2010.12.13 JAC Response to Defense Motion to Approve Prior Travel for Experts

New Posts

CarolinaMoon said:
We all know that the JAC has their rules. I have their lists of allowable expenses. I know Nums24 knows those rules almost by heart! Why can't Baez get it down straight?

To get the airline tickets, he had to pay for them first. (Unless he made the experts pay them). At that point, he could have double-checked all rules were followed, submit his invoice with the records asap and voila! That would include other allowable expenses such as hotels and meals.

If Baez & Co. doesn't have one yet, I'm sure a decent bookkeeper could take care of all these piddlin details.
Click to expand...

Yes, the JAC has rules/policies that they follow. Another obstacle that Baez will need to overcome, is proving that these expenses were incurred by "approved" experts. In Baez's motion he states these are "approved" experts, however I'm not so certain about that.

I'd like to see a comparison of the "approved" experts from the JAC budget hearing compared to the experts on the latest Defense Witness List and the experts listed in the Motion for reimbursement for prior travel expenses. What was Petraco's "area of expertise?" Or Selma Eikelenboom's?
 
Sun said:
Yes, the JAC has rules/policies that they follow. Another obstacle that Baez will need to overcome, is proving that these expenses were incurred by "approved" experts. In Baez's motion he states these are "approved" experts, however I'm not so certain about that.

I'd like to see a comparison of the "approved" experts from the JAC budget hearing compared to the experts on the latest Defense Witness List and the experts listed in the Motion for reimbursement for prior travel expenses. What was Petraco's "area of expertise?" Or Selma Eikelenboom's?
Click to expand...

Yes and if it is international travel for Selma and her husband, Jose can know right now that will be denied. Jose just puts off the inevitable, of course the procedures weren't followed and now he will have to face that music. If these experts paid themselves, and do not get reimbursed, that could very well effect their willingness to be ongoing participants, now realizing the lack of value Jose's word has. Ouch.
 
Selma and her husband are not approved experts as far as I know. I do know Baez was told he could have ONE DNA expert. I believe they were in the US (something to do with opening a lab in Colorado).

Petraco was the hair expert who will not be testifying at trial.

To add: Baez listed Richard Eikelenboom (may testify about DNA) in his e-mail to Ashton. IF any DNA is found, he will testify to it. I hope that IF he has to testify, he already has a reason to be in the US to give testimony.

Personally, rumors and all aside, I doubt any DNA will be found and he may NOT testify about DNA.
 
JB is asking for reimbursment of travel expenses for Richard AND Selma Eikelenbloom and Dr. Petraco.

However, only Richard Eikelenbloom is listed on the defense's expert witness list. Since Selma and Dr. Petraco are not listed, does that mean the JAC does not have to pay their expenses? Or if they were on a previous defense expert witness list, does that count? I can't find a previous list to know whether they were on it or not. I know it's here somewhere I just can't put my finger on it right now.
 
Macushla said:
JB is asking for reimbursment of travel expenses for Richard AND Selma Eikelenbloom and Dr. Petraco.

However, only Richard Eikelenbloom is listed on the defense's expert witness list. Since Selma and Dr. Petraco are not listed, does that mean the JAC does not have to pay their expenses? Or if they were on a previous defense expert witness list, does that count? I can't find a previous list to know whether they were on it or not. I know it's here somewhere I just can't put my finger on it right now.
Click to expand...

Petraco was on the list IIRC but now will not testify (not an unusual situation). As for Selma, it will be interesting to find out.
 
CarolinaMoon said:
Selma and her husband are not approved experts as far as I know. I do know Baez was told he could have ONE DNA expert. I believe they were in the US (something to do with opening a lab in Colorado).

Petraco was the hair expert who will not be testifying at trial.

To add: Baez listed Richard Eikelenboom (may testify about DNA) in his e-mail to Ashton. IF any DNA is found, he will testify to it. I hope that IF he has to testify, he already has a reason to be in the US to give testimony.

Personally, rumors and all aside, I doubt any DNA will be found and he may NOT testify about DNA.
Click to expand...

http://boards.insessiontrials.com/s...-(4-14-10-TO-10-1-10)&p=14440917#post14440917

My warmest thanks go out to Pam, who transcribed the following from the JAC budget hearing.

Bio Medics,DNA, @ 20:40 JA: I believe that the witness has already been listed, a Dr. Kobilinsky. JB: No. @ 21:04 JB: Your honor, I rather not your honor unless its. CJP: Well if were going to pay for it and he is going to testify I think you need to tell me and if he is not going to testify then that is fine then we don’t need to pay for it. JB: Right now we have been using the Bio Medics laboratory, not a laboratory, consultants specifically the person, there is a group of people right now that are reviewing the evidence. However, we haven’t made the determination as to which one will testify, but I can tell you that there will be someone testifying in relation to the DNA evidence that is in this case. A good reason for that issue we just two weeks ago finished deposing the FBI and DNA analyst and we’re still getting certain bench notes and back ground data. We have got the majority of it now and I want to say the last day or two it has been shipped to DNA company. CJP: Put it this way, now Mr. Aston looks like he wants to say something. JA: No I was just going to say, the reason the documents have nothing to do with DNA they were other forensic specialist and not DNA. CJP: You only get one . JB: Understood. CJP: So you can have as many look at it, consult but we’re only paying for one. Now I know JAC is interested in why this isn’t done locally in the state of Florida, correct. JAC: that is correct your honor and as a matter of fact we are aware of several DNA’s that are right here who are used in capital cases right here throughout Florida. Apparently this is an out of state expert. JB: Yes they are an I can tell you that I figured that the extent of the work that they have all ready done are. There are numerous items to be tested for DNA and I have and I can certainly say that well over 60 percent of the work has already been done, including the review of the electro fairagrams, the different runs of DNA from both neucular and micro condial DNA. We have requested and received, from my understanding, a great majority of the bench notes all of this work has been done. To go back and have somebody locally and do it may not be cost affective. CJP: JAC. We will defer to the court on this matter. CJP: The unique thing about DNA examinations is sometimes some of the samples are consumed by DNA testing and sometimes there are not enough samples to go around. Granted for only 1
 
Does this request include expenses for AF to travel to Ohio? I ask because, not to derail the thread, but I was wondering if she had gone to Ohio yet. I was thinking maybe GAs relatives told him of her line of questioning and that could be behind his absence/(non)marital issues.
 
Sun said:
http://boards.insessiontrials.com/s...-(4-14-10-TO-10-1-10)&p=14440917#post14440917

My warmest thanks go out to Pam, who transcribed the following from the JAC budget hearing.

Bio Medics,DNA, @ 20:40 JA: I believe that the witness has already been listed, a Dr. Kobilinsky. JB: No. @ 21:04 JB: Your honor, I rather not your honor unless its. CJP: Well if were going to pay for it and he is going to testify I think you need to tell me and if he is not going to testify then that is fine then we don’t need to pay for it. JB: Right now we have been using the Bio Medics laboratory, not a laboratory, consultants specifically the person, there is a group of people right now that are reviewing the evidence. However, we haven’t made the determination as to which one will testify, but I can tell you that there will be someone testifying in relation to the DNA evidence that is in this case. A good reason for that issue we just two weeks ago finished deposing the FBI and DNA analyst and we’re still getting certain bench notes and back ground data. We have got the majority of it now and I want to say the last day or two it has been shipped to DNA company. CJP: Put it this way, now Mr. Aston looks like he wants to say something. JA: No I was just going to say, the reason the documents have nothing to do with DNA they were other forensic specialist and not DNA. CJP: You only get one . JB: Understood. CJP: So you can have as many look at it, consult but we’re only paying for one. Now I know JAC is interested in why this isn’t done locally in the state of Florida, correct. JAC: that is correct your honor and as a matter of fact we are aware of several DNA’s that are right here who are used in capital cases right here throughout Florida. Apparently this is an out of state expert. JB: Yes they are an I can tell you that I figured that the extent of the work that they have all ready done are. There are numerous items to be tested for DNA and I have and I can certainly say that well over 60 percent of the work has already been done, including the review of the electro fairagrams, the different runs of DNA from both neucular and micro condial DNA. We have requested and received, from my understanding, a great majority of the bench notes all of this work has been done. To go back and have somebody locally and do it may not be cost affective. CJP: JAC. We will defer to the court on this matter. CJP: The unique thing about DNA examinations is sometimes some of the samples are consumed by DNA testing and sometimes there are not enough samples to go around. Granted for only 1
Click to expand...

BBM: So I thought Mr. Baez said he did not have any notes??????
 
LambChop said:
BBM: So I thought Mr. Baez said he did not have any notes??????
Click to expand...

That caught your eye too! There are several nuggets of info in that earlier JAC budget hearing.
 
Indeed, Baez has bench notes from the State discovery.

Understandably, the State has much more information to turn over, it is their job to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt and Baez got tons from the experts.

All Baez has to do (so to speak) is refute the State's experts. I believe he's having trouble doing this...
 
The World According said:
Yes and if it is international travel for Selma and her husband, Jose can know right now that will be denied. Jose just puts off the inevitable, of course the procedures weren't followed and now he will have to face that music. If these experts paid themselves, and do not get reimbursed, that could very well effect their willingness to be ongoing participants, now realizing the lack of value Jose's word has. Ouch.
Click to expand...



I think his plan of attack is this:
- ask for what you know you might not get
- smirk
- take what you can get
- smirk
- complain loudly about how unfair it is if you don't get what you know you shouldn't have gotten anyway
- smirk
 
CarolinaMoon said:
Selma and her husband are not approved experts as far as I know. I do know Baez was told he could have ONE DNA expert. I believe they were in the US (something to do with opening a lab in Colorado).

Petraco was the hair expert who will not be testifying at trial.

To add: Baez listed Richard Eikelenboom (may testify about DNA) in his e-mail to Ashton. IF any DNA is found, he will testify to it. I hope that IF he has to testify, he already has a reason to be in the US to give testimony.

Personally, rumors and all aside, I doubt any DNA will be found and he may NOT testify about DNA.
Click to expand...

I agree. The Eikellenboom's wre never approved by HHJP in the JAC budget hearing. Baez stated that he was consulting with Bio Medics and that over 60% of the work was done. And, that he didn't know who would testify, but someone would.

A "hair expert" was never approved by HHJP at the JAC budget hearing.

Am I correct in my math, that only ten defense experts were approved by HHJP at the JAC budget hearing?
 
LiveLaughLuv said:
I thought JAC doesn't pay for travel expenses??? Am I confused..
Click to expand...

They won't for the defense attorneys, but may for the defense experts (if Baez has everything approved and filed correctly with the JAC). I think.
 
You mean, like if JB actually presents receipts and invoices for them?
 
Sun said:
I agree. The Eikellenboom's wre never approved by HHJP in the JAC budget hearing. Baez stated that he was consulting with Bio Medics and that over 60% of the work was done. And, that he didn't know who would testify, but someone would.

A "hair expert" was never approved by HHJP at the JAC budget hearing.

Am I correct in my math, that only ten defense experts were approved by HHJP at the JAC budget hearing?
Click to expand...

I hate to quote myself, but it appears that I posted incorrect info. According to HHJP's Order, a hair banding expert was approved.

http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...& Procedures for Future Motions 5-12-2010.pdf
 
Marshmallow said:
I think his plan of attack is this:
- ask for what you know you might not get
- smirk
- take what you can get
- smirk
- complain loudly about how unfair it is if you don't get what you know you shouldn't have gotten anyway
- smirk
Click to expand...

This is the type of thing my pop would have said "Stop that everylasting whining, before I give you something REAL to cry about!"

They just never learn
after getting Judge Perry in lieu of Judge Strickland

after being made to place the TES calls in front of TES and a retired judge

after getting not only the OCSD to indeed sit in, but also the ASA and for the entire endeavor to be videotaped

after not properly detailing the witnesses and now having to literally explain what they will say on the stand


they just never learn. You just can't make this stuff up!!!!
 
It seems to pay off though because JB always gets more.
This has gone on too long already! I can hardly believe it and don't really understand why this case in particular seems to get such special consideration. I've branched out and have looked into several other cases. This one seems like a circus case. :banghead:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 80 more.
Total: 3,550 (members: 81, guests: 3,469)

Online statistics

Members online
81
Guests online
3,469
Total visitors
3,550
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,666
Messages
17,957,282
Members
228,584
Latest member
Vjeanine
Back
Top