State wants answers from Baez

[Reagan]

Hola ZsaZsa,

Both Judge Strickland and Judge Perry have asked her if she's satisfied with her counsel, so that should be sufficient enough. So I agree with you, and the Judge most certainly isn't there to hold her hand and babysit her. Not only did she make the choice and stick with baez, she even paid for him haha.
Oh and correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Judge Strickland ask her TWICE? Out of all the cases I've followed I have never seen or heard of a Judge asking the defendant that. Anyway, baez already is the laughing stock of the legal community. But I don't have to point that out to anyone

AZLawyer, I'm not sure if anyone has asked you this, but out of all your years in practice, have you ever heard of a Judge repeatedly asking the defendant if they're satisfied with their counsel? I can see why it would be asked in this case due to baez's incompetence..but is this common?

 

[Reagan]

logicalgirl LOL! Ya beat me to it!

 

[milliac]

I haven't posted here for a long time, but still follow daily. These all to be very childish tricks. I think HHJP needs to treat them as children, and say "We are not leaving court until we all understand. Now look in my eyes and repeat to me what I just told you." Crazy!

 

[Star12]

Hi Trapshooter! I think that he is. I am basing this on the latest news that Nums has posted. If you follow the link, you can see the photo with the caption confirming that he arrived in Chicago.

I am attaching the photo and here is Nums posting:
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 2011.02.22 Today's Current News **NO DISCUSSION HERE PLEASE**

Ummm, I don't think so. It's darn horrible cold in Chicago and I don't think JB would be wearing just a polo. And the lady in the background has a sleeveless top or dress on. Not Chicago winter attire. The caption to the picture says he is somewhere to examine evidence, not that he is in Chicago to attend a meeting. IMHO that is a file photo.

"Attorney Jose Baez arrives to an experts&#8217; review of evidence in the Casey Anthony case." <<<caption

I could be very wrong, but this photo belies Chicago travel....

 

[doogiesgirl]

I think him and CM both want the judge to give them the boot. Nothing else explains their actions, collectively. If it were just JB.....then ignorance and lack of IQ and knowledge might take the day; but with CM allowing this circus to go on I think they want to be twarted out the door.

ITA. JB has nothing....his life has gone down the tubes since he has taken on the Casey Marie Anthony case. He is unable to influence his client to take a plea, unable to get her to understand that she is going to lose this trial. I truly believe this guy, at this point, wants off this case so badly that he is willing to gamble his license to practice law(I think he believes that in the end he'll keep it). And the sad fact is that Justice for Caylee will be back to square one if this guy shoots himself in the foot to get off this case. But I do believe one thing.....if this is how it all plays out, there will be a queue to take this guy to court for incompetence, mismanagement of state funds, mismanagement of client funds....on and on and on.

Is justice postponed still justice? It doesn't seem like it. Revenge might be a dish best served cold....but justice? no. Poor Caylee. Will she ever get justice?

MOO

 

[AZlawyer]

Hola ZsaZsa,

Both Judge Strickland and Judge Perry have asked her if she's satisfied with her counsel, so that should be sufficient enough. So I agree with you, and the Judge most certainly isn't there to hold her hand and babysit her. Not only did she make the choice and stick with baez, she even paid for him haha.
Oh and correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Judge Strickland ask her TWICE? Out of all the cases I've followed I have never seen or heard of a Judge asking the defendant that. Anyway, baez already is the laughing stock of the legal community. But I don't have to point that out to anyone

AZLawyer, I'm not sure if anyone has asked you this, but out of all your years in practice, have you ever heard of a Judge repeatedly asking the defendant if they're satisfied with their counsel? I can see why it would be asked in this case due to baez's incompetence..but is this common?

I have only worked on death penalty cases at the appellate level, but I've read lots of trial transcripts for death penalty cases, and I know I've seen that question pop up quite a few times. (Not sure about multiple times in the same case.) I assume that the judges think it will help to counter an argument for ineffective assistance of counsel.

In practice, however, it is really not a helpful question. If the defendant says, "Yes, I am very happy with my attorney. Based on my decades of not having a bit of legal experience, I feel he is doing a bang-up job," that's not going to prevent them from making an IAC argument down the road. No one truly expects non-lawyer criminal defendants to understand whether or not their lawyers are doing a good job. On the other hand, if the defendant says, "NO! I think this attorney is an incompetent fool and I want a new one!" then you've pretty much got to stop everything lol.

 

[A_News_Junkie]

:wave: Yeah, it really does seem as if stall/thwart is the primary weapon in Baez's arsenal (lol). The only advantage I can see in this tactic is what you've so clearly pointed out above.

jmo when it gets to trial, Baez is going to try to charm the jury with winsome smiles and rueful glances (at least that's how he sees himself vs. the smirker and shirker lol). He has nothing and will rely on "style points."

I am not sure that Baez will get anything from his experts. He hopes he will, lol, but so far hoping against hope has not played out too well--darnit! State still wanted to go for the DP! Major thwartment! lol

Call Webster's we have a new entry!
TWART-U-NI-TION
Having nothing else at trial, former attorney Jose Baez threw twartunition in hopes the courthouse and trial would blow up faster than his career.

 

[doogiesgirl]

I hope the Judge doesn't say anything to her about this doofus. It's a match made in heaven. I am looking forward to seeing his pitiful attempt at defending her during the trial . This should be somthing to watch.... I want to see him shot down in flames by the SA team, and he will be the laughing stock of the legal community, just as he deserves.

And isn't it her responsibility to know what's going on in her own trial? And I am sure she has access to newspapers, right? I don't think that keeping yourself ignorant of your own legal problems is a viable excuse. Plus if JB & KC aren't spending their visitation time discussing her trial = that's her problem.

moo

 

[Leila]

Maybe I should be over in the "what's the defense" thread. But I do believe that Jose actions and mistakes will be added up and be part of an appeal for Casey after she's tried and convicted to claim she was represented by ineffective counsel. Well...it's possible.

jmo

Jose is the lead attorney for the defense, but at what point will CM, as co-council, come into play on this?

Certainly with CM's years of trial experience, as co-council he should be providing Jose with assistance from his knowledge of trial procedure. If they're a team, it's the team that failed to meet the deadline.

As the defense team, shouldn't both JB and CM be held in contempt?

 

[Purple Iris]

The thing is, IMO, is that Casey does not know what is really going on with her case.
From recent jail visitation logs, neither Baez or Mason are keeping her company.
Maybe she has contact with them via the phone? That info wouldn't be released.

He has kept her isolated - he blows smoke up her arse when he has to.

In the end, even with her being asked if she is happy with her team, and even agreeing to it, when this is all said and done, she'll be able to get her hands on the same info that we have seen I would imagine.

As far as Baez goes - I don't think he cares one way or another about his "Law Career" or his liciense to practice.
When this fell into his lap, he let his mind fly with all kinds of possibilities of new and exciting things for his future.
Those slipped out of his grasp a long time ago, also, IMO.
But, he still is probably holding out hope for something to come along.
He'll still his books and movies, etc.

He, much like his client, will get by ~ and, like his client, he doesn't care what that avenue is as long as there is a dollar sign at the end, and, not a stop sign.

 

[nssherlock]

snipped by me

To me it's actually quite obvious what he is trying to do. Stall, stall, stall and he's running off to the conference in a Hail Mary attempt to resuscitate the results of his experts so he can actually have something to object to in the Frye hearings.

For some reason Baez believes he has found a tiny speck of (fool's) gold that will convince these experts to see the evidence his way if he can only get together with several of them in person and get them to actually focus on whatever the heck this idea is.

Okay Mr. Baez, apparently you are a risk taker, but I'm not sure you've done the appropriate weighing and balancing of possible results before taking this (foolhardy) leap.

BBM - I agree totally Logical Girl. He (JB) didn't like the due date - it didn't give him time to attend the conference to find out what he should include in his motion/twist some arms - so he changed the date "The Baez Way".

I can remember telling my son "if you'd just spend as much time & energy doing the job as you do trying to get out of it, you'd be amazed at how much you can actually accomplish"......this is eerily familiar.:maddening:

 

[Spangle]

The thing is, IMO, is that Casey does not know what is really going on with her case.
From recent jail visitation logs, neither Baez or Mason are keeping her company.
Maybe she has contact with them via the phone? That info wouldn't be released.

He has kept her isolated - he blows smoke up her arse when he has to.

In the end, even with her being asked if she is happy with her team, and even agreeing to it, when this is all said and done, she'll be able to get her hands on the same info that we have seen I would imagine.

As far as Baez goes - I don't think he cares one way or another about his "Law Career" or his liciense to practice.
When this fell into his lap, he let his mind fly with all kinds of possibilities of new and exciting things for his future.
Those slipped out of his grasp a long time ago, also, IMO.
But, he still is probably holding out hope for something to come along.
He'll still his books and movies, etc.

He, much like his client, will get by ~ and, like his client, he doesn't care what that avenue is as long as there is a dollar sign at the end, and, not a stop sign.

What is there to keep updated on? She knows the game plan. It's a miss trial. To her, it's all going according to plan. I just wondering is she understands that a mistrial doesn't mean she goes free. The only winner of that, would be JB. He would have gotten her money and PR in the process. ON with his life he would go. She would still be setting in jail, still in the news, doing it all over again.

Does she understand that? Doubtful, since she made that comment about the trail being in Miami and getting to hit the Beach when she was finally free.

On the flip side.. She knows what she did. She knows what he has to work with. She might enjoy being able to 'give' this to him.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Can someone refresh my memory - Was this deadline in relation to the experts? I recall Baez saying he had the "unique opportunity" to basically somehow get everyone (physically) together to talk at the conference (why that is important, I have no clue) but then HHJP set the deadline BEFORE the conference took place? Am I on the right track here? Sounds like Baez is going to basically make a "mistake" then try to get what he wants from his experts, then ask for forgiveness and hope it all works out. Kind of an "easier to ask forgiveness than get permission" sort of thing (quote from Grace Brewster Harris)?

 

[logicalgirl]

:wave: Yeah, it really does seem as if stall/thwart is the primary weapon in Baez's arsenal (lol). The only advantage I can see in this tactic is what you've so clearly pointed out above.

jmo when it gets to trial, Baez is going to try to charm the jury with winsome smiles and rueful glances (at least that's how he sees himself vs. the smirker and shirker lol). He has nothing and will rely on "style points."

I am not sure that Baez will get anything from his experts. He hopes he will, lol, but so far hoping against hope has not played out too well--darnit! State still wanted to go for the DP! Major thwartment! lol

Oh Lord - I hope you weren't reading my comments and thinking I meant whatever experts he was trying to sandbag would actually testify to what he wants? Or would look at whatever he digs out of his pocket in Chicago and shows them will make one iota of difference to his (lack of) Frye motion material.

I think he will completely fail. I just didn't think he was willing to admit that before he left for Chicago. Some people are icons only in their own minds. I think Baez fits in quite nicely there.

In the meantime, I'll icon this behavior for you Mr. Baez!:loser:

 

[Soju]

Jose is the lead attorney for the defense, but at what point will CM, as co-council, come into play on this?

Certainly with CM's years of trial experience, as co-council he should be providing Jose with assistance from his knowledge of trial procedure. If they're a team, it's the team that failed to meet the deadline.

As the defense team, shouldn't both JB and CM be held in contempt?

re bbm:

ITA Leila. I don't understand it either. In Ashton's motion for rule to show cause, he says the court required jose baez do "blah blah". He put the judge's instructions in quotes, but Ashton himself said it applied to Jose Baez. Wouldn't the judge's instructions have applied to the team as a whole? I understand Ashton just talked to Baez on the phone and included the Baez email, but isn't Mason technically first chair as the dp-qualified guy? I don't get it.

And I'm also curious as to how Ashton got a copy of the email Baez sent to "Jill".

Anyone know or have any guesses? It just seems odd to me that a Judicial Assistant would forward emails to the SA that aren't part of the court record. Maybe they have to?

 

[logicalgirl]

Call Webster's we have a new entry!
TWART-U-NI-TION
Having nothing else at trial, former attorney Jose Baez threw twartunition in hopes the courthouse and trial would blow up faster than his career.

Good Plan! Now A_News_Junkie, would that be a noun or a verb? Jose threw a twartunition in hopes the trial would blow up his career? (Oh....not a complete quote of your sentence I see...)

Do I smell a twartunition just now?

Stop goofing around or I'll twartunition you!

Or.........?:waitasec:

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Jose is the lead attorney for the defense, but at what point will CM, as co-council, come into play on this?

Certainly with CM's years of trial experience, as co-council he should be providing Jose with assistance from his knowledge of trial procedure. If they're a team, it's the team that failed to meet the deadline.

As the defense team, shouldn't both JB and CM be held in contempt?

Mason made it clear to the judge he's "not going to let it happen" with regard to (I think both) sanctions or contempt. I hope HHJP makes it happen.

 

[logicalgirl]

Nums24 has just posted a new news clip in Todays News - kind of surprising comment from Richard Hornsby.

Casey Anthony Plea Deal Unlikely Now
Tense Relationship Between Defense, Prosecution Shows In Recent Motion

Article: http://www.wesh.com/r/26957536/detail.html

Video Report with R. Hornsby: http://www.wesh.com/video/26958587/detail.html

Quote:
"I've never seen a prosecutor hold another attorney in contempt for something so minor," said Orlando criminal defense attorney Richard Hornsby, who is not connected to the case.

At issue is a court ordered deadline that Ashton said Baez missed last week to list objections he plans to raise during an upcoming hearing.
*******************

RH seems to think missing this deadline is "something so minor" ???WTH??
Does that means the Judge's instructions and motions can be ignored in a capital murder case? Wow - maybe slid a bit sideways here RH? :waitasec:

 

[nums24]

Nums24 has just posted a new news clip in Todays News - kind of surprising comment from Richard Hornsby.

Casey Anthony Plea Deal Unlikely Now
Tense Relationship Between Defense, Prosecution Shows In Recent Motion

Article: http://www.wesh.com/r/26957536/detail.html

Video Report with R. Hornsby: http://www.wesh.com/video/26958587/detail.html

Quote:
"I've never seen a prosecutor hold another attorney in contempt for something so minor," said Orlando criminal defense attorney Richard Hornsby, who is not connected to the case.

At issue is a court ordered deadline that Ashton said Baez missed last week to list objections he plans to raise during an upcoming hearing.
*******************

RH seems to think missing this deadline is "something so minor" ???WTH??
Does that means the Judge's instructions and motions can be ignored in a capital murder case? Wow - maybe slid a bit sideways here RH? :waitasec:

I don't think it's minor, I was taken back by RH's comments. The defense has been screaming Frye issue for years now, the hearings are finally on the calendar and the State needs to know the information. I don't think RH is as up to date on this case as we are.

 

[Spangle]

Can someone refresh my memory - Was this deadline in relation to the experts? I recall Baez saying he had the "unique opportunity" to basically somehow get everyone (physically) together to talk at the conference (why that is important, I have no clue) but then HHJP set the deadline BEFORE the conference took place? Am I on the right track here? Sounds like Baez is going to basically make a "mistake" then try to get what he wants from his experts, then ask for forgiveness and hope it all works out. Kind of an "easier to ask forgiveness than get permission" sort of thing (quote from Grace Brewster Harris)?

IMHO... It's about the Frye Hearing coming up. JB wants to hold it by "ambush". Which isn't allowed in Florida. He was required to state what his experts was going to talk about, what their objection was (reason for the hearing). Using evidence, etc. JB only stated very little. The State requested more detail, the Judge set a deadline for when JB had to comply with giving MORE detail. JB ignored the Judge's order for more info by claiming he was 'confussed', since he considered he gave enough info in the first place. so he had nothing new/reason to file anything else. Hence, missed the deadline. <wink>

To me, this is more then just missing a simple hearing. He is bluntly ignoring the Judge and the State of Florida's rules. He doesn't think he should comply, and he isn't.