Prosecutors Ask For Hearing On How Baez Is Getting Paid

[DotsEyes]

A book or movie deal that is not contingent on the outcome of the case is not a conflict.

I fail to see how this money/payment issue is relevant to the case. KC is the one to complain that her attorney is at odds with her best interests, not the State, and she hasn't done so. Furthermore, the State is always going to maintain that KC's interests are best served with a confession, so I can not understand their concern that KC's defense in not in her best interest. She isn't the State's client and the practice of law is an art, not a science. Second guessing the trial strategy of a lawyer is very tricky business. One lawyer's approach may not match up with what another would do, but that does not mean one lawyer's approach is better than another's.

As long as the client is informed and doesn't object, there is a presumption of aquiesence on the client's part.

Apparently, JB has hit some nerves with the SA's office since they are attacking him and not his client. Typical government BS. Next, the State will audit his personal and business tax returns - this is how underhanded SA's can be. The Feds investigate any lawyer who dares to represents a criminal defendant in the Federal system. Then they bully the attorney with IRS audits, wire taps, USPS mail Inspectors - you name it.

Not exaclty justice, is it?

 

[shgrbkr]

Stupid Question: If KC had to get rid of Baez, either now or later, HOW would she afford another one? Would she be forced to use a Public Defender?

 

[californiared]

I'm calling that whoever is paying for him is the one that hooked him up with Casey to begin with. I don't believe her that she "heard his name from other inmates and told them to pass her name along".In the jailhouse visit, Lee seemed very suspicious of this too, and when he kinda questioned it she quickly goes "yeah, three of them can confirm it" Huh?? Ok who would say that..reminds me of when she said her "coworkers" Juliette and Jeff can confirm Zanny exists. Like, "look! I said other people can confirm it! So you know it's true." She knows Lee wouldn't really go and track down the three inmates and ask them about it. Also, In George's interview with LE, he also seems totally baffled as to how Casey got a lawyer without him. He told LE he knew Casey didn't have any money and he had no idea how she was paying for Jose. As soon as a person is booked, they are allowed to use the phone. It would be expected that Casey would immediately call mommy and daddy to take care of everything, just like they always have. Anyway, I have an idea who I think she called but I don't want to throw a name out there without any proof. Just saying, I think her story about just chatting with the other inmates, hearing a name, and taking care of everything herself is total bs!

 

[Gypsy Road]

I'm sure this has been posted before, but here's the Florida Bar's web address:

http://www.floridabar.org/tfb/flabarwe.nsf

I'm searching through it to find if Baez has violated any rules of conduct (relating to selling the pics to the media pay for Casey's defense). I can't find anything so far....

Maybe there aren't any (yet)? I wonder if this case will prompt the bar to rewrite or incorporate some new rules of conduct?

 

[Omachka]

Thanks, MH, that was a great post.

Thinking about this from an ethical standpoint - Baez is doing a job and deserves to be paid. Casey is on trial for her life, basically, and is entitled to the best defense she can afford. If selling photos, which are hers to sell, buys her that defense and pays Baez, is that ethically wrong?

Discuss amongst yourselves

The ethical problem is that he may be giving her bad advice or not presenting all her options to her if it may lead for more money for him. If he is making the sales deals instead of KC doing it herself, that could mean he might go the route that gets him the most money. Another problem is that if it continues it could be grounds for KC to appeal in the event she is convicted even if he is actually working in her best interest.

 

[coco puff]

A book or movie deal that is not contingent on the outcome of the case is not a conflict.

I fail to see how this money/payment issue is relevant to the case. KC is the one to complain that her attorney is at odds with her best interests, not the State, and she hasn't done so. Furthermore, the State is always going to maintain that KC's interests are best served with a confession, so I can not understand their concern that KC's defense in not in her best interest. She isn't the State's client and the practice of law is an art, not a science. Second guessing the trial strategy of a lawyer is very tricky business. One lawyer's approach may not match up with what another would do, but that does not mean one lawyer's approach is better than another's.

As long as the client is informed and doesn't object, there is a presumption of aquiesence on the client's part.

Apparently, JB has hit some nerves with the SA's office since they are attacking him and not his client. Typical government BS. Next, the State will audit his personal and business tax returns - this is how underhanded SA's can be. The Feds investigate any lawyer who dares to represents a criminal defendant in the Federal system. Then they bully the attorney with IRS audits, wire taps, USPS mail Inspectors - you name it.

Not exaclty justice, is it?

Justice for who? Caylee? Nope

 

[californiared]

A book or movie deal that is not contingent on the outcome of the case is not a conflict.

I fail to see how this money/payment issue is relevant to the case. KC is the one to complain that her attorney is at odds with her best interests, not the State, and she hasn't done so. Furthermore, the State is always going to maintain that KC's interests are best served with a confession, so I can not understand their concern that KC's defense in not in her best interest. She isn't the State's client and the practice of law is an art, not a science. Second guessing the trial strategy of a lawyer is very tricky business. One lawyer's approach may not match up with what another would do, but that does not mean one lawyer's approach is better than another's.

As long as the client is informed and doesn't object, there is a presumption of aquiesence on the client's part.

Apparently, JB has hit some nerves with the SA's office since they are attacking him and not his client. Typical government BS. Next, the State will audit his personal and business tax returns - this is how underhanded SA's can be. The Feds investigate any lawyer who dares to represents a criminal defendant in the Federal system. Then they bully the attorney with IRS audits, wire taps, USPS mail Inspectors - you name it.

Not exaclty justice, is it?

Oh wow. I honestly mean this in the most polite way possible and I agree that might apply in some cases, but I don't think you could be more wrong here. Article from Scared Monkeys:





Casey/Caylee Anthony Case: Why we SO Care How Team Baez et al, is Getting Paid

Losing his round of judicial dodge ball has defense attorney to Casey Anthony muttering something about mincemeat. “Anonymous” from the State’s attorney’s office, who apparently takes their ethical responsibilities as an officer of the court seriously, filed a complaint against Baez, citing his own spokesperson’s words. Yep, Blink, we are all up to date on that, where ya going with this? Glad you asked. The actual video of Baez stating that Black does work for “us” meaning his defense team, notwithstanding, the potential for a possible conflict of interest on the part of Baez is the 800 lb Gorilla in every law office in Florida.

I have spoken with the two highest profile attorneys in the state who wish to be anonymous for this article. They expressed their sense is that the legal community in general is outraged at the egregious lack of professionalism and mockery of Floridian Jurisprudence Baez is exhibiting with his playground antics. That isn’t the half of it. If there is ANY *whiff* of truth that Baez fees are being paid through an entertainment or rights agreement this needs to investigated immediately. What I am clueless about is why this has not been done already. I have personally been told by people that were in the house or offices when the negotiations and/or discussions were going on about this, that it is true. Get Leo on the horn, call Skip Davis, and ask THEM YOURSELF, and then call ACAP already.

Conflict of interest and YOU- The Taxpayer

“Everyone involved in this case gets body-slammed..” my dear friend Tim Miller says.

He’s right. I have, he has, OCSO has, and you all have vicariously. However, there is the potential for very serious financial fallout to the taxpayers of Florida in the midst of a recession. Warning: This will frost your shorts.


If no investigation into the possible conflict of interest of Atty Baez’s representation of Casey Anthony occurs prior to a disposition in this case, the likelihood a verdict could and would be overturned in this case is very high. Think Keyser Soze and Kobayashi. Any conceivable scenario you can come up with as a disposition to this case causing an appellate groundswell would cost the taxpayers MILLIONS.

Scenario 1: Casey is convicted. Casey fires Baez for ineffective counsel, hires Allan Dershowitz.

Dershowitz proves ethics violations. Casey wins new trial. We all start this madness over again. Cost to Florida taxpayers for a second trial: Millions. O and btw, the FDLE is considering eliminating the AMBER ALERT and Sex Offender Notification because they are strapped for cash. How would you like to house and pamper that nit-wit for another year while those programs, designed to PROTECT children, are eliminated?

Scenario 2: Casey pleads out. The day before sentencing a document is *leaked* showing proof that Baez was paid through channels that would have a vested interest in the outcome of the case. Judge says, UM, back we go, can’t accept your plea based on this pending information in need of review by the FBA, or worse. Well, we now know what the state may or may not have been in a position to prove, probably their entire case, and anyone that tells you that does not seriously compromise a successful prosecution, when there is this much cash to throw at a defense, is lying.

There are probably 3o other machinations of first- year law LSAT questions here, you get the drift.

United States v. Nebbia, 357 F.2d 303 (2d Cir. 1966)

Who bears the burden? The burden of proof in a Nebbia hearing is on Casey Anthony and his/her family to prove that the bail funds or collateral come from legitimate, honest sources.

Repeat or cut and paste after me:

Ninth Circuit State Attorney
Mr. Lawson Lamar, SA
415 N. Orange Avenue
Orlando, FL 32802

Dear State’s Attorney Lamar, I am a tax paying citizen and resident of Florida (or insert your home state).

I respectfully request that your office conduct a preliminary review, and if appropriate, open an investigation into the funding and surety of the current bond of record for defendant Casey Marie Anthony, Inmate # 08049710, oc jail. It is my understanding that the court retains discretion on whether or not to hold a Nebbia hearing, inasmuch as the state cannot automatically invoke it. However, without a motion filed from your office, I feel that a verdict in this case may be at risk for being set aside or appellate reversal.

Sincerely,
You

For anyone like me, when the ole ADD kicks in, what I am trying to say, in the most subtle, but call to action kind a way: The investigation isn’t over at arrest. The Nebbia hearing, largely a hearing to determine a lawful source of bond funds, is wrought with opportunities to gather information on the defendant’s income. The Prosecutors in this case, should they be granted their motion, are in a position of opportunity to educate the court about the defendant.




So, not only is this extremely important, but it should have been done a long time ago. And I think the prosecution has actually been incredibly professional towards Baez, considering um his character. I really am shocked you think the prosecution is taking a cheap shot at Baez, considering all the rediculous motions he has filed. Oh well, I hope the article above explains everything.

 

[JSR]

A book or movie deal that is not contingent on the outcome of the case is not a conflict.

I fail to see how this money/payment issue is relevant to the case. KC is the one to complain that her attorney is at odds with her best interests, not the State, and she hasn't done so. Furthermore, the State is always going to maintain that KC's interests are best served with a confession, so I can not understand their concern that KC's defense in not in her best interest. She isn't the State's client and the practice of law is an art, not a science. Second guessing the trial strategy of a lawyer is very tricky business. One lawyer's approach may not match up with what another would do, but that does not mean one lawyer's approach is better than another's.

As long as the client is informed and doesn't object, there is a presumption of aquiesence on the client's part.

Apparently, JB has hit some nerves with the SA's office since they are attacking him and not his client. Typical government BS. Next, the State will audit his personal and business tax returns - this is how underhanded SA's can be. The Feds investigate any lawyer who dares to represents a criminal defendant in the Federal system. Then they bully the attorney with IRS audits, wire taps, USPS mail Inspectors - you name it.

Not exaclty justice, is it?

A book or movie deal if contracted via Baez IS a conflict of interest. Baez is most certainly being "paid" on a contingency basis. Casey has no viable assets and I doubt she had even enough for a retainer fee.

If Baez is paying for her other 7 other attorneys and numerous experts by monies made off a future movie or book deal that is a problem. That is most certainly a conflict of interest, which could be argued cannot in good faith be waived. If this turns out to be true (and I have the personal opinion it is) then an appellate court would grant Ms. Anthony a new trial based on ineffective counsel and a conflict of interest on Mr. Baez's part. Wherein the argument is that Mr. Baez's "payout" wouldn't be as large if she pleas out. Ms. Anthony could argue that she wasn't adequately informed what her options were because Mr. Baez wanted to go to full trial so that the movie or book would be more interesting.

Point blank this is NOT the State trying to be a bully. The State is only interested in Casey wasting more of the taxpayers money. I believe like everyone else that Casey has the right to a fair trial. But she doesn't have the right to get a "freebie" and pay for her attorneys via unethical means which would allow her to get another trial. An inquiry is appropriate in this situation. It doesn't mean her finances should be open to the public but the State and the Judge have a right to know if Baez's unethical behavior is jeopardizing the validity of a future verdict.

 

[JSR]

Stupid Question: If KC had to get rid of Baez, either now or later, HOW would she afford another one? Would she be forced to use a Public Defender?

If she cannot afford an attorney then yes a public defender would be provided for her. Or at some point if she claims she has no money and she still has Baez and her litany of experts the FL taxpayers could be forced to pay their fees (up to a certain amount). This is what happened out here in CA with Scott Peterson. The CA taxpayers had to pay a portion of Geragos' fee after Scotty's parents ran out of money.

 

[lawlady84]

A book or movie deal that is not contingent on the outcome of the case is not a conflict.

I fail to see how this money/payment issue is relevant to the case. KC is the one to complain that her attorney is at odds with her best interests, not the State, and she hasn't done so. Furthermore, the State is always going to maintain that KC's interests are best served with a confession, so I can not understand their concern that KC's defense in not in her best interest. She isn't the State's client and the practice of law is an art, not a science. Second guessing the trial strategy of a lawyer is very tricky business. One lawyer's approach may not match up with what another would do, but that does not mean one lawyer's approach is better than another's.

As long as the client is informed and doesn't object, there is a presumption of aquiesence on the client's part.

Apparently, JB has hit some nerves with the SA's office since they are attacking him and not his client. Typical government BS. Next, the State will audit his personal and business tax returns - this is how underhanded SA's can be. The Feds investigate any lawyer who dares to represents a criminal defendant in the Federal system. Then they bully the attorney with IRS audits, wire taps, USPS mail Inspectors - you name it.

Not exaclty justice, is it?

Those are some wild generalizations my friend.

First, there is another huge potential conflict no one seems to be picking up. KC does not have income. KC lived off her parents, and her financial records were reviewed by OCSO and I'm going to assume the FBI during the fraud investigation. We all know she had no money; she had to steal. She cannot afford the going rate of 8 lawyers, and world-renown expert witnesses. Expert witnesses go for around $1,600 a day. Small-time Florida lawyers probably bill at $300 an hour. If someone knows the exact billing rate, please correct me, but 2nd year NYC associates at wall street firms bill out at $400 an hour - and I'm assuming FL should be around then. Her big expert defense attorneys? Probably closer to $700 an hour. I'm not exaggerating.

Someone is paying between $500,000 and $1,000,000 for Casey's defense. WHO is that close to Casey that they would pay $1,000,000 on her behalf? More importantly, WHY? If Casey is (humor me for a minute) covering for someone, the prosecution has more than a right - but a duty - to investigate that angle. Supplying a defendant with a million dollar defense is a pretty good payment for taking the fall. Not saying this happened, but the prosecution SHOULD look into this. Even if JB did nothing wrong, they should know at least if this is coming from a private person.

Second, as some of you have said, Casey is isolated. JB is her contact with the outside world. She doesn't even speak to LE, her family, friends, other inmates. Having ONE lawyer who is constantly in the spotlight and getting FREE ADVERTISING nationwide is suspect. How do we know that JB is not exploiting Casey? I seriously, seriously doubt she has read every contract he has signed - I also doubt that she has the intelligence and schooling to understand just how much money and how little worth some of the expert witnesses he has hired will give her.

It is totally reasonable for the judge to review this to make sure there is no fraud.

I strenuously object to your characterization of State Attorney's as somehow underhanded. That's just unfair. And the FBI has not badgered any criminal defense attorney I have worked with or for. In fact, many top white collar criminal defense attorneys have worked for the Attorney General. Personally, many of the best partners at my firm came from the SEC's criminal enforcement division. And we often loan associates to the SDNY prosecutor. And nope, there have been no wire taps, IRS audits, etc. If they actually did that, you'd think they'd do that to Enron's criminal defense attorneys... Sorry, but I don't think spreading false information about State Attorneys is really useful.

PLUS- no one questioned where OJ's "dream team" came from because...HE WAS RICH! And could pay for them! The problems arise when someone does not physically have the income to pay! If I showed up to work in a porsche instead of taking the subway, I'd get a ton of questions because everyone knows my income goes directly to law school loans ha

 

[trixi491]

I remember there being at least 2 JonBenet Ramsey movies on TV and I'm pretty sure the Ramsey's didn't get compensated. I don't understand the whole 'selling the rights' thing..can't movies be made without having to pay them?

 

[Gypsy Road]

Lawlady, I know for a fact that some defense attorneys in my area (north Florida) charge $400.00 - $450.00 PER HOUR - not per day.

 

[shgrbkr]

If she cannot afford an attorney then yes a public defender would be provided for her. Or at some point if she claims she has no money and she still has Baez and her litany of experts the FL taxpayers could be forced to pay their fees (up to a certain amount). This is what happened out here in CA with Scott Peterson. The CA taxpayers had to pay a portion of Geragos' fee after Scotty's parents ran out of money.

I had no idea the taxpayers would have to pick up the remaining dream team tab after her resources ran out.
Regarding whether or not KC or JB is making the decisions on what to sell/not sell, even if KC is "signing" for sales or whatever, I'm sure she's taking JB's advice on it so ultimately he would still be in control of it.

Another stupid question: CAN any of the lawyers/experts walk off the team if there are no resources to pay them, and if so, does this include the lead attorney? Would they really do that?

 

[lawlady84]

I'm sure this has been posted before, but here's the Florida Bar's web address:

http://www.floridabar.org/tfb/flabarwe.nsf

I'm searching through it to find if Baez has violated any rules of conduct (relating to selling the pics to the media pay for Casey's defense). I can't find anything so far....

Maybe there aren't any (yet)? I wonder if this case will prompt the bar to rewrite or incorporate some new rules of conduct?

I was looking through the rules too, didn't see anything directly. But if JB sold the pictures and didn't disclose to KC how much he got or where the money was going, that's a problem. Or if he didn't explain to her why she needs 8 attorneys or misrepresented his hiring them, that's also a problem.

The biggest problem is that as a lawyer, you are a representative and counselor of your client- it's not quite an agency relationship, but you generally have to do what your client says within certain limits. You can advise them and advise them, but if they want to do something you don't agree with - like testify, talk to LE, confess, etc. - you have to let them do what they want.

Here, it sort of looks like that the best thing for KC would have been to take a plea deal in July. For JB, the longer this goes on and the more media attention he gets, the more he is paid - both thru hourly billing, media deals, etc. JB would ethically have an obligation to do the BEST thing for KC, not even considering his own interests.

 

[Gaia713]

Good! This definitely needs to be looked into. We've been asking how Casey is paying for things for a long time.

I agree totally. HE has a destitute client, with a destitute family, yet he is hiring every high-priced expert in the USA. I know Henry Lee requires a $300,000 just to testify. I don't for a minute believe that everyone in this case is working for free or for publicity. These high-priced experts DON'Twork for free.

There is also an issue in my book that early on when Cindy was denying any movie deals, that Baez was NEGOTIATING for a movie deal then.

He claims also to be consulting with an ethics attorney. I don't his Baez, the same man holding Casey's hand, and hugging her inappropriately in the jail, even knows WHAT ethics are.

Some might be doing it for free, but certainly not ALL of them. Famous experts survive on what they are PAID. They become famous for being "high priced." There's something wrong in the Baez office. It's not like he's a Gerry Spence, who has contadcts with the high profile experts. He's a low-level atty with a poor record of defending drunks and lying in his bio. Is this someone that a high-profile expert would want to be assoicated with? I don't think so.

 

[JSR]

Those are some wild generalizations my friend.

First, there is another huge potential conflict no one seems to be picking up. KC does not have income. KC lived off her parents, and her financial records were reviewed by OCSO and I'm going to assume the FBI during the fraud investigation. We all know she had no money; she had to steal. She cannot afford the going rate of 8 lawyers, and world-renown expert witnesses. Expert witnesses go for around $1,600 a day. Small-time Florida lawyers probably bill at $300 a day. If someone knows the exact billing rate, please correct me, but 2nd year NYC associates at wall street firms bill out at $400 an hour - and I'm assuming FL should be around then. Her big expert defense attorneys? Probably closer to $700 an hour. I'm not exaggerating.

You are NOT exaggerating my friend, that sounds about right. Although many expert witnesses aren't paid on a daily salary but a general lump sum. Or sometimes by conducting just ONE test. I worked with an expert witness that was paid $250,000.00 to conduct just one test. Just one, which took only 4 days. The test didn't work to our clients favor but we still had to pay the expert none the less.

 

[Gaia713]

Lawlady, I know for a fact that some defense attorneys in my area (north Florida) charge $400.00 - $450.00 PER HOUR - not per day.

I think, if you would look further, you would find they make evenmore for time spent IN COURT.

Even at a paltry $300 a hour, Casey is into Baez for some pretty big bucks.

Not to mention that SOMEONE has to pick up the tab for expenses for these experts - hotels, etc airplane trips to FL.

 

[shgrbkr]

It certainly has seemed odd that JB kept saying "when the truth comes out...." now that Caylee's remains have been found, bring it on, but then, that would mean no more milking of the cow. JMO.

 

[lawlady84]

Lawlady, I know for a fact that some defense attorneys in my area (north Florida) charge $400.00 - $450.00 PER HOUR - not per day.

Oops yeah that's what I meant! I edited my post. Thanks!

 

[JSR]

I had no idea the taxpayers would have to pick up the remaining dream team tab after her resources ran out.
Regarding whether or not KC or JB is making the decisions on what to sell/not sell, even if KC is "signing" for sales or whatever, I'm sure she's taking JB's advice on it so ultimately he would still be in control of it.

Another stupid question: CAN any of the lawyers/experts walk off the team if there are no resources to pay them, and if so, does this include the lead attorney? Would they really do that?

Yes, if one of the attorneys wish to remove themselves as an attorney of record they need to reqest the judge's permission. If granted, they simply are no longer apart of the team.