2011.01.25 Defense Requests More Time to Submit Expert Reports

New Posts

faefrost said:
No! More and more I am coming to the realization that no he does not. I recently described JB in another thread as a "legal sociopath". I still think that that is the most apt description for him. In many ways he and his client are exactly alike. The only differences are matters of degree. He has that rare extra special disconnect that allows and compels him to say anything with no remorse or regrets. he has no guilt, he has no empathy with those who are not fixed to his purpose. And even then what little empathy he has is limited to how can this benefit me or mine? he like his client is a creature that cannot recognize boundaries of behavior and chooses to simply stride right through them to his own purpose.

Now this sort of flawed behavior or personality trait is not always a bad thing. Some of our best presidents and Generals were known for suffering from it. But in JB's case it truly cripples him, his abilities and his clients defense. he is in that same self centered focus as his client. As a result he has repeatedly refused to back down on any thing when facing questions of actual law, questions of experience and qualifications, questions on whether he should be in the media, questions on money. It all comes down to a completely self centered "sociopathic" behavior. "he's still the lead attorney even though he is the most inexperienced and is not DP qualified under statute", "Things are unfair because the laws are not benefiting him", "The judge is being unfair to him specifically", "this belief that his personal opinions trump the judges orders", "His complete restriction of his client from any other input or influences".

Right now I think HHJP and HHJS before him are giving JB a longer than expected leash, simply because they have not yet come to the full realization of exactly what they are dealing with. Just looking at the shocked responses from our various legal professionals around here and you can see. JB is sofar outside the lines of ingrained, trained, almost worshipful legal behavior before the courts and the law as to be an almost completely alien creature to other legal professionals. They can't quite see him for what he is, because he is already inside the door. His name tag says "Lawyer" so he must be behaving in a certain expected way, right? This has to be some sort of act or trick, right? "I mean why would somebody lie about something like that?" See where I am going with this?

The even scarier thing is the Florida bar should be better at recognizing this sort of aberration than most other states. They have had recent experiences with a similar figure, who they finally did disbar. The lunatic anti video game crusader Jack Thompson.
Click to expand...

:goodpost: This is such a brilliant analysis and so eloquently expressed. I couldn't stop boldfacing--everything was so spot on :)

And yes, I do see where you are going.....

(Now I am going to see how the FL Bar proceeded in the case you mention.)

Thanks very much for this great post! :D
 
LambChop said:
If he can't produce a report at this time I would guess JB is buying time. Is it possible he is trying to work a deal with SA to spare KC's life? There is just no way the experts would not provide him with a report. It would undermine their credibility big time. Just like the TES volunteers who were deposed. They had nothing to report. KC, again, taking the taxpayers all the way to the end of the hall. Wasn't JB suppose to give SA a copy of his discovery within 15 days from the time he received it? It's been over 2 years since Caylee's remains were found and the second autopsy was completed. Talk abut imaginary. First the nanny, then KC's best friends, Juliet and Jeff, the nanny's family and now the imaginary reports. Someone give HHJP his gavel so he can bring his hammer down on this nonsense. jmo :maddening:
Click to expand...


Interesting. Wonder what these experts are thinking right now after hearing JB swear as an officer of the court that no reports had been provided although they had submitted them to JB? Wouldn't they be getting miffed at JB's antics because his behavior is affecting their credibility?

This may be confusing, sorry
Novice Seeker
 
Kentjbkent said:
I agree with you.

I don't think these experts HAVE reports because it would not be in the best interest of the defense to have WRITTEN reports that support the prosecution written reports......

So what's a smirking boy to do?

Give it one last effort....rush down to the convention where all his "boys and girl" will be present (since they won't answer their phone!) and beg them to take one more look...but in the meantime, must buy another 45 days in case he is forced to come up with a Plan B!
Click to expand...

It's protocol and an ethical requirement of their professions to document each step and to document any opinions the evidence suggests though. Good or bad. I think when BP was ordering all notes, documentation, opinions and evidence that led to those conclusions, etc be submitted as discovery in lieu of 'reports' he understood this truth even if Baez didn't.
The paperwork exists. It may not be officially called a report though. :) I don't believe any expert would get on the stand without a copy of whatever work product they generated to arrive at their expert conclusion. You don't like the conclusion you don't call that expert. Isn't it that simple?
What's troubling is that he seems to be stalking these experts the same way his PI's are stalking TES searchers. They can't reach these people by phone or email so are going to unique lengths to see if a face to face undocumented discussion about some imaginary new information will sway their initial opinions. How convenient he now has some cash to try and reel in and sway an expert opinion.
I can promise you Dr Reichs doesn't have her full Caylee file on hand at the Conference and will not be willing to speculate without reviewing her files in full. I'm almost sure she'll expect an immediate payment, the same way a lawyer would for taking up her precious time at the conference.

I wonder if JB knows he's one move away from losing his licence anyway and is helping things along thinking he'll get a mistrial or huge delay for his fantasy girl. If he isn't a lawyer and has KC's blessings, he could make a fortune off this case and beat CA and GA to the punch. Couldn't he? He could get rich appearing on JVM every night as a commentator plus he'd probably get a clothing allowance.

Sorry but this whole report subject is freaking me out a little. Can you tell? LOL
 
faefrost said:
No! More and more I am coming to the realization that no he does not. I recently described JB in another thread as a "legal sociopath". I still think that that is the most apt description for him. In many ways he and his client are exactly alike. The only differences are matters of degree. He has that rare extra special disconnect that allows and compels him to say anything with no remorse or regrets. he has no guilt, he has no empathy with those who are not fixed to his purpose. And even then what little empathy he has is limited to how can this benefit me or mine? he like his client is a creature that cannot recognize boundaries of behavior and chooses to simply stride right through them to his own purpose.

Now this sort of flawed behavior or personality trait is not always a bad thing. Some of our best presidents and Generals were known for suffering from it. But in JB's case it truly cripples him, his abilities and his clients defense. he is in that same self centered focus as his client. As a result he has repeatedly refused to back down on any thing when facing questions of actual law, questions of experience and qualifications, questions on whether he should be in the media, questions on money. It all comes down to a completely self centered "sociopathic" behavior. "he's still the lead attorney even though he is the most inexperienced and is not DP qualified under statute", "Things are unfair because the laws are not benefiting him", "The judge is being unfair to him specifically", "this belief that his personal opinions trump the judges orders", "His complete restriction of his client from any other input or influences".

Right now I think HHJP and HHJS before him are giving JB a longer than expected leash, simply because they have not yet come to the full realization of exactly what they are dealing with. Just looking at the shocked responses from our various legal professionals around here and you can see. JB is sofar outside the lines of ingrained, trained, almost worshipful legal behavior before the courts and the law as to be an almost completely alien creature to other legal professionals. They can't quite see him for what he is, because he is already inside the door. His name tag says "Lawyer" so he must be behaving in a certain expected way, right? This has to be some sort of act or trick, right? "I mean why would somebody lie about something like that?" See where I am going with this?

The even scarier thing is the Florida bar should be better at recognizing this sort of aberration than most other states. They have had recent experiences with a similar figure, who they finally did disbar. The lunatic anti video game crusader Jack Thompson.
Click to expand...

Brilliant analysis faefrost!! Thanks wasn't enough, ITA!! You just crystalized all my random speculations on WTH the problem was. Wow!!!
 
I guess we will find out if HHJP means what he says, or not.
 
Intermezzo said:
bbm
I certainly hope Judge Perry calls him to his chambers and asks Baez to give specifics of this "unique opportunity in the very near future" mystery.
Click to expand...

Isn't it obvious? It was promised in JB's fortune cookie at lunch the day he filed the motion:

"You will have a unique opportunity in the very near future!" :floorlaugh:
 
kaRN said:
It's protocol and an ethical requirement of their professions to document each step and to document any opinions the evidence suggests though. Good or bad. I think when BP was ordering all notes, documentation, opinions and evidence that led to those conclusions, etc be submitted as discovery in lieu of 'reports' he understood this truth even if Baez didn't.
The paperwork exists. It may not be officially called a report though. :) I don't believe any expert would get on the stand without a copy of whatever work product they generated to arrive at their expert conclusion. You don't like the conclusion you don't call that expert. Isn't it that simple?
What's troubling is that he seems to be stalking these experts the same way his PI's are stalking TES searchers. They can't reach these people by phone or email so are going to unique lengths to see if a face to face undocumented discussion about some imaginary new information will sway their initial opinions. How convenient he now has some cash to try and reel in and sway an expert opinion.
I can promise you Dr Reichs doesn't have her full Caylee file on hand at the Conference and will not be willing to speculate without reviewing her files in full. I'm almost sure she'll expect an immediate payment, the same way a lawyer would for taking up her precious time at the conference.

I wonder if JB knows he's one move away from losing his licence anyway and is helping things along thinking he'll get a mistrial or huge delay for his fantasy girl. If he isn't a lawyer and has KC's blessings, he could make a fortune off this case and beat CA and GA to the punch. Couldn't he? He could get rich appearing on JVM every night as a commentator plus he'd probably get a clothing allowance.

Sorry but this whole report subject is freaking me out a little. Can you tell? LOL
Click to expand...


But wait.....doesn't this call into play whether these experts actually AGREED to be defense witnesses as opposed to being contacted initially as a "consultant"?

As I am understanding it after reading AZLawyers posts in the legal thread, as well as the quotes by Hornsby posted by TWA, the defense may have originally contacted these experts on a consultation basis to see what they have to say before making a determination that they would serve the defense well as a "defense expert"?

Is it possible that these experts were originally contacted for consultation but after review and verbally stating that they did not find anything contradictory in prosecution expert reports, they did NOT agree to testify as a defense witness, but Baez, with his limited knowledge, listed them as witnesses anyway...hence the current problem with getting them to return Baez' calls?

I thought I read earlier that as a defense attorney, if you consult with an expert whose opinion AGREES with the prosecution, you do NOT want a written report that will be turned over in discovery and used in trial against your client...so initial oral consultation between expert and defense attorney of findings is first step before retaining expert?
 
Intermezzo said:
bbm
I certainly hope Judge Perry calls him to his chambers and asks Baez to give specifics of this "unique opportunity in the very near future" mystery.
Click to expand...

Judge Perry is going to get first shot at Jose's time share.
 
Our brilliant attorney member, Themis, helped us with this last year...

:" What is even more interesting is that the prosecution attorneys know this too. So, if the prosecution sees a nationally renown expert whose truthfulness is established suddenly leave a case, the prosecution can usually read between the lines. That is one reason why so often the defense doesn't release any information about their expert consultants until they have to issue a witness list. The point of issuing the witness list identifies the experts that the attorney intends to use in trial AND is the point where the other side can interview or depose your experts. "

So this sures it up in my mind, if the defense plans on calling them to the stand in the case in chief or in rebuttal, no matter, they need to be the witness list.

Baaaaam! (Thank you to Themis and AZ lawyer, and Richard Hornsby for being here at WS)
 
I was looking through my file and found another answer Themis helped me with.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4645764&postcount=59"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #1[/ame]
Regarding the hiring of folks just to get them off the market
 
Another favorite of mine, Florida defense expert William Sheaffer opines on the hold ups

http://www.wftv.com/video/22593166/index.html

Mom, pop and Brad approached another local lawyer offering him media rights to take over the case from Joe ....they were very clear with him that there was no money, and Casey had no money to pay him a cash retainer. There is no reason that Jose did not start having experts work on this case two years ago, rather than just using their names for credibility while they have an empty Casey Anthony file. WOW
 
faefrost said:
No! More and more I am coming to the realization that no he does not. I recently described JB in another thread as a "legal sociopath". I still think that that is the most apt description for him. In many ways he and his client are exactly alike. The only differences are matters of degree. He has that rare extra special disconnect that allows and compels him to say anything with no remorse or regrets. he has no guilt, he has no empathy with those who are not fixed to his purpose. And even then what little empathy he has is limited to how can this benefit me or mine? he like his client is a creature that cannot recognize boundaries of behavior and chooses to simply stride right through them to his own purpose.

Now this sort of flawed behavior or personality trait is not always a bad thing. Some of our best presidents and Generals were known for suffering from it. But in JB's case it truly cripples him, his abilities and his clients defense. he is in that same self centered focus as his client. As a result he has repeatedly refused to back down on any thing when facing questions of actual law, questions of experience and qualifications, questions on whether he should be in the media, questions on money. It all comes down to a completely self centered "sociopathic" behavior. "he's still the lead attorney even though he is the most inexperienced and is not DP qualified under statute", "Things are unfair because the laws are not benefiting him", "The judge is being unfair to him specifically", "this belief that his personal opinions trump the judges orders", "His complete restriction of his client from any other input or influences".

Right now I think HHJP and HHJS before him are giving JB a longer than expected leash, simply because they have not yet come to the full realization of exactly what they are dealing with. Just looking at the shocked responses from our various legal professionals around here and you can see. JB is sofar outside the lines of ingrained, trained, almost worshipful legal behavior before the courts and the law as to be an almost completely alien creature to other legal professionals. They can't quite see him for what he is, because he is already inside the door. His name tag says "Lawyer" so he must be behaving in a certain expected way, right? This has to be some sort of act or trick, right? "I mean why would somebody lie about something like that?" See where I am going with this?

The even scarier thing is the Florida bar should be better at recognizing this sort of aberration than most other states. They have had recent experiences with a similar figure, who they finally did disbar. The lunatic anti video game crusader Jack Thompson.
Click to expand...

Again Faefrost you have upped the ante by giving us this brilliant and informed analysis of Baez and the reasons for his truly bizarre behavior. Baez is a performance all to himself in the midst of this case - it is truly amazing to watch his "from another dimension" behavior - and the most interesting to me is his complete unawareness of how out of step he is with his production vs. the rest of a fairly honorable legal profession.

Objectively it is for me like watching a serial on TV, you check in every week and can't believe the plot of the week - thinking okay, there are no more tricks to pull - and behold - another incredible feat of stupidity - and think - is it this week he's going to crash and burn?

His performance in the upcoming trial will be something the legal profession has never seen before - I can't wait! :skip:
 
Kentjbkent said:
But wait.....doesn't this call into play whether these experts actually AGREED to be defense witnesses as opposed to being contacted initially as a "consultant"?

As I am understanding it after reading AZLawyers posts in the legal thread, as well as the quotes by Hornsby posted by TWA, the defense may have originally contacted these experts on a consultation basis to see what they have to say before making a determination that they would serve the defense well as a "defense expert"?

Is it possible that these experts were originally contacted for consultation but after review and verbally stating that they did not find anything contradictory in prosecution expert reports, they did NOT agree to testify as a defense witness, but Baez, with his limited knowledge, listed them as witnesses anyway...hence the current problem with getting them to return Baez' calls?

I thought I read earlier that as a defense attorney, if you consult with an expert whose opinion AGREES with the prosecution, you do NOT want a written report that will be turned over in discovery and used in trial against your client...so initial oral consultation between expert and defense attorney of findings is first step before retaining expert?
Click to expand...

Hello friend. Yes, we have seen many a time his limited knowledge on matters. The Joe Jordan debacle is a recent example!!!!Knowing what we know now, that Joe Jordan would have blown them out of the water by testifying that Laura Buchanan was NOT CORRECT and indeed no he never searched with her, etc......it would have been suicide to call him. Baez should thank God, Joe stood him up in court that day. But my point is ...he was calling him as a witness!!! A limited understanding is putting it politely. In words of Mark Nejame "I am being overly generous in my characterization".

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/23085002/detail.html
http://www.wftv.com/video/23056801/index.html
 
logicalgirl said:
Again Faefrost you have upped the ante by giving us this brilliant and informed analysis of Baez and the reasons for his truly bizarre behavior. Baez is a performance all to himself in the midst of this case - it is truly amazing to watch his "from another dimension" behavior - and the most interesting to me is his complete unawareness of how out of step he is with his production vs. the rest of a fairly honorable legal profession.

Objectively it is for me like watching a serial on TV, you check in every week and can't believe the plot of the week - thinking okay, there are no more tricks to pull - and behold - another incredible feat of stupidity - and think - is it this week he's going to crash and burn?

His performance in the upcoming trial will be something the legal profession has never seen before - I can't wait! :skip:
Click to expand...

He should join the cast of Jersey Shore, he would fit right in.. just when you think they can't get any more disgusting.....
 
Since Jose has this undeniable hangup about getting all the experts together to hold hands and sing campfire songs, I'm guessing his unique opportunity is the conference. I wonder if he'll ask if ICA can go, too!!
Honestly, he wants until March 11 for Reichs and Roddy? A reasonable amount of time for the others, Logan and Spitz? Does he even know what a reasonable amount of time means?
I can not wait for HHJBP to put widdle Jose in timeout!
Geez, no wonder the prosecution wanted to know how much the experts had been paid, promised, etc.

Jose had $225,000 that we KNOW about. Now, he's lacing each argument with the prosecutions' resources? I'm sick of his incessant whining!
 
The lack of news or any information today is almost like the calm before the storm :) I was sure i'd see some court filings or responses from the SA or HHJBP

It's eerie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 64 more.
Total: 2,709 (members: 65, guests: 2,644)

Online statistics

Members online
65
Guests online
2,644
Total visitors
2,709
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,492
Messages
17,969,825
Members
228,789
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top