Defense Motion to Seal Penalty Phase Discovery Documents

Discussion in 'Caylee Anthony 2 years old' started by truckengirl, Nov 24, 2010.

  1. truckengirl

    truckengirl New Member

    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I find it funny that the Defense holds a press conference on several occassions to discuss documents that the SA has released yet when they have to give their discovery up to SA they want it sealed. I see GA and CA going under the bus and they dont want their discovery released to the public because then her parents might not stand behind her once they realize what all she as said about her life growing up and them as parents.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. The World According

    The World According Inactive

    Messages:
    3,722
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  4. QB.

    QB. New Member

    Messages:
    1,959
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What are the chances their motion will be successful?
     
  5. watergirl

    watergirl Inactive

    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Methinks it is merely an example of the following classic defense maneuver:

    a) a nanny-nanny-boo-boo at the State's latest motion,
    b) an attempt to get MORE attention than the state at the hearing,
    c) an attempt to create a diversion, or
    d) all of the above

    :waitasec:
     
  6. TallCoolOne

    TallCoolOne Registered Lurker

    Messages:
    1,405
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, considering this motion was already denied by Judge Perry, I would think their chances are slim to none, and slim's outta town!

    Can't believe their wasting the courts valuable resources to hear a motion that has already been denied.

    What a Huge Waste!!!
     
  7. QB.

    QB. New Member

    Messages:
    1,959
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :bow:

    Thanks World! That is just what I wanted to see.
     
  8. QB.

    QB. New Member

    Messages:
    1,959
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The actual title of the motion according to the docket is:
    Motion
    Defendant's; to Seal Penalty Phase Discovery Response

    and AZLawyer answered a question about its possible meaning in the legal thread.
     
  9. chefmom

    chefmom Seriously! Ancient Aliens!

    Messages:
    4,524
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks as always, TWA, for your lightening fast delivery of pertinent videos and filings! I can't wait to see how HHJP is going to react to one of his very own decisions being the subject of a request for review! Lol! Me thinks he won't be too happy! :dance:
     
  10. Intermezzo

    Intermezzo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,310
    Likes Received:
    48
    Trophy Points:
    48
    :waitasec:
    Am I reading or understanding correctly.
    This Motion is a Response???
    What are they responding too?
    Can they file a response motion to the Order Denied by the Judge?

    Hopefully we will get to read the Motion soon to clear this up.
     
  11. The World According

    The World According Inactive

    Messages:
    3,722
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    http://www.wftv.com/video/23518001/index.html
    sorry folks in my earlier post I left out Part four.

    We need to see the actual document, right now we are just guessing. At least I am.I think that the defense may have done what my high school girlfriends would have called.... got all happy over nothing.
    When the judge suggested to the defense that regarding the investigation for the penalty phase that they may want to submit requests for funds to him under seal as to not divulge their trial strategy, they may have misunderstood the scope of what he would seal.
    We learned in that hearing that Mason had a poor understanding of what has went on in the case so far. Again. He had no knowledge of the filing by Mark regarding the additional documents that were in possession of TES, many, many months ago, and that those documents have been sitting waiting to be reviewed by the defense. Also, Mason stood up and argued that the defense learned of mom and pop filling out the questionnaire for the FBI agents for the very very first time, only the day before the hearing. . Mrs. Drane-Burdick informed the judge and Mason that indeed Baez knew all about it, even commented on it during the depo!!

    Likewise, it could very well be that the defense has NOT informed Mrs. Finnell, which imo seems to be a theme, that this matter has already been argued and ruled on. SO , possibly she may want to expand that idea out further to not have to divuldge documents they plan to use in the penalty phase, or exhibits, possibly even names of witnesses; because, that would effectuate the same thing and one could easily infer the trial strategy. I need to read the actual new document to see what the extent of their request is. If they are asking for anything along the lines of what they did and the judge ruled on in May, I do not see him reversing his own well thought out, researched and specific cases he relied upon sited in his decision. View attachment Motion for POR.pdf

    I do know one thing, Mrs. Finnell did not seem happy to have to turn around and look at Cheney and Jose like don't have me up here making a fool of myself. So, unless they want the revolving door to click again, they would do well to try to start bringing her up to speed. It is bad enough when Cheney makes it obvious he has a very poor understanding of what has went on in the case.
     
  12. Intermezzo

    Intermezzo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,310
    Likes Received:
    48
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Help, Please
    I am having trouble locating the Defense Motion for Protective Order with Respect to Penalty Phase Discovery filed April 28, 2010,..(The Defense filed a few motions that day)
    I know the Motion was Denied on May 11 2010 by Judge Perry..http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...pect To Penalty Phase Discovery 5-11-2010.pdf

    I have found Motions with that in the title but when I bring it up the Motion is about the States Request for the Death Penalty..
     
  13. AZlawyer

    AZlawyer Verified Attorney

    Messages:
    7,778
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I don't think it's a response--I think it's a motion to seal a "discovery response," which probably means a response to a subpoena sent by the defense to a third party.
     
  14. The World According

    The World According Inactive

    Messages:
    3,722
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thank you so very very much. This makes a lot more sense. I was concerned we were going to get another "Bear in mind....." raised eyebrow, what part of no don't you understand talk from the judge.

    I did notice something the new lawyer mentioned that I have been meaning to ask you about. Mrs. Finnell said something to the effect of
    well, your honor, you bring a new guy on the team, and he has his own ideas
    how to maybe go at it in a different way
    (paraphrased). She was explaining why on earth Mrs. Barrett's work wasn't comprehensive as the judge had been led to believe.

    It is interesting how the judge told them they could submit the requests for payment regarding what the PI was looking into under seal; however, in his ruling he is pretty clear that once something is discovery there will be no sealing of that. That would mean that the withholding of the name would be quite temporary indeed, if they must turn over the tape of the interview, any notes they took, etc. and then the State would be entitled to depose them? I am sure it is not gray to the judge, just to me.

    Thank you for all you do here!
    Do you expect her to be asking for matters to be reconsidered if she has different arguments than , say, Andrea argued already?
     
  15. krisskross

    krisskross New Member

    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Could that be someone in Ohio?
     
  16. TigerBalm

    TigerBalm Pray for all the missing and innocent people whose

    Messages:
    6,189
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That is what I am thinking ....
     
  17. The World According

    The World According Inactive

    Messages:
    3,722
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    View attachment Motion for POR.pdf For all we know it could simply be a letter in response to a subpoena that says

    I have nothing, literally nothing to opine on this matter, why in the world am I being brought into this, please leave me alone.

    At the recent hearing Mrs. Finnell did let the judge know that indeed the defense staff had tried to talk to these relatives in Ohio, but were met with,
    "Resistance".

    Judge Perry set the defense straight that no one is going to be flying to Ohio on the taxpayers dime to show up at someone's home, univited and unannounced, not even knowing their schedule, if they are even home or on holiday, etc.
    He told them to get an appointment first, then come to him. If that is who they subpoenaed, perhaps AZ Lawyer can help us one more time, that may indicate the defense is not indeed finding them willing to talk and that explains the need for the subpoena.

    This was the recent hearing when the judge took the defense to school on fishing expeditions. This was my favorite hearing!
    Here the judge tells Ms. Finnell ( part four ) that "I don't know if they have shared this with you, but all mitigation witnesses have to be listed by November 30th, 2010. If you don't have any by the 30th of November, then you don't have any!"
    Happy Thanksgiving!!!

    http://www.wftv.com/news/25561067/detail.html

    http://www.wftv.com/video/25567059/
    http://www.wftv.com/video/25567604/
    http://www.wftv.com/video/25568340/

    heh
     
  18. nums24

    nums24 Praying for Justice!

    Messages:
    4,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I found it!

    http://www.docstoc.com/docs/35304530/Casey-Anthony-protective-order-to-death-penalty
     
  19. AZlawyer

    AZlawyer Verified Attorney

    Messages:
    7,778
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    She (Finnell) might ask for matters to be reconsidered based on different arguments, but (1) I wouldn't expect any such requests to be granted, and (2) Andrea's arguments were already pretty, um, comprehensive (i.e., envelope-pushing :rolleyes: ) already.

    I don't think this new motion will request that something be kept secret from the state, but only that it be sealed and thus not available to the public. I could be wrong, of course--I really want to see the actual document rather than speculating on what it might or might not say.

    I wonder if the defense got some documents from Ohio that they plan to use in the "Throw Momma From the Train" phase of the trial--oops I mean the penalty phase--and they don't want the Anthonys to figure out the plan and decide that maybe, just maybe, KC is not worthy of their unconditional loyalty?
     
  20. watergirl

    watergirl Inactive

    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    --respectfully snipped--
    bbm

    That would totally be in line with ICA's priorities re: privacy of mail, commissary, phone calls, etc etc.
    I sense a theme...
    I can just see her shaking her l'il fisties.

    :hopping_mad:
     
  21. beach

    beach Administrator Staff Member Administrator Moderator

    Messages:
    17,931
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    38
    -- snipped and BBM

    Is that even possible??!? :D

    Really though....anything THAT juicy just makes me salivate to see it! :rotfl:
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice