Was Jose Baez retained by Casey on June 17, 2008?

[LinasK]

Does anyone think there is a possibility after CA threatened to take Caylee
away from KC maybe she did hire JB to fight CA ?

He doesn't specialize in family law, but then again, he didn't specialize in criminal defense either IIRC...:waitasec:

 

[JBean]

I think what bothers me about this is I could see a simple one time mistake. But, JB says it twice. "This case started in June". "I was retained June 17th". He said it, and then restated it. Plus, neither CM or AL caught it, so that tells me there is some truth behind it.

Well not only did Yuri state that they towed the car on July 17th at least 2 times, but he also said that the Anthony's picked up th car at the tow yard on July 16. He said all this under oath. Of course, my point is not to discredit YM in any way at all. Rather, I am pointing out that people of even the highest integrity make mistakes under oath with dates even when you might expect them to have it clear in their mind when preparing for something like this in front of a judge.
Human error,imo.

 

[luvmygarden]

He doesn't specialize in family law, but then again, he didn't specialize in criminal defense either IIRC...:waitasec:

Yes soooooo true. But if she did hire him to fight CA and then got herself in this pickle maybe that is how he got to her so fast.
His quick appearance just doesn't make sense and at that point how would he guess he would be doing this for publicity. So many kids go missing and do not get this attention. I think KC did only because she has a crazy family that brought all this attention.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Mistakes are made by people. IMO Yuri is not trying to mislead anyone. I have no idea why they don't bring notes with them to these gatherings. The dates are confusing but this is one and a half years into the case and this is KC's lawyer for cry'n out loud. Also it's JB's actual life when he decided to take the case.

Yuri would have a million other things going on having to do with police work. I don't really understand that his mistakes justify Jose's as he is the Lawyer and should have his facts straight as it's his client who is on trial.

Two wrongs don't make a right and, afterall, we're supposed to discuss the subject of the topic who is Jose who misstated when he began representing KC. I find it unnerving to say the least that peeps in a court of law would not help each other if an obviously misstated date is uttered - would they not allow one of the other Defense Lawyers to speak up and state an honest correction?

I make a ton of mistakes but I'd fire me if I didn't know when I took on a client. It's ludicrous imo. This makes me angry because it's like a bad joke or something. If these people don't even know the basic facts as they apply to their own lives, how can we trust any of them?

 

[Woe.be.gone]

He doesn't specialize in family law, but then again, he didn't specialize in criminal defense either IIRC...:waitasec:

What did/does he specialize in?

 

[Ripley007]

Since a retainer date of JUNE 17 would be a bombshell revelation with many implications, I think, at the very least, Baez needs to be questioned for clarification. Using the alleged bounced check is a great idea? Anyone know if there is mention of it in the documents?

 

[Woe.be.gone]

If Baez had been hired in June, would that have not made him the attorney of record at the time of the Universal Studios interview and her arrest? Which would be a reason he would already be exploiting loud and far to get those statements tossed from evidence. I really think he mispoke and the Judge realized it, saw the actual month on the papwerk and moved on.

If true, wouldn't the Judge be required to right the wrong? KC is up for the death penalty here - I think the truth should be spoken by the professionals period. I don't think we should be required to assume or to believe we heard what we think is the right answer. That would be what CA does. Some issues involve facts, period; either she came to JB in June or she came to JB in July, which was it?

 

[JBean]

Mistakes are made by people. IMO Yuri is not trying to mislead anyone. I have no idea why they don't bring notes with them to these gatherings. The dates are confusing but this is one and a half years into the case and this is KC's lawyer for cry'n out loud. Also it's JB's actual life when he decided to take the case.

Yuri would have a million other things going on having to do with police work. I don't really understand that his mistakes justify Jose's as he is the Lawyer and should have his facts straight as it's his client who is on trial.

Two wrongs don't make a right and, afterall, we're supposed to discuss the subject of the topic who is Jose who misstated when he began representing KC. I find it unnerving to say the least that peeps in a court of law would not help each other if an obviously misstated date is uttered - would they not allow one of the other Defense Lawyers to speak up and state an honest correction?

I make a ton of mistakes but I'd fire me if I didn't know when I took on a client. It's ludicrous imo. This makes me angry because it's like a bad joke or something. If these people don't even know the basic facts as they apply to their own lives, how can we trust any of them?

LOL! I was hardly going for the 2 wrongs don;t make a right defense. I rate that right up there with the liar liar pants on fire prosecution.
Woe,my point was only to show that people make mistakes under oath and it is possible that this is what happened here. YM gave his testimony less than a month after the fact and I would guess it is equally important that he has his facts as straight as JB.
A few posters have said they didn't even notice so possible others that knew the correct date didn't pick up on it either. or maybe it wasn'y important enough to speak up about.

Woe, I have no idea if he was speaking the bombshell truth or if he misspoke, I am only offering a reasonable alternative; that perhaps he misspoke.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Thanks JBean. I understand but then I don't understand. For some reason, I can't get a handle on this supposed mistake. LE should make sure they have their facts straight too imo or they should precede their remark with 'to the best of my knowledge or iirc' etc. I can't get over the sloppiness in a court of law nonetheless. My son has more pressure put upon him to turn in proofread work in HS than these people do - unless, of course, JB spoke the truth. Time will tell.

 

[LinasK]

What did/does he specialize in?

According to his website these are his area of practice: Sex Offenses
Internet Crimes
Drug Offense
Homicides
Domestic Violence
White Collar Crimes
Drunk Driving
Federal Crimes

There is another thread on his previous clients. I think this is only his 2nd murder case...

 

[newsaddict]

This might be a bit far out there, but it crossed my mind once along with the thousands of other mysterious things we can't figure out. Ok, could it be possible (this is just a theory, it's very unlikely) that Baez claiming the truth will come out at trial, blah blah blah... IF she retained him in June, could she have been setting up a kidnapping story with a so called "script" and that's what he will try to say??? I can't explain too good what I am trying to get at so I hope you all understand.

IF this were the case how would he explain this without testifying to it? What I mean is could they concoct some ridiculous story like this? That she went to him cause she was too afraid to go to police, etc? (I wouldn't believe it anyway, I believe she killed Caylee with total premeditation) Any thoughts?

 

[Purple Iris]

I'm glad that this post has been bumped up to the front again for discussion.

I've not taken a look at the video clip that has been posted, but, I so remember this day, very vividly.

My memory is that when asked when he was retained by Casey, he hesitated, looked towards the floor, and then proceeded with his answer.
He had time to think about his answer, as he had time correct the date had it been wrong.

The look on Casey's face was that of a deer caught in the headlights ~ She was visably taken aback and had a look of fear on her face when he came with that date, IMO.

I don't think that it was mistake at all.
He had/has had plenty of opportunity to set the record straight from that day.

Richard Hornsby's explanation and blog of the timeline of getting back and forth to the courthouse, etc, makes sense in as much as he went into.
The time that it would have taken for Casey to make contact with him, the drive to the jail to visit her and get at least some facts, return to his office to draw up the paperwork, and back to the courthouse to file them.

There is not enough during the time that she was arrested, and went before the judge, even with the court appointed attorney that she had to begin with, for all of this to happen in my mind.

And, I also don't think for one minute that this got by Linda Drake or Jeff Ashton either.
It can all lead and give them reason to follow through with what they have charged her with.

Other's have made good points, I will admit.
That Baez would have told her to straighten up and keep a low profile.
But, when has Casey ever done anything that Casey didn't want to do?

That he may have told her "loose that phone".

I hadn't realized that she had some "radio silence" so to speak on her phone for June 17, that's interesting, considering the girl couldn't go 5 minutes without it connected to her hand and ear without having withdrawall.

At any rate, when this finally goes to trial, there will be some pretty interesting things that are gonna come out, and not to the liking of the defense I bet.
Guess we'll see.....it can't happen soon enough.
I would love to see them all take a dive and go down for what they have done.

 

[Purple Iris]

This might be a bit far out there, but it crossed my mind once along with the thousands of other mysterious things we can't figure out. Ok, could it be possible (this is just a theory, it's very unlikely) that Baez claiming the truth will come out at trial, blah blah blah... IF she retained him in June, could she have been setting up a kidnapping story with a so called "script" and that's what he will try to say??? I can't explain too good what I am trying to get at so I hope you all understand.

IF this were the case how would he explain this without testifying to it? What I mean is could they concoct some ridiculous story like this? That she went to him cause she was too afraid to go to police, etc? (I wouldn't believe it anyway, I believe she killed Caylee with total premeditation) Any thoughts?

I can see them thinking that if this story could take flight, they would let it fly any way that they could.
They are not above trying anything, IMO.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Its a mistake. He was retained in JULY.

 

[Mamabear1963]

I do find RH blog entry interesting...regarding the time line.

It baffles me...not one thing in this case has simply made sense...

It does seem like KC was able to get an attorney faster than OJ or some crime professional.

 

[comomx3]

How would this information be presented to a jury? Casey isn't going on the stand. Of course, Baez isn't either.... How would the jury even hear this date June or July- whatever the case may be?

 

[logicalgirl]

I do find RH blog entry interesting...regarding the time line.

It baffles me...not one thing in this case has simply made sense...

It does seem like KC was able to get an attorney faster than OJ or some crime professional.

How hard is it Mamabear1963 if the lawyer is just hanging around the booking counter looking for work? :waitasec: