the hearing. Is it over? I went to the link and nothing is coming up. Can someone give me a quick recap and judges decision on the motions heard? Or a link to the video of the hearing if it has been released. Please and Thank You. :blowkiss:
Click to expand...



please help us who missed it!! i need link to as none work i have tried
 
PotatoHead said:
Just want to point out that KASEN used the term first. Not the Judge.
Click to expand...

I don't like Kasen and I had a feeling that the Judge wasn't going to put up with any of his nonsense.

Was Judge Rodriguez just repeating Kasen?
 
DogMom2JoeAndWillie said:
I'm sorry, my question wasn't very clear. I understood that part....but I didn't understand any of the legal stuff that was going on. What was the point of them being there, what was the outcome, etc. I AM glad that you went ahead and explained what the "splitting the baby" meant for others who weren't familiar with the story about Solomon and wanting to cut the child in half (one half for each of the women claiming the child) in order to see who the real mother was. Thanks, too, for putting it into the context of this case :)
Click to expand...

The court refused to hear anything other than the motion to dismiss the suit because nothing else was scheduled for today. The ruling allowed the suit to go forward and allowed Mitnik to amend the original complaint and to sue for punitive damages. Was there anything specific you didn't understand?
 
PotatoHead said:
Kasen. Judge R responded to it, and to me, sounded offended, but I'll have to watch again when the tape is up to see if that was a correct interpretation.

p.s. @LIN - TY for the explanation of what 'splitting the baby' means in legal circles.
Click to expand...

Potatohead,

ITA with you, it was Kasen who said "the court was splitting the baby" and the Judge IMO, sounded VERY offended, as he quickly said WE are NOT or I was NOT splitting the Baby. I don't think it was meant by either of them though as ANY offense or in bad taste. Just as Lin said, just an old saying and probably just a bad choice of words. These lawyers and judges have tons of cases and this is NOT on their minds 24/7. So, it was just a faux pas, IMO.

I did think though, when the judge said they were in a different position than they were months ago regarding KC answering questions and they could revisit postponing this until AFTER the criminal case, it was a hint that WILL happen.

In the meantime though, more information will get to be heard from GA and CA though. But KC will NEVER be answering ANYTHING about THIS case until after the criminal trial.

I also found it interesting that Kasen said, they have never seen it in writing that ZG will drop her suit, if, in fact, KC will just point to this ZG ans say it is NOT her. Why NOT just do that and see if it gets dropped? This would probably be over. I don't see how it could hurt KC's case AT ALL.
 
Just another impression about the offensive figure of speech. Things happen fast in court when you're participating. While I'm sure the judge would see the problem with the statement in context, my impression was that he was reacting with some disapproval at the moment to the demeaning of his prior ruling. The suggestion was that it was just some attempt to give everybody something, as if he hadn't thought it out or had a reason for what he ruled. He seemed to me to be sort of bristling at that suggestion by the defense. That isn't to say he is heartless and doesn't care about the question of taste, or wouldn't upon reflection.
 
Sprout said:
I don't like Kasen and I had a feeling that the Judge wasn't going to put up with any of his nonsense.

Was Judge Rodriguez just repeating Kasen?
Click to expand...

Yes, responding to his statement, I thought. Perhaps it was reverse? But, I do believe it was Kasen first.
 
seagull65 said:
it's called grief
Click to expand...
grief pertaining to the motion hearing or grief over
caylee's murder? He appears to remain in a state of anger and frustration to me. CA appeared to me to look like a child who is afraid of possible punishment for lying and snotty disrespectful attitude. Good thing CA left her jewelry home and carry herself as if she is worn down. CA new the judge read those depos and was watching for any antagonistic behavior in his courtroom. After today it appears this judge isn't going to stand for any antics out of anyone.
 
MD MOMMY said:
No b/c thanks to KC there aren't any more babies to split..what is that????? OMG it's splitting HAIRS not babies. I'm going to run and hide, this is ridiculous. That comment struck a nerve..sorry.:mad:
Click to expand...

MDMOMMY, the reference to 'splitting babies' is in the story of Solomon the judge in the Bible. Which is the real mother? The one who would hand over the baby to keep it unharmed, or the one who would 'split' it in half?
 
Hi all, I'm pretty new here (great stuff!) (& lots of it!). I'm sure that this has already been mentioned somewhere in this vast forum and I've simply not found it yet in the meaty reading here, but...I'm curious about something, if anyone can help point me in the right direction.

I support ZFG's civil defamation suit, but have always wondered if ZFG has any sort of alibi-like proof of her whereabouts when Caylee was last seen/died -- does anyone know? For example, has she been able in any way to definitively disprove Casey's claims by proving her whereabouts on June 16th & the days following?

Many thanks in advance!
 
amethyst221 said:
Just another impression about the offensive figure of speech. Things happen fast in court when you're participating. While I'm sure the judge would see the problem with the statement in context, my impression was that he was reacting with some disapproval at the moment to the demeaning of his prior ruling. The suggestion was that it was just some attempt to give everybody something, as if he hadn't thought it out or had a reason for what he ruled. He seemed to me to be sort of bristling at that suggestion by the defense. That isn't to say he is heartless and doesn't care about the question of taste, or wouldn't upon reflection.
Click to expand...

TY. Good explanation. I think you are right.
 
Shrimpdip said:
Hi all, I'm pretty new here (great stuff!) (& lots of it!). I'm sure that this has already been mentioned somewhere in this vast forum and I've simply not found it yet in the meaty reading here, but...I'm curious about something, if anyone can help point me in the right direction.

I support ZFG's civil defamation suit, but have always wondered if ZFG has any sort of alibi-like proof of her whereabouts when Caylee was last seen/died -- does anyone know? For example, has she been able in any way to definitively disprove Casey's claims by proving her whereabouts on June 16th & the days following?

Many thanks in advance!
Click to expand...

Welcome! Great question!
 
Sprout said:
I missed the splitting babies comment. Who said it?
Click to expand...

King Soloman was trying to determine the true intentions of two women and said he would split the baby so they would each have half, of course one spoke up and said no, let the child live, let her take him. It is in the bible in Kings if I am not mistaken. This is a common phrase used when a judge is in a situation where he/she is trying to discern the litigants true intentions in my opinion. In this case, if you listen very closely it was Casey's lawyer who said it. Coming from him, representing a woman accused of murdering her daughter and disposing of her like trash, it was so inappropriate. In a lesser context it is an innocuous comment, here it is unforgivable. Where does she find these folks? Like Jose, his documents are prepared wrong, filed incorrectly and he is ill prepared for the hearings, not to mention conducts himself unprofessionally , wasting the court's time with childish remarks. If any law students are watching, this is a good lesson in what not to do. If it weren't so serious, it would seem like an episode of SNL mocking lawyers, right?
 
PotatoHead said:
*doing a lil' happy dance*

There will be questions answered! And we'll be seeing the first dollops of justice in this case.

Conga Line? cha-cha-cha-cha-cha- CHA!
Click to expand...

Too cute PH - :)

PotatoHead said:
ITA!

And, the punitive damages are going to take a big bite out of someone's ca-ching. :woohoo:
Click to expand...


Now this news calls for a repeat of your "cha-cha-cha-cha-cha- CHA!"
:bananapowerslide: :sponge: :Banane59: :genie: :Banane23:
 
will the punitive damages be against Cindy and George as well as Casey?

Casey has no Cha-ching :) But I'll bet a tim horton's coffee, the Anthony's have some :)

OOH! and does this mean Zenaida will get all of casey's Commisary money!!?? hehe
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 84 more.
Total: 4,286 (members: 85, guests: 4,201)

Online statistics

Members online
85
Guests online
4,201
Total visitors
4,286
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,402
Messages
17,968,432
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top