Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #1

[SleuthyMama]

So, Casey was searching for legal assistance early on. It took some nerve for her to call her boyfriend's dad though (I know she's not short on nerve). From what we know she had not spoken with Tony's parents before this, right ?

I understand everyones right to legal counsel, but (generally) seeking a lawyer before one has been charged speaks to the actions of a guilty person. But, that's just my opinion.

I wonder what time on the 15th this call to TL's dad was placed ?

Excuse me, what? Would anyone care to elaborate on this one for me? Casey called Tony Lazzaro's parents??? For what?

I'm sorry...I'm sure this isn't the right thread for this but it just took me so by surprise that I had to ask the question. I think I will move this question to another thread. Carry on. Sorry for the interruption lol

 

[chckmate22]

Depositions cost money. If there is nothing the defense feels will help in KC's defense why waste their time in redoing them when they have copies of the depositions done by SA. My guess is that they will just try to shoot holes through some of the testimony. KC has attempted to throw under the bus the only people who originally said they felt she was a good mother, JG, AH, RM. KC has made her own bed. JMO So if the reason is money, would this be the best way to handle it??

BBM- Isnt it true and hopefully one of the attys here can answer this....never ask a question that you dont know the answer too...meaning imo that maybe they are afraid to ask a question and get a response that they may never ever ever be able to get out of...so then isnt it in their best interest just to let the state ask the questions???:waitasec:

 

[AZlawyer]

BBM- Isnt it true and hopefully one of the attys here can answer this....never ask a question that you dont know the answer too...meaning imo that maybe they are afraid to ask a question and get a response that they may never ever ever be able to get out of...so then isnt it in their best interest just to let the state ask the questions???:waitasec:

Depos are the one time you would ask questions you don't know the answer to. It's always best to find out everything, even the "bad stuff," before trial, so you can figure out how to deal with it. The "never ask a question you don't know the answer to" rule is for trial, when you don't want to be caught by surprise. And how do you know all the answers ahead of time? Because you already took the guy's deposition (and did other discovery)!

The defense did take some depositions, including Tony's. But there sure is a lot of missing information that, if I were JB, I wouldn't want to find out for the first time in front of the jury with no opportunity to figure out how to "spin" it. I think the failure to take more depositions is a sign of incompetence and/or lack of funds.

 

[Trapshooter]

AZLawyer what would JB do if one of those "Perry Mason" moments happened in court? Say that he does ask a question and is totally shocked (court room & jury shocked too) at the answer....he can't retract that question can he?

 

[AZlawyer]

AZLawyer what would JB do if one of those "Perry Mason" moments happened in court? Say that he does ask a question and is totally shocked (court room & jury shocked too) at the answer....he can't retract that question can he?

Ha well that hardly ever happens because people prepare so much for trial...but I can see it happening to JB.

No, you can't say, "I withdraw the question due to the harm the answer might cause to my client's case." :angel: Most important is to LOOK like you completely expected the answer. If it is truly damaging and unexpected and there's absolutely no way around it with that witness, you just look bored and immediately follow up with a "safe" question you know will go your way. Then you hope the jurors will think they misunderstood and it wasn't damaging to your case at all.

 

[Trapshooter]

Thanks for the info AZLawyer! I really can't see Baez looking "bored" and not totally shocked can you? LOL

 

[Themis]

December 15, 2008 Dr. Lee says he is indeed working Pro Bono:
"GRACE: Tonight, a stunning discovery allegedly of a trail of bones leading to a child`s skull. All of this just 15 homes away from grandparents George and Cindy`s home.

Straight out to special guest joining us right now, famed forensic pathologist Dr. Henry Lee. He is a forensic scientist and a consultant on the Anthony defense team. Dr. Lee, thank you for being with us. Dr. Lee, what have you heard regarding a trail of bones leading to the child`s skull?

DR. HENRY LEE, FORENSIC SCIENTIST, CONSULTANT TO DEFENSE TEAM: That`s the first time I heard. We were in Florida yesterday. However, as you know, the coroner (ph) did not judge (ph) did not prove that. So the other defense expert, we did not have chance to observe, nor examine anything.

GRACE: Dr. Henry Lee, everyone, famed forensic scientist, is on the Anthony defense team. Dr. Lee, you are saying the judge denied a particular motion. Was that to allow you and other defense experts on the scene while police were processing it?

LEE: Not exactly observe. Not really join examination. But many time, you know, like (ph) cases, most of time, they allow for defense expert to observe. Some of the time, we even join together, work on the searching (ph) of the remain or search of the trace evidence.

GRACE: To Sheryl McCollum joining us tonight, crime analyst and director of the cold case squad at Pine Lake Police Department. Sheryl, I find that highly unusual, that defense experts are at the initial processing of the scene? No way!

SHERYL MCCOLLUM, CRIME ANALYST: No way. With all due respect to Dr. Lee -- and I`ve trained under Dr. Lee -- no way are they going to be on my crime scene. They`re not necessary. They`re not needed.

GRACE: Back to Dr. Henry Lee, who, as you all know, is a famed forensic scientist on the Anthony defense team. Dr. Lee, I`ve just got to ask you, you know, tot mom Casey Anthony was siphoning gasoline from her family`s car to fill up her own tank. How the heck are you getting paid? I`m sure you`re costing a pretty penny. Dr. Lee does not come cheap.

LEE: No, we did not get any pay for that and for -- I`ll say, you know, this country, as you know, everybody entitled a defense. And many forensic experts, we do pro bono cases and that`s our obligation to our profession. As an expert, we look at evidence, doesn`t matter inculpatory, exculpatory, we report (ph) as it is. I don`t think should be labeled as a defense expert going to just for defense. Many time, found more evidence, inculpatory evidence, than the police found. There -- you know, case history, case example, many time we`re allowed to work on the case together. Many of my cases, I let the defense expert observe. It`s nothing wrong.

GRACE: So Dr. Lee...

LEE: Nothing unusual.

GRACE: Dr. Lee, are you telling me that you are working on the case pro bono, for free?

LEE: Yes."

My question is how common is this really for someone like Dr. Lee to work pro bono on a case that does not have publicity?

There would be a factual answer to this question, but it would take a poll, not a legal opinion, to answer it. Experts, like Dr. Lee, may or may not have an obligation based on their state professional organization's ethical or other rules to provide pro bono services. This is most likely to be found with doctors and lawyers, but not generally other professions. One of the problems with providing pro bono services is so many doctors and lawyers work for an employer and that employer provides the professional liability insurance either through payment of premiums or for government employees by having statutes that immunize government employees. These employees do not generally carry their own professional liability policies. Therefore, it makes it very risky for that employee personally and for the financial security of their family, to go outside of their usual practice area and professional support teams and systems to provide pro bono services to members of the public.

The lack of errors and omissions insurance is a big enough problem to essentially shut down pro bono services for employed professionals. Those professionals who are self employed or partners in a law firm or medical group obviously have different problems. Their issue is, for example, that they have to produce over 2,000 billable hours per year for the firm. Since generally, more than 60 minutes of time go into creating a billable hour, this doesn't leave a lot of time to eat, sleep, engage with their spouses, be a parent, be a caretaking child to an elderly parent, shop, participate in religion and their community, get the recreation and rest that is needed to maintain a healthy condition and deal with financial decisions. There just isn't any more flexible time to take on any other significant case. Medical professionals have the same kind of "rainmaker" or billable services requirements. The big incomes that you hear of don't come without a price -- the life minutes and hours of the professional.

In light of these factors, the amount of pro bono services that are given in a charitable cause is really amazing. Still, it is a drop in the bucket for what is needed. Essentially, the private individual can't afford legal services anymore and without health insurance, can't afford access to the medical professional.

 

[Themis]

I so appreciate your input!

About pro bono: when experts are flown in to inspect a case, who pays?

A prepared defense counsel will have some formal or informal, written or oral, contract with the expert. Who pays will depend on what they agreed to. If there is no agreement at all, then it gets very practical; the one who orders the airline ticket will have to pay or the airline won't give them a ticket! Since there is no agreement for reimbursement, obtaining the money from the other party might be difficult. Most experts who do this have businesses that fund their pro bono expenses and it is probably a tax deduction for them.

 

[Themis]

If a defendant is declared indigent and a public defender is assigned would the state also pay for experts and their associated expenses if warranted? What about additional counsel such as LKB. If so, are any special petitions or filings required to get the experts paid?

Not saying Baez is working in the capacity of public defense but just wondering how the indigent status applies to other counsel and experts.

TIA

If the defendant is indigent and qualifies for a public defender, the taxpayer pays for the experts. It may be through a contract with the Public Defender's Office or other means; this procedure differs among the states and local governments. Sometimes before hiring the expert, the request from the defense attorney has to be submitted to the court or some higher approval authority. Again, this would depend on the jurisdiction.

If a defendant is indigent and has a pro bono attorney, the defendant may still be authorized to have publically funded experts on the case. The same approval procedure would be used.

 

[QB.]

Angel has just posted in the current news thread that the criminal court docket has been updated

Events & Orders of the Court
01/05/2010---Correspondence---Filed From Prisoner to Judge Rec'd From Judge

What could this possibly mean?

 

[Themis]

Very interesting!!!!

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.

 

[Themis]

A question from Bean E:

"FLORIDA COLLEGE OF ADVANCED JUDICIAL STUDIES 2009
CONDUCTING THE PENALTY PHASE OF A CAPITAL CASE

6.10.0 CIRCUMSTANCES NOT CONSIDERED MITIGATING

6.10.6 Testimony of Relatives of the Victim Requesting the Death Penalty Not be Imposed

Florida cases have held it either not to be an abuse of discretion to exclude this testimony or that the testimony was irrelevant because it had nothing to do with defendant's character or record.


My question:

Does this mean that (should KC be found guilty) Cindy and George won't get to ask that the DP not be imposed on KC?

Thank you! "

IF the defense can think of some way that those statements would be relevant and material to the sentencing phase of the trial, then the defense can present the statements of GA and CA. All the court cases decided was it was not relevant to the issue of mitigation in that it did not go to the defendant's character or record.

 

[Themis]

Themis, thank you so much for coming here to help us. What do you think of this apparent media tour Andrea is about to do and if she will or will not field questions about this case? It makes pro bono pretty transparent, right?
Casey Anthony: Andrea Lyon to appear on ‘Today’
Caylee and Casey Anthony, NBC, Today, WESH — posted by halboedeker on January, 6 2010 4:46 PM
<snipped>
Andrea Lyon has a book to promote, and NBC’s “Today” is giving her a national platform.

Lyon’s “Angel of Death Row: My Life as a Death Penalty Defense Lawyer” came out earlier this week. Lyon is doing a reading in Greenwich Village tonight.

She will be a guest on Thursday’s “Today,” WESH-Channel 2 reported this afternoon. “Today” starts at 7 a.m. on WESH.

Article:
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/ent...y+(TV+Guy)

Actually, I don't blame AL for timing her book release during the time when she has high media exposure during this case. Obviously, it should help book sales. I expect the book does not mention the Casey Anthony case. AL needs money too, no matter how generous her professional contribution in defending this case. It doesn't matter if she "needs" it or not. Earning money is not a crime. I'm not jealous of people who make money and do it well without criminality. I don't see anything morally or ethically wrong here for her to sell a book that does not discuss this case. (I am assuming she has proper releases from clients who may have an existing right to attorney-client confidentiality.) I doubt she will field specific questions about this case.

 

[Themis]

Angel has just posted in the current news thread that the criminal court docket has been updated

Events & Orders of the Court
01/05/2010---Correspondence---Filed From Prisoner to Judge Rec'd From Judge

What could this possibly mean?

Prisoner would be Casey. The Judge is the Honorable Stan Strickland. Correspondence would be a written communication. So, Casey wrote something to Judge Strickland and Judge Strickland turned it over to the Orange County Clerk of Court for filing. Could be something new or it could be Judge Strickland was cleaning off his desk.

 

[Themis]

I've been suspicious for some time that Baez's intent is to delay, delay, delay this case for as long as he can. Retaining a DP certified attorney is a prime example. It took the SA's office going before the judge to force Baez to get off his butt and bring a DP lawyer in. As of now, the defense has yet to take any depositions of individuals that even we as sleuthers know should be deposed. Baez is still yet to submit the defenses witness list which means it going to take hauling him in to answer to Judge Strickland why. Then, there's AL who agreed to join the team despite her busy teaching schedule which she freely uses as a crutch to postpone anything she can.

So, my question is will Baez be allowed to continue his delay tactics? Does the State have any recourse in putting a stop to this??

Novice Seeker

AL and JB can request any delays or continuances they want. Unless the court prohibits further delays, they have the right to request them. The state cannot prevent it and the court is unlikely to prohibit such requests. The State can file objections. The maker of the motion, AL and/or JB, can file a reply since they have the burden of carrying the motion. That's why they get two turns to speak. The motions can be "speaking motions" in court -- they don't all have to be in writing -- sometimes it just happens when they are scheduling the next hearing or are at a Case Management Conference appearance before the Court. Ultimately, the responsibility and authority for granting or denying objections and for moving the case along lies with the Presiding Judge. It is the Presiding Judge's responsibility to keep order in his court, keep the case moving when appropriate, protecting the record from unnecessary appeal issues (which is a good reason for granting some reasonable delays), and otherwise to act consistent with the administration of justice.

 

[QB.]

Themis,
I understood that it could be kc to JS but wondered if it is unusual for a prisoner to send written correspondence to the judge.

 

[Themis]

It is coming up soon. What do you predict?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kaoyq7deMRg&feature=player_embedded

I don't have my 8-ball handy. :crazy:

 

[Themis]

Thank you for answering that. Do you agree with Richard Hornsby that the experts financial motives for being on the case may be if they are selling a book at the time, and they are on the record as pro bono? I have seen them on news shows mentioning their book and fielding questions about this case during the same interview.

I should clarify. There's nothing wrong with talking about legal issues generally that are also present in this case, but there is a risk in doing so. The client's right to attorney-client confidentiality and the confidentiality of the attorney work product in doing that client's case must be protected. As to their mentioning the book when being interviewed about the case; well, it isn't a crime.
Before someone suggests that we ought to make a law, just remember that adding all this legislation costs more and more taxpayer money to enforce, prosecute, litigate and incarcerate. At what point should people say it is not harmful to society so we will not criminalize it? Of course, there are other ways to modify behavior; like adding prohibitions in ethical rules. However, those need to be balanced against property rights and the like. The topic could become complex very quickly.



No answer to your question as to whether or not I agree with Mr. Hornsby. That is not saying I do or do not. It is just a professional courtesy to Mr. Hornsby, AZlawyer or any of the other attorneys here that I don't have to opine on their opinions. If I agree, I may so comment. If I disagree, I may say that too, but not in response to a question as to whether or not I agree. It would be sua sponte. My silence on a particular quote or topic doesn't mean disagreement. It may be that I'm busy or that I simply choose not to elaborate on their comment.

 

[Themis]

What do you think of Andrea saying in her lectures that she often hires the experts by paying them $100.00 just to get them off the market for the other side, even though she has no intention of ever having them work the case?

It's a well known legal tactic. If the experts are aware, they can decline the appointment or refuse the funds. If they aren't aware they should become aware. Lawyers often offer a free initial consultation. Some people use this to go to many of the best lawyers to have a first free initial consultation, explain their case and then leave without any intention of hiring the lawyer. However, lawyer client privilege attached at that first meeting and the lawyer cannot thereafter do any work for the other side.

 

[Themis]

Themis,
I understood that is was kc to JS but wondered if it is unusual for a prisoner to send written correspondence to the judge.

I was pretty sure you did know it was from KC to JS. I don't have a poll, but it would probably be unusual. Her attorney should have something really significant to say to her in their next visit if they didn't authorize it. If they did authorize it, the State may have some issues with ex-parte communications and professional responsibility. There are a very few things that are allowed with ex-parte communications but notice must first be given to the other side in advance of the ex-parte communication. Therefore, I doubt that the defense attorneys knew in advance. No defense attorney is going to risk the ire of a state bar investigation for something so trivial. However, now that you mention it, if the defense team didn't know and KC did communicate directly with the Judge, then it might say something about KC's willingness to cooperate with her counsel or strike out on her own. This, of course, would be important in the lack of family visits issue. More than likely, this was just a copy of the previous motion with KC's handwriting where she states the prosecutor is angry with her for refusing to plead guilty to a crime she didn't commit. That may be considered "correspondence" by a clerk's office.