2010.06.01 - Defense Motion for Tips

Jomo said:

You bring up a very good point! If those tips were really so important, you would think that a meazly 1,500.00 would be easily paid from the 200,000.00 given.

Now I don't recall for certain but I am pretty sure the photos and videos were sold before the baby was found (backpack full to JB's office while she was out). You would think that they would have paid the copying fees for the tips prior to Caylee being found so that they could assist in the search!

Of course, we all know they were not interested in the tips and the search when it counted the most. They only want them now to serve themselves and to create more victims a-la-Kronk style!

Click to expand...

Jomo, they went though hundreds of thousand of dollars and you are correct for a measily $1500 he could have picked up those tips a year ago but didn't.

He now wants them as well as Joe Jordan's illegal tape to create reasonable doubt. My hope is that whatever jurors are seated will see through all the smoke and mirrors and do the right thing for Caylee.

Cheny is truly putting on a circus and hope he stays true to himself and as he stated when commentating on this case, in the end ICA will get LWOP..JMHO

Justice for Caylee

notthatsmart said:

Some of us are not rich and can not just drop a thousand bucks just like that. I do not expect defense attorneys to use out of pocket money. She is indigent and the Judge wants them to come to him for money. I do not see the problem here. Moo

Click to expand...

The problem with this line of thinking is that these tips were available rather early on in this case. Back before the defense received money from ABC, Todd M., and such I believe. These tips should have been paid for and picked up at that point (when the defense received said money). To my knowledge the money and expenditures still don't add up either.

The main point being the defense did have the money at one point and did not pay for and pick up these tips. Much of this case should have already been completed back when the defense did have money. That and lets not forget JB was paid 90k for his "work" on this case.

Ummmm, maybe someone should sent JB the link to the docstore website and he would be able to view all the released docs, tips included as we have. The mans diet has to change; he is consuming far too much cheese with his whine.

It's a moot point now since HHJP authorized 2K to get the tips from the sheriffs office.

notthatsmart said:

Some of us are not rich and can not just drop a thousand bucks just like that. I do not expect defense attorneys to use out of pocket money. She is indigent and the Judge wants them to come to him for money. I do not see the problem here. Moo

Click to expand...

Baez claims he paid $1000 and received psychic tips, is this not correct? Had Baez, or an employee of his office, gone to OCSO, and gone through the tips, they could have easily weeded out these tips that Baez referred to, IIRC, as 'junk', and saved themselves the $1000. Is this not correct?

IIRC, Baez stated in court he has received somewhere around $90,000 in payment for his services, though he doesn't seem to have any record of billable hours. Is it really that unreasonable to you for Baez, or an employee of his firm even, to actually go through some paperwork and pick out what they want? It is my understanding there is more to representing a client than filing motions, appearing in court, and giving press releases, but maybe I am mistaken. I'm just going by what my friends and family members who are attorneys and paralegals do in their line of work, maybe things are different in Florida?

marspiter said:

The problem with this line of thinking is that these tips were available rather early on in this case. Back before the defense received money from ABC, Todd M., and such I believe. These tips should have been paid for and picked up at that point (when the defense received said money). To my knowledge the money and expenditures still don't add up either.

The main point being the defense did have the money at one point and did not pay for and pick up these tips. Much of this case should have already been completed back when the defense did have money. That and lets not forget JB was paid 90k for his "work" on this case.

Click to expand...

I see nothing wrong with Jb being paid 90k for his work. I think Todd or any other donor could allocate their donated money to whatever part of the defense they wanted. It sounded to me like these tips were not available and that there is some kind of misunderstanding about putting in motions for certain things. Jb was making it clear that someone at the sherrifs office was only providing phychic tips. Sa went ahead and made all the coppies for them since the Sherrifs office was being difficult IMO. At anyrate there was a mix up and now the Judge has approved the money for the records request. It is my opinion that these records were not always available.

How can the defense move on and move toward completion when the state is being difficult with discovery? It is my opinion that this trial will not move forward until the state turns over all discovery. The state turns over all discovery first, then the defense knows what they are defending against, in that order. That is my opinion. Yesterday the Judge took control of that situation and approved to pay for the tips. Now we can move on. IMO

Lanie said:

Baez claims he paid $1000 and received psychic tips, is this not correct? Had Baez, or an employee of his office, gone to OCSO, and gone through the tips, they could have easily weeded out these tips that Baez referred to, IIRC, as 'junk', and saved themselves the $1000. Is this not correct?

IIRC, Baez stated in court he has received somewhere around $90,000 in payment for his services, though he doesn't seem to have any record of billable hours. Is it really that unreasonable to you for Baez, or an employee of his firm even, to actually go through some paperwork and pick out what they want? It is my understanding there is more to representing a client than filing motions, appearing in court, and giving press releases, but maybe I am mistaken. I'm just going by what my friends and family members who are attorneys and paralegals do in their line of work, maybe things are different in Florida?

Click to expand...

I personally love how HHJP keeps mentioning that dreaded chore "depo" over and over again.....depo = work! go figure!!! They have wasted so much time chasing after reasonable doubt....its truly a shame!!! I think they are running scared now because now they do have some deadlines and I think HHJP will make them keep them! As he mentioned 98% of this should be done...my guess is that the defense is still working on the 3% ----:furious: Interesting that everytime this comes up jb does that sad little whine...didn't go over the first time why try it again....I hope soon he will take his comedy act off and play lawyer...none of his little "jokes" go over...(i.e., yesterday implying that HHJP could meet in his neck of the woods on that June hearing date):twocents:

Aedrys said:

The defense is wanting the tips brought to them and paid for by someone else. HHJP told them, NO, go them yourself and pay out of your own pocket to be reimbursed by the state!

I do NOT understand why the defense can't do simple things like pay for things, and pick up things. What kind of court is Baez used to practicing in? Clown court? Doitallforme court? I can't believe he passed law school, much less the bar!
It seems like the entire defense just keeps on sinking itself! I mean how are they going to put together a good argument when they can't get off of their lazy butts to get the material they need to do that? It's like they're just going to run around in circles until they get tired and just ask for a plea deal. Sheesh.

Click to expand...

RBBM

I agree that Baez is WAAAAAY out of his league with this case and seems extremely inexperienced with a capital case or lazy or some combination thereof. I do not know much about his firm, their finiancial situation, etc. But I will say that many small law firms are simply unable to tackle a large, high profile case such as this because contrary to popular belief, all lawyers are not rich and all law firms do not have endless cash reserves to work with.

Perhaps Mr. Baez is in such poor financial shape that he quite literally cannot afford to continue to outlay funds for filing fees, copy fees, etc. and wait for reimbursement later. If that is the case - He may want to reconsider filing all the frivilous, baseless motions. Maybe save a few pennies. KWIM? lol

notthatsmart said:

I see nothing wrong with Jb being paid 90k for his work. I think Todd or any other donor could allocate their donated money to whatever part of the defense they wanted. It sounded to me like these tips were not available and that there is some kind of misunderstanding about putting in motions for certain things. Jb was making it clear that someone at the sherrifs office was only providing phychic tips. Sa went ahead and made all the coppies for them since the Sherrifs office was being difficult IMO. At anyrate there was a mix up and now the Judge has approved the money for the records request. It is my opinion that these records were not always available.

How can the defense move on and move toward completion when the state is being difficult with discovery? It is my opinion that this trial will not move forward until the state turns over all discovery. The state turns over all discovery first, then the defense knows what they are defending against, in that order. That is my opinion. Yesterday the Judge took control of that situation and approved to pay for the tips. Now we can move on. IMO

Click to expand...

Oh, Yes it will. The honorable Judge Perry will make sure of that.

RainyGirl said:

Oh Lordy Lordy...the TIPS! :crazy:
Please forgive my extreme eye-rolling this late evening but I just finished bugging my poor hubby (who just wants to get some sleep...lol) because I wanted his professional opinion (note: just opinion here!!!) on what this defense motion is all about.

His answers to all my questions???

"Fishing expedition---fishing for possible suspects---more fishing---yeah, fishing there----did I mention FISHING for any crumb of reasonable doubt?-they're looking for more innocent folks to add to their flimsy "Kronk-pile"---fishing------yep, the fish-word-----fishing for anything there that could be called exculpatory for their case----Nope, won't find anything there I bet----more fishy-fishing----Nope, sounds like LE did their job----Yep, she was the natural suspect-----come 'on Hon, I already TOLD you it's about fishing here!!"

:blushing: Nighty Nite!

Click to expand...

Well fishing may be okay. When you believe your client is innocent and the State believes she is guilty, your going to look at things differently. Problem is, is that the state whom thinks the client is guilty, is the keeper of the data. The law clearly supports the defenses right to discovery. The defense should have the right to look over the data and see if Le missed anything important. Call it fishing if you will. Obviously the Le did not take Rk tip serious enough to go down into the water and check it out. So in my opinion, the Le has shown me that they don't always act as though it is important. IE the Rk tip, IE the JJ tip, sealing the pontiac. A fishing we must go. IMO

notthatsmart said:

Well fishing may be okay. When you believe your client is innocent and the State believes she is guilty, your going to look at things differently. Problem is, is that the state whom thinks the client is guilty, is the keeper of the data. The law clearly supports the defenses right to discovery. The defense should have the right to look over the data and see if Le missed anything important. Call it fishing if you will. Obviously the Le did not take Rk tip serious enough to go down into the water and check it out. So in my opinion, the Le has shown me that they don't always act as though it is important. IE the Rk tip, IE the JJ tip, sealing the pontiac. A fishing we must go. IMO

Click to expand...

What this tells me IMO, is the defense, at this late date, still has nothing!

notthatsmart said:

I see nothing wrong with Jb being paid 90k for his work. I think Todd or any other donor could allocate their donated money to whatever part of the defense they wanted. It sounded to me like these tips were not available and that there is some kind of misunderstanding about putting in motions for certain things. Jb was making it clear that someone at the sherrifs office was only providing phychic tips. Sa went ahead and made all the coppies for them since the Sherrifs office was being difficult IMO. At anyrate there was a mix up and now the Judge has approved the money for the records request. It is my opinion that these records were not always available.

How can the defense move on and move toward completion when the state is being difficult with discovery? It is my opinion that this trial will not move forward until the state turns over all discovery. The state turns over all discovery first, then the defense knows what they are defending against, in that order. That is my opinion. Yesterday the Judge took control of that situation and approved to pay for the tips. Now we can move on. IMO

Click to expand...

Well it's been 24 hours has the defense picked up these tips yet? The judge gave them the money so whats the hold up now? Personally if it's that important I would have been there that day picking them up or first thing this morning.

I keep seeing the accusations that the state is purposely trying to with hold information or act in an unprofessional manner. Many times the defense has been told there is a process and that process must be followed. I have seen numerous examples of the defense not following said protocols. Case in point the defense still owed $200 dollars for the tips according to the hearing.

A representative of the defense had actually stopped by to collect the tips and then left with out obtaining them if I recall from the hearing.

Also I believe JB wasn't specific when he first asked for "tips". I believe he asked for "tips" that were called into the hotline. He made a broad request and was given 5000 plus tips which he did not want to pay for. To me it's akin to walking into Wendy's and ordering the entire dollar menu and after you get it you refuse to pay because what you really wanted was the meal combo number 1.

In other wards judging from the hearing I took it as the confusing was created by the defense. The judge ordered JB to get it done. I guess we'll see how long it takes for the defense to comply with the courts order. The SA stated the requested records are ready and available.

OT but may I say marspiter, I really like your new avatar and siggy

notthatsmart said:

Well fishing may be okay. When you believe your client is innocent and the State believes she is guilty, your going to look at things differently. Problem is, is that the state whom thinks the client is guilty, is the keeper of the data. The law clearly supports the defenses right to discovery. The defense should have the right to look over the data and see if Le missed anything important. Call it fishing if you will. Obviously the Le did not take Rk tip serious enough to go down into the water and check it out. So in my opinion, the Le has shown me that they don't always act as though it is important. IE the Rk tip, IE the JJ tip, sealing the pontiac. A fishing we must go. IMO

Click to expand...

*Bolded by me*

Discovery in the state of Florida is reciprocal. There are no Perry Mason moments in Florida courts. The defense by law is to hand over any evidence it plans to use at trial to the prosecution as well. So far the defense has handed over.........? *jeopardy theme*

marspiter said:

*Bolded by me*

Discovery in the state of Florida is reciprocal. There are no Perry Mason moments in Florida courts. The defense by law is to hand over any evidence it plans to use at trial to the prosecution as well. So far the defense has handed over.........? *jeopardy theme*

Click to expand...

That's what I don't understand. Why does prosecution have GA's grand jury testimony and defense does not. This is a question I asked my husband last night. I thought grand jury testimony was SECRET. Does prosecution have it (the State), and the defense does not? That is not possible, IMO.

dunlurken said:

That's what I don't understand. Why does prosecution have GA's grand jury testimony and defense does not. This is a question I asked my husband last night. I thought grand jury testimony was SECRET. Does prosecution have it (the State), and the defense does not? That is not possible, IMO.

Click to expand...

There is actually a very good discussion/explanation of this very question over on the questions for verified legal experts thread.

dunlurken said:

That's what I don't understand. Why does prosecution have GA's grand jury testimony and defense does not. This is a question I asked my husband last night. I thought grand jury testimony was SECRET. Does prosecution have it (the State), and the defense does not? That is not possible, IMO.

Click to expand...

The SA is present at the GJ hearing as it is the SA who brings forth the charges and evidence to the GJ. GA was a witness for the SA at the GJ. For the state a GJ is a way to test it's case and evidence before trial to ensure that the charges are correct. The proceedings are normally held in secret to protect a potential jury pool imho.

The SA wanted a transcript of GA's GJ testimony because the SA believes that GA has made comments that contradict his GJ testimony.

So basically to answer your question the SA would already be aware of what went on during the GJ proceedings and the defense would not. So as my tech guy would say. Everything is working as the system intended.

Once again JB demonstrates what a [unusual person] he is. Last year he filed a request for ALL tips--then he complained to the judge that they wanted him to pay for it (par for the course), then he complained that they gave him all the tips when really he only wanted specific tips-well, that's what he asked for--they are not mind readers! Now he's saying they didn't provide unsolicited emails to LE regarding one individual's opinion on whether or not Caylee was in the woods at a particular time. That's not a tip. You want it you have to ask for it. I thought the Judge showed alot of patience with this [unusual person].

marspiter said:

*Bolded by me*

Discovery in the state of Florida is reciprocal. There are no Perry Mason moments in Florida courts. The defense by law is to hand over any evidence it plans to use at trial to the prosecution as well. So far the defense has handed over.........? *jeopardy theme*

Click to expand...

I am curious about this subject in particular. Do you know if the state has recieved discovery from the defense? How will we know that and how is it recorded and where do we go to find out such information?

For instance: If the defense turned over a witness list.

If the defense turned over photos of Kc and Caylee in a loving manner to show she was a caring mother.

If the defense turned over Morts interview with JJ.

How would we find out?

Also, if it is tied to Attorney client privilege, would we ever see that discovery?

Also, I remember a poster, who said the state will never turn over exculpatory evidence. Don't know if he was right, but I have not seen much of that in discovery.

If an searcher emailed Ym saying that he searched that area and the body wasnt there. Way back in Dec of 08, I would consider that exculpatory evidence that should have been turned over in discover a long time ago. IMO

So, how could we possibly know when the defense turns over discovery if the state won't release exculpatory discovery?????????

notthatsmart said:

I am curious about this subject in particular. Do you know if the state has recieved discovery from the defense? How will we know that and how is it recorded and where do we go to find out such information?

Click to expand...

(These records may very well not be subject to FL's sunshine laws but there are many posters on here who probably can answer this for certain)

For instance: If the defense turned over a witness list.

Click to expand...

(I'm fairly certain this has been discussed at length on these boards and the answer is that they have not yet turned over their finalized witness list)

If the defense turned over photos of Kc and Caylee in a loving manner to show she was a caring mother.

If the defense turned over Morts interview with JJ.

How would we find out?

Click to expand...

(anything that the defense has rec'd through their discovery requests and/or intends to use at trial must be provided to the State)

Also, if it is tied to Attorney client privilege, would we ever see that discovery?

Click to expand...

(no, not unless they plan to use it at trial)

Also, I remember a poster who said the state will never turn over exculpatory evidence. Don't know if he was right, but I have not seen much of that in discovery.

Click to expand...

(may have been said, but if so, is wrongfully informed)

If an searcher emailed Ym saying that he searched that area and the body wasnt there. Way back in Dec of 08, I would consider that exculpatory evidence that should have been turned over in discover a long time ago. IMO

So, how could we possibly know when the defense turns over discovery if the state won't release exculpatory discovery?????????

Click to expand...

If the State failed to hand over material/exculpatory evidence to the defense it would be certain grounds for mistrial and/or basis for new trial. I know you have your doubts about SA and LE, but they are not going to purposely withhold such evidence and essentially destroy their own careers by doing so.

notthatsmart said:

I am curious about this subject in particular. Do you know if the state has recieved discovery from the defense? How will we know that and how is it recorded and where do we go to find out such information?

For instance: If the defense turned over a witness list.

If the defense turned over photos of Kc and Caylee in a loving manner to show she was a caring mother.

If the defense turned over Morts interview with JJ.

How would we find out?

Also, if it is tied to Attorney client privilege, would we ever see that discovery?

Also, I remember a poster who said the state will never turn over exculpatory evidence. Don't know if he was right, but I have not seen much of that in discovery.

If an searcher emailed Ym saying that he searched that area and the body wasnt there. Way back in Dec of 08, I would consider that exculpatory evidence that should have been turned over in discover a long time ago. IMO

So, how could we possibly know when the defense turns over discovery if the state won't release exculpatory discovery?????????

Click to expand...

I believe much of this has been answered for you before.

"#What is a public record?

The Florida Supreme Court has determined that public records are all materials made or received by an agency in connection with official business which are used to perpetuate, communicate or formalize knowledge. They are not limited to traditional written documents. Tapes, photographs, films and sound recordings are also considered public records subject to inspection unless a statutory exemption exists.

# Does an agency have to explain why it denies access to public records?

A custodian of a public record who contends that the record or part of a record is exempt from inspection must state the basis for that exemption, including the statutory citation. Additionally, when asked, the custodian must state in writing the reasons for concluding the record is exempt.

# When does a document sent to a public agency become a public document?

As soon as a document is received by a public agency, it becomes a public record, unless there is a legislatively created exemption which makes it confidential and not subject to disclosure."

http://www.myflsunshine.com/sun.nsf/pages/FAQs

So in other wards as soon as the defense gives it to the SA or clerk of court it becomes public record. If that info is not eligible for release according to sunshine the agency must state why that info is not eligible for release. So if the defense did hand anything over we would know..that or we would know it was handed over but not what was handed over to put it simply.

In regards to exculpatory evidence the state would be required to turn over such evidence as it's part of due process. If not it would be clear grounds for an appeal. It's part of the US Supreme Courts decision in Brady v. Maryland 373 US 83 (1963).

http://supreme.justia.com/us/373/83/
So in other words that poster would be wrong in that assumption.

In regards to your email statement I believe you are referring to JJ. If I recall JJ gave a sworn statement negating his email comments.

HTH