Websleuths
Go Back   Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community > Featured Case Discussion > Caylee Anthony 2 years old

Notices

Caylee Anthony 2 years old Not reported missing for a month after she was last seen.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #351  
Old 12-30-2010, 06:33 PM
logicalgirl's Avatar
logicalgirl logicalgirl is offline
Peace Hawk
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 16,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macushla View Post
I just did a quick count and since 12/21 the defense has filed 19 motions (I may have missed one or two).

I am wondering if the next motion will be:

Motion in Limine to exclude any and all mention of the fact that Caylee was missing for 31 days before being reported missing by her grandmother. I am sure he is going to state that the 31 days is 'utterly irrelevant to the case at hand' and that 'any alleged probative value of the mention of the 31 days is substantially outweighed by by it's potential prejudicial effect on the jury'

If in the world accoding to JB, all these motions were granted - would there be anything left to argue at the trial?
Whether or not all those fragile tiny bones scattered over an acre of brush and swamp land actually belonged to little Caylee???
Reply With Quote
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:
  #352  
Old 12-30-2010, 06:34 PM
nums24's Avatar
nums24 nums24 is offline
Praying for Justice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 4,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
AAACCCCKKKKK! :



Why oh why do I have to work right now. I keep dipping back in and are happening while I am busy doing while you are having fun doing at Baez's motions.

What every happened to damned life work balance!!! Oh well, I've only got an hour to go if I just quit moaning and get on with it. and I"ll be back shortly.
It's alright LG, we've all been there before. I'm working this weekend, just so I can watch the hearing with a clear conscious.
__________________
My posts are my opinion only. Praying for Justice for Caylee Marie!
The Florida Bar summed up the problem regarding Mr. Baez.
"His overall behavior, they wrote, showed "a total lack of respect for the rights of others and a total lack of respect for the legal system, which is absolutely inconsistent with the character and fitness qualities required of those seeking to be afforded the highest position of trust and confidence recognized by our system of law." (Thank you to TWA) Read their opinion here: http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/d...ps/sc95855.pdf
Reply With Quote
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to nums24 For This Useful Post:
  #353  
Old 12-30-2010, 06:35 PM
Macushla's Avatar
Macushla Macushla is offline
Our Royal Himalayan Gopher Hounds
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Orlando, FL area
Posts: 2,433
It's a good thing the courthouse is closed tomorrow! If it wasn't I am wondering if we would see another 10 - 20 motions filed at 4:29 pm tomorrow afternoon.
__________________
Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.
Euripides
Reply With Quote
The Following 21 Users Say Thank You to Macushla For This Useful Post:
  #354  
Old 12-30-2010, 06:49 PM
Sun Sun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macushla View Post
It's a good thing the courthouse is closed tomorrow! If it wasn't I am wondering if we would see another 10 - 20 motions filed at 4:29 pm tomorrow afternoon.
I'm not happy with Baez making the good folks at the clerk's office working past quitting time today. The time on one of the faxes makes me wonder if their fax machine could still be spitting out pages right now (and we'll see the entry of even more motions Monday following the holiday).
Reply With Quote
The Following 21 Users Say Thank You to Sun For This Useful Post:
  #355  
Old 12-30-2010, 06:52 PM
sumbunny's Avatar
sumbunny sumbunny is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,278
Do you think the judge will be hearing ALL of the motions on Monday?
Geeeez louise, team Casey have been working their slimy fingers to the bone!
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to sumbunny For This Useful Post:
  #356  
Old 12-30-2010, 06:57 PM
Mrs G Norris's Avatar
Mrs G Norris Mrs G Norris is offline
Cached
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Straya!
Posts: 9,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by nums24 View Post
They filed it to Judge Strickland!!!
Wait! What...OMG seriously? Someone needs to do a little proof reading when copy / pasting old work. So they've had these waiting in the wings for awhile then no doubt.....anyone else thinking a few 'no longer with us' lawyers did the writing?
__________________
Put down the pitchfork and back away from the monitor ..
Reply With Quote
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Mrs G Norris For This Useful Post:
  #357  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:08 PM
LolaMoon08's Avatar
LolaMoon08 LolaMoon08 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 6,534
I don't know if they can hear all of the motions on January 3rd? It seems like an awful lot to go over in one day? I could be wrong, but I also thought that Judge Perry said he thought he might be sitting in on a trial this week and that he had no problem scheduling anything after 5pm if they need to be heard... that was into reply to Jeff Ashton stating that he may need him this week. I might have my dates mixed up?
Reply With Quote
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to LolaMoon08 For This Useful Post:
  #358  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:21 PM
Cabin girl's Avatar
Cabin girl Cabin girl is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
AAACCCCKKKKK! :



Why oh why do I have to work right now. I keep dipping back in and are happening while I am busy doing while you are having fun doing at Baez's motions.

What every happened to damned life work balance!!! Oh well, I've only got an hour to go if I just quit moaning and get on with it. and I"ll be back shortly.
LOL you make me laugh!
Reply With Quote
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Cabin girl For This Useful Post:
  #359  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:25 PM
flourish's Avatar
flourish flourish is online now
Yo I'm a ninja!
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 2,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muzikman View Post
Here's the motion from yesterday -

2010.12.29 Defense Motion to Exclude Unreliable Evidence - Trunk Smell
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/68137874...iable-Evidence

MM
Thanks, MM!

Check out this gem:
Quote:
"The Oakridge National Laboratories refused to comply with...[blah...blah blah]...choosing to mask the empirical data relied upon for it's [sic] conclusions and instead has taken a rare unheard of "trust me" approach to science."
TRUST ME, huh...where have I heard those words before?
__________________

Unless specified otherwise and linked, my posts are simply random thoughts of mine, in no particular order, not directed at any post or poster, including but not limited to the ones directly above mine. My opinion only, yours may vary. IMO. JMO. IMHO. JMHO. MOO. Disclaimer, small print, asterisk, and etc.
Reply With Quote
The Following 24 Users Say Thank You to flourish For This Useful Post:
  #360  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:34 PM
Macushla's Avatar
Macushla Macushla is offline
Our Royal Himalayan Gopher Hounds
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Orlando, FL area
Posts: 2,433
I wonder how many of these motions can be ruled on without a hearing? I would imagine the State would not argue against the Jib Jab video - it is just too minor to worry about. That is just about the only one that I think could go away without affecting the state's case. Maybe the knife too, but that is just a maybe. There are a few I think the Judge will grant, but don't know if he would do it without a hearing. I doubt all of them will be heard Monday because the State will have to have time to put their thoughts together to argue against granting them. While I think LDB and JA are both heroic in all that they do, even they would need super powers to get all this done by Monday afternoon. I would imagine the first six will be heard, along with JA's motion for sanctions, and maybe the JAC filing would come up. I would think HHJP will have seen the rest of the motions and set a hearing date for them.

I am still not sure a lot of these motions will even be heard. I agree with the posters who say that some of them were filed past the deadline of Nov. 30th, but that JB will claim he thought he had until the 31st to file. I find it very interesting that there is no Kronk motion in this group. I guess he realized he could not get away with filing that one late since HHJP called him on it in open court.
__________________
Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.
Euripides
Reply With Quote
The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to Macushla For This Useful Post:
  #361  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:40 PM
whiteangora's Avatar
whiteangora whiteangora is offline
I'm on the right track baby. I was "Born This Way"
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 5,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macushla View Post
I just did a quick count and since 12/21 the defense has filed 19 motions (I may have missed one or two).

I am wondering if the next motion will be:

Motion in Limine to exclude any and all mention of the fact that Caylee was missing for 31 days before being reported missing by her grandmother. I am sure he is going to state that the 31 days is 'utterly irrelevant to the case at hand' and that 'any alleged probative value of the mention of the 31 days is substantially outweighed by by it's potential prejudicial effect on the jury'

If in the world accoding to JB, all these motions were granted - would there be anything left to argue at the trial?
bbm
In JB's world there shouldn't even be a trial!
This is very upsetting, how can he be brazen enough to even think so much crucial evidence can be excluded? Is this normal pretrial behavior?
__________________
Neighborhood Watch is...
NOT the Vigilante Police
http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigati...PowerPoint.pdf




Reply With Quote
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to whiteangora For This Useful Post:
  #362  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:43 PM
denjet's Avatar
denjet denjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macushla View Post
I just did a quick count and since 12/21 the defense has filed 19 motions (I may have missed one or two).

I am wondering if the next motion will be:

Motion in Limine to exclude any and all mention of the fact that Caylee was missing for 31 days before being reported missing by her grandmother. I am sure he is going to state that the 31 days is 'utterly irrelevant to the case at hand' and that 'any alleged probative value of the mention of the 31 days is substantially outweighed by by it's potential prejudicial effect on the jury'

If in the world accoding to JB, all these motions were granted - would there be anything left to argue at the trial?
That appears to be Jose's strategy, his ONLY strategy ... get ALL of the evidence tossed ...

(But don't give him any ideas about the "31 days" ... )
Reply With Quote
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to denjet For This Useful Post:
  #363  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:43 PM
AZlawyer's Avatar
AZlawyer AZlawyer is offline
Verified Attorney
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: AZ
Posts: 5,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteangora View Post
bbm
In JB's world there shouldn't even be a trial!
This is very upsetting, how can he be brazen enough to even think so much crucial evidence can be excluded? Is this normal pretrial behavior?
Yes, and thank god he's doing this. It reduces the chance of an ineffective assistance of counsel argument down the road.
__________________

"It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94
Reply With Quote
  #364  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:44 PM
AZlawyer's Avatar
AZlawyer AZlawyer is offline
Verified Attorney
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: AZ
Posts: 5,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by denjet View Post
That appears to be Jose's strategy, his ONLY strategy ... get ALL of the evidence tossed ...

(But don't give him any ideas about the "31 days" ... )
Heck, I'd like to hear a better strategy considering what the defense team has to work with.
__________________

"It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94
Reply With Quote
The Following 22 Users Say Thank You to AZlawyer For This Useful Post:
  #365  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:46 PM
flourish's Avatar
flourish flourish is online now
Yo I'm a ninja!
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 2,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZlawyer View Post
Heck, I'd like to hear a better strategy considering what the defense team has to work with.
Good point!
__________________

Unless specified otherwise and linked, my posts are simply random thoughts of mine, in no particular order, not directed at any post or poster, including but not limited to the ones directly above mine. My opinion only, yours may vary. IMO. JMO. IMHO. JMHO. MOO. Disclaimer, small print, asterisk, and etc.
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to flourish For This Useful Post:
  #366  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:47 PM
whiteangora's Avatar
whiteangora whiteangora is offline
I'm on the right track baby. I was "Born This Way"
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 5,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZlawyer View Post
Yes, and thank god he's doing this. It reduces the chance of an ineffective assistance of counsel argument down the road.
Thanks AZ, it was pretty shocking for me when I read that last loooong list of motions......hopefully he will be shot down (not literally) on the majority of them.
__________________
Neighborhood Watch is...
NOT the Vigilante Police
http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigati...PowerPoint.pdf




Reply With Quote
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to whiteangora For This Useful Post:
  #367  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:57 PM
sumbunny's Avatar
sumbunny sumbunny is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macushla View Post
I wonder how many of these motions can be ruled on without a hearing? I would imagine the State would not argue against the Jib Jab video - it is just too minor to worry about. That is just about the only one that I think could go away without affecting the state's case. Maybe the knife too, but that is just a maybe. There are a few I think the Judge will grant, but don't know if he would do it without a hearing. I doubt all of them will be heard Monday because the State will have to have time to put their thoughts together to argue against granting them. While I think LDB and JA are both heroic in all that they do, even they would need super powers to get all this done by Monday afternoon. I would imagine the first six will be heard, along with JA's motion for sanctions, and maybe the JAC filing would come up. I would think HHJP will have seen the rest of the motions and set a hearing date for them.

I am still not sure a lot of these motions will even be heard. I agree with the posters who say that some of them were filed past the deadline of Nov. 30th, but that JB will claim he thought he had until the 31st to file. I find it very interesting that there is no Kronk motion in this group. I guess he realized he could not get away with filing that one late since HHJP called him on it in open court.
The timing of all these motions are suspect. The SA are busy trying to depose the defenses expert witnesses. It's almost like they saved everything to throw at the SA at the last minute.
Pretty lame defense tactic, and to me it shows that they have an extremely weak case.
Reply With Quote
The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to sumbunny For This Useful Post:
  #368  
Old 12-30-2010, 07:58 PM
beach's Avatar
beach beach is offline
Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: the Plains & Jordan-Hare stadium
Posts: 13,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by nums24 View Post
I thought it might be a copy and paste from their prior motion to have it sealed.
I think that is exactly what happened. The paralegal/atty just pulled up the old motion and failed to edit. omg...just ONCE ...just one.time. I would love to see a motion filed with no glaring errors and include ALL appropriate parties on the certificate of service. It makes me crazy because it just ain't THAT hard to get it right. If I had to draft motions for a case where I knew my work would appear on media sites for public viewing within hours of filing, I can guarantee you I would be beyond anal about proofing it.

I have decided that his whole staff is of the same caliber as DC and Hoover. A win-win for Caylee.
__________________
Never interrupt your opponent when they are making a mistake.
Reply With Quote
The Following 24 Users Say Thank You to beach For This Useful Post:
  #369  
Old 12-30-2010, 08:03 PM
LancelotLink's Avatar
LancelotLink LancelotLink is offline
Better Days
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,266
Not sure it was a copy paste from a previous motion to seal. The motion to seal has
JUDGE: STAN STRICKLAND (ALL CAPS)
This new one has:
Hon. Stan Strickland

Could Finnell have done this?
__________________
Justice for CAYLEE
Reply With Quote
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to LancelotLink For This Useful Post:
  #370  
Old 12-30-2010, 08:08 PM
denjet's Avatar
denjet denjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macushla View Post
I wonder how many of these motions can be ruled on without a hearing? I would imagine the State would not argue against the Jib Jab video - it is just too minor to worry about. That is just about the only one that I think could go away without affecting the state's case. Maybe the knife too, but that is just a maybe. There are a few I think the Judge will grant, but don't know if he would do it without a hearing. I doubt all of them will be heard Monday because the State will have to have time to put their thoughts together to argue against granting them. While I think LDB and JA are both heroic in all that they do, even they would need super powers to get all this done by Monday afternoon. I would imagine the first six will be heard, along with JA's motion for sanctions, and maybe the JAC filing would come up. I would think HHJP will have seen the rest of the motions and set a hearing date for them.

I am still not sure a lot of these motions will even be heard. I agree with the posters who say that some of them were filed past the deadline of Nov. 30th, but that JB will claim he thought he had until the 31st to file. I find it very interesting that there is no Kronk motion in this group. I guess he realized he could not get away with filing that one late since HHJP called him on it in open court.
Also, I think the state has already argued against some of the nonsense ones like MySpace and Hearsay ones and stuff the Anthonys have said ... they may be prepared to respond to most of them ... at least the less critical ones
And yes, no sign of any Kronk one ... YAY ... that's a good sign
But the best outcome of all would be for Judge Perry to say "Mr Baez, you've known the schedule since (such and such), you've been reminded and warned of the deadlines and have not adhered to them ... your motions are denied WITH prejudice" ... NEXT

I'm hoping that the forensic/scientific ones get set for another date and the rest .. oh well, too bad
Reply With Quote
The Following 17 Users Say Thank You to denjet For This Useful Post:
  #371  
Old 12-30-2010, 08:12 PM
Snaz's Avatar
Snaz Snaz is offline
"Heavens to Habeas Corpus" ~ Legal Eagle Lion
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 1,176
12/30/2010 Motion In Limine Preclude the use in any Fashion Whatsoever of a Certain "Jib Jab" Cartoon

Can someone please explain to me, seriously, why the defense would file this motion??? Why would they even THINK the State would use something so lame and pathetic as "evidence" in a capital murder trial??

I seriously do not understand this one.....

TIA!
__________________
"Judge, Mr, Ashton is laughing at me..... " ~ Jose Baez, Closing Argument 7/3/11 (Paraphrased, of course!)
Reply With Quote
  #372  
Old 12-30-2010, 08:17 PM
beach's Avatar
beach beach is offline
Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: the Plains & Jordan-Hare stadium
Posts: 13,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaz View Post
12/30/2010 Motion In Limine Preclude the use in any Fashion Whatsoever of a Certain "Jib Jab" Cartoon

Can someone please explain to me, seriously, why the defense would file this motion??? Why would they even THINK the State would use something so lame and pathetic as "evidence" in a capital murder trial??

I seriously do not understand this one.....

TIA!
That one totally baffles me. CRAZY!
__________________
Never interrupt your opponent when they are making a mistake.
Reply With Quote
The Following 19 Users Say Thank You to beach For This Useful Post:
  #373  
Old 12-30-2010, 08:34 PM
denjet's Avatar
denjet denjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaz View Post
12/30/2010 Motion In Limine Preclude the use in any Fashion Whatsoever of a Certain "Jib Jab" Cartoon

Can someone please explain to me, seriously, why the defense would file this motion??? Why would they even THINK the State would use something so lame and pathetic as "evidence" in a capital murder trial??

I seriously do not understand this one.....

TIA!
Your not alone ... what on earth it has to do with anything is beyond me
I'm pretty sure I haven't seen it listed in discovery either ... so maybe it's just Jose who's panties are in a twist over it (meaning it probably has nothing to do with KC and more with the way HE was depicted) ...
I'm reminded of the stink he made over his myspace photo that showed up on ************'s site (after being photoshopped) ... his priorities are sure screwed up ...
Reply With Quote
The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to denjet For This Useful Post:
  #374  
Old 12-30-2010, 08:38 PM
Leila's Avatar
Leila Leila is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 12,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aedrys View Post
Yeah, I can see that: Motion to exclude EVERYTHING.

That's literally what it would have to be titled. And there's no way he'd win it either.
Holy Moly! I go shopping today and come back to find out that JB has added a whole slew of new motions! He really should have just made one motion asking that everything that would implicate his client be excluded from the trial.

With that list of motions, Monday's hearing won't be completed until Wednesday!
__________________
My posts are my opinion..........


Reply With Quote
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Leila For This Useful Post:
  #375  
Old 12-30-2010, 08:39 PM
LancelotLink's Avatar
LancelotLink LancelotLink is offline
Better Days
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,266
I think Baez is flinging as much spaghetti as he can to see what he can get to stick.
__________________
Justice for CAYLEE
Reply With Quote
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to LancelotLink For This Useful Post:
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
List of Motions/Links to Court Documents **NO DISCUSSION HERE PLEASE** JBean Caylee Anthony 2 years old 399 09-26-2011 06:57 PM
2010.05.23 ~ Misty Jailhouse videos released: General Discussion doubletrouble Haleigh Cummings 186 06-01-2010 08:15 PM
2010.5.23 Tommy jailhouse videos on Sky: General Discussion lynnb Haleigh Cummings 158 05-28-2010 01:03 PM
2010.05.21 Tommy Jailhouse phone calls released: General Discussion Patty G Haleigh Cummings 516 05-26-2010 05:39 PM
General discussion about the drug busts on Jan 20, 2010 Kimster Haleigh Cummings 526 01-26-2010 11:08 AM


© Copyright Websleuths 1999-2012 New To Site? Need Help?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:14 PM.

Advertisements

Pre-Order Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony today!