2009.05.28 Motions Hearing

[ziggy]

If you see them in person you might feel/see their grief a bit more. Their grief was pretty palpable.

I could feel it and it was the first time in forever I felt for them.

Thanks to you and Gaia for the information.

I was pretty surprised that TM said the tape doesn't prove anything either way. Odd if they want to rant and rave later about how prejudicial it is. I guess that leaves them on the hill arguing about medical privacy to fight and die on, That one argument seems like a flimsy very GRAY area that the media outlets will most likely overcome since no medical treatment is being disclosed because she was not treated.

 

[ButForFortune]

I just watched the hearing in its entirety and the defense attorneys' press conference immediately after. I think the new death penalty attorney will definitely defend Casey vigorously. However, I have a very adverse reaction to Macaluso (sp?). I do not think the jurors will like him or react favorably toward him. I watched him in both the hearing and talking to reporters afterward and in my opinion he comes across as a bully. Loud, argumentative, aggressive bullying posture, forcefully waiving his arms and hands. In my opinion, he will remind everyone of any bully they have ever known. Anyone's comments?

 

[harleysnana]

Did not even look at her parents--Looked like George was crushed.

:banghead:
When are they going to realize that there is a reason she can not look at
them!

 

[Ryansgrama]

I am hearing she did not.

It was so sad for George and Cindy. Did you see them watching her, hoping she'd glance at them, and she didn't. I am no fan of George or Cindy, but that was just painful to watch.

 

[Theonly1]

It was so sad for George and Cindy. Did you see them watching her, hoping she'd glance at them, and she didn't. I am no fan of George or Cindy, but that was just painful to watch.

It was so damn painful. Perhaps she would have acknowleged them if she was not distracted by shaking all the attorneys' hands? I kinda doubt it though.

Like I mentioned before, it was kind of like two expectant dogs lovingly and eagerly waiting for attention and being totally ignored. It was sad and they seemed crushed.

I know she's not supposed to have like CONVERSATIONS with people other than counsel but how hard would it have been to turn her head around while the side-bar is going on and to smile at them, or just look at them? Or to stop and wave before going out? The bailiffs were not pushing her along, she could have if she wanted to.

After all, these two people are perhaps two of the only people left on the planet who truly love her. Whatever grudge does she hold against them? Why can't she be bothered?

If they had all agreed that she would not look at them then they would not have had that look of expectation and then extreme sadness, right?

 

[RR0004]

Quick question, please. Can anyone tell me why the attorney for the media wasn't present?

 

[Ezryder9]

I watched the hearing but, apparently, I missed the discussion of the innumerable constitutional rights of Caylee's which were violated.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone in jail should be guaranteed simply 3 hots and a cot. It's not a vacation, a retreat, a spa. But to think there are jails without video cameras is living in a make-believe world. Oh, wait...

 

[Theonly1]

I am still confused and I think I will continue to be confused when it comes to this case. Thank Goodness for the wonderful members here with the right answers. Thank You all so much. :blowkiss:

Now, here I go again with questions. Baez is claiming Casey's medical privacy is being invaded. Now, did I misunderstand something? Did I not hear they said there is no sound to this audio that the media wants to release? If there is no sound then I would not think that Casey's medical privacy is at stake. Also, Was this audio not outside of the clinic? There was no doctor there, no one would know she received medical attention unless he said so, which he did. So in essence he violated her medical right to privacy by bringing it up today I would assume.

Re: Medical privacy

Assuming this was admitted at trial, which it likely won't be, if the video is shown and you can see the nurse giving her something, I would assume it could not be elicted that she was given a sedative without violating her medical privacy. And I understand Casey was given a sedative.

But to say, "Well, she went to the nurse's station (for medical attention) so therefore every action caught on camera at the nurse's station is privileged by Hippa" is reaching. What if Casey decided to do a Hannibal Lechter and bit off the face of the nurse at the nurse's station? Does anyone think that Hippa rules would preclude it being shown. Heck no. The cameras are there to monitor the inmates, plain and simple.

If I was the Strickland, with both sides really not wanting to put the video into evidence, I would cling to the first *reasonable* reason to seal the video. If the public gets ahold of the video through the Orlando Sentinel (or whomever else motioned to get access) then it will simply be another thing to address at voir dire during jury selection to ensure the juror did not see the video and if they did that it did not prejudice Casey in any fashion.

It is really much ado about nothing except that we are now hearing all these amazing stories about some kind of a master plan by law enforcement and the state's attorney in order to get some kind of a reaction from Casey (which she must have produced or they would not be fighting the video's release).

 

[amethyst221]

I just watched the hearing in its entirety and the defense attorneys' press conference immediately after. I think the new death penalty attorney will definitely defend Casey vigorously. However, I have a very adverse reaction to Macaluso (sp?). I do not think the jurors will like him or react favorably toward him. I watched him in both the hearing and talking to reporters afterward and in my opinion he comes across as a bully. Loud, argumentative, aggressive bullying posture, forcefully waiving his arms and hands. In my opinion, he will remind everyone of any bully they have ever known. Anyone's comments?

I don't react well to him, either, and bully is the word that comes to mind for me. Maybe it just strikes such a wrong note with me that Casey is smirking it up in court and torturing her parents, and he is booming on and on about how cruelly and inhumanely she has been treated. Ms. Lyon strikes me as a true believer and I don't expect her to be s shrinking violet. But TM seems so insincere and self-important.

 

[Theonly1]

I watched the hearing but, apparently, I missed the discussion of the innumerable constitutional rights of Caylee's which were violated.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone in jail should be guaranteed simply 3 hots and a cot. It's not a vacation, a retreat, a spa. But to think there are jails without video cameras is living in a make-believe world. Oh, wait...

Heh. It was a veritable laundry list of alleged violated constitutional rights (without the supporting case law verbally discussed). I could see them huffing and puffing if they also tried the "prejudicial" angle and if the State was looking to introduce the video. Since they are not looking to introduce the video, I am led to believe this is simply the defense trying to either lay some groundwork for an appeal and/or put it out in the public domain that law enforcement and the state's attorney did something "cruel" to Casey.

 

[amethyst221]

I find this whole overdone thing about the tape showing the defendant's reaction weird. I try to think like a lawyer and be rational, but it always pops into my mind that it must look really, really bad. They've taken round after round of depositions of the same people and dragged this out eternally. It seems a crazy waste of resources and time. Are they really wasting time thinking about filing civil suits now, when their client's life is on the line?

 

[roller26]

Sorry I'm terribly behind and haven't been able to read all post so forgive me if this has been covered but JB states JG as being a suspect in Caylee's disappearance. Since when? I don't recall LE ever saying he was a suspect. In the same sentence he drops AH's name thus alluding to her also being a suspect. Wth? This is just plain WRONG!

 

[Theonly1]

I find this whole overdone thing about the tape showing the defendant's reaction weird. I try to think like a lawyer and be rational, but it always pops into my mind that it must look really, really bad. They've taken round after round of depositions of the same people and dragged this out eternally. It seems a crazy waste of resources and time. Are they really wasting time thinking about filing civil suits now, when their client's life is on the line?

I think that when some defense attorneys think of "CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS" or think they even smell a whiff of them they get all crazy and lose their focus! They think they have a guaranteed appeal and go looney tunes!

Seriously, THE STATE DOES NOT WANT TO INTRODUCE THE DARN VIDEO :crazy: (the defense stated so itself it its motion) so any part or portion of an *imaginary violation* is "cured" by not having the video at trial.

If they think they are going to get Casey off by simply showing jail officials videotaped her at the nurse's station they have another think coming!

How is Casey harmed if the jury never knows about it?

 

[Theonly1]

Sorry I'm terribly behind and haven't been able to read all post so forgive me if this has been covered but JB states JG as being a suspect in Caylee's disappearance. Since when? I don't recall LE ever saying he was a suspect. In the same sentence he drops AH's name thus alluding to her also being a suspect. Wth? This is just plain WRONG!

It was not as blatant as saying, "Jessie G is a suspect."

It was more obscure like (paraphrased), "...even up until recently he was considered a suspect".

Regardless, I felt exactly as you do; it was just plain wrong.

 

[Ezryder9]

Heh. It was a veritable laundry list of alleged violated constitutional rights (without the supporting case law verbally discussed). I could see them huffing and puffing if they also tried the "prejudicial" angle and if the State was looking to introduce the video. Since they are not looking to introduce the video, I am led to believe this is simply the defense trying to either lay some groundwork for an appeal and/or put it out in the public domain that law enforcement and the state's attorney did something "cruel" to Casey.

What keeps coming to mind for me are the times that the defense whines about how slow the SA is to turn over evidence. And then complained, when the evidence was turned over,that it was released. The SA continually has to reiterate that it is bound by law, the nasty little three-letter word, to comply with the Sunshine Law in the State of Florida. It's their job. It's not a media ploy by the SA. Baez should know by now that whatever he asks for becomes fair game for the media and the public. Perhaps he should begin approaching state legislators to have the laws changed.

I want to see the video. There. I've said it. I want to see and hear and read everything available to me. I don't want a secondhand interpretation of the discovery, especially if it comes from Baez which is the only place from which it would come, since the SA does NOT hold media conferences, before or after court appearances. Prejudicial? Nothing could prejudice me more against this particular defendant than the personal opinion and belief that yes, she murdered her child.

 

[2goldfish]

I find this whole overdone thing about the tape showing the defendant's reaction weird. I try to think like a lawyer and be rational, but it always pops into my mind that it must look really, really bad. They've taken round after round of depositions of the same people and dragged this out eternally. It seems a crazy waste of resources and time. Are they really wasting time thinking about filing civil suits now, when their client's life is on the line?

I really am wondering about this too, dont get me wrong, I am out of the jury pool for sure cause I "know" she did it but from what I heard about her reaction it could go either way "oh sheet could that be my baby" or "oh sheet the game is up" so why wont they let it released for goodness sake, if that was her actual reaction it could go either way and isnt that a good thing? no...I think it looks worse than it sounds....you know a guilty person from a scared one IMO.....and the defense team KNOWS IT TOO. the stuggle to suppress when KC is facing lethal injection certainly implies something to me.

 

[curves]

It was so sad for George and Cindy. Did you see them watching her, hoping she'd glance at them, and she didn't. I am no fan of George or Cindy, but that was just painful to watch.

Yip...that was just hideous to watch. Their body language was so needy and she basically kicked them in the teeth. Not nice to see anybody treated like that, regardless of their own past behaviour.

 

[one_hooah_wife]

For one thing, prisoners do NOT have rights. Those go bye bye when you are in jail. Secondly, her attorney knows this and chooses to ignore it. I think there is something else on that video that Baez does not want the public to see.

Also, what is this crapola that LKB is saying about the jail denying her rights to her atty. Nothing has been mentioned about that.

The best argument for not allowing the tape is the prejudicial vs the probative, but Baez was too stupid to figure that out. How could this tape have been toget her reaction when she already had a radio in her cell and surely already heard about this.

Baez is truly an idiot. A double idiot if he thinks that filing an amendment to a motion at 6pm the night before will get him his way. Obviously there would be no time for anyone to respond to it.

Actually, prisoners do have rights ... both before and after they are convicted. (See, The Constitution - Amendments 4,5,6 and 8)

In the pursuit of justice, prisoners may have certain rights withheld or limited ... liberty, for one! Privacy, for another, except what is reasonable and expected under the law. All prisoners, whether accused or convicted, are entitled to basic human and civil rights.

And the argument of prejudicial over probative is one for trial. If the SAO tried to admit the video into evidence the defense could, outside the presence of the jury, make a case that the value of it was more inflammatory and prejudicial than probative. The SAO has said that they are not planning to use this at trial ... the problem comes in with the Sunshine Laws as they pertain to discovery. JB must prove that for the sake of a fair trial there needs to be an exception ... either by applying a statutory exemption to this circumstance or citing case law to justify the requested action.

 

[The World According]

I think the last minute filing was a strategic gesture on Baez's part. Then again, I'd be surprised if he thought that strategically. I don't know. lol

To do this while you are under a judge who has filed a complaint against you with the state bar, it is hubris. Colossal hubris! It would be tough to measure.

 

[Chezhire]

C & G need to take a lesson from Lee and stay home. Why go to Court and grovel for a smile or an acknowledgement and be humiliated by that demon ingrate time after time? They have got to be gluttons for punishment. There is no way that KC will allow their visits to jail, no matter how many times they say it is because of the videotaping being released to the media. I think KC has arrived at the conclusion in her evil little mind that G & C are to blame for Caylee's demise.

Bolded by me, Chezhire.

Casey decided that Cindy was to blame for Caylee's death before she killed Caylee.