2009.07.28 Prosecution Deposes Cindy Anthony: Any thoughts?? - Page 8

magic-cat · #**176** 07-29-2009, 08:23 PM

So does anyone know if Cindy was in there all day today? She was in all morning and then returned after lunch...they are being REALLY thorough with Mrs. Anthony aren't they? I cannot imagine being the poor soul who is taking these depos...horror of horrors to depose Cindy for this many hours...

Brini · #**177** 07-29-2009, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by magic-cat

So does anyone know if Cindy was in there all day today? She was in all morning and then returned after lunch...they are being REALLY thorough with Mrs. Anthony aren't they? I cannot imagine being the poor soul who is taking these depos...horror of horrors to depose Cindy for this many hours...

I can't imagine CA being able to: 1) tell the truth, or,2) avoid contradicting herself for an entire workday.

magic-cat · #**178** 07-29-2009, 08:32 PM

Brini-me neither!

Curious Me · #**179** 07-29-2009, 08:59 PM

May these depositions help clarify information that is crucial. The Anthony Family has had us under their spell with their story spinning. The public and the courts have been patient long enough. Caylee is really dead, and this isn't a game.

SondraK · #**180** 07-29-2009, 09:42 PM

Can't wait to see if CA ever fesses up that they had an argument the day KC left. She flat denied it before. None of them would know truth if it bit them on the butt.

Just my humble opinion

Cara's Mom · #**181** 07-29-2009, 09:47 PM

What happens when someone is named a "Hostile Witness"? TIA O/T-I stopped reading this forum for awhile, was getting way too upset and preoccupied with it (though Caylee is always in my heart and not forgotten, along with Sandra Cantu and Nevaeh). My anger towards KC and the A's was just not doing me any good. It was a nice surprise to come back yesterday to see the SA and Judge Strickland getting tough with the A's. The wheels of justice turn slowly, but the A's are finally being called on the carpet for their antics, maybe this'll ratchet their arrogance down just a bit.

mitzi · #**182** 07-29-2009, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travelgal

Hi Search - I was going to post that HNL announced the 1500 page doc dump tomorrow! You beat me to it!

Finally, we will have the long awaited doc dump! Guess I better rest my eyes tonight to get ready, huh?

Do you think we will get the transcripts from Rob and Tracy in this doc dump? Or are we still waiting for the judge to decide on Jose/ALyon's motion regarding this? I sure hope we get to see Tracy's for sure!

Nore · #**183** 07-30-2009, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThinkTank

I had thought about the Anthonys requesting "protection" from the media and/or protestors .... maybe the attorneys decided the "escort" was necessary to keep CINDY's mouth shut while she was coming and going ....... no escort on Day 2 of Cindy's depo, which makes me think it was not Cindy's idea to have the LE escort on day 1 .....

-------------------------------
I am wondering if she has sense enough to keep her mouth shut now,or will they wait til after G's depo and go on GMA..

Theonly1 · #**184** 07-30-2009, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omachka

The parties would have transcripts but that doesn't make them public record. I heard a bit of a report on our local news that by having these depos the SA may be working out whether or not the A's would have to be declared as hostile witnesses. If so, they may need to file a motion and attach parts of the transcript that back up their motion... the filing of the motion with the attached transcript would then become public record under the Sunshine law. IIRC that's how we got to read parts of the depo transcript of the LE when JB filed a motion to seal the jail house video.

Does anyone know whether inconsistencies between this depo and Morgan's depo would be enough to have them declared hostile? It would be interesting to compare the two transcripts side by side.

They can wait until the last minute to request to the judge to take them as hostile witnesses (like in the middle of questioning them on the stand at Casey's trial). Declaring them hostile allows the State to "lead" their own witness and ask them leading questions.

I'm curious as to why they would be declared hostile this early in the game.

cloud9 · #**185** 07-30-2009, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenny60123

And, Cindy was lying about the computer not working being the reason that she couldn't produce the documents. She sent emails during that time.

She sure was!

Thanks

Theonly1 · #**186** 07-30-2009, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cara's Mom

What happens when someone is named a "Hostile Witness"? TIA O/T-I stopped reading this forum for awhile, was getting way too upset and preoccupied with it (though Caylee is always in my heart and not forgotten, along with Sandra Cantu and Nevaeh). My anger towards KC and the A's was just not doing me any good. It was a nice surprise to come back yesterday to see the SA and Judge Strickland getting tough with the A's. The wheels of justice turn slowly, but the A's are finally being called on the carpet for their antics, maybe this'll ratchet their arrogance down just a bit.

Hostile witness:

When a party calls their own witnesses, usually a witness will be open and answer fully, truthfully, and non-evasively. The party usually does not have to "lead" their own witness down the garden path. But once a witness becomes stubborn on the witness stand, evasive to questions asked them before (like in previous sworn depositions), etc., the party can ask leave of the court to treat their own witness as a "hostile" witness. Once approved, the party can then start to ask their own witness leading questions like, "Isn't it true, Mr. Anthony, that you told the FBI that Casey stole money from Caylee's piggy bank?"

It could start like this (EXAMPLE):

SA: Was Casey a good mother?
George: She was the Mother-of-the Year.
SA: George, did Casey ever steal from her daughter?
George: What do you mean, Caylee did not have money.
SA: George, did Casey steal from Caylee's piggy bank or bank account?
George: I don't know. I did not see her do it.

SA asks leave of court to take George as a hostile witness.
Strickland: Granted.

SA: Mr. Anthony, isn't it true that you told the FBI on (insert date) Casey stole money from Caylee's piggy bank?

and so on and so on and so on and so on...

But, on cross-examination (of the other party's witnesses) you can ask leading questions.

RR0004 · #**187** 07-30-2009, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cloud9

She sure was!

Thanks

Ok...I'll bite...did someone get an email?

To be honest with you, everyone including the prosecution/judge didn't buy the excuse.

mysteriew · #**188** 07-30-2009, 01:39 AM

Does anyone know what time they ended CA's depo? One article posted in media mentioned 7:15 pm. If that is correct, that was a very long day for CA. Can you imagine being questioned for a full day and a half? Going to be hard to keep track of what you already said and what you didn't.

Also I thought they had GA scheduled for this afternoon. But since he apparently got rescheduled I guess they didn't. Is that a sign that things didn't go to well with CA, the fact that it took longer than expected? I do worry that CA will have time to relay to GA what she said in the depo and that they will synch their stories.

Themis · #**189** 07-30-2009, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Truthwillsetufree

Well on the other side of that, what was JB doing there? He is not CA/GA attorney, this is after all, the SA deposition. KC is his client, so if JB is allowed to be there, why not the general public, JMO but that is essentially who JB is. I hope there is a Legal Eagle that can explain this to me, 'cause I want to know.

A deposition is a pre-trial discovery/trial preparation method. It is essentially an interview of a potential witness, placed under oath, and transcribed by a court reporter. It is not done in the presence of a judge. It differrs from an interview because the witness is under oath and the statements made by the witness can be used as a prior sworn statement to impeach the witness at trial. Depos are noticed to the other side and they are allowed to attend and ask questions. The witness may also bring an attorney to consult with, but the witness attorney does not ask questions, just consults with the witness privately. Anyone can record the deposition (like taking notes) but only the court reporter's transcript is the official record of the deposition. The witness gets a chance after the deposition to review the transcript and make end notes, like "Page 4, paragraph 7, I recall testifying that the light was not red. The transcript states I testified that the light was red. This is called an errata sheet or comment sheet. The deposition and errata sheet become part of the record. If there is a substantive dispute like that, the attorneys who scheduled the depo may want to re-open the depo to ask further questions in that area. Otherwise, the audio and typed record of the court-reporter are the only official record to be referred to to resolve a substantive dispute. Depositions are generally taken to preserve the testimony of a witness in the event a witness becomes unavailable for trial. Some of the reasons a witness may become unavailable for trial are: the witness is in ill health and dies before trial or is too ill to attend the trial (physical unavailability), the witness moves out of the jurisidiction and beyond the subpoena power of the court (geographic/jurisdictional unavailability), the witness states they can't remember certain things and the depo can be used to refresh their memory at trial (mental unavailability), or the witness may be subject to charges or otherwise have a right to and does claim the 5th amendment right to remain silent (that is a legal unavailability). If a witness is subpoenaed for a deposition and refuses to show up or is belligerent in refusing to answer questions and that refusal is not based on a legal privilege or the 5th Amendment rights to remain silent because what is asked calls for an answer that may incriminate the witness, then the remedy is to make a motion in court to compel the witness to answer. Once the witness is ordered by the court to answer the question(s) and does not, the witness may be subjected to an Order to Show Cause why the witness should not be held in contempt of court; exposing the witness to possible incarceration and heavy fines.

milliac · #**190** 07-30-2009, 03:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Theonly1

They can wait until the last minute to request to the judge to take them as hostile witnesses (like in the middle of questioning them on the stand at Casey's trial). Declaring them hostile allows the State to "lead" their own witness and ask them leading questions.

I'm curious as to why they would be declared hostile this early in the game.

Wow...I didn't know that declaring a hostile witness allows SA to ask leading questions. How does that work? So Strickland makes a ruling when SA requests they be deemed hostile witnesses? Very interesting. I am still a bit confused about impeaching them. It seems like the initial 911 calls and some other statements are important to the prosecution. What good is it to impeach or does the hostile witness work better for SA?

milliac · #**191** 07-30-2009, 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mysteriew

Does anyone know what time they ended CA's depo? One article posted in media mentioned 7:15 pm. If that is correct, that was a very long day for CA. Can you imagine being questioned for a full day and a half? Going to be hard to keep track of what you already said and what you didn't.

Also I thought they had GA scheduled for this afternoon. But since he apparently got rescheduled I guess they didn't. Is that a sign that things didn't go to well with CA, the fact that it took longer than expected? I do worry that CA will have time to relay to GA what she said in the depo and that they will synch their stories.

I was wondering the same on my drive home tonight. If CA brought a recording device, they would have plenty of time to sync their stories. Why would they allow her to leave with any recordings prior to completing LA and Ga depositions?

zadari · #**192** 07-30-2009, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeriouslySearching

Yes. I wonder if CA was trying to lead the SA around by the nose like she did the other guy? This time it could get her into big trouble...so I hope she tried to pull that same BS. :P

i think ca is finally leveling with them .. i think mabey she has after this whole tapes being broadcast stuff .. i dont know why but there has to be a reason these people arnt in jail yet .. i think they are now working with the police if not then im assuming they will be in jail if found guilty of the lies .. my gut tells me shes finally working with them tho i cant explain it .. its just a feeling i have

impatientredhead · #**193** 07-30-2009, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milliac

I was wondering the same on my drive home tonight. If CA brought a recording device, they would have plenty of time to sync their stories. Why would they allow her to leave with any recordings prior to completing LA and Ga depositions?

Both parties are entitled to record the proceedings if they choose to.
The state would have no grounds to prevent her from doing so.
This is not their first rodeo, they know how the answers before they ask the questions. George could come in with a transcript of Cindy's answers and it would make them cohesive. Don't forget that all of the conflicting statements they gave to LE and the FBI can be referenced during the depo. The Anthony's are not going to outwit the professionals interviewing them. And the harder they try to do so the more it will backfire on them.

Mamabear1963 · #**194** 07-30-2009, 07:48 AM

These were just "normal" depos before the trial, right?

It does sound like CA's took longer than expected...I for one am not worried about GA, LA and CA getting their stories to sync. They haven't been able to do it...and I don't think a recording or transcript will help them. moo

lawlady84 · #**195** 08-17-2009, 11:58 PM

Are the depos getting released??? I need some comic relief at work - at midnight - after a week of depositions. I want to see JB repeatedly inappropriately object. Please tell me that happened?

Reagan · #**196** 08-18-2009, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mysteriew

Does anyone know what time they ended CA's depo? One article posted in media mentioned 7:15 pm. If that is correct, that was a very long day for CA. Can you imagine being questioned for a full day and a half? Going to be hard to keep track of what you already said and what you didn't.

Also I thought they had GA scheduled for this afternoon. But since he apparently got rescheduled I guess they didn't. Is that a sign that things didn't go to well with CA, the fact that it took longer than expected? I do worry that CA will have time to relay to GA what she said in the depo and that they will synch their stories.

Welp, she better get used to it. Last trial I followed (Melanie McGuire case) the star witness was on the stand for atleast 3 days. I don't think the As will be star witnesses necessarily, but they are the only ones who can corroborate Caseys lies... *cough* I mean story.

With all the twists and turns, players in this case, and especially the 31 days to account for, this is going to be a very long, detailed, and intricate trial.

Reagan · #**197** 08-18-2009, 12:24 PM

Oh, I am very curious which story they all decide to go with. I was re-listening to the A's LE and FBI interviews and it seems to me that they were more forthcoming with OCSO, then as the days passed, their stories began to transform.

Example. GA told LE that KC didn't let him go near the trunk, that she pushed passed him before he could get near it and see inside. Then he told FBI that he did see inside the trunk. He spoke of the blue tote thingie that they all had in their cars... to verify that there was no Caylee in the trunk on the 24th.

So liar faces... which story ya going with?

essies · #**198** 08-18-2009, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reagan

Oh, I am very curious which story they all decide to go with. I was re-listening to the A's LE and FBI interviews and it seems to me that they were more forthcoming with OCSO, then as the days passed, their stories began to transform.

Example. GA told LE that KC didn't let him go near the trunk, that she pushed passed him before he could get near it and see inside. Then he told FBI that he did see inside the trunk. He spoke of the blue tote thingie that they all had in their cars... to verify that there was no Caylee in the trunk on the 24th.

So liar faces... which story ya going with?

G&C won't be able to pick a story according to this attorney! The SA will nail them down with the depos if they try to deviate or spin!!

YouTube - Casey Anthony: Her Parents' Attorney Speaks Out - 5PM Broadcast

The World According · #**199** 09-03-2009, 10:11 PM

I can't wait until tomorrow to read these depos!!

momtective · #**200** 09-03-2009, 10:27 PM

As much as I'm looking forward to the depo's and other info in tomorrows release, I'm not at all looking forward to the "A Speak". I have Advil standing by...I'm sure I'll need it.