2009.10.16 Motions Hearing

[marspiter]

Coming on to this thread kinda late but was wondering. Given that JB said his experts are not able to to use the technology to access the photos. Could that be used to discredit his experts at trial.

Getting on to a secured server is not exactly rocket science, or in this case forensic science. Also most forensics labs in the county in this day and age use data banks and other server systems. So to me JB stating this in open court is basically admitting that his "experts" are unable to use this technology. If they can't use this simple technology what else can't they use and how can they give an expert opinion on current modern forensic techniques. To me it would be kind of hard for someone who doesn't understand how the technology works to try and discredit it. Like the air sniffing tests for example.

If I were the SA I think I would make a mental note of this statement and bring it back up when JB's experts are on the stand trying to discredit my experts findings.

 

[ZsaZsa]

Coming on to this thread kinda late but was wondering. Given that JB said his experts are not able to to use the technology to access the photos. Could that be used to discredit his experts at trial.

Getting on to a secured server is not exactly rocket science, or in this case forensic science. Also most forensics labs in the county in this day and age use data banks and other server systems. So to me JB stating this in open court is basically admitting that his "experts" are unable to use this technology. If they can't use this simple technology what else can't they use and how can they give an expert opinion on current modern forensic techniques. To me it would be kind of hard for someone who doesn't understand how the technology works to try and discredit it. Like the air sniffing tests for example.

If I were the SA I think I would make a mental note of this statement and bring it back up when JB's experts are on the stand trying to discredit my experts findings.

I was stunned when he said that.
Umm- couldn't he call the FBI and ask them how they do it? :innocent:

 

[Kentjbkent]

Guys, I have a real hard time believing this. Come on. Out of all the HUNDREDS of blogs out there about this case and the judge just happens to follow Dave's blog? Not buying it.

Here is my concern my friends. Dave seems to be inserting himself in this. I don't want to give him a million hits on his site from Websleuths unless I am sure he is being truthful.

New Rule: unless what he has on his blog can be verified let's not post about it OK? This reminds me of another time during this case when we got wrapped up in another blogger who turned out to be a total kook. His name rhymes with "flirt."

No more links to his site please that is unless we can prove what he is saying.

Deal?

Good rule, but keep in mind, "someone" (cannot say positively that it was JS since I was not in courtroom but does sound just like him) can be heard on the hearing audio/video at the end describing MD and stating he wants to meet him)

But I completely agree. I don't frequent that blog but visited when this incident started and did NOT like what I was reading about WS!

 

[LambChop]

Not sure about Florida but in some states inserting yourself into the middle of an investigation or "interviewing witnessess" prior to a trial can get you into a lot of trouble. Maybe the judge was giving this blogger a friendly reminder. This is still an ongoing investigation until defense turns in their discovery, I would think. Can't see the judge saying to this person, "Gee you're really doing a great job of interviewing potential witnesses for the State. Keep up the good work cause you might find something our experts missed." And maybe the judge overheard what was said to BC. Very, very, very inapproriate to have that conversation with BC in the courtroom.

 

[mysteriew]

You know, what bothers me about Judge Strickland is that he asked to be introduced to Marinade Dave yesterday- he apparently follows his blog- and I have looked at his site a couple of times re the James Thompson report, but does it pass the sniff test when a Judge expresses interest in a website like that? I don't know what to make of it...

Actually it makes sense that the judge had been to the blog and may have wanted to talk to Marinade Dave. A COV has been filed in the cases. So the judge would be interested in how the case is being discussed. Are bloggers saying she is guilty and to hang her? Or are they just following the case as it goes? Big difference there as far as influencing jurors. And other items of interest might be how big a readership does he have and how many are local. If his readership is mostly from other areas of the country, then he wouldn't be influencing potential jurors. But if they are mainly local, then it could influence jurors. Since the judge is the one charged with making sure that KC gets a fair trial, then he would be neglient if he didn't check it out.

 

[mysteriew]

Coming on to this thread kinda late but was wondering. Given that JB said his experts are not able to to use the technology to access the photos. Could that be used to discredit his experts at trial.

Getting on to a secured server is not exactly rocket science, or in this case forensic science. Also most forensics labs in the county in this day and age use data banks and other server systems. So to me JB stating this in open court is basically admitting that his "experts" are unable to use this technology. If they can't use this simple technology what else can't they use and how can they give an expert opinion on current modern forensic techniques. To me it would be kind of hard for someone who doesn't understand how the technology works to try and discredit it. Like the air sniffing tests for example.

If I were the SA I think I would make a mental note of this statement and bring it back up when JB's experts are on the stand trying to discredit my experts findings.

KC could probably show them how.

 

[Kentjbkent]

Actually it makes sense that the judge had been to the blog and may have wanted to talk to Marinade Dave. A COV has been filed in the cases. So the judge would be interested in how the case is being discussed. Are bloggers saying she is guilty and to hang her? Or are they just following the case as it goes? Big difference there as far as influencing jurors. And other items of interest might be how big a readership does he have and how many are local. If his readership is mostly from other areas of the country, then he wouldn't be influencing potential jurors. But if they are mainly local, then it could influence jurors. Since the judge is the one charged with making sure that KC gets a fair trial, then he would be neglient if he didn't check it out.

But isn't the judge supposed to make a ruling on COV just based on the opposing arguments presented to him in a court of law by the prosecution and the defense? Or can he go out on his own "investigating" to form an opinion?

And what importance would blogs and message boards on the internet have since there is no way of knowing what state any of the members are from? Would it matter if 3/4 of the state of Texas was blogging about the case?

Would think it would only be the local citizens of the Orlando and surrounding areas that would matter since that is where a jury would be pulled from?

 

[JWG]

[/b]

So the judge is reading blogs about this case? This can't be good, can it?

So what? So is Det. Melich. He is a member of this forum.

By reading and participating in this forum or another blog have we somehow labeled ourselves as being impartial?

 

[MD MOMMY]

I was stunned when he said that.
Umm- couldn't he call the FBI and ask them how they do it? :innocent:

I think one of the "points" they were trying to make is the server wouldn't let them manipulate the photos..side by side comparison etc. But, do I still think that is silly? Yes, I do. I think they just wanted to win for once LMAO.

 

[MD MOMMY]

So what? So is Det. Melich. He is a member of this forum.

By reading and participating in this forum or another blog have we somehow labeled ourselves as being impartial?

Correction...he was a member until he got his hand slapped LOL.

 

[Just Jayla]

Correction...he was a member until he got his hand slapped LOL.

Hope he sneaks back in every once in a while and brings LDB with him, sleuth results are still flowing in more and more everyday.

 

[JWG]

Correction...he was a member until he got his hand slapped LOL.

He is still a member, and last logged on September 11, 2009. He may have visited as a guest since then.

 

[Oakley]

Good rule, but keep in mind, "someone" (cannot say positively that it was JS since I was not in courtroom but does sound just like him) can be heard on the hearing audio/video at the end describing MD and stating he wants to meet him)

But I completely agree. I don't frequent that blog but visited when this incident started and did NOT like what I was reading about WS!

BBM. I heard the (disembodied) male voice that we are assuming was JS reference the man in the 'stripped shirt' sitting in the court room. I am not so sure the words he used were that he wanted to meet him or be introduced. He was calling him out for some reason but then the microphone's were turned off and we never found out. As someone pointed out previously, only MD knows the reason. Again, it would shock me immensely if JS was giving MD kudo's. Sorry to beat a dead horse.

 

[QB.]

There has been some discussion and question here as to whether or not the judge did ask the court deputy to ask Dave to speak with him.

On this clip [nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae5J_ObjkTw"]YouTube - Uncut Video: Casey Anthony Hearing On Friday[/nomedia]
at 22:59 the judge clearly says '......deputy can I mention something to you...'
23:04 he whispers to the deputy '....there's a guy in the 2nd row behind the lady in the pink shirt...'
23:09 '....I just wanted to say hello to him if you'll tell him'

The judge then goes on to describe what he is wearing, grey shirt etc. The judge proceeds to continue wrapping up the hearing and says he will meet defense in a minute I assume to clarify details of the photographs motion.

I don't think its really a problem for judges to read blogs that discuss the case, I think its when they start posting that it might become a problem. Just my opinion though.