Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #1

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Snaz said:
Question for one of the lawyers on the board: If KC, by some miracle, decides to plead guilty to the murder of her child, doesn't that take the DP off the table? Isn't LWOP the most she can get, at that point?

As I understand it, that is one of the reasons defendants will sometimes plead guilty at some point along the way; to avoid the DP.

TIA!
Click to expand...

Quoted myself...LOL

I'm actually referring to if KC changes her plea from 'not-guilty' to 'guilty'.... not if the SA offers her a plea.... I'm not convinced the SA would offer her a plea....

So I guess what I'm asking is this: Can you please elaborate as to the procedure if KC changes her plea of her own accord and not with a plea offer from the State.

Thank you!
 
Snaz said:
Question for one of the lawyers on the board: If KC, by some miracle, decides to plead guilty to the murder of her child, doesn't that take the DP off the table? Isn't LWOP the most she can get, at that point?

As I understand it, that is one of the reasons defendants will sometimes plead guilty at some point along the way; to avoid the DP.

TIA!
Click to expand...

logicalgirl said:
Thanks for this question Snaz, and I'd like to tag along with it - just to get the plea process clear in my mind once and for all. I believe you've answered this in the past AZ or Themis, but once more please?:waitasec:

If and when the defense comes to the table with a guilty plea, doesn't the SA then begin a negotiation process, starting with the DP, since that's what's on the table and negotiate from there?

In other words, the SA can say these are the conditions and the consequences we outline for a plea, and the defense can accept the conditions or no?

Do you think the SA will drop the DP for LWOP for a guilty plea, if the defense approaches for said guilty plea? Or does the judge make this decision?
Click to expand...

Snaz said:
Quoted myself...LOL

I'm actually referring to if KC changes her plea from 'not-guilty' to 'guilty'.... not if the SA offers her a plea.... I'm not convinced the SA would offer her a plea....

So I guess what I'm asking is this: Can you please elaborate as to the procedure if KC changes her plea of her own accord and not with a plea offer from the State.

Thank you!
Click to expand...

I don't believe it would take the DP off the table for KC to change her plea on her own (i.e., not as part of a plea agreement). My understanding is that the DP would still be on the table, and KC would have the right to have a jury decide the sentence.

Certainly the DP would be off the table as part of any plea agreement, and I would think the State would be willing to discuss such an agreement in light of the circumstantial nature of the evidence and the uncertainties of proceeding before a jury.

ETA: Any plea agreement would have to be reviewed and accepted by the judge.
 
Snaz said:
Quoted myself...LOL

I'm actually referring to if KC changes her plea from 'not-guilty' to 'guilty'.... not if the SA offers her a plea.... I'm not convinced the SA would offer her a plea....

So I guess what I'm asking is this: Can you please elaborate as to the procedure if KC changes her plea of her own accord and not with a plea offer from the State.

Thank you!
Click to expand...

Sorry for confusing you Snaz - because I meant the same thing - that is if Casey steps forward with a guilty plea without the State offering a plea deal first.

I don't think the SA has a plea offer on the table at the present time - I remember there was one in the early days, but I believe they took it off the table when the DP was put back on.
 
logicalgirl said:
Sorry for confusing you Snaz - because I meant the same thing - that is if Casey steps forward with a guilty plea without the State offering a plea deal first.

I don't think the SA has a plea offer on the table at the present time - I remember there was one in the early days, but I believe they took it off the table when the DP was put back on.
Click to expand...

No problem! I wasn't sure if I had made my first post clear about what I was asking!

Thanks!
 
I asked this question on the Trial thread, but no one quite sure...
If the Court is now paying for Casey's defense do they have to operate within a pre-set budget, or do they have a blank checkbook to depose any and everyone they want, obtain expert opinions Nationwide, from as many experts as they wish, until they find one they agree with...?
 
Now that JS has outlined timeframes for depos, trial start date and even (seemingly) trial conclusion date... is there any way that the defense could stall? If we come up to the deadline for expert depos, say, and defense claims they just couldn't work in a good time for everyone to get together by that date, what happens?

TIA and for all your help!
 
ZsaZsa said:
I asked this question on the Trial thread, but no one quite sure...
If the Court is now paying for Casey's defense do they have to operate within a pre-set budget, or do they have a blank checkbook to depose any and everyone they want, obtain expert opinions Nationwide, from as many experts as they wish, until they find one they agree with...?
Click to expand...

No blank checks...but in a capital case the defense will be given lots of leeway to get experts, etc.

ynotdivein said:
Now that JS has outlined timeframes for depos, trial start date and even (seemingly) trial conclusion date... is there any way that the defense could stall? If we come up to the deadline for expert depos, say, and defense claims they just couldn't work in a good time for everyone to get together by that date, what happens?

TIA and for all your help!
Click to expand...

Dates can always be changed for good cause. As we get closer to trial, however, the judge will be less tolerant of delay.
 
AZ, thanks for all your answers. Can you elaborate on how the defense is kept under control with their expenses, once KC is indigent. I understand that there are no blank checks, yet leeway. But how is that accomplished?? Does the state make a judgement call each time Baez submits an invoice for an expense incurred? Will we see Baez in court arguing each time the state doesn't cover one of his expenses? It could be a real headache for the state to decide what's reasonable vs not reasonable with a lawyer who's known to push the limits. KWIM? TIA for any insight you can provide!
 
knt said:
AZ, thanks for all your answers. Can you elaborate on how the defense is kept under control with their expenses, once KC is indigent. I understand that there are no blank checks, yet leeway. But how is that accomplished?? Does the state make a judgement call each time Baez submits an invoice for an expense incurred? Will we see Baez in court arguing each time the state doesn't cover one of his expenses? It could be a real headache for the state to decide what's reasonable vs not reasonable with a lawyer who's known to push the limits. KWIM? TIA for any insight you can provide!
Click to expand...

The decisions should be made by the judge, not by the state.
 
In all today's "bombshell" discussion re: the purported GA affair, there was not much lawyerly input. I would be grateful to any of our WS legal eagles for sharing their thoughts about the veracity and/or implications of the latest news. Many thanks in advance!
 
ynotdivein said:
In all today's "bombshell" discussion re: the purported GA affair, there was not much lawyerly input. I would be grateful to any of our WS legal eagles for sharing their thoughts about the veracity and/or implications of the latest news. Many thanks in advance!
Click to expand...

I at least don't feel I have enough information yet to have useful thoughts :waitasec:. What has come out so far is confusing. It appears that the sister who spoke to Kathi Belich, Skye Benhaida, has a twin sister, but I am still not sure from what I have read whether the (alleged) mistress of GA is that twin, or yet a third woman who is the sister of the twins.

The apparent parallels *are* quite intriguing to me, but nothing more at this point.
 
I haven't read this entire thread, and chances are I probably won't because it all goes so far over my head, but I just wanted to throw out a random question and see if anybody cares to answer off the top of their head:

Is there anything that has happened so far in this case, from infidelities to unethical behaviors to lying to LE to whatever (so far), that sets precedence?
 
Gnatcatcher said:
I haven't read this entire thread, and chances are I probably won't because it all goes so far over my head, but I just wanted to throw out a random question and see if anybody cares to answer off the top of their head:

Is there anything that has happened so far in this case, from infidelities to unethical behaviors to lying to LE to whatever (so far), that sets precedence?
Click to expand...

"Anything that has happened" by definition are facts (or allegations of fact).

A precedent is a legal ruling, i.e. a judge making a decision about what consequences should arise from the facts that are ultimately determined to have occurred.

So the answer to your question is, strictly speaking, no.

If what you really want to know is whether the facts in this case are unique, I have a two-part answer: (1) all cases have unique aspects if you look at the facts closely enough but (2) there is nothing new under the sun.
 
I heard today that KC stated that she has not sold her rights to her story, however I have not heard anyone ask if Caylee's story had been sold..... Who would have rights to sell Caylee's story? Could KC, JB, and AL have found a loophole, by telling the truth that there is no deal to sell Casey's story, however would she or JB be able to sell Caylee's story?
 
butterfly1978 said:
I heard today that KC stated that she has not sold her rights to her story, however I have not heard anyone ask if Caylee's story had been sold..... Who would have rights to sell Caylee's story? Could KC, JB, and AL have found a loophole, by telling the truth that there is no deal to sell Casey's story, however would she or JB be able to sell Caylee's story?
Click to expand...

I don't think there could be a story "belonging" to Caylee without her being here to tell it. IMO, anyone could attempt to tell whatever they think is her story. Many WS members have told snippets of what they think is the story through her eyes in their posts here.

To answer your other question, there could be lots of loopholes in the statement "there is no deal to sell Casey's story." But wasn't JB asked a much broader question about deals relating to the case? I didn't watch the hearing, just read the updates. And, of course, a deal could be made down the road.
 
Thanks AZ I started a topic about this a few hours ago, it seems to me like someone outside the Anthony's or the lawyers should have the rights to Caylee. She is the victim here and I do not see how the alleged killer of her could still have the rights to her, like her photos, videos even her name, such as the Caylee Marie name.. The Caylee Marie Anthony foundation uses her name and it trademarked or registered..... So even her story of her few years could be sold... and I dont like that idea.
 
snipped

Anthony's custody status forbids her from having any contact with other inmates.

http://www.wesh.com/news/22878005/detail.html

What repercussions would there be, if any, for violating her "custody status"?

ETA

would this be it? I guess she could just get a reprimand. I think she should get some kind of sanction.


from jail handbook on Pg 6 and 7 (sorry - it's a pdf and I can't link to it.)


CATEGORY III: When an inmate is found guilty, any combination of the following sanctions may be imposed:

 Disciplinary confinement of up to twenty (20) days,
 Recommended loss of up to twenty (20) days of gain time earned or earned but not credited as of the date of the
hearing,
 Restitution,
 Loss of one or more privileges for up to twenty (20) days,
 Confinement to quarters for a maximum of seven (7) days, and/or
 Written reprimand.

One of the violations listed is

3.26 Violation of mail, telephone, property or commissary regulations
 
I thought JS gave JB a deadline (sometime in Feb) to come clean on the evidence he said would prove Casey didn't commit the crime. The time line came and went and I never heard another word. Did JB ever give this information? If not, why wouldn't JS enforce his order?

Tks.
 
I asked this in another thread, but I cant find it...

I am wondering if Baez can be terminated by the state now?
...for any reason?

Thanks in advance :wave:
 
Tiki said:
snipped

Anthony's custody status forbids her from having any contact with other inmates.

http://www.wesh.com/news/22878005/detail.html

What repercussions would there be, if any, for violating her "custody status"?

ETA

would this be it? I guess she could just get a reprimand. I think she should get some kind of sanction.


from jail handbook on Pg 6 and 7 (sorry - it's a pdf and I can't link to it.)


CATEGORY III: When an inmate is found guilty, any combination of the following sanctions may be imposed:

 Disciplinary confinement of up to twenty (20) days,
 Recommended loss of up to twenty (20) days of gain time earned or earned but not credited as of the date of the
hearing,
 Restitution,
 Loss of one or more privileges for up to twenty (20) days,
 Confinement to quarters for a maximum of seven (7) days, and/or
 Written reprimand.

One of the violations listed is

3.26 Violation of mail, telephone, property or commissary regulations
Click to expand...

I think you figured out the answer to this one on your own. :)

Basically the jail administration gets to decide what's reasonable to enforce their rules. But I suspect they are more upset about the guard who helped pass the notes.

jon_burrows said:
I thought JS gave JB a deadline (sometime in Feb) to come clean on the evidence he said would prove Casey didn't commit the crime. The time line came and went and I never heard another word. Did JB ever give this information? If not, why wouldn't JS enforce his order?

Tks.
Click to expand...

Assuming that order was never modified, it would not be up to the judge to raise the issue. It would be up to the SA. Maybe the SA would rather just interpret the failure to file the disclosure as an admission that no such evidence existed.

OKaraMia said:
I asked this in another thread, but I cant find it...

I am wondering if Baez can be terminated by the state now?
...for any reason?

Thanks in advance :wave:
Click to expand...

Terminated as in fired?? No. Paying costs (or fees) for an indigent defendant does not give the state control over the attorney-client relationship.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 212 more.
Total: 3,898 (members: 213, guests: 3,685)

Online statistics

Members online
213
Guests online
3,685
Total visitors
3,898
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,827
Messages
17,959,701
Members
228,621
Latest member
Greer∆
Back
Top