2011.06.27 TRIAL Day Twenty-nine (Afternoon Session)

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
JB: not interesting to pre try my case so the prosecution can have another look
 
JA wants to proffer Dr. Furton. JB getting annoyed and doesn't want it allowed.
 
witness source is article he read so that is hearsay....JA
 
In the hallway: Sgt. John Allen and private investigator Dominic Casey
by oscaseyanthony via twitter at 12:26 PM
 
JA says it is a proffer, and JB is up being argumentative - doesn't want to try his case again in front of JA again. HHJP saying if the Doctor is giving his opinions then fine but if he is regurgitating articles that is inadminisable heresay. (Spelling shot - no sleep again.)
 
The anchor on HLN just said, "We have to go back to court, JB is complaining about something to HJBP." Something about the way he said it cracked me up.
 
Holy moly..I just saw the video where ICA snarls at either JB or LDB! I completely missed that! I can't watch the whole thinkg at work. I can only get youtube. For some reason WESH only has Friday morning but not Friday afternoon on it's youtube channel. I was enjoying watching it there because it shows ICA...then no afternoon.
 
JB: I'm not interested in pre-trying my case for the benefit of the prosecution. (paraphrase)

Say what? Baez's arrogance is blinding...
 
Good Afternoon All!!

bringing this over from the (side)bar....Does anyone know of the sidebar transcripts that the media was going to get from the past couple of days of court? Haven't seen them posted anywhere. Unless I missed them...tia
 
Dr. Furton got his testimony about chloroform by researching on the internet... says JA
 
Prosecutors want to proffer. Baez says, " We're not interested in trying our case for the prosecution." #CaseyAnthony -jfell

by cfnews13casey via twitter at 7:35 AM
 
Sounds like the SAO anticipates that Dr. furton will only be citing an article and NOT expressing a personal opinion.

Of course....JB wants to give it a shot anyway.
 
Perry not requiring proffer.
 
Judge doesn't think a proffer is necessary but doesn't want testimony to be hearsay (inadmissible)
by cfnews13casey via twitter at 12:36 PM
 
CJBP saying if on cross, it comes out that his testimony is heresay, then it will all be stricken.
 
Testimony subject to being stricken with and instruction to disregard if under cross it's discovered it's based hearsay
 
JB objecting to having to pre-try his case in front of the prosecution. JA objects to regurgitating hearsay information from articles. Judge does not require proffer but if it comes up in the cross that it's entirely hearsay then it's subject to being stricken..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 221 more.
Total: 3,955 (members: 222, guests: 3,733)

Online statistics

Members online
222
Guests online
3,733
Total visitors
3,955
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,159
Messages
17,964,380
Members
228,705
Latest member
mhenderson
Back
Top