- Oct 1, 2008
- Reaction score
That answers a related question in the back of my mind.
So to clarify, it cannot be argued that an admission contained within an attorney's openining statement on behalf of their client binds the client? As in how an agent binds his principal.
Correct. What an attorney says in the opening statement does not bind his client.
I'm so confused. What "unofficial testimony" do you mean? Are you talking about testimony that took place at trial? I didn't watch most of the trial videos but I don't remember seeing any summaries that included this line of questioning.
It sounds like you're suggesting that the evidence might support an allegation that Cindy molested Casey and Caylee? If so, I don't understand what you mean by "the defendants allegations that he or she had molested her child before it died." Casey never alleged (and even JB never alleged) that anyone had molested Caylee before she died. And assuming she had, what would that have to do with anything? What's the legal question here? :waitasec:
if you get an admission by someone on the stand- can it then be used as testimony at another time? is it "on the record"
like is it "official?" because it's not hearsay.
I knowCasey said her dad did and JB did too. but it wasn't allowed in.
JB could not speak about it.
MOTHERS ARE VERY UNDER REPORTED-
it really seemed like Linda was headed
down that road i wasn't sure.
I know I had been told that I would at least report it.
is that making any sense?
not can she report it but
could it be used to brings charges?
Sure, if you get an admission from someone on the stand, it can be used against them at a later time. It is on the record. It is official. It is ALSO hearsay but would become non-hearsay if used to impeach the person's later testimony down the road.
Sexual abuse evidence, if any had existed, would have been "allowed in." JB didn't present any such evidence, so he wasn't allowed to talk about it in closing argument. He would have been allowed to present the evidence, but he didn't have any.
What you quoted in your earlier post about Cindy certainly would not be enough to bring charges of sexual abuse against Cindy, if that's what you're asking.
Why are jurors allowed to profit off of jury duty?
Excellent question and one I have been asking myself all day.
JA has said State will go after her for some monies. Not sure if it happens or not but would be nice. lol
I know she was sentenced to 412 days for check fraud. Is she serving that currently or did she get time served when sentenced? I thought she could still serve 2.5 years tomorrow but I've seen it reported she's out or 1 year due to 3 served. Any idea in regards to 412 days?
She had already served that time before she was sentenced for the check fraud charges on January 25, 2010. She has served 1.5 years since then. Technically she could get another 2.5 tomorrow, but HHJP would have to give her the max.