2011.06.23 TRIAL Day Twenty-six (Afternoon Session)

[kpalma715]

:great:

 

[Linda7NJ]

this is what "per bono" gets you......

Jose is getting paid by Florida tax payers...make no mistake

 

[liltexans]

Talking in the hallway: #JoseBaez , #cindyanthony and Cindy's attorney, Mark Lippman. Curious.
by stevehelling via twitter at 1:36 PM

 

[beachgal58]

HHJP cannot let this result in mistrial. Doing so opens the door to allow any defense lawyer to use shoddy questioning as an strategy or mechanism to defend their client. It outright undermines the process and encourages bad behavior instead of good.

Shouldnt there be consequences for lawyers who constanly try to get a mistrial by messing up on purpose? Why are they allowed to do this?

 

[tehcloser]

The DT has not asked for a mistrial over this.........

 

[Nana46]

I wish they would take the inmate out everytime there is a recess...I am sooooooooooo over her.

 

[newsjunkie]

Back at sidebar and JA got his spot by the bench back from DS.

 

[JSR]

I will cry if a mistrial goes down. Especially if the SA's fault.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

The DT (per Sims) asked "could you replicate this test?"....opening up the line of questions from JA about did you? Why not? It boils down to the same thing we had the other day about the dna evidence. The DT never sent it, they never asked that this test be replicated, because of what it MIGHT prove against their client. And they didn't have to do that. That would be putting the burden on them to show their client DID NOT DO IT. In a criminal trial, the burden lies with they Prosecution in showing she DID DO IT.

Here is a simple way to explain what just happened. In my simple words.

 

[Oakley]

anthonycase WOFL
Just saw #caseyanthony's mom Cindy, her attorney Mark Lippman and Jose Baez having a pow wow in the hallway. #fox35

 

[pinkfly]

I thought double jeopardy only applied when someone had actually been aquitted....that they could never ever be tried again for that same crime. No?

It can apply if prosecution is cause of mistrial and defense effectively argues that it amounts to double jeopardy to put accused through it again.

 

[mydailyopinions]

Talking in the hallway: #JoseBaez , #cindyanthony and Cindy's attorney, Mark Lippman. Curious.
by stevehelling via twitter at 2:36 PM

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

I understand that the "burden of proof" is the states responsibility but could someone explain to me how the DT can throw things out there without having to PROVE the theory their witness is testifying to.

I hope this question makes sense, it did in my head but not sure it came out the same way!

No, I agree with you. For me, that would be the "reasonable" part of "reasonable doubt." MOO - if I were a juror, I wouldn't be interested in hearing that some witnesses with impressive titles could imagine an alternate scenario (to that presented by the SAs). I would want to know that the alternative explanations were based on facts.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Witness was asked if he is able to replicate Dr. Vass's results, and JA thinks it opened the door for him to ask why he didn't try. DS objects because it shifts the burden of proof to the defense implying that they should have run the tests and she was just trying to point out that the tests were run according to no protocol the witness is aware of and the reports give insufficient information to replicate.

Judge saying that it's a fine line here and let's recess.

The parties quoted caselaw, Overton and Hayes I think.

Best summary yet, Donjeta. Thanks.

 

[wenwe4]

I understand that the "burden of proof" is the states responsibility but could someone explain to me how the DT can throw things out there without having to PROVE the theory their witness is testifying to.

I hope this question makes sense, it did in my head but not sure it came out the same way!

Oh you mean like the baby drown, GA molested KC, LA molested KC, LA might be the baby Daddy, cannot replicate this test- yes we can, ZFG, looking for a live Caylee, ....

 

[Wise Old Owl]

If I understand correctly (correct me if I'm wrong), it is because it is not the DT's burden to prove anything. It is the State's. So their witness didn't HAVE to test anything and can't be impeached or whatever due to not testing it.

Right! BUT - the witness is testifying about his OPINION of the results. He is basing his opinion upon his reading of the report and bench notes not being complete enough. That then offers an opinion of other expert witnesses (particularly the ones that conducted the test, took the bench notes and wrote the report).

Such a sticky mess here. True definition of the word "quagmire".

 

[reasonable]

jp screwed up letting ds go on with this line of questioning ,after ja objected to it.
now jp has got to clean up the mess or it will be a solid basis for appeal.

I agree exactly. This is the judge's making by letting them stomp around this issue at all. I don't think being "never overturned" is such a great thing. Maybe he is too cautious to the detriment of one side or the other.

The rules are the rules.

IMO, this is far from mistrial worthy, but I kind of choke on CM's curative instruction.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

I was on the road when the question was asked and the cans were put up on the stand but from listening now I get the impression the guy said he could not replicate the test. That is a very basic thing in science, others have to be able to do the test. I would think Ashton would have the right to call him on that since it is a simple test and laid out in steps. It is not like the guy was using vodoo or something to do the test with.

I don't think that is putting any burden on the DT to produce evidence it is just making this guy explain why he can not do the test.

 

[Eidetic]

 

[anb]

Can someone please tell me EXACTLY why there could be a mistrial?? I am SOOOO confused!! I don't understand what DCS did and about the evidence? I am lost.