Cindy Anthony subpoenaed to appear in court

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
LambChop said:
One would think SA would just keep her to yes or no answers only. jmo
Click to expand...


LambChop, you would think so, but we have seen demonstrated over and over that the A's all seem to have "Diarrhea of the Mouth". Why use one word when fifty will do the job better? They all do it: misuse/mispronounce words, add unnecessary extraneous details, blah blah blah. I do not think they are capable of yes/no responses.
MOO
 
I wonder if Lee and Cindy will be able to be present in the courtroom while the other is testifying? :waitasec:
 
I hope CA tells the prosecution their questions aren't relevant, that would be good.
 
LambChop said:
One would think SA would just keep her to yes or no answers only. jmo
Click to expand...

They'll try...but CA is a highly opinionated woman who maintains the "I'll give them a piece of my mind" attitude. Problem with that is...she has so very little to give.:dance:
 
I hope Baez and Conway are sweating right now. Neither of them have any control over the A's on the stand and they know it. I just know the thought of Cindy alone up there is giving them nightmares. I bet they are relieved George isn't testifying.

And for some reason, I picture the SA grinning like Cheshire cats at the thought of not one, but two A's on the stand. I bet JA and LDB are fighting over who gets to question them, lol.

And please, oh please perjure yourself Cindy! Hey, if you get a cell next to Casey, she might finally start writing you letters!

I just cannot wait for this hearing!!!! And it's a week from Thursday, darnit!
 
strawberry said:
I'm sure they'll try. I've never heard a simple yes or no answer from them though.
Click to expand...

Difference is: On the 15th there will be a judge sitting on the bench and one that demands obedience. It is good, in a way, as it let's CA understand what will be expected of her during the trial. The rude "overtalking" is over..... jmo
 
CA should be shook up by this...but instead she is probably standing in front of her mirror reciting: "Oh, I said that silly thing about the car smelling like a body ...just to the police to come out faster..you know, the police are not very fast...and they should have issued an amber alert. They don't want to do their jobs. I should have been a policeman. I should have been a lawyer. I should have been a judge..but I shouldn't be a clerk".
 
essies said:
I wonder if Lee and Cindy will be able to be present in the courtroom while the other is testifying? :waitasec:
Click to expand...

I understood Hal, answered that question on his blog an he said 'NO" ..like they make most witnesses stay outside til called..This is when they will screw up their answers, not knowing what the other one said...Can hardly wait..Bring on the Judge, he will slap some sense into them..:dance:
 
shotzie said:
I understood Hal, answered that question on his blog an he said 'NO" ..like they make most witnesses stay outside til called..This is when they will screw up their answers, not knowing what the other one said...Can hardly wait..Bring on the Judge, he will slap some sense into them..:dance:
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see if LA stays after his testimony or skips right out.
 
I'll try to answer a few questions and hopefully AZ will get a chance to drop by to expound.

zoey said:
Was it ever determined that she was given that immunity thing? If she goes into some of the various "mis-truths" while on the stand can they get her for contempt?????
Click to expand...

"Use immunity" does not protect a witness from perjury. However, if one of them absolutely refuses to answer a question after the judge has ordered them to, they can be held in contempt.


diz39 said:
OK, I may be the only dumb one here ( I lurk more than I opine) but what happens if Cindy or Lee get on the stand and really show their arse, a la Morgan depo. Do they declare them hostile witnesses? What is the implication of that?
Or if they tell LIES in direct conflict with previous statements, does the judge hold them in contempt? :waitasec:
Diz
Click to expand...
*snipped*

Well, they are both probably already hostile witnesses considering neither one of them wants to be there to answer the SA's questions. ;) If they attempt to tell the SA what is "relevant" and dodge the question posed to them, HHJP will order them to answer it.

If they say anything in direct conflict with their prior statements/depos taken while under oath, LDB will drag out their statement or depo and read them the portion that is in conflict, thereby impeaching them. (LDB's motion cited several portions of their depos/statements that she finds relevant to the motion)


essies said:
I wonder if Lee and Cindy will be able to be present in the courtroom while the other is testifying? :waitasec:
Click to expand...

I know during the trial they would NOT be allowed to. I am assuming the same rule will apply at this hearing.

To clarify - the one who testifies first would be allowed to hear the second witness' testimony, UNLESS there is reason to think the first witness would need to be re-called to the stand
 
beach2yall said:
I'll try to answer a few questions and hopefully AZ will get a chance to drop by to expound.



"Use immunity" does not protect a witness from perjury.



*snipped*

Well, they are both probably already hostile witnesses considering neither one of them wants to be there to answer the SA's questions. ;) If they attempt to tell the SA what is "relevant" and dodge the question posed to them, HHJP will order them to answer it.

If they say anything in direct conflict with their prior statements/depos taken while under oath, LDB will drag out their statement or depo and read them the portion that is in conflict, thereby impeaching them. (LDB's motion cited several portions of their depos/statements that she finds relevant to the motion)




I know during the trial they would NOT be allowed to. I am assuming the same rule will apply at this hearing.

To clarify - the one who testifies first would be allowed to hear the second witness' testimony, UNLESS there is reason to think the first witness would need to be re-called to the stand
Click to expand...

Thank you for your answers! If I can ask a followup: what is the implication of being a hostile witness?
Also, if LDB impeaches their credibility due to conflicting statements, is there any legal repercussion for them? TIA!
 
diz39 said:
Thank you for your answers! If I can ask a followup: what is the implication of being a hostile witness?
Also, if LDB impeaches their credibility due to conflicting statements, is there any legal repercussion for them? TIA!
Click to expand...

When one is declared a "hostile witness" by the judge, it allows the SA to ask more 'leading' questions. I have a few more thoughts but I am not 100% positive of them, so I'm gonna stop there and let AZ take over.

In re. the conflicting statements - it is going to be BAD for the defense if they are impeached. It would not surprise me to see CA perjure herself (mainly because she doesn't know when to hush). However, I would faint if it got so bad that she was formally charged with perjury.
 
Undoubtedly, Cindy Anthony will say that she was only doing what she could to get the police to hurry to her home that night. And if memory serves, I don't think she has ever said under oath that directly contradicts that.

The problem with this is, why just say "anything" to get the police there if there was no emergency in her mind?

Many people can testify to the putrid smell of that car, showing that what she said was true. Is George being called to testify also?

If I were walking the shoes of the lovely Mrs. Drane-Burdick, I would make sure Cindy testified first. Then bring in the others in right after her to show how misguided her memory (and loyalty) is.
 
strawberry said:
It will be interesting to see if LA stays after his testimony or skips right out.
Click to expand...

Well, hopefully, the SA won't allow Lee to leave just in case he needs to be re-questioned after Cindy's testimony!! Oh my, the scenarios that are playing in my head right now!!
1sm067roll.gif
 
momtective said:
They'll try...but CA is a highly opinionated woman who maintains the "I'll give them a piece of my mind" attitude. Problem with that is...she has so very little to give.:dance:
Click to expand...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Beautifully said! <3

Here is a :gold_crown: for you :)
 
I think it'll be very very interesting to see if GA shows up at all. He hasn't been to the last couple of hearings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 92 more.
Total: 3,787 (members: 93, guests: 3,694)

Online statistics

Members online
93
Guests online
3,694
Total visitors
3,787
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,189
Messages
17,964,845
Members
228,714
Latest member
hannahdunnam
Back
Top