ZFG Civil Case: Casey's Deposition #2

[AZlawyer]

https://s3.amazonaws.com/ForThePeople/motion-to-compel.pdf

AZ, isn't this M&M's argument for OCA to answer? I thought I already saw this. filed November 4 2011.

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO DEPOSITION QUESTIONS

ETA: do M&M have any good arguments in this?? Thanks.

Thank you!!! I had missed that one.

I don't get it though; he says no appeal is pending, and it clearly is... :waitasec:

How long should we expect this appeal to take? Thanks.

Oh, approximately a bunch more months...maybe 9? That's a random guess, though.

But I thought she wasn't appealing to vacate the convictions, just to say it's one lie instead of four. This is what I don't understand. So she has the right to the 5th even if she's not appealing to get the lying convictions overturned? Or could the court decide to vacate instead of making it one lie or leaving it at four lies and so that gives her the right to the 5th?

It makes me so mad. The state of Florida has already said they're not going after her for anything Caylee related anymore. What exactly is she being protected from? I swear, she gets all the breaks and everyone else suffers for it. It stinks!

I think she's appealing all the lying convictions.

 

[RR0004]

Maybe a question here or there, but not the ones we want her to answer.



"Incarnation" haha...no...that's a typo. Incarceration is the word he was looking for.

She is appealing the lying convictions, so, in theory, the convictions could be vacated and she could be retried. Until the appeal is Totally Over, IMO she has the right to take the 5th on anything relating to those convictions, which is to say anything at all interesting.

Whoa, whoa, whoa...she could be retried on the lying convictions??!! why would she even want to risk that??

 

[AZlawyer]

Whoa, whoa, whoa...she could be retried on the lying convictions??!! why would she even want to risk that??

What risk? :waitasec:

 

[NavySubMom]

Thank you!!! I had missed that one.

I don't get it though; he says no appeal is pending, and it clearly is... :waitasec:

Here is the way I read it, but I am probably way off base as I am not a lawyer or a chemist, so I am just asking this question here, does the word "FURTHER" mean anything??

......."CASEY ANTHONY was acquitted of all charges other than those related to making false statements to the police and JEOPARDY has attached. There is no appeal pending that would subject her to FURTHER incrimination or punishment."

ALL CAPS MINE. +bbm mine. --
are they trying to say, she has ALREADY been punished by serving her 4 years incarceration time for these lies (**supposedly, I know there was the question as to how exactly these 4 years were determined when she was actually serving time for check fraud), so she cannot be subject to any FURTHER jail/prison time, even if her appeal is denied? Although there was the issue of the fines due. Now as I recall, LF said they were trying to reduce the 4 separate lies down to 1 lie, so the fine would be less $$. so she would not be subject to any FURTHER fine, but a LESSER monetary fine, therefore a LESSER punishment.

And on the lies, she cannot be further incriminated on the lies because she has already been found guilty once on these lies, with jeopardy attached. so whether the lying appeal is upheld or denied, she cannot be tried AGAIN for these same 4 lies, down to 1 lie ....... so she cannot incriminate herself in those lies in this civil case versus the criminal case.

am I making one bit of sense?? probably not. but I was just trying to figure out what they were saying about the appeal.

(Maybe I need to try to find her appeal and re-read that to see what she is really apealing.)

ETA: can't find the actual appeal.....maybe they didn't file it yet? just filed a Notice of Intent to File an Appeal or something????

IMO, MOO, etc.

 

[RR0004]

t

What risk? :waitasec:

Being found guilty...again. And according to her attorneys she's very much at risk...wouldn't she have to come out of hiding for a new trial? I'm just not quite sure what's in it for her (except puting off the inevitable of having to pay out money she doesn't have...right now).

 

[Aedrys]

Thank you!!! I had missed that one.

I don't get it though; he says no appeal is pending, and it clearly is... :waitasec:

Here is the way I read it, but I am probably way off base as I am not a lawyer or a chemist, so I am just asking this question here, does the word "FURTHER" mean anything??

......."CASEY ANTHONY was acquitted of all charges other than those related to making false statements to the police and JEOPARDY has attached. There is no appeal pending that would subject her to FURTHER incrimination or punishment."

ALL CAPS MINE. +bbm mine. --
are they trying to say, she has ALREADY been punished by serving her 4 years incarceration time for these lies (**supposedly, I know there was the question as to how exactly these 4 years were determined when she was actually serving time for check fraud), so she cannot be subject to any FURTHER jail/prison time, even if her appeal is denied? Although there was the issue of the fines due. Now as I recall, LF said they were trying to reduce the 4 separate lies down to 1 lie, so the fine would be less $$. so she would not be subject to any FURTHER fine, but a LESSER monetary fine, therefore a LESSER punishment.

And on the lies, she cannot be further incriminated on the lies because she has already been found guilty once on these lies, with jeopardy attached. so whether the lying appeal is upheld or denied, she cannot be tried AGAIN for these same 4 lies, down to 1 lie ....... so she cannot incriminate herself in those lies in this civil case versus the criminal case.

am I making one bit of sense?? probably not. but I was just trying to figure out what they were saying about the appeal.

(Maybe I need to try to find her appeal and re-read that to see what she is really apealing.)

ETA: can't find the actual appeal.....maybe they didn't file it yet? just filed a Notice of Intent to File an Appeal or something????

IMO, MOO, etc.

That's what I want to know too! This is all so confusing. We need to know if she is appealing the convictions and trying to get them vacated, or just appealing the four convictions down to one conviction instead. Or are appeals automatically for vacating all convictions? I don't understand the appeal process. I don't even understand why this appeal is taking so darn long. It's lies, not murder. Does that even make a difference or do any appeals take forever? Has she even appealed yet or are we waiting for her to actually file an appeal? Is there any way to figure out just what she's doing with her appeal?

This is really frustrating me. I just don't think the 5th should apply to her UNLESS she is really trying to get these convictions vacated completely. It boggles my mind that she would get the 5th for wanting one lie instead of four. That just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[Dells]

That's what I want to know too! This is all so confusing. We need to know if she is appealing the convictions and trying to get them vacated, or just appealing the four convictions to try to make them one conviction instead. Or are appeals automatically for vacation of all convictions? I don't understand the appeal process. I don't even understand why this appeal is taking so darn long. It's lies, not murder. Does that even make a difference or do any appeals take forever? Has she even appealed yet or are we waiting for her to actually file an appeal? Is there any way to figure out just what she's doing with her appeal?

This is really frustrating me. I just don't think the 5th should apply to her UNLESS she is really trying to get these convictions vacated completely. It boggles my mind that she would get the 5th for wanting one lie instead of four. That just doesn't make any sense to me.

casey even appealing her lying convictions is just so frustrating to me. She and her attorneys have to know just how lucky she was to *only* get convicted of the lying charges. I think most people know that the only reason she is appealing these lying convictions is so that it interferes w/the civil cases. It's yet another obvious abuse of the legal system by casey and her attorneys.:banghead:

 

[Oldsoul2]

Here is the Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Answers to Deposition Questions Greene filed yesterday Dec. 5 if anyone is interesting in reading this, this is what the DT will be arguing in thursday's hearing to Judge Munyon as to why OCA does not have to answer any questions at all (related to her lying appeal), I love reading these legal documents, lol:

http://www.cfnews13.com/static/articles/images/documents/casey-depo-response-1205.pdf

on p. 12 in the last paragraph, Greene talks about the decision Munyon already made to seal the video portion of OCA's disguised deposition where she repeatedly took the 5th , writing about how people showing that video over and over "undoubtedly would have further tainted the jury pool......."

HOW ABOUT YOU MR. GREENE (yes, I am yelling at him) going to the media a few days ago and blasting ZG and mentioning everything she has ever done in her life, blatantly trying to paint HER in a bad light to taint the jury pool!! How about THAT Mr. Greene?? These Sunshine Laws put the actual documents filed with the Courts out there for us to read (like the one above), we are capable of reading them ourselves, and if this goes to trial we hopefully will see or can read the witness testimony. If ZG's past life is not in some document filed with the Court in this case and would NOT be admissible in Court, Greene should not be tainting the jury pool in OCA's favor against ZG by portraying her in a bad light TO TAINT THE SAME JURY POOL Munyon will not let be tainted AGAINST OCA, because she is just oh so special.

Grrrrrr, anyway, for your reading pleasure if interested.

IMO, MOO, etc.

This was exactly what pissed off Jeff Ashton. Baez pulled the same tactic several times and than would turn it around and blame the prosecution for info that rightfully becomes public. He wrote about this in his book...more than once

 

[AZlawyer]

Thank you!!! I had missed that one.

I don't get it though; he says no appeal is pending, and it clearly is... :waitasec:

Here is the way I read it, but I am probably way off base as I am not a lawyer or a chemist, so I am just asking this question here, does the word "FURTHER" mean anything??

......."CASEY ANTHONY was acquitted of all charges other than those related to making false statements to the police and JEOPARDY has attached. There is no appeal pending that would subject her to FURTHER incrimination or punishment."

ALL CAPS MINE. +bbm mine. --
are they trying to say, she has ALREADY been punished by serving her 4 years incarceration time for these lies (**supposedly, I know there was the question as to how exactly these 4 years were determined when she was actually serving time for check fraud), so she cannot be subject to any FURTHER jail/prison time, even if her appeal is denied? Although there was the issue of the fines due. Now as I recall, LF said they were trying to reduce the 4 separate lies down to 1 lie, so the fine would be less $$. so she would not be subject to any FURTHER fine, but a LESSER monetary fine, therefore a LESSER punishment.

And on the lies, she cannot be further incriminated on the lies because she has already been found guilty once on these lies, with jeopardy attached. so whether the lying appeal is upheld or denied, she cannot be tried AGAIN for these same 4 lies, down to 1 lie ....... so she cannot incriminate herself in those lies in this civil case versus the criminal case.

am I making one bit of sense?? probably not. but I was just trying to figure out what they were saying about the appeal.

(Maybe I need to try to find her appeal and re-read that to see what she is really apealing.)

ETA: can't find the actual appeal.....maybe they didn't file it yet? just filed a Notice of Intent to File an Appeal or something????

IMO, MOO, etc.

They might have been trying to make some distinction with the word "further"--but given the fact that the law on this issue is not IMO on their side you would think they would have backed up any kind-of-vague attempts to distinguish the situation with...oh....i don't know...case law or something?

The appeal has definitely been filed and is pending. Casey's attorneys are required to file the trial transcript by Jan. 17, 2012.

t
Being found guilty...again. And according to her attorneys she's very much at risk...wouldn't she have to come out of hiding for a new trial? I'm just not quite sure what's in it for her (except puting off the inevitable of having to pay out money she doesn't have...right now).

Being found guilty again for something for which she's already served the time is not too much of a risk. Maybe she sees coming out of hiding as a risk--I'm not sure--but IMO the assumption is that there would be a quick plea agreement in the event that the appeal is successful.

That's what I want to know too! This is all so confusing. We need to know if she is appealing the convictions and trying to get them vacated, or just appealing the four convictions down to one conviction instead. Or are appeals automatically for vacating all convictions? I don't understand the appeal process. I don't even understand why this appeal is taking so darn long. It's lies, not murder. Does that even make a difference or do any appeals take forever? Has she even appealed yet or are we waiting for her to actually file an appeal? Is there any way to figure out just what she's doing with her appeal?

This is really frustrating me. I just don't think the 5th should apply to her UNLESS she is really trying to get these convictions vacated completely. It boggles my mind that she would get the 5th for wanting one lie instead of four. That just doesn't make any sense to me.

She has appealed. The case number for the appeal in the Fifth District Court of Appeal is 5D11-2357, and you can check the docket (list of filings) anytime at this link: http://199.242.69.70/pls/ds/ds_docket_search. Casey's attorneys have to file the trial transcript by Jan. 17, and presumably the opening brief sometime after that.

Until the opening brief is filed, we won't know the exact issues being appealed, but certainly she has left open the option of requesting that all 4 convictions be vacated. I would estimate that this process will take another 9 months or so.

ETA: Per the Florida rules of Appellate Procedure, it looks like the opening brief (Casey's brief) would be due Feb. 16. The response from the State would be due 20 days later, and Casey's reply brief would be due another 20 days after that. (All these deadlines, of course, can be extended for various reasons.) Then there could be an oral argument scheduled, and then the court will take its own sweet time to rule.

 

[wonders]

They might have been trying to make some distinction with the word "further"--but given the fact that the law on this issue is not IMO on their side you would think they would have backed up any kind-of-vague attempts to distinguish the situation with...oh....i don't know...case law or something?

The appeal has definitely been filed and is pending. Casey's attorneys are required to file the trial transcript by Jan. 17, 2012.



Being found guilty again for something for which she's already served the time is not too much of a risk. Maybe she sees coming out of hiding as a risk--I'm not sure--but IMO the assumption is that there would be a quick plea agreement in the event that the appeal is successful.

She has appealed. The case number for the appeal in the Fifth District Court of Appeal is 5D11-2357, and you can check the docket (list of filings) anytime at this link: http://199.242.69.70/pls/ds/ds_docket_search. Casey's attorneys have to file the trial transcript by Jan. 17, and presumably the opening brief sometime after that.

Until the opening brief is filed, we won't know the exact issues being appealed, but certainly she has left open the option of requesting that all 4 convictions be vacated. I would estimate that this process will take another 9 months or so.

ETA: Per the Florida rules of Appellate Procedure, it looks like the opening brief (Casey's brief) would be due Feb. 16. The response from the State would be due 20 days later, and Casey's reply brief would be due another 20 days after that. (All these deadlines, of course, can be extended for various reasons.) Then there could be an oral argument scheduled, and then the court will take its own sweet time to rule.

I know I'm stupid but please bare with me for a moment.
By the time all is said and done for the appeal OCA will have already served her time and probation, so what exactly will the appeal acomplish other then reducing it to one count, she will still be a felon. Is it really so that she can throw a wrench into the civil cases? Is that what this is really all about?

 

[AZlawyer]

They might have been trying to make some distinction with the word "further"--but given the fact that the law on this issue is not IMO on their side you would think they would have backed up any kind-of-vague attempts to distinguish the situation with...oh....i don't know...case law or something?

The appeal has definitely been filed and is pending. Casey's attorneys are required to file the trial transcript by Jan. 17, 2012.



Being found guilty again for something for which she's already served the time is not too much of a risk. Maybe she sees coming out of hiding as a risk--I'm not sure--but IMO the assumption is that there would be a quick plea agreement in the event that the appeal is successful.

I know I'm stupid but please bare with me for a moment.
By the time all is said and done for the appeal OCA will have already served her time and probation, so what exactly will the appeal acomplish other then reducing it to one count, she will still be a felon. Is it really so that she can throw a wrench into the civil cases? Is that what this is really all about?

I don't really think that's the strategy, because the appeal is NOT throwing a wrench into the civil cases. The civil cases can chug along just fine while Casey's taking the 5th, and in fact would be easier for the plaintiffs to win that way.

Now, part of the strategy might be to prevent Casey from having to ACTUALLY ANSWER QUESTIONS UNDER OATH in the civil cases. They might not care so much if she LOSES the civil cases, but might think that Casey is one of those very rare people that the State of Florida would actually consider prosecuting for perjury lol.

 

[wonders]

I don't really think that's the strategy, because the appeal is NOT throwing a wrench into the civil cases. The civil cases can chug along just fine while Casey's taking the 5th, and in fact would be easier for the plaintiffs to win that way.
Got you. Thank you.

Now, part of the strategy might be to prevent Casey from having to ACTUALLY ANSWER QUESTIONS UNDER OATH in the civil cases. They might not care so much if she LOSES the civil cases, but might think that Casey is one of those very rare people that the State of Florida would actually consider prosecuting for perjury lol.

Ohhhh! Well, that makes perfect sense.
Is there a statute of limitations on filing perjury charges? The reason I ask is because if she ever wrote a book, has an interview or whatever in the near future she'll be sunk. But later down the road would she still be sunk? Thank you AZ.

 

[AZlawyer]

[/B]
Ohhhh! Well, that makes perfect sense.
Is there a statute of limitations on filing perjury charges? The reason I ask is because if she ever wrote a book, has an interview or whatever in the near future she'll be sunk. But later down the road would she still be sunk? Thank you AZ.

Well, the statute of limitations doesn't START running until you lie under oath. So if she lies under oath 10 years from now, then the statute of limitations would start, and the state would have 3 years to prosecute.

 

[logicalgirl]

Well, the statute of limitations doesn't START running until you lie under oath. So if she lies under oath 10 years from now, then the statute of limitations would start, and the state would have 3 years to prosecute.

Must be interesting for OCA to find that while she clawed her way out of one box - she has found herself in another one - bigger and roomier but a box just the same...:floorlaugh:

 

[wonders]

Must be interesting for OCA to find that while she clawed her way out of one box - she has found herself in another one - bigger and roomier but a box just the same...:floorlaugh:

She sure has LG. It makes my heart feel good for Caylee when I learn that OCA still has much to deal with and hopefully she will never make one more red cent off of Caylee. It also makes my heart feel good to know that she just may have to accept Larry Flint's offer after all and that we wont have to read or listen to her lies.

 

[logicalgirl]

She sure has LG. It makes my heart feel good for Caylee when I learn that OCA still has much to deal with and hopefully she will never make one more red cent off of Caylee. It also makes my heart feel good to know that she just may have to accept Larry Flint's offer after all and that we wont have to read or listen to her lies.

Best she be doing some form of exercise then because we all know sitting around munching on chips and salsa and drinking beer isn't at all helpful to a body that's over 25...

 

[krkrjx]

She sure has LG. It makes my heart feel good for Caylee when I learn that OCA still has much to deal with and hopefully she will never make one more red cent off of Caylee. It also makes my heart feel good to know that she just may have to accept Larry Flint's offer after all and that we wont have to read or listen to her lies.

If I could have one wish at this point it would be that KC never makes a penny off Caylee. Or her defense team, but I'd rather they make it than her. Her getting away with murdering her child is heartbreaking enough; that she should profit from it is something I must keep pushing out of my mind.

Now, if I were to have two wishes, my second would be that KC comes down with a hearty case of flatulence that never goes away, the kind with no known cure or intervention available.

 

[Aedrys]

They might have been trying to make some distinction with the word "further"--but given the fact that the law on this issue is not IMO on their side you would think they would have backed up any kind-of-vague attempts to distinguish the situation with...oh....i don't know...case law or something?

The appeal has definitely been filed and is pending. Casey's attorneys are required to file the trial transcript by Jan. 17, 2012.



Being found guilty again for something for which she's already served the time is not too much of a risk. Maybe she sees coming out of hiding as a risk--I'm not sure--but IMO the assumption is that there would be a quick plea agreement in the event that the appeal is successful.

She has appealed. The case number for the appeal in the Fifth District Court of Appeal is 5D11-2357, and you can check the docket (list of filings) anytime at this link: http://199.242.69.70/pls/ds/ds_docket_search. Casey's attorneys have to file the trial transcript by Jan. 17, and presumably the opening brief sometime after that.

Until the opening brief is filed, we won't know the exact issues being appealed, but certainly she has left open the option of requesting that all 4 convictions be vacated. I would estimate that this process will take another 9 months or so.

ETA: Per the Florida rules of Appellate Procedure, it looks like the opening brief (Casey's brief) would be due Feb. 16. The response from the State would be due 20 days later, and Casey's reply brief would be due another 20 days after that. (All these deadlines, of course, can be extended for various reasons.) Then there could be an oral argument scheduled, and then the court will take its own sweet time to rule.

Oh how depressing that she gets that much time for LIES. Good grief! And her lawyers conveniently haven't filed exactly what the appeal issue is yet. I just know they're going to either turn everything in at the last minute or take a note from Baez and get as many delays as possible. I see more thwartation in the future - bakers, get those thwartcakes ready! Sheesh.

Well, there goes ANY chance of getting Casey under oath. No WAY the judge is going to allow that. Gotta love how freaking SLOW our legal system is. Oh well, at least taking the 5th so many times practically guarantees a win since this is civil case!

 

[RR0004]

snipping AZ's post for brevity....BBM

Being found guilty again for something for which she's already served the time is not too much of a risk. Maybe she sees coming out of hiding as a risk--I'm not sure--but IMO the assumption is that there would be a quick plea agreement in the event that the appeal is successful


Yup, AZ...that's what I was thinking. No way the good State of Florida would want to incur additional expense prosecuting her...and I'm sure her attorneys know that.

 

[strawberry]

@bobkealing
bob kealing
#zenaidagonzalez attorneys tomorrow will argue their motion before Judge Lisa Munyon to compel #CaseyAnthony to answer questions.