Legal Questions for our Verified Lawyers #4

Kimster

Former Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
58,137
Reaction score
349
Website
www.ufo2001.com
***ASK A QUESTION***NO DISCUSSIONS!!!***

Our fantastic team of verified attorneys will answer for you!

Here's a list of those who are verified to answer:

AZLawyer
BG4pip
Cybersleuth58
Desquire
Gitana1
Gwenabob
Hell's Belle
Katprint
Miracleshappen
nancy botwin
Rhornsby
Themis
RLynne
GermanePoints
Just A Lawyer
gritguy
SoCalSleuth
ChinaCat67
beachbumming
patriciah


(I think this list is up-to-date. If you are verified and not on here, please PM any moderator. :tyou:)

Link to lawyer thread #3: [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=135704"]Legal Questions for our VERIFIED Lawyers #3 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
 

Wagara

Wishin' and hopin’ and thinkin’ and prayin’...
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
991
Reaction score
22
Not sure what was asked last but I'll start with this.

In your opinion, in the eyes of HHJP, what has the prosecution table done that he considers game-playing?

Thanks for all you do!
 

bayouland

New Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
1,514
Reaction score
0
As an attorney would you feel at all confident about getting an aquittal or mistrial?
 

AZlawyer

Verified Attorney
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
7,884
Reaction score
2,129
Not sure what was asked last but I'll start with this.

In your opinion, in the eyes of HHJP, what has the prosecution table done that he considers game-playing?

Thanks for all you do!

IMO he doesn't really have any major problem with the SA but is being careful to include them in any comments so that the appellate court can look at the transcript and say "no bias here." :)

It is clear that the reason JA didn't take some expert depos was because he did not want to give the experts the chance to expand on their crappy reports. IMO this is not gamesplaying but strategy and perfectly OK.
 

uklaw

New Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
785
Reaction score
0
Excerpt from "Friday's Distraction: Rakofsky vs. the Internet"

Wait, I know what you are thinking - voir dire is not transcribed or 'taken down' as we call transcription in the south. I will tell you that in each of my trials I do have voir dire transcribed so that if there is any issue regarding a civil Batson claim I don't leave it up to memory or handwritten notes. (Tip: I know, it costs more to do it, but transcribe jury selection. It has saved me twice.)

http://bit.ly/myQdNg

QUESTION: Is it true that voir dire/jury selection is not transcribed by a court report usually or is that just for civil trials?
 

LolaMoon08

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
7,138
Reaction score
238

I have some additional questions for this answer.

Do you think the defenses own expert witnesses have helped or hurt their case?

Do you think that some of the testimony is bordering on insulting the jury's intelligence and will that play a role with the jury when deliberating? It is evidence after all... insulting as it may be.

As of right now... what do you think the jury will find Casey guilty of?? First Degree or a lesser charge?
 

Beccaboo

New Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2011
Messages
613
Reaction score
0
Is it possible for Jose Baez to be disbarred due to his continued disregard for court orders? Also doesn't Jose's behavior effect the rest of the "team" are they not equally as responsible? TIA :)
 

okiedokietoo

New Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
3,399
Reaction score
3
Hi and Thank you.
Ok I am still looking for loopholes lol
According to this website: (and yes I realize it is not case law legal site but lost other link - figure you all Attorney's would know if this info is true or not)
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/opening+statement
The Supreme Court has characterized an opening statement as "ordinarily intended to do no more than to inform the jury in a general way of the nature of the action and defense so that they may better be prepared to understand the evidence" (Best v. District of Columbia, 291 U.S. 411, 54 S. Ct. 487, 78 L. Ed. 882 [1934]).
AND
The attorney must reasonably believe that the matters stated will be supported by the evidence. In addition, statements that are purely argumentative are not proper during opening statements. An attorney may not assert personal opinions, comment about the evidence, or comment about the credibility of a witness during an opening statement.
(don't want to over quote the article)
Why do you think JA did not object when (bolded ) JB made the comments about Mr. Kronk (something about morally corrupt individual) . Seems like it was something he could have objected to.
 

AZlawyer

Verified Attorney
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
7,884
Reaction score
2,129
Excerpt from "Friday's Distraction: Rakofsky vs. the Internet"

QUESTION: Is it true that voir dire/jury selection is not transcribed by a court report usually or is that just for civil trials?

I do civil trials and the voir dire is always transcribed. I know it is transcribed on a regular basis in criminal trials in AZ as well, because I have read criminal transcripts for appeals.

And in this case, I'm quite sure it was transcribed.

I have some additional questions for this answer.

Do you think the defenses own expert witnesses have helped or hurt their case?

Do you think that some of the testimony is bordering on insulting the jury's intelligence and will that play a role with the jury when deliberating? It is evidence after all... insulting as it may be.

As of right now... what do you think the jury will find Casey guilty of?? First Degree or a lesser charge?

Thus far, the defense experts have not helped them, and yes, some of it is just silly and will taint the jury's opinion of the entire defense.

Still thinking aggravated manslaughter.

Is it possible for Jose Baez to be disbarred due to his continued disregard for court orders? Also doesn't Jose's behavior effect the rest of the "team" are they not equally as responsible? TIA :)

Not yet. But if he keeps going down this path, maybe.

The "team" is not necessarily equally responsible for everything that happens. The judge has discretion to sanction individual attorneys.
 

AZlawyer

Verified Attorney
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
7,884
Reaction score
2,129
Hi and Thank you.
Ok I am still looking for loopholes lol
According to this website: (and yes I realize it is not case law legal site but lost other link - figure you all Attorney's would know if this info is true or not)
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/opening+statement
The Supreme Court has characterized an opening statement as "ordinarily intended to do no more than to inform the jury in a general way of the nature of the action and defense so that they may better be prepared to understand the evidence" (Best v. District of Columbia, 291 U.S. 411, 54 S. Ct. 487, 78 L. Ed. 882 [1934]).
AND
The attorney must reasonably believe that the matters stated will be supported by the evidence. In addition, statements that are purely argumentative are not proper during opening statements. An attorney may not assert personal opinions, comment about the evidence, or comment about the credibility of a witness during an opening statement.
(don't want to over quote the article)
Why do you think JA did not object when (bolded ) JB made the comments about Mr. Kronk (something about morally corrupt individual) . Seems like it was something he could have objected to.

"Credibility" means whether or not someone is likely to lie. JB was saying that Kronk stole and moved a dead body, but not that he was a liar lol.

But as a general rule judges do not like objections during opening and closing, so attorneys tend to restrain themselves unless it is something really important.
 

Shadow5618

New Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2008
Messages
212
Reaction score
0
When HHJP was lecturing Baez today he mentioned that he didn't want to "...impose the ultimate sanction". What is the ultimate sanction? A mistrial? A report to the FL Bar? Can HHJP recommend disbarment? TIA!
 

AZlawyer

Verified Attorney
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
7,884
Reaction score
2,129
When HHJP was lecturing Baez today he mentioned that he didn't want to "...impose the ultimate sanction". What is the ultimate sanction? A mistrial? A report to the FL Bar? Can HHJP recommend disbarment? TIA!

He just meant excluding the witness. ;)
 

Wholehearted

New Member
Joined
May 19, 2011
Messages
721
Reaction score
1
It seems like though there are 5 lawyers on the DT, only JB is taking the field (though CM has done some cross-ex). Why, in your opinion, are the other lawyers not taking up the slack with JB's poor performance?
 

AZlawyer

Verified Attorney
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
7,884
Reaction score
2,129
It seems like though there are 5 lawyers on the DT, only JB is taking the field (though CM has done some cross-ex). Why, in your opinion, are the other lawyers not taking up the slack with JB's poor performance?

I have no idea. Perhaps they do not care about their reputations or their client or their professional obligations.
 

DesSands

Author I'd die for you & White Satin
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
780
Reaction score
0
IMO he doesn't really have any major problem with the SA but is being careful to include them in any comments so that the appellate court can look at the transcript and say "no bias here." :)

It is clear that the reason JA didn't take some expert depos was because he did not want to give the experts the chance to expand on their crappy reports. IMO this is not gamesplaying but strategy and perfectly OK.

Ah, Thank you AZ, you're so smart. It bothered me to no end that JB has been pulling all kinds of stunts and poor JA comments that he needed more time and he caught double tooth picks. :woohoo:
 

DesSands

Author I'd die for you & White Satin
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
780
Reaction score
0
I asked this question and another attorney answered me but I don't think I was clear in what I wanted to know, since we're not lawyers alot of the technical is difficult to understand.
If she's convicted and this goes to appeal, can she be aquitted? The other attorney said no, she would be retried. Outside of being found not guilty by the jury, is there any other way she can be aquitted after conviction? Finally, I figured out the correct way to ask this since I'm terrified that she might be due to the complexities of this case. Most of what ICA brought on herself and JB helping to sink her ship further. :waitasec:
 

burningsky22

New Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
410
Reaction score
3
big lurker in this thread, and ty to the lawyers who are taking their time to answer our many questions.

my question is how does the attorney-client privilege work? i know it is for a life time and assume it extends to when the lawyer is no longer practicing. is this correct? (i can't find the answer with google searches.

tia.
 

AZlawyer

Verified Attorney
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
7,884
Reaction score
2,129
I asked this question and another attorney answered me but I don't think I was clear in what I wanted to know, since we're not lawyers alot of the technical is difficult to understand.
If she's convicted and this goes to appeal, can she be aquitted? The other attorney said no, she would be retried. Outside of being found not guilty by the jury, is there any other way she can be aquitted after conviction? Finally, I figured out the correct way to ask this since I'm terrified that she might be due to the complexities of this case. Most of what ICA brought on herself and JB helping to sink her ship further. :waitasec:

If she is convicted and the conviction is reversed on appeal, she would be retried. The only thing that would prevent retrial that I can think of is a mistrial that is the SA's fault. She still wouldn't be "acquitted" in that case, but she couldn't be retried.

big lurker in this thread, and ty to the lawyers who are taking their time to answer our many questions.

my question is how does the attorney-client privilege work? i know it is for a life time and assume it extends to when the lawyer is no longer practicing. is this correct? (i can't find the answer with google searches.

tia.

Sure, it would continue even if the lawyer were no longer practicing. And I believe in most jurisdictions it continues even after the client's death.
 

krkrjx

The answer is blowin' in the wind.
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
11,398
Reaction score
30,797
If this trial ends in a hung jury, what happens next? Is it a do-over starting from scratch: New jury selection, re-entering all the evidence into the record, etc. Would there be a whole new set of pre-trial hearings?

The new trial would no doubt sport Baez for the defense but would it likely be the same prosecution team? IMO it would be extremely difficult to seat a new jury and a new trial would be just as likely to be the same kind of circus this one is leaning toward so what are the odds of the state opting to not retry or at least taking the DP off the table if they do retry?
 
Top