lillygator
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2008
- Messages
- 2,571
- Reaction score
- 108
oh he didn't win anything - he got lucky!
Casey Anthony reportedly planning to dump lawyer Jose Baez
- Thread starter Linda03
- Start date
Scamperoo
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2010
- Messages
- 1,143
- Reaction score
- 6
Really...so a win no matter how achieved is a victory ? If a runner trips his opponents it's a win ? if you stack a deck of cards in your favor is it a win ? is lying and cheating to get a win really any sort of victory. All I saw was the loss for our justice system and the erosion of everything fair and honest.
I think the supposed win was garnered at great cost to everyone with the exception of Casey Anthony who sails blithely along reveling in her successful manipulation of the system.
As for JB all he won was a sullied reputation, the derision of his colleagues and probably a lot of debt. Yes this is a win for sure....
When the whole world knows you pulled a fast one to achieve your aims, only looking at it myopically can you judge it a win. JMHO
krkrjx
The answer is blowin' in the wind.
- Joined
- May 4, 2010
- Messages
- 12,920
- Reaction score
- 42,008
Yes, Jose Baez won the case. But only in terms of what our legal system has become. Baez didn't make the system what it is; that decline has been in the works for some time now--but he did take advantage of the many flaws in our legal system. And those advantages allowed him to win the case.
But still, justice did not prevail. Not for either side. And not for society as a whole.
When justice fails, there are no winners.
2goldfish
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Messages
- 3,979
- Reaction score
- 51
sure, but all he won was his name linked with OCA for eternity. I dont think we'll hear much about him at all unless OCA farts and people call JB to verify which type of fart it was.
Yes, he can judge it a win - most definitely. Casey is not in prison or facing the death penalty. His client is out of jail - and free -.
No one said he had to prove the truth, they just want him to win and he did. He was not there to find the truth - he was there to get his client off and he did, so he won.
dog.gone.cute
Kyron Horman - Missing Since 6-4-10
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2011
- Messages
- 15,653
- Reaction score
- 1,947
BBM: I would not be surprised either ... JMO, but I think the CMA's have been communicating all along ...
One of my "several theories" : I think that Casey was complaining to Cindy that Jose has not delivered the big bucks ... whine whine whine ... :boohoo: So Cindy tells Casey "that blankety blank Jose" . . . "You need to do it the Anthony way " ... So the two CMA's have their little game plan in place to release the videos, and ya know, blame it on a "hacker" ... blah blah blah ... Play the "I am the victim" role ... :sick: So the two CMA's are "jumping for joy" when CA is back in the news ... [they make me :sick: ]
Jose does NOT want this video released because he "thinks" he will still be able to land a deal for him and his girl ... So Jose is peeved when he finds out CMA released this video because this was NOT part of the plan ...
Jose screaming "Look what you've done" ... Jose knows there ain't gonna be no $$$$$ deal now ... the "cat" is out of the bag. hee hee hee :floorlaugh:
And the drama continues ...
I know ... :crazy::crazy: but NOTHING would surprise me from the CMA's ...
MOO ...
dizzychick
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Messages
- 2,723
- Reaction score
- 1,845
IMO it wasnt Baez alone that can take the glory for this victory. It was a combination of decisions starting with how fast that jury was picked. Remember the last juror chosen didnt want to be and wasnt death penalty qualified. How long does it take to vio dire a death penalty case anyways? Something like 3 weeks at least was my impression and this jury was chosen with ramming speed. That was the 1st strike against the prosecution. Then they get sequestered strike 2. Then IMO cagey tactics are employed by the defense and IMO photoshopped pics to lean credit to their case and ofcourse liars galore. Whip all of that into a parfait of confusion and Voila, a not guilty verdict...
I agree but I also think the foreman led and he did not like the prosecution and as much as said so.
But people don't put all that together - they think wow who is the lawyer that won that case? And Baez is the answer they get.
Scamperoo
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2010
- Messages
- 1,143
- Reaction score
- 6
I wholeheartedly disagree with your interpretation of winning but each to his own. It's a sad day when people consider the truth irrelevant and deceit and subterfuge are appropriate substitutes.
You can make a valid argument that she got a NG verdict despite JB. How many times during the trial did he say things where it was commented numerous times it was actually hurting his client, not helping her? How many times did it seem the judge would bend over backwards in JB's favor just to make sure there was no avenue for mistrial?
It doesn't help that the state was prevented from introducing a whole lot more than they wanted.
It doesn't help that OCA's mother was willing to do anything in her power to protect her daughter, even if that meant lying.
It doesn't help that GA appeared weak and vulnerable in the face of outlandish charges by the DT.
Put it all together and there you have it. JB will get the credit because he was the lead attorney, but anyone who watched that trial, including those in the law profession, could tell you that he was not the ultimate reason she got off.
dog.gone.cute
Kyron Horman - Missing Since 6-4-10
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2011
- Messages
- 15,653
- Reaction score
- 1,947
Yep ... Jose got real LUCKY ... the "Scarecrow" from The Wizard of Oz had more brains than the jurors ...
MOO ... :floorlaugh:
I did not say the truth is irrelevant - but any lawyer will tell you especially when talking about this case that he was not there to tell the truth,he was there to win and he did.
Why is when I post something, it gets read into that these are my beliefs. Obviously, he was not there to tell the truth, he was there to win.
And I am not the only one who knows this - watching HLN last night the usual lawyer who comments on this case said exactly that "he was not there to find the truth, he was there to get his client off".
That is a reality.
If you feel that someone lost who was set free and no longer faces the death penalty, then we do sincerely disagree. She is not facing prisoners, nor is she in a room 23 hours a day, she is not going to die there - she is out -
Yes, she lost. I can see how you feel that way.
I don't disagree there, a defense lawyer's job isn't necessarily to find the truth, it's to defend their client.
passionflower
Verified Insider
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2008
- Messages
- 28,742
- Reaction score
- 11,307
dumping jose does not surpise me at all.
Atleast he is alive.........
KC dumped her murdered baby girl
and dumps friends and parents as well.......
she uses and destroys.
I believe it will all come back to all of them someday like Karma........JMOO
Atleast he is alive.........
KC dumped her murdered baby girl
and dumps friends and parents as well.......
she uses and destroys.
I believe it will all come back to all of them someday like Karma........JMOO
katydid23
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 66,833
- Reaction score
- 227,218
WE have to STOP the stupid practice of choosing jurors from a pool of people WHO DO NOT READ OR LISTEN TO THE NEWS. We cannot choose juries made up of people who do not have the curiousity or the concern or the brains to want to know what is going on in their world. We see what happens if we choose jurors like that. FCA's jury listened to Opening Arguments and that was that. They stopped listening or thinking after that and just focused on what the night's entertainment was going to be.
Thank you City. That is all I am saying. As much I sat that shaking my head when Baez put in the gas can thing with the duct tape and wondered what the f$#@ are you talkin about. And as much as I was in shock when the verdict came down- I do believe I walked straight into the wall when leaving the bedroom - the fact is he got her off - he kissed up to the jury every day and every evening - so that he actually had me laughing - but it worked apparently - the jury did not like the prosecution and when that happens they just don't give a chit.
RR0004
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2008
- Messages
- 19,987
- Reaction score
- -27
...and IMO...something is up...we just don't know what it is yet.
IMPO, the man is a joke...verdict or no verdict.
You're never going to get that because then there is no way to stop the opposite from happening, having jurors who are seated with already a bias towards one's guilt or innocence. You could have the same thing happen, only in this case most of the jury won't even bother to listen to the OS because they've already formulated an opinion.
Right. That will be put into effect immediately so we can have an absolutely biased jury.
This jury had enough information with the lying and the 31 days to look at the case aND SAY ok, I think we need to spend a lot more time than a day and a half just because we don't have a video or definitive DNA.
They complained about chloroform - maybe yes maybe no. But the FBI forensics scientist said the chloroform from the rug in the cardboard box was nearly gone but still there when he got the cardboard box a month later.
That should have told them a lot. If there were remnants in a cardboard box which was open and chloroform dissipates quickly - that should have told them someone used chloroform and a lot of it.
But this was not a very bright jury - that was fairly clear from the answers.