Originally Posted by ijam View Post
Does it matter if an expert witness varies his opinion on the stand compared to what was in his report?
Dr Spitz, on the stand, stated Dr G did shoddy work by not opening the skull b/c protocol calls for the opening...but in his report he stated "The skull had not been opened, at the first autopsy, in accordance with normal protocols as when dealing with skeletal remains"
http://www.baynews9.com/static/artic...spitz-0315.pdf[/quote]
Seems like the same opinion to me. :waitasec:
[/QUOTE
Maybe I didn't word it well..
...on the stand he stated Dr G's autopsy was shoddy work b/c Dr G
violated protocols by
NOT opening the skull...but in his report he stated it was not opened at Dr G autopsy b/c
she followed protocols when dealing with skeletal remains.
I see what you mean now. No, IMO he just worded it oddly in his report, but what he meant in the report was that the skull had not been opened, which (opening the skull) would have been in accordance with protocol. So not opening it was not in accordance with protocol.
If in the end JB loses his license to practice law, is that an automatic grounds for appeal on basis of ineffective counsel?
No, but in any event IMO he isn't going to lose his license over violating a discovery order, even 3 times.
"Ineffective assistance of counsel" does not mean you had a terrible lawyer. It means your lawyer screwed up in some SPECIFIC way that led to a SPECIFIC problem with your case.
For example, if HHJP excluded a witness due to JB's failure to disclose his opinions, Casey would have an excellent chance of getting a new trial due to ineffective assistance of counsel. This is why HHJP is so frustrated.
Could Judge Perry order that Mason take over as lead counsel for the defense since Baez is violating orders, causing delays, and is not very effective?
At this point in the trial can Jose step down ( or be made to step down) and CM take over as lead attorney ?
Thank you
No. First of all, there is really no such thing as "lead attorney." You could call DS "lead attorney" and that wouldn't mean that she would be examining any witnesses or arguing anything. But to answer what I think is really the question, HHJP cannot force the defense team to abandon its strategy (assuming they have one) regarding which attorneys will question which witnesses.
regarding the JB violation of the courts discovery orders a second time in 2 days... I gotta ask, what now?
Has HHJP been backed into a corner where he has to risk the appellate issue of excluding a witness in order to preserve the power and integrity of the court?
Have you ever seen an attorney willfully violate a court order repeatedly like this?
How would you have reacted if after Saturdays dressing down of JB, Dr. Eikenbloom showed up at your door looking to be deposed?
HHJP is backed into a corner, yes. IMO he is VERY FRUSTRATED AND ANGRY that he cannot do what he wants to do, because he KNOWS that Casey will then win one of the very rare reversals due to ineffective assistance of counsel. IMO he is going to do something when the trial is over--probably (1) a contempt hearing against JB, with whatever monetary sanctions are available by law and perhaps a week or so in jail as well, and (2) a letter to the Fla State Bar saying this guy is incompetent, disrespectful to the court, and can't follow an order to save his life.
I have never seen an attorney so oblivious to the anger of a judge that he keeps triggering that anger over and over again in the same way. But I am not convinced that JB thinks he "technically" violated the order. I think he believes he was just being clever.
ETA: I forgot to answer your last question. I would have been STUNNED beyond belief and sent the guy away!!
What is the order today about release of the Juror's names all about ?
06/20/2011
Amended Order
Barring Release of Seated Jurors' Names
Thanks for your answer.
Who knows? We haven't seen it.
Anyone know about the 8 death sentences Judge Perry Handed down - I am trying to get some information on the cases and can't find anything. Any help is appreciated. Thank you.
I don't, but I know there is a thread somewhere in this forum all about him and his career. I would search the thread titles for "Perry."
On Saturday, HHJP told JA to depose William Rodriguez at 1:00PM that afternoon and that Rodriguez would testify Monday morning. Today, JA said he hadn't had time to review the transcript of the deposition. How soon after the deposition should JA have received a transcript, given HHJP's statement that the witness would be examined Monday morning? Is this the court reporter's fault that he wasn't prepared to cross-examine the witness on schedule? How much time would JA need to review a transcript for a deposition he conducted? TIA!
JA could get a "rough" transcript of a 2-hour depo maybe on Sunday if he paid enough,
but maybe not til Monday morning. In any event, IMO when he says he needed time to go over it, he means he needs time for his
experts to go over it and tell him what should be covered on cross-examination to set things up for their rebuttal testimony.
--------------------------
BTW, I would bet $100 that the recess is for the SA to take Eikenbloom's depo and for JB to review his experts' opinions and certify to the court that he has really, truly, fully disclosed everything now.
