More Catching Up With The Casey Anthony Murder Trial

UPDATES!

December 7, 2010

WESH has just published an article which discusses two documents.

JAC RESPONSE to request for more PI hours. The gist of the response is that, while they take no position on whether or not they should be granted, they indicate that the hours must be "reasonable and necessary".

The article also included a link to the DNA Testing Stipulations.

December 8, 2010

Muzikman has just provided us with the defense Motion asking for a taphonomy expert. Again, Baez takes a few cheap shots at Jeff Ashton. Let's see, who has more credibility?

In addition, Muzikman has supplied us with a copy of the Notice of In Camera Inspection which claims that the experts notes are all work product. No surprise here!

*************************************

It’s the busy season of the year. Thanksgiving has passed and it’s been time to get Christmas gifts ready to be mailed far and wide. In between, I’ve been checking out the motions in the case and printing them out for such emergencies when I want to use them and my cable is down. Today is the day!

Here’s a recap of what’s gone on lately and on the defense’s part, it’s mostly about the money!

Sometime in late November, Jose Baez again filed a motion for an expert in taphonomy to add to his expert witness list. This request had been denied previously without prejudice by Judge Perry.

November 19, 2010

States' Assistant Attorney Jeff Ashton filed his Motion To Compel Additional Discovery. While not granted the first four parts, Judge Perry did order the defense to turn over notes taken by the experts which were not work product as well as photographs and video of the inspection.
He also told the defense to tell the prosecution by Friday, December 3, the areas of expertise of the witnesses and information about what they would be testifying about.

November 29, 2010

Jose Baez files a Motion For Additional Hours Of Investigation. As the reason he needs the hours, he states that, “the defense is respectfully requesting additional hours for investigative servies rendered in-state in order to continue investigating the evidence alleged in the State’s Discovery, which continues to be on-going.” My question is, having spent the additional 60 hours given him on October 29th, has he shown the judge how those hours were used? I noticed that he didn’t ask for a specific amount of time either, seemingly throwing himself on the court’s mercy.

On the same day, he filed a Motion To Approve Prior Travel Of Out Of State Experts. This hearkens back to the examination of evidence by the defense experts. In order to get these expenses paid, Baez needs a court order.

November 30, 2010

Right on time, the defense filed it’s list of expert witnesses. The list included Dr. Henry Lee, Dr. Werner Spitz, Dr. Kathy Reichs, Dr. Jane H Bock, Dr. Tim Huntington, Dr. Scott Fairgrieve, Dr. Kenneth Furton, Dr. Barry Logan, Dr. John Leeson, Dr. William Rodriguez, Richard Eikelenboom, Michael O’Kelly, and Dr. Michael Freeman.

The same day, the JAC filed a Response about the expert in taphonomy. It mentioned a short Wikipedia definition, “... the study of decaying organisms over time and how they become fossilized (if they do).”

According to the motion”

The JAC takes no position on whether Defendant is entitled to the requested expert services, however, the defense must show a particularized need for this experts. JAC notes that the defense already has a panoply of experts, among them a preeminent forensic anthropologist and a showing must be made that these defense experts are unable to testify in this matter.

December 1, 2010

Ann Finnell noticed the media in her Amended Notice of Hearing. Now, her motion to seal the names of mitigation witnesses can be heard on December 20, at 1:30 PM.

This same day, the defense filed yet another money motion. Remember, at the November 29th hearing, Cheney Mason explained that they had thought that the transcription service for the Tennessee depositions would charge JAC rates. Seems he was wrong.

In his Defendant’s Motion To Authorize And Compel Preparation Of Transcripts, he asks the judge to authorize an expenditure of $860.70.

As to his reasons for being granted the difference, Mason points out that the transcripts are crucial for the Frye hearings and said transcriptions will only be available two weeks after full payment. He also whined that while the prosecutors and their scientific adviser traveled to Knoxville on the State, he and Jose Baez had to pay for their own expenses. He also includes a long affidavit by his secretary as to her dealings with the transcription firm.

Quite frankly, I agree with Judge Perry on this issue. When planning a major expense at the JAC budgetary limits, GET IT IN WRITING. An unofficial "okey-dokey" won’t stand up in a court of law.

Needless to say, I agree with Muzikman, who provided most of these documents, this is a “must read”.

Assistant State’s Attorney Jeff Ashton was the next to file a motion on this day. In his Motion For Clarification/To Compel Compliance With Order For Additional Discovery, he argues that Jose Baez’ so-called “compliance” with the judge’s order to compel this discovery, he stated at the November 29th hearing that the defense, “shall include the subject matter as to what the experts will testify to and the area of expertise for each expert.”

Instead, Baez sent the list of witnesses presented to the court with little, snide annotations such as,

Dr. Henry Lee: (Criminalist: He inspected the car and was at the evidence inspection and inspected the scene ALL OF WHICH YOU ALREADY KNOW)

Dr. Jane H. Bock (Botany: Reviewed Hall’s report and inspected the scene and will testify about BOTANY, PLEASE TELL ME YOU KNEW THIS)

Dr. William Rodriguez (Anthropologist/Taphonomy: You know what he will testify to as you objected to it at the hearing and have read my motion)

Ashton also included a series of e-mails between him and Baez. Ashton did redact some of the text as non-relevant (It must be pretty good!). The best Baez can tell Ashton is to give him a call if he has a question. It seems that Baez wants absolutely NOTHING in writing.

This motion is another MUST READ!

December 3

Judge Perry published his Order based on decisions he made at the November 29th hearing.

As far as the filings in the case go, the defense is clearly about the money. I ardently hope that Judge Perry doesn't give the defense a penny extra for those transcriptions. It’s about time Baez got hit in the pocketbook for not following the rules. He’s the only one of the lawyers who made a dime on the case anyway.

In terms of the reciprocal discovery, I trust John Ashton will be able to get the answers he needs from the defense and the experts. Baez is going to make it as difficult as possible to keep his "defense" a secret. However, there is no way Judge Perry will allow a trial by ambush.

Any guesses as to what will happen next?