BC Waived Conflict re: Mark NJ repping TES- what does this mean?

[impatientredhead]

I am thinking that the A's asking for discovery docs to be given to the defense as quickly as possible is about getting Caylee buried. Until JB has all info from SA office, that gives JB/KC an excuse to hold up turning over Caylee's remains to the A's. Thats the excuse I've heard last from defense anyway--that they need to keep possession of the remains until they get all info from SA. Thats what I'm thinking anyway.

I think this is exactly why they want discovery done as quickly as possible. They would like to bury their granddaughter and end this phase where JB/Casey treat her like just another piece of evidence.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

I think this is exactly why they want discovery done as quickly as possible. They would like to bury their granddaughter and end this phase where JB/Casey treat her like just another piece of evidence.

I thought he was addressing the Court only on the TES motion? Which, IMO, is in no way holding up the funeral. Just a few weeks ago he said it was Hoover holding up the funeral. And there were certainly no issues raised in Court about non-compliance with discovery requirements in relation to the examination of the remains. I thought the last statement BC made was that they were waiting til George came out of hospital??? But that was about 2 days ago, so it may have changed again.

 

[impatientredhead]

How can you be sure of that? For some crazy reason the As were pretty angry at TM. Do you work for him or do you have direct knowledge, or are you guessing?

BC and MN both seem to be competent at their jobs. Clearing conflict issues is normally established pretty early on. Even if the Anthony's hadn't waived it, MN/TES probably could have gotten the judge to sign off it. TES and the Anthony's interests are not in conflict with each other whether they like/respect each other.

 

[impatientredhead]

I thought he was addressing the Court only on the TES motion? Which, IMO, is in no way holding up the funeral. Just a few weeks ago he said it was Hoover holding up the funeral. And there were certainly no issues raised in Court about non-compliance with discovery requirements in relation to the examination of the remains. I thought the last statement BC made was that they were waiting til George came out of hospital??? But that was about 2 days ago, so it may have changed again.

I thought BC was referring to discovery in general. Though technically the TES stuff Baez is asking for is not part of discovery at all. He is asking for something to be generated, not asking for something the state has been able to use and has not given him a copy of. They can't provide something under discovery that they don't have and don't intend to get. If Baez wants to get those documents from TES he would need a subpoena, and I doubt the judge is going to sign something like that without a really good reason, of which one has not been outlined yet.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

BC and MN both seem to be competent at their jobs. Clearing conflict issues is normally established pretty early on. Even if the Anthony's hadn't waived it, MN/TES probably could have gotten the judge to sign off it. TES and the Anthony's interests are not in conflict with each other whether they like/respect each other.

It normally is...but we can't be sure it was in this case. No lawyer is perfect. MN is privy to information from the As, and like any clients, they are entitled to be protected by his duty of confidentiality. I am surprised they signed off on MN representing a party that they disliked so much.

I'm not sure when MN started representing TES, but the As were without counsel for a period of time, and of course would have required independent advice before signing off on such a waiver.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

I thought BC was referring to discovery in general. Though technically the TES stuff Baez is asking for is not part of discovery at all. He is asking for something to be generated, not asking for something the state has been able to use and has not given him a copy of. They can't provide something under discovery that they don't have and don't intend to get. If Baez wants to get those documents from TES he would need a subpoena, and I doubt the judge is going to sign something like that without a really good reason, of which one has not been outlined yet.

He said he would issue his ruling today....hopefully we will know the answer shortly. And TES/MN did not argue that the information was irrelevant, though I"m not sure why, at least insofar as personal information re all the searchers.

 

[whiteangora]

is it common for an attoryney to interject himself in every area of the case such as bc has done???? Seems like he is everywhere and anywhere.....tia

Couldn't he have submitted his statement in writing to the judge, avoiding what seemed to be a disruption of the proceedings?
His little message about the family loving and supporting their daughter was improper as far as I'm concerned.

 

[debs]

M. Nejame sent someone out into the hall as soon as Baez began his objection to Nejame representing TES and suggesting it was a conflict of interest. Immediately thereafter, BC rolled into court. As soon as Baez was done, Nejame asked if BC could address the court with information directly relating to the objection Baez had just made. BC then rolled forward and stated that his clients knowingly waived conflict with Nejame representing TES. I think it was very smart of Nejame to anticipate the objection (and incredible that Baez thought ahead to object to it) and point goes to Nejame to have put an end to it right then and there. Baez has nowhere to go with it later on if he thinks ahead to perhaps needing an appeals basis.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Couldn't he have submitted his statement in writing to the judge, avoiding what seemed to be a disruption of the proceedings?
His little message about the family loving and supporting their daughter was improper as far as I'm concerned.

ITA. They also could have handed a written and signed waiver up to the Judge, assuming they had one.

 

[pirate]

So perhaps waving objection was less about cooperating and more about getting a message to Casey that her parents love her????????????????/

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

BC and MN both seem to be competent at their jobs. Clearing conflict issues is normally established pretty early on. Even if the Anthony's hadn't waived it, MN/TES probably could have gotten the judge to sign off it. TES and the Anthony's interests are not in conflict with each other whether they like/respect each other.

I don't want to appear argumentative, but it would seem the paragraph in his motion that dealt with any monies given to TES needing to be established as legitimate etc, may be based on confidential information he received from the As re where her funding was coming from. Otherwise I think he would only have media reports to go on and rumour, and don't think he would have put it in the motion if that was the highest he could take it.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

So perhaps waving objection was less about cooperating and more about getting a message to Casey that her parents love her????????????????/

The way I read it....and I may be wrong....was that BC had convinced G & C to agree to the waiver by leading them to believe it would somehow help Casey, and he was hoping to reinforce his position with G & C by stating it the way he did.

 

[Chezhire]

is it common for an attoryney to interject himself in every area of the case such as bc has done???? Seems like he is everywhere and anywhere.....tia

It is likely that the reason BC was there to speak was because he knew JBaez was going to talk about this "conflict of interests" as yet another reason why his motion re: TES should be granted. (I know, it isn't relevant, but JBaez raises all sorts of irrelevant things in his motions.) BC wanted Judge Strickland to HEAR him say that any such conflict had been waived...

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

It is likely that the reason BC was there to speak was because he knew JBaez was going to talk about this "conflict of interests" as yet another reason why his motion re: TES should be granted. (I know, it isn't relevant, but JBaez raises all sorts of irrelevant things in his motions.) BC wanted Judge Strickland to HEAR him say that any such conflict had been waived...
He does NOT want to be alligned with JBaez on this case.

He was there for the last hearing though too, when that was not a live issue. I think he's going because he doesn't want to miss a chance to get in the press.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

It is likely that the reason BC was there to speak was because he knew JBaez was going to talk about this "conflict of interests" as yet another reason why his motion re: TES should be granted. (I know, it isn't relevant, but JBaez raises all sorts of irrelevant things in his motions.) BC wanted Judge Strickland to HEAR him say that any such conflict had been waived...
He does NOT want to be alligned with JBaez on this case.

It does seem that way. I wonder how the As will feel about that?

 

[Chezhire]

He was there for the last hearing though too, when that was not a live issue. I think he's going because he doesn't want to miss a chance to get in the press.

Lawyers speak to one another prior to most all hearings. I could almost guarantee you that BC knew this issue was going to be raised today. As far as his being present on other occasions, when issues pertaining directly to his clients weren't raised, all I can say is that with the way JBaez decides to "motion" the court without even filing a proper motion, I'd always be present, too, just in case. Unfortunately, you just never know with JBaez.

 

[VALee]

Here's what I don't get, why is Baez interjecting himself in this part of the case anyway? MN, BC, and the A's are not his clients, nor have they ever been, so he has no need to even bring it up as part of his client's case, who is KC and only KC.
And truly, focusing on that seems to be increasingly difficult for him.

My opinion, today was a tidy win for the prosecution and a badloss for the defense. I think JB realized this as in the footage after the trial he was ramming things into his bag and looked fer-oche.

And each trial and motion makes JB look less effective than the last.

I was also appalled, yes totally appalled, that he would come into court today and state to the judge that someone on the Prosecution side of the table was not familiar with the case, that may have been directed at MN as I recall, but would have to watch it again.

I'm off to the rant thread!

 

[gitana1]

is it common for an attoryney to interject himself in every area of the case such as bc has done???? Seems like he is everywhere and anywhere.....tia

BC is acting on behalf of his clients, the Anthonys. With my lawyer eyes, I saw a lot in that hearing. BC was trying to deliver a message to casey from the Anthonys - that they love her, want the best for her and want things speeded along so she does not have to sit in jail longer than necessary. All fo that was simply to further to Anthony goal to let their daughter, who they apparently are not allowed to speak with or contact, know that they are still behind her. I noticed BC also spoke after the hearing with JB, asking him if casey would do something. JB then whispered to casey, who nodded and then JB asnwered in the affirmative to BC. My guess? Something along the lines of will she talk with the parents, or accept a letter, or something to that effect.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Lawyers speak to one another prior to most all hearings. I could almost guarantee you that BC knew this issue was going to be raised today. As far as his being present on other occasions, when issues pertaining directly to his clients weren't raised, all I can say is that with the way JBaez decides to "motion" the court without even filing a proper motion, I'd always be present, too, just in case. Unfortunately, you just never know with JBaez.

I know! But it does appear there may be a rift b/w BC & JB and perhaps they didn't talk. If JB knew there was a proper waiver in place beforehand, presumably he would not have raised it.

 

[gitana1]

I agree. I just watched it....I thought it was really weird....the guy likes the sound of his own voice and has incredible arrogance to speak to the judge the way he did! Ordinarily the State would speak on behalf of a victim's family member.

I really think this waiver could backfire on him big time, if the As decide to turn on him....unless it was fully and properly explained to the As and he has written, informed consent to waive it, I would think they would have a good basis for a complaint. I know that I would never waive my rights to confidentiality like that, and find it very odd that he has done it on behalf of his clients.

I disagree. It's not confidenitality that is being waived. It's a possible conflict of interest claim. JB was not going to go anywhere with his complaint about possible conflict because such a claim likely would not get very far. MN is not working with the prosecution, he's working with TES and MN never represented the defense. He represented the Anthonys, as private citizens, who are NOT parties to the case. I don't think it can be shown that TES are on opposite sides from the Anthonys in any case the Anthonys have. They don't have one.
Also, BC was saying that his clients waive conflict so that will not be an issue that holds up discovery, then further holding up the case, causing an innocent casey to be held in jail longer than she should. So, there is no real conflict, IMO and JB knows it and BC knows it and neither want to run with that theory, holding up trial unnecessarily.