Casey Anthony Answers Questions In Civil Suit Or Did JB? Legal Implications

[Oakley]

Just wanted to say thank you kindly, Amethyst, for your clear, understandable explanations. They really help in explaining the legal matters.

One more quick question. What about the senior Anthonys? What will happen to them if the outright refuse to answer the deposition questions? Fines? Jail? What can the courts do to them?

Ditto. Good questions Paintr asks. This is a learning experience for me.

 

[sweetmop]

Wow. On pages 8 and 9 of 11 there is some very interesting info. In Lee's deposition he made it very clear that the Zenaida that had Caylee had NO children according to what Casey told them and her statement to the police, but according to HER countersuit against Zenaida she states plainly that the Zenaida who had Caylee has 2 children...

RUH ROH!

Ruh Roh is right, magic-cat! I believe this to be only one of the many holes that 'the murdering mother of the year' has dug herself into! Serves her right. Had she made her precious child her priority we wouldn't be here, would we?
In the end she will see that GOOD will win out over her evil:furious: ways!

 

[MiraclesHappen]

I cannot see the legality of ZG's attorney asking Casey if she was involved in the murder of Caylee... that should not be allowed, it should be left to the criminal trial.
Neither Mr. Morgan or the other guy has any business asking her those questions, that goes beyond his scope of things, he's not a criminal lawyer anyway.

Hi :wave: Good Morning.

ZG's Attys
have done nothing illegal. The scope of questioning in discovery for this cause of action is governed by the Civil Rules of Procedure.

This does not preclude the questioning atty. from inquiring about matters which involve criminal business or topics. The latitude given for questions is broad and is not defined by limited general topics such as civil or criminal stuff, but defined by rules which don't limit the materials to things necessarily admissible at trial under the rules of evidence.
The criminal matter is interwoven with the civil matter. This delving is permissible. A lawyer this experienced isn't going to go on the NG show to highlight things that weren't triple checked under a microscope.
Whether she has the right to invoke the 5th of course, is another ballgame in the same park.

:smiliescale:MH & K :wolf:
Humble Opinion is everything above...

 

[Oakley]

Hi :wave: Good Morning.

ZG's Attys
have done nothing illegal. The scope of questioning in discovery for this cause of action is governed by the Civil Rules of Procedure.

This does not preclude the questioning atty. from inquiring about matters which involve criminal business or topics. The latitude given for questions is broad and is not defined by limited general topics such as civil or criminal stuff, but defined by rules which don't limit the materials to things necessarily admissible at trial under the rules of evidence.
The criminal matter is interwoven with the civil matter. This delving is permissible. A lawyer this experienced isn't going to go on the NG show to highlight things that weren't triple checked under a microscope.
Whether she has the right to invoke the 5th of course, is another ballgame in the same park.

:smiliescale:MH & K :wolf:
Humble Opinion is everything above...

Thanks for weighing in, MiraclesHappen. I always appreciate your "humble opinion"

 

[MiraclesHappen]

Thanks for weighing in, MiraclesHappen. I always appreciate your "humble opinion"

You are too sweet. :blowkiss:


bump :wink:

 

[Zoe Bogart]

What is it that ZG's lawyers are doing that would merit :trout:?


I kinda think they deserve :applause: and a community service award.


Humble Opinion is above :wolf:

Your humble opinion is mine also. I believe ZG's attorneys are spot on and they have every right to get the facts and to clear their client's name. Casey had no right to accuse her or any Zenaida of the non-existent crime. Typical Anthony spiel, someone else did it, Casey is innocent - gag me. I hope the judge allows Morgan and company to rake KC over the coals and back again.

Doesn't her counter-suit against Zenaida erase KC's 5th amendment rights? After all, she is both defendant in ZG's case against her and plaintiff in her counter-suit against ZG.

Or is it just getting to be a ten-ring circus?

 

[amethyst221]

I think you guys get the law a lot better than you think you do! You are honing right in on what the significant issues and contradictions are.

The fact Casey filed a counterclaim in the civil suit doesn't waive or erase her 5th amendment rights. They take precedence. But if she takes the 5th, she can't have it both ways in the civil case, which the judge has allowed to continue. You can't pursue a claim, but refuse to give information in the claim against you. Her counterclaim may get tossed out of court, and she could even lose the main case eventually. But we aren't there yet.

As to the A's, if they are validly subpoenaed and the court doesn't excuse them for medical reasons, then they have to answer questions, even if they aren't relevant. That isn't the test during discovery in a civil case. They can each invoke their own 5th amendment rights, even though no criminal charges are pending now. They can't refuse to answer things because it might incriminate Casey. That is why they don't want these depositions, of course. If they just refuse and don't comply with valid court orders, then they can be sanctioned. Those can range from being forced to pay the other side's attorney's fees, contempt, etc.

 

[Oakley]

I think you guys get the law a lot better than you think you do! You are honing right in on what the significant issues and contradictions are.

The fact Casey filed a counterclaim in the civil suit doesn't waive or erase her 5th amendment rights. They take precedence. But if she takes the 5th, she can't have it both ways in the civil case, which the judge has allowed to continue. You can't pursue a claim, but refuse to give information in the claim against you. Her counterclaim may get tossed out of court, and she could even lose the main case eventually. But we aren't there yet.

As to the A's, if they are validly subpoenaed and the court doesn't excuse them for medical reasons, then they have to answer questions, even if they aren't relevant. That isn't the test during discovery in a civil case. They can each invoke their own 5th amendment rights, even though no criminal charges are pending now. They can't refuse to answer things because it might incriminate Casey. That is why they don't want these depositions, of course. If they just refuse and don't comply with valid court orders, then they can be sanctioned. Those can range from being forced to pay the other side's attorney's fees, contempt, etc.

Thanks for your post. Bumping this. (Bold mine)