Video of KC and Baez Crying together to be released UPDATE BAEZ THREATENS TO SUE

[suepitzl]

You could be right. We all know how much JB likes to get his mug on camera and proclaim KC's innocence. However, I think this kind of stuff backfires on him and his client. She is so hated at this point, there's no changing people's minds, and he just looks like an idiot for trying. Obviously he hasn't figured this out yet. It just makes him look incompetent (even if he's not). I'd have an ounce of respect for him if he just worked on this case and stopped playing these little media games. He whines about the DA's office and Pros team, but I have yet to see any of them on any of the talk show circuits.

her statement :I have refused to take a plea agreement for a crime that I DID NOT COMMIT." It is all over then media, it is allowing Casey to make a statement without the benefit of the prosecution to x-amine her 7 months b4 trial..........it is a ploy by the defense.......get it sleuthers?,,,,,,,,,

 

[Themis]

According to local attorney Mark NeJame as quoted in the article.....

"Prominent local defense attorney Mark Nejame, who once represented Anthony's parents, said it is not illegal for the jail to record visits."
"It might be bothersome, but it's surely not anything unordinary to the extent that routinely all that I can remember in 28 years of jail visits, we're always watched and there's no expectation of privacy in the jail," NeJame said.

Mr NeJame is a very well respected attorney and I would certainly put my money on his views about videotaping in the jail.

JMO

I agree. The County has to provide security in the jail facility. Part of the method of doing that is using constantly rolling security cameras. Attorney visiting rooms are no exception. Notices are posted. Both inmates and attorneys who visit know this. Those security cameras are also for the lawyers' protection. They can still talk and have an attorney-client meeting and that content is privileged. There is no audio and the cameras are far enough away so the camera monitor can't see things written on papers. However, those video recordings do become subject to disclosure. Normally no one asks for them unless there is an incident, but the media has asked and is paying for the public records release because this is a high profile case. There's no big issue here in the recordings.

 

[Themis]

her statement :I have refused to take a plea agreement for a crime that I DID NOT COMMIT." It is all over then media, it is allowing Casey to make a statement without the benefit of the prosecution to x-amine her 7 months b4 trial..........it is a ploy by the defense.......get it sleuthers?,,,,,,,,,

It was just a media appearance by KC. However, there is another possible effect. KC has now made a sworn statement and submitted it to the court on a matter affecting the merits of the case. That means prosecution is likely to be able to cross examine her. In short, she "opened the door."

 

[Themis]

I have a couple of questions. Help me out here!

Did Orange County Jail release this tape to the DA's office?
If so, why? The jail and the DA's office are two seperate entities. no?
Everybody knows that there is no privacy in jail - videos cameras are everywhere, even in the meeting rooms where Baez and KC met. But since these meetings are privileged - how is it that a video taping of these meetings can be released? Do they get released without sound or something?
My last question, how does Baez already know what's on these tapes?


I'm just trying to understand. I'm not siding with KC here, but this does seem a bit off. If it's priviledged info, it shouldn't be released (unless of course, it shows them in some kind of compromising position or in a lip lock or something, but crying? I just don't get it - why would the DA's office release this? What does that prove?)

The County is required to release public records pursuant to a public records request. The video recording is a public record.

 

[dax]

IMO, that is a total violation of attorney-client privelege, another reason for an appeal......go ahead and release it.......it will only help his case.....

na uh....attorney client privilege applies to what the client TELLS the attorney. Physical interaction is not privileged...much to Baez' frustration...imo

 

[Psmith]

The County is required to release public records pursuant to a public records request. The video recording is a public record.

Agree. LE would not release if protected under privilege.

Forgive me if I am not seeing the obvious.

As in, it isn't covered, therefore allegations from Baez, means ha ha, it was outside of client area. He wants MORE than privilege.

Perhaps 3rd party......= fair play, so to speak.

 

[Gypsy Road]

The County is required to release public records pursuant to a public records request. The video recording is a public record.

I gotcha (I'm a Fla resident), but why did the jail release them to another party in the first place? How does attorney/client priviledge play into this. That's the part where I'm still fuzzy.

Hey...I WANT to see these tapes as much as the next person, but I'm trying to understand how and why they are being released - it's the whole attorney/client priviledge that's snagging me up here. Thank you in advance for your help Themis! I love reading your posts and glob onto every single one of them.

 

[dimples37398]

I gotcha (I'm a Fla resident), but why did the jail release them to another party in the first place? How does attorney/client priviledge play into this. That's the part where I'm still fuzzy.

Hey...I WANT to see these tapes as much as the next person, but I'm trying to understand how and why they are being released - it's the whole attorney/client priviledge that's snagging me up here. Thank you in advance for your help Themis! I love reading your posts and glob onto every single one of them.

IMO

Oh and the jail probably released them to the Prosecutor, therefore maybe they released it to Baez in Doc Dumps or they are going to, once they do that, it is under the Sunshine Law I believe. (Not real sure) someone correct me please if I have it wrong.

Which I don't know a lot about Florida Law, and I don't know for certain, but Attorney Client Privilege only includes audio of what they are saying.....

Unless they are playing charades, there won't be any information that we should not know on the video.

 

[Psmith]

I gotcha (I'm a Fla resident), but why did the jail release them to another party in the first place? How does attorney/client priviledge play into this. That's the part where I'm still fuzzy.

Hey...I WANT to see these tapes as much as the next person, but I'm trying to understand how and why they are being released - it's the whole attorney/client priviledge that's snagging me up here. Thank you in advance for your help Themis! I love reading your posts and glob onto every single one of them.

Me, too! Themis! Chezhire! Nancy B!

I really do think Jose did something really bad x 2 client with motion today. Burning down the house!

 

[Psmith]

IMO

Oh and the jail probably released them to the Prosecutor, therefore maybe they released it to Baez in Doc Dumps or they are going to, once they do that, it is under the Sunshine Law I believe. (Not real sure) someone correct me please if I have it wrong.

Which I don't know a lot about Florida Law, and I don't know for certain, but Attorney Client Privilege only includes audio of what they are saying.....

Unless they are playing charades, there won't be any information that we should not know on the video.

Means they were observed in conditions not under privilege. imho., therefore......

Waiting for Themis.....legal peeps....

 

[dax]

Agree. LE would not release if protected under privilege.

Forgive me if I am not seeing the obvious.

As in, it isn't covered, therefore allegations from Baez, means ha ha, it was outside of client area. He wants MORE than privilege.

Perhaps 3rd party......= fair play, so to speak.

I'm beginning to wonder if Baez doesn't want his WIFE to see the videos. He can't be so dumb as to think the video should be sealed, can he?

The jail released the tape because it is public record and if someone asks for it....they get it. My guess is that media asked for it.....imo

 

[Themis]

The attorney is responsible for maintaining confidentiality and privilege. JB knew or should have known he was being taped in the classroom where they met. There are notices posted. It is common knowledge. Did JB ask for a private meeting place where there were no cameras? Did he ask for the camera to be turned off? Probably not.

The County is responsible for maintaining security. They do so by cameras. That security also protects JB. Once a recording is made, it is a document in the possession of a governmental agency. All such documents in the possession of governmental agencies are subject to disclosure under the sunshine laws (requests for public records). In this case, it is a high profile case and the media has a standing request for all public documents. The media has the money to pay for them. So, the governmental agency has to release public records to the requestor; the media.

The attorney-client privilege of confidential communications and the attorney-work product have been preserved. No audio in jail security cameras and they are generally too far away and too grainy to show any writing on paper. So, they could have a professional meeting and talk all they wanted and all of that remains privileged.

This is a red herring. This is a false complaint. It is going nowhere.

 

[Themis]

I'm beginning to wonder if Baez doesn't want his WIFE to see the videos. He can't be so dumb as to think the video should be sealed, can he?

The jail released the tape because it is public record and if someone asks for it....they get it. My guess is that media asked for it.....imo

Probably forgot about the cameras if there is any untoward behavior. If so, the real reason probably lies in your first sentence.

 

[Themis]

The article says JB is filing a motion for sanctions. Usually, when an attorney doesn't want some evidence released, they will file a motion for supression, backed up by legal case law called points and authorities. Doesn't sound like the right motion to me. Sounds more like an attempt to intimidate the prosecution attorneys or the County employees.

 

[Themis]

JB entered the jail knowing security tapes were running. If he wanted a client meeting without cameras he should have asked. His responsibility for maintaining the level of confidentiality necessary for each meeting.

 

[Themis]

If a lawyer and client are talking about a matter under representation in lawyer's office, all would agree the conversation and meeting is confidential.

So, what if the lawyer and client are talking in a crowded restaurant and the people at the next table overhear them? Well, they took that risk.

So, what if they are now in a place where they know cameras are running. At least the video portion is disclosed by their own conduct.

So, what if they are now in a place where cameras are running and microphones are everywhere. They voluntarily disclosed so no expectation of privacy or privilege.

See the difference?

 

[mitzi]

eewww, or the other way around..

Double eeewwww!

 

[john's mom]

Shouldn't a lawyer defending a client NOT be emotionally involved in the case?

Is it weird to be crying if you are supposed to be the professional? Don't they cover this type of thing in law school?

A member of my family died. I had to pick up his mother at work, after she found out.
I couldn't fall apart, I had to drive her home and help her . I lost it later, when I could, but this was family, not a 'client'. I really don't get Baez. At all.

 

[Gypsy Road]

Thank you Themis. Your posts made me understand - crystal clear!

 

[Bluebelle]

Moral of the story? Don't commit a crime in Florida if you don't want your jail videos on the evening news, LOL!