This morning, Jose Baez and Cheney Mason held a press conference at Baez' Kissimmee office to announce two new additions to the criminal defense team and a new civil attorney for Casey Anthony.
New to the team are Dorothy Sims, an Ocala attorney who will work in the questioning of scientific experts and Ann Finnell, of Jacksonville, a death penalty expert.
It would seem that the defense team is back up to steam with Sims taking the role of former defense attorney Todd Macaluso and Finnell that of Andrea Lyon.
Charles Green of Orlando is the new civil attorney for the Zenaida Gonzalez lawsuit. He replaces Jonathan Kasen of Fort Lauderdale. The new attorneys will be working pro bono.
With the newly configured defense team in place, let's hope that the defense will have an easier go of completing their depositions on time and be well prepared for the trial in May. Casey has the right to a competent defense in her death-penalty case. Let's hope there is no more need to change the team at this point.
TES Document Filed
Dated September 9, 2009, the Joint Stipulation Regarding Defense Review Of The Documents In The Possession Of Texas Equusearch lays out an agreement between TES and the defense concerning the review of the thousands of documents relating to the searchers who worked through the heat and discomfort to try and find Caylee Anthony. Judge Perry executed his order on September 11, and this is the final word on the process.
I hope that this is the last we hear of this entire issue and the process goes smoothly.
Signed by Cheney Mason and Mark NeJame, the document provides a strict outline for the process. Hmmm... it was signed in Baez office, but Baez didn't sign it?
The stipulation begins by briefly reviewing the situation with the searchers. The defense wants to know the ground conditions at the location where Caylee's remains were found. They had been previously given the names of 32 searchers who had been within 50 yards of that spot.
The defense wanted to contact other searchers to see if they had been in that area on their own or with TES. To protect the privacy of the searchers, the following procedures have been agreed to.
If the defense finds a searcher they wish to question, they will be permitted to call them in the presence of the TES representative and counsel as well as the special magistrate. They will only be permitted to ask the following questions:
A TES representative will be present at all times and TES counsel is also permitted to be there. The documents will be brought to the location (probably somewhere in the courthouse) each day and removed at the end of each day by the TES representative.
1. If such a search occurred, when did the search occur, 2. If such a search occurred, was it a part of TES or done independently, 3. If such a search occurred, who was involved in the search with them, 4. If such a search occurred, an inquiry would be made as to what was observed and what occurred during the search at or near the Suburban Drive area.
If the defense feels that more information is needed for a searcher after the call, they will receive the form. As with previous agreements, the names of the searchers will be kept confidential.
The rationale for this change is clearly explained in the document.
This procedure eliminates the need of note taking by the defense, other than identifying those searchers who were unable to be reached for further follow up, unless a call identifies a searcher who has relevant information concerning anyone who has information as to who may have searched the Suburban Drive area. If a searcher indicates they were not in the Suburban Drive area then their information shall not be released further to the Defense and the Defense is not permitted to secure or leave with any of their information.
So, that being apparently settled, I'd like to add some of my own opinion about this phone call business.
I taught secondary level students for over thirty years and one of my favorite duties was "phone duty". I would be given a list of students who hadn't shown up at school and who hadn't had a parent call in an absence. For an hour every day, I'd be on the phone, calling the parents of these students to let them know their child was absent. I'd call the home phone number first. If I was lucky, the student would answer the phone and admit they were "skipping". Much of the time, there would be no answer. Second on the list would be the workplace of a parent. Third would be the other parent, if available. I would have two to three numbers for every student and they all lived within a specific area. 90% of the time, it would take two or three calls to contact someone. In the other 10%, no contact could be made.
My average number of contacts per hour was about 10. Now, the TES documents will most likely have phone numbers, and people do work. With approximately 4,000 searchers... and assuming the defense will try to contact them all, what are the odds? And of those that they contact, how many will say they searched Suburban Drive? It's a needle in a haystack situation!
The battle over the TES records has reached new heights as George and Cindy Anthony's latest attorney, Brad Conway resigned as of their attorney. This latest development comes after a heated trading of accusations between Mark NeJame, TES counsel and Jose Baez, Casey Anthony's long-time "lead" attorney.
Baez started hurling accusations at NeJame in his Response To Motion To Quash The Court's Order . In a long part of the motion which accused NeJame of all sorts of nefarious behavior, Baez stated:
13. The Defense grew increasingly concerned that Mr. Nejame has a direct conflict of interest in this matter as he is representing Texas Equusearch in a substantially related matter, whose interests conflict with that of his former clients. See Exhibit "B". What is more disturbing is that he has used his position with Texas Equusearch to compel his former clients to sign a waiver of conflict in exchange for their new lawyer reviewing the Equusearch documents. Exhibit "B". This can under no circumstances be considered a knowing and voluntary waiver. Furthermore, after George and Cindy Anthony withdrew their waiver. Mr. Nejame falsely claimed that the waiver is "valid and cannot be recanted." This court cannot allow Mr. Nejame to continue in this matter given the obvious conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is thedefenses position that Mr. Nejame is using this case to further promote his owninterests.(bold mine)
Of course, the infamous "Exhibit "B" contains the letter from Conway's clients to Mark NeJame, in which they rescinded their waiver. This was probably the same waiver of conflict of interest that Conway had waved before the court on more than one occasion to bolster NeJame's assertion that there was no conflict of interest in his representation of TES.
Mark NeJame's Reply to Defendant's Response to Motion to Quash the Court's Order on Defendant's Application for Subpoena Duces Tecum for the Documents in the Possession of Texas Equusearch Based on Bad Faith responded to the accusation by stating: 4. In the Defendant's response they falsely claim that the undersigned compelled a waiver of conflict from Mr. and Mrs. Anthony in exchange for allowing their attorney, Brad Conway, to review the TES files. In the time that the Defense took to write this ludicrous and untrue response, they could and should have performed their due diligence and contacted Brad Conway, attorney for George and Cindy Anthony, who would have informed them that these allegations were frivolous, untrue and lacked any measure whatsoever of truthfulness or veracity. Mr. NeJame has communicated with Mr. Conway as recently as yesterday morning and Mr. Conway reconfirmed that no consideration was offered whatsoever to review the TES documents and that Mr. NeJame's act was that of compassion for the grandparents, with no consideration of anything in return.
The defense attorneys should have simply done a modicum of work or expended the most minimal effort by checking their facts and calling Mr. Conway, rather than filing deceptive, untruthful, irrelevant and outlandish pleadings. Mr. Conway is an ethical, respected member of the Bar and is well aware of the truth and the facts surrounding this specious allegation contained in Defendant's pleadings and confirms them to be untrue. This latest claim by the defense placed Conway in an untenable situation in regards to his clients. NeJame is clearly stating that their attorney has verified his position. Brad Conway's letter of resignation: WESH published a copy of Conway's resigation letter:
With regret I am forced to resign as George and Cindy Anthonys attorney. The defense motion filed on August 9, 2010 contains allegations that are not in fact true. As an officer of the court I cannot stand idly by knowing allegations involving me have been misstated. I am now a witness to an inaccurate legal pleading filed in our court system. As such, I cannot continue in good conscience as a legal representative. George and Cindy Anthony have done nothing improper, it is the failure of the defense to verify the facts alleged in their motion that forces my withdrawal. I will continue to support the Anthonys, will continue to attend hearings and the eventual trial and most importantly I will continue to search for the full truth regarding the killing of Caylee Marie Anthony.
Bradley A. Conway, Esq. Law Office of Bradley A. Conway 189 S. Orange Ave. Suite 1850 Orlando, Fl. Office: 407-246-0803Fax: 407-386-3114
Notice that Conway doesn't put any of the blame on Georg and Cindy Anthony. He puts it all squarely on Baez, as well he should. The defense did not verify their facts and he joins with NeJame in indicating that that is the issue at hand.
Conway couldn't say anything else without breaching his attorney-client privilege. However, one has to wonder if he was ticked off at being the conduit for information between the Anthony's and Mark NeJame. See Baez' Exhibit C.
I have a feeling he's felt like the monkey-in-the-middle for a long time. Now, he has jumped out of the middle and steered himself closer to Mark NeJame in regards to the waiver of immunity.
This morning, Brad Conway appeared on The Today Show. Here is the video:
As for Jose Baez, InSession broadcast a response from him this morning. Host Vinnie Politan quoted Baez as saying:
Brad Conway sat in my office with me and Andrea Lyon and told us that the only way he could view the documents was if George and Cindy signed a waiver.
I'm not really sure if that answers the question, we'll have to watch the news coming out. Stay tuned here for updates!
The obvious question is, what happens next? Will there be a TES hearing with the laywers duking it out as to who is telling the truth? Will Judge Belvin Perry simply rule in chambers on the merits of the motion? Will he call all the attorneys into chambers for a "Come to Jesus" talk? Will their be charges to the Florida Bar?
This video of Tim Miller was posted on YouTube on December 15, 2008. Within the first couple of minutes, Miller again reviews the reasons he called off the searches. The area they wanted most to search, on Suburban Drive, was flooded. Mr. Miller, in his interview with the State says the same thing (p. 8). He clearly indicated that, if Caylee's remains were there, a search could easily destroy them or force them into the underlying soil.
Regardless of those facts, the defense went on an immediate rampage to get the TES records to prove that the area had been dry and searched. To do that, they petitioned the court twice and were rebuffed twice by Judge Stan Strickland for not filing their motion in a proper way.
By July 16, 2009, the defense manage to file a motion (link unavailable) which asked for TES records in the vicinity of Hidden Oaks Elementary School. At a hearing on August 27, 2009, Casey's then attorney, Todd Macaluso, made the following statement:
As Your Honor knows, the body of Caylee Marie Anthony was found very close to the Anthony home, and the body was found in a wooded area that if one were to search for a missing child, this is the first place you would go search. There is substantial evidence that we’ve discovered, and that’s been set forth in our brief, Your Honor, that the body or the remains of Caylee Anthony were placed there after Casey Anthony was locked up in the Orange County Correctional Facility. There is substantial evidence, and that proves, Your Honor, her innocence. That’s exculpatory evidence, it proves that somebody else placed the remains in the area where it was ultimately found.
Macaluso indicated that the evidence they would unearth would be exculpatory because it would prove Casey is innocent. He argued that if a person volunteered to search for a missing child and found the child, the remains, or evidence, there would be no expectation of privacy because the person would be a material witness.
In later motions, the defense claimed that they had two witnesses, Laura Buchanan and Joseph Jordan who would testify that the area was searched by them, that it was dry, and that there were no remains there. Later, Jordan was interviewed twice by LE (#1,#2) where he indicated that he had mid-identified the area where he searched and that he hadn't searched that location, since it was under water at the time. Laura Buchanan, the second witness, seems to be making herself scarce and has yet to be deposed by the State.
At that time, TES attorney Mark NeJame offered the names of 32 searchers who were within 50 yards of the area where Caylee's remains were discovered. Judge Stan Strickland ruled that the area relevant to the defense's argument would be so limited and that the defense could examine the other documents under the terms proposed by Mark NeJame.
In the hearing on July 15, Judge Belvin Perry did not address the TES issue in open court. The prosecution, defense, and NeJame met for a substantial period of time at the bar and when it concluded, Perry announced that Baez was withdrawing his most recent TES motion and that NeJame could file a motion to quash the motion based on bad faith. The defense would have until August 25 to review the documents with a special magistrate and would be able to take notes. They were to tag files which the special magistrate (a former judge) would copy and bring to the court for in camera review. The judge also said that he would not rule on the tagged files until after a hearing on the motion to quash.
In this motion, ordered by Judge Perry at the July 15 hearing, NeJame outlines the entire history of the TES battle with the defense team. Dates and information here and above were taken from this motion. I've added a few dates in for myself as I feel they may be relevant.
September 18, 2009: a member of the Baez Law firm made an appointment to review the documents
Prior to the appointment, NeJame learned that they were planning to send "The Presentation Group" to copy all the documents from all the files. Baez cancelled the appointment.
October 15, 2009: NeJame's office contacted Baez to ask when he would pick up the 32 files. When asked to fax them, NeJame chose to have them hand delivered to Baez' office.
November 23, 2009: Baez files a new motion for a subpoena duced tecum based on the information provided by Joe Jordan and Laura Buchanan stating no body was found.
March 10, 2010: NeJame responded by pointing out that Joe Jordan was one of the 32 searchers whose records were provided to Baez, Laura Buchanan searched the area on her own, hence no official record.
April 5, 2010: Judge Stan Strickland denied the motion.
Although not in the motion, I would like to add these two:
April 16, 2010, 4:48 PM on a Friday afternoon: The defense files a motion for Judge Stan Strickland to recuse himself.
April 19, 2010: Judge Stan Strickland issues an Order and recuses himself from the case.
I have always wondered if the TES issue was one of the reasons that the defense wanted Strickland off the case. They wanted all the documents and weren't happy at all with Strickland's rulings on the issue.
April 23, 2010: Jose Baez and Cheney Mason appear at Mark NeJame's office to inspect the documents. Here are snips from paragraph 12, p. 9 of the motion.
...The office of the undersigned counsel also learned that when the meeting was scheduled, Mr. Baez had to leave within two hours from the start of the meeting to go to another appointment.
...With the $12 prepaid throw down by Mr. Mason and Mr. Baez' limited schedule, it is patently obvious that there was no real interest or good faith attempt to review any of the document that counsel for Casey Anthony has claimed were important.
...This is entirely consistent with the fact that it took them from August 22, 2009 until April 23, 2010, to finally get around to even coming by to peruse the documents...a full seven (7) months and twenty seven (27) days later.
In addition, during the inspection, the attorneys tagged files of searchers from 300 yards away to 8 miles away, clearly outside of the parameters they were given.
It's patently clear to me that, from the get-go, Baez and whichever attorneys were on the team at the time wanted ALL the documents. Since their original motion specified a specific search area and the defense agreed in August, 2010 to the solution provided by Strickland gave them everything they asked for.
Even now, they want another try at fishing in the TES pool of searchers, without any limitations.
This comes about now, even with Cheney's press conference on June 21, 2010. NeJame includes this portion in the motion:
Uh, yeah, it's been, the public has been made to believe that these people searched the exact area, um, where the body was, or tried to and couldn't. The fact is they didn't try to, and they didn't, they weren't there, and it was impassible at the time. So there's a lot of people who are mistaking things of what happened back in the summer of 2008 and what happened in the Winter of 2008.
If you pry apart the message, Mason said:
The searchers either tried to or were unable to search the area where the body WAS.
It was impassible at the time.
NeJame then went on to use this quote as the basis of his argument for bad faith on the part of the defense.
18. a. The defense took seven (7) months and twenty seven (27) days to review the files located at the undersigned counsel's office.
b. The defense stated in several of their motions that Joe Jordan was part of the search team that searched the exact area where Caylee's remains were found and that his name was not turned over to the defense in October 2009. The defense's position regarding Mr. Jordan formed a substantial part of the basis for their request for the records of the other searchers.
c. Laura Buchanan was named in several of the defense's motions as being another searcher who was in the exact area where Caylee's remains were located... It is not only unrealistic but it is ludicrous to expect TES to keep track of or to even have knowledge of the searches that volunteers conduct on their own and not under TES's guidance or supervision.
d. ... The defense only took two hours to review the same documents compared to the many hours up to several day (sic) to review. Instead of following the order which requires them to request an in camera review by the Court.. the defense filed a motion to Reconsider Certain Prior Rulings by a Disqualified Judge. The defense is clearly operating under bad faith and looking to harass the volunteers.
e. ... Mr. Mason's statement on June 21, 2010 blatantly and clearly contradicts the position they have held for the last 11 months. (bold face mine)
There are NeJame's reason for asserting bad faith. For me, the bad faith seems to come more from the fact that the defense never showed much interest in tagging any additional searchers who could help their case. They flaunted the judge's ruling and turned it into a ridiculous farce.
Nejame winds up his motion by going back to Mason's statement in the presser.
19. ... it is patently obvious and apparent that the defense knows the conditions of the area, and that they are no longer in need of the names of any searchers to verify this information. Furthermore, since the defense has become aware of this information, the original thirty-two (32) volunteer names that were turned over in October 2009 are no longer relevant and any further inquiries of any additional names would be a fishing expedition made in bad faith. (bold mine)
Now, let's get to the defense's Response To Motion To Quash The Court's Order which was published last night. As WFTV has now published links, we learn that it was filed at 4:54 PM yesterday. Here is where we find an awful lot of CARP!
The motion is filled with vituperative language at every turn and has whole sections which do no more than sling mud at Mr. NeJame. There are four "Exhibits" which mostly do more of the same.
The first argument the defense puts forward is prefaced by the following:
1. It is apparent that counsel for TES has chosen to not understand the clear and direct theories of defense with respect to his client's "searching" for the victim. This is really a simple proposition that everyone else seems to grasp.
Baez then explains the defense theory. Here are some snippets of it.
If any evidence exists of persons searching the specific area where the remains of the child were found, and no such remains were then present, but obviously showed up later at the same spot, then significant questions arise as to when and how the remains were placed in that location. It is the Defense position that Casey Anthony was either in custody or under such relentless and continuous public scrutiny that she could not have placed the remains of her child, where discovered, any time after the Texas Equusearch searches. (bold mine)
The final TES efforts at Suburban Drive were in early November. As Tim Miller stated in the video, the exact area where they were found was still not searchable due to the flooding. A quick study of the State's forensic botanist would show them that he estimated the body had been in the same location for a minimum of 3 months based on the plant growth through holes in the bones. In addition, there are other reports that stated that the body had been disarticulated in that location. I won't go into the gory details, but the position of the bones clearly demonstrated that. In addition, bones were located at a pretty good distance away from the bag. There were bones covered by soil that had to have been there when there was rain to wash the soil onto them.
Of course, somebody could have placed the body there. However, the fact is that from the time hurricane Faye hit until shortly before the body was discovered, the site was under water. In addition, Baez later differs from Todd Macaluso who claimed that would prove Casey's innocence, he did admit it did not rule out Casey as the killer. In that case, he would really know some truth of the matter from his client. Even he and his investigators have yet to find "Zanny" and LE hasn't found her either!
In his second argument, he pushes to justify having all the records by stating that some Equusearch searchers did search other places on their own. He wants the ability to contact them and ask.
By paragraph 3, he starts to throw accusations at TES and Mark NeJame:
Texas Equusearch has professed to have a desire of trying to help, and trying to seek the truth. Yet, when it comes down to inquiries about what evidence there may be regarding the search, they have taken a consistent position of obstruction. It may well be that it is more the influence of Texas Equusearch counsel for his own privateand personal reasons, more so than the organization itself. (bold mine)
In paragraph 4, Baez states that
4. Counsel for TES...apparently acknowledges that it is the position of his client that their records do not indicate any searchers in the immediate area where the remains where found. If that is the case, then it is patently absurd for them to take an obstructionist position of trying to suggest or, for that matter, for the prosecution to suggest, that the remains were there the whole time and just simply not discovered.
Again, Baez needs to read the scientific reports, or check with his own experts on this. It seems to me that before he continues this endless battle, he needs to consider what they all have to say about how long the remains were in that location.
Paragraph 5 brings up a problem. Baez states that the defense theory was based on information received from Buchanan and Jordan. Yet, months before this, Macaluso used the same theory in open court! He then states that the defense had discovered two witnesses who said the area was not under water. That would again be Jordan and Buchanan. As I've said countless times, Jordan no longer agrees with that. Haven't they read his interviews? That leaves one deposition-shy witness!
By paragraph 6, he is discussing topography and the fact some areas were under water and some were not. Also,
Moreover, at the time of the TES searching, much of the area was so overgrown that it could not be seen from the road right away and, thus, a person walking along there could not even tell whether the critical area was actually underwater or not.
I would assume that Tim Miller and his crew as well as any others who might be searching the area would go off the "road right away" to check the area!
In paragraph 7, Baez tries to get around Cheney Mason's strange interview after the hearing. VIEW Baez states that in the depositions of State witnesses who searched the area had not been to the exact spot and that is was
... because the overgrown conditions made it basically impossible.
I read some of the interviews with some searchers. I'm not sure if they are the same ones the defense deposed, but I recall them talking about not searching there because of the water. I have to wonder if the defense has more information that they only searched along the "right away"!
Next up, Baez turns to the "right to privacy" issue. It's pretty much the same as he has said before, and I haven't heard any judge rule that it was a problem with that. He also indicates again that NeJame allowed Brad Conway to look at the documents. Again, I don't recall Strickland having a problem with that. Baez says something here that varies from what Mark NeJame has stated more than once:
That is that he allowed an attorney, not related to the Defense of Casey Anthony, to view al14,OOO pages of documents, making whatever notes and conclusions he wanted to do, and then allowing the State to do the same thing. (Bold mine)
Baez then refers the judge to Exhibit A, an affidavit from Cheney Mason. He gives his version of events during their review of the documents in April and insists he was quite polite!
There follows a discussion of the boxes they were unable to view and then goes on another rant about Brad Conway being able to review the documents. We all watched the hearings, we know what NeJame told both judges about that review. Yet, Baez has to toss in some inaccuracies yet again!
There were no issues of privacy raised then; no indications that that lawyer was restricted from having copies or making notes; no indications that that lawyer had to pay cash in advance to look at the files. Where is the "bad faith" now?
From this point on, the motion goes into a major slam-job on Mark NeJame and is full of accusations which have absolutely no relation to the issues discussed in the motion. There are additional exhibits to back up the claims.
Entitled: Does TES counsel. NeJame, have an ulterior motive behind his efforts to thwart the Defense?
I won't even dignify this part by a major discussion. This is truly the CARP part of the motion.
Paragraph 12 accuses NeJame
-of soliciting George and Cindy as clients. -doing a media blitz (just to say, he did that to improve their image) -did not file any motion to protect them from the protestors -represented them on TV (hello, Brad Conway doesn't do that?) -made media comments in front of the Anthony house -tried to undermine his (Baez') representation of Casey and take the case over -asked to join the defense team (Baez turned him down due to lack of experience)
Baez utilizes Exhibit C to demonstrate this. You have to read this stuff to believe it! It's a copy of e-mails sent to Beth Karas prior to the July 15 hearing! Talking about leaks! The bulk of the information is an letter sent to NeJame and a reply.
The fact is, with all this CARP, one has to rely a great deal on credibility. Who do we believe, Mark NeJame or Cindy Anthony? Mark NeJame or Jose Baez. You pick.
The next CARP is the issue of conflict of interest. In this, Baez refers to Exhibit B. It's an unsigned letter from George and Cindy Anthony dated February 12, 2010 to NeJame, rescinding their waver. Again, ask the credibility question! Gee, can I rescind my waiver I signed with the insurance company and ask for more money?
The end of that particular paragraph ends with
This can under no circumstances be considered a knowing and voluntary waiver. Furthermore, after George and Cindy Anthony withdrew their waiver. Mr. Nejame falsely claimed thatthe waiver is "valid and cannot be recanted." This court cannot allow Mr. Nejame tocontinue in this matter given the obvious conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is the defenses position that Mr. Nejame is using this case to further promote his owninterests.
Pot, call the kettle!
The last accusation is that, oh my goodness, Mr. NeJame consulted with crime writer David Lohr about the possibility of ghost-writing a book! Baez even includes a transcript of a phone interview between NeJame and defense PI Jeremiah Lyons. The most interesting aspect of the interview, Exhibit D, is that Lohr claims NeJame told him Casey was offered a plea-deal for 10 years! There are statements from NeJame in this WFTV article.
Baez ends his motion by playing nicey-nicey with Judge Perry.
15. This Court, after having reviewed the history of this case, with respect to the subject ofTexas Equusearch documents, has crafted a method and announced intentions, by his Order, to allow a proper investigation of the Texas Equusearch documents under the control of a Special Magistrate (Jim Glatt). This process will eliminate all questions regarding the Defense's entitlement to full discovery, eliminate questions of impropriety, eliminate bickering between counsel, and allow this case to proceed on in an orderly fashion, respecting the due process rights of the Defendant, Casey Marie Anthony, as well as her Constitutional entitlements to the effective assistance of counsel and the Supreme Court Mandates, recognizing that "Death is Different". The TES Motion to Quash should be denied, summarily.
The fact is, were the judge grant the motion to quash, the defense would see no more of those documents!
In his response, NeJame takes the time to explain to the Court the entire situation between Casey Anthony's attorneys and Texas Equusearch since July 16, 2009. He gives a recap of the arguments and rulings that took place. He cites Judge Stan Strickland's rulings in the situation. He also informs Judge Perry of the process that was used to choose and review the documents.
For those of you who get confused with all the motions and what has occurred between all the parties involved, the response becomes an absolute must-read.
To be fair, I will post a brief version of what NeJame wrote.
14. ...On April 23, 2010, Attorneys Cheney Mason and Jose Baez came to the undersigned counsel's office to review the files containing the searches of the approximately 4,000 searchers.... When they arrived Mr. Mason was arrogant, rude and disrespectful to the staff of undersigned and to the monitor. Mr. Mason threw $12 cash on the table at the monitor saying that this would be enough to cover the one hour they were going to be there.
...With the $12 prepaid throw down by Mr. Mason and Mr. Baez' limited schedule, it is patently obvious that there was no real interest or good faith attempt to review any of the documents that counsel for Casey Anthony has claimed were important...
NeJame also explains that while there were 4 boxes of TES records, only two of them contained the pertinent files to be examined. The other two boxes contained material not related to the to the searched areas. He states that they were shown the boxes to demonstrate that TES was not holding anything back.
There is also mention that the documents Baez and Mason flagged for review were for searches that occurred over 300 yards to 8 miles away.
After an hour, one of the attorneys gave the monitor, an out-of-work TES volunteer, another $12. According to the response,
19. ...The monitor was treated rudely and unprofessionally.
When it comes to the Channel 6 new crew that showed up, both NeJame and the reporter for the station indicated that it was not somebody from NeJames firm who had called them.
The account of the incident continues
...The reporter and his cameraman videotaped for approximately one minute, from across the lobby, when Mr. Mason burst out of the conference room causing a scene in front of the camera. It is the epitome of irony that almost contemporaneously when Mr. Mason and Mr. Baez review of the files concluded, the television camera appeared, allowing Mr. Mason's to cast aspersions on the media against undersigned counsel, which Mr. Mason has a history of doing.
There is more in the motion, READ it and enjoy. Apparently, Mr. Mason's behavior with Kathi Belich witnessed by many was not an aberration .
In addition to NeJame's response, Muzikman has also provided a copy of the Defense Supplemental Memo Regarding Admissibility of Contents from 911 Calls. As far as I can see, Cheney Mason is adding to his arguments as to why the defense wants the calls to not be allowed. Their motions and memos have yet do counter the reasons the State wants them in. At this point, we should expect to see the two sides arguing apples and oranges!
Enjoy reading and see you at 2 PM EDT for what should be a real doozie of a hearing.
As for his arguments in favor of the motion, they deal entirely with the media. He attacks the media in oh, so many ways. He even manages to take a swipe at the "talking head" lawyers who have neither the experience, knowledge, or predicates for their public comments..." I recommend a quick trip over to WFTV to read their article. I've also included their most excellent links.
I know that I won't be alone on Thursday, July 15 at 2 PM. There will be many people who follow the Casey Anthony trial hearing watching to see what will happen. Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. will presiding over what may well be one of the most contentious hearings we have witnessed.
The genesis of this hearing goes all the way back to the defense's May 6, 2010 Motion To Reconsider Strickland Rulings. One of the portions that was scheduled for that day was the motion to make all the Texas EquuSearch records available to the defense. Unfortunately, when setting the date for the hearing, defense attorney Cheney Mason did not confer with TES attorney Mark NeJame, who was unavailable for that date. The hearing for this issue was then scheduled for July 15. If you would like to review the content of this, read the article I posted on the topic. This motion is technically not a "second bite of the apple" since the Baez and Mason claim that it was impossible to review all the documents properly. Baez even stated in open Court during the May 6 budget hearing that he wanted all the names so that he could research all the volunteers.
To date, we haven't heard Mark NeJame's side of the story, but it will be very interesting to listen to. Do you think Judge Perry will buy the defense's claims? Somehow, I don't think so. Linda Drane Burdick had stated that it had taken her about six hours to go over the forms and had found no more to flag. Also, I hope the judge puts an end to the whole issue for once and for all.
In addition, we have Cheney Mason's odd comments about the searchers after his solo hearing on June 16 after the status hearing. In the middle of discussing the 911 calls and what Cindy Anthony had made in her deposition which was released last summer, Mason made a sharp seque to say
... the depositions where they searched and did not search, it turns out that they did not search the exact area where the body was found.
Kathy Belich then steered the conversation back to the 911 calls. The discussion then went back to the searchers. Mason said,
... the public has been made to believe that these people searched the exact area where the body was, or tried to, and couldn't. The fact is, they didn't try to, they didn't. They weren't there. It was impassable at the time. So, there's a lot of people who've mistaken what happened back in the summer of 2008, the winter of 2008.
He then went on to discuss that the defense wants to establish reasonable doubt as to when the body was put there. This is the same story that we've heard for quite a while, that the body was placed in that location when Casey was in jail.
Here's the problem with the "when Casey was in jail" part. Casey was in and out of jail between July 16, 2008 and October 14, 2009 when she was indicted by the grand jury. I would see that they would have a problem saying the body was put on Suburban drive after October 14, due to scientific evidence. Are they really going to try for a summer date when Casey was in and out of jail on bond?
Mason went on to state that the defense would have to establish "who, how, and when". He also mentioned that various people had given different information about the condition of the area. He said that some stated that they couldn't search the area because it was under water. He also said that someone said the area wasn't under water.
His statement concerning the searches ended with the statement concerning June 16, 2008,
That's when Caylee was missing. We don't know when she disappeared.
Listen HERE for yourself and see if what he says makes any sense to you!
The second issue on the agenda will be the admissibility of Cindy Anthony's 911 calls. On March 8, 2010, the defense filed the Motion to Exclude Heresay, Evidence, Gossip and Innuendo. The motion was pretty much put on the back burner, the State replied on June 9 with a motion outlining the reasons that the calls should be admitted. As I discussed in this article, the prosecution does not want to have the calls admitted as an excited utterance, they want them admitted because they show the developing story Casey made as the evening wore on.
Thanks to Richard Hornsby, we have a copy of the motion filed by Cheney Mason on June 22, Defense Reply to State Motion to Admit 911 Calls. In it, Mason goes through June 15, 2008 from Cindy Anthony's perspective to show that it was a "plan" of sorts based on her learning that the car was impounded and all the actions she took that day. He even mentioned that Cindy had explained her motivations for the call in the Good Morning America appearance.
He also gave a very complicated explanation in the presser he gave, which is already linked above.
The latest news broke last week that the prosecution has subpoenaed Cindy and Lee Anthony to testify at the hearing. I don't need to tell anyone who read here that this may be the most explosive part of the hearing. All over the Internet, people are asking, "What will Cindy say?" , "What will Lee say", "will George be there?". Even the family attorney, Brad Conway, made a statement to the OrlandoSentinel saying,
"She's going to tell the truth," Conway said today. "She made the phone calls. It's factual. She's going to testify truthfully."
Will she? That's why we'll all be watching.
For more news, check out Calls for Justice, donchais has a new article up today.
Late last week, Judge Belvin Perry announced a hearing date for June 1, 2010. The hearing will take place at 2:30 P.M. Judge Perry has set aside two hours for this hearing.
There will be two motions discussed at the hearing.
The first one is the Motion To Seal Jail Visitation Logs, filed by the defense on April 29, 2010 was supposed to be heard at the hearing on May 10. I find it curious that a seasoned attorney such as Cheney Mason would forget to notice the target of the motion, Orange County, the entity which administers the county correctional facilities. In fact the Certificate of Service at the end of his motion says:
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by U.S. Mail and/or hand delivery to the Office of the State Attorney, 415 N. Orange Avenue, Orlando, Florida 32801 and to Tamara Gapen (sic), Esq, at the Orange County Jail, Post Office Box 4970, Orlando, Florida 32802-4970 this 29th day of April, 2010.
8. ...Counsel for the defense has again failed to provide proper notice to Orange County in this Motion. This failure to provide proper notice is in violation of this Court's Order Requiring Proper Notice to Orange County entered on October 22, 2009.
Clearly, proper notice goes to the county, not to the jail.
According to the defense, the jail logs need to be sealed because
2. The inability to maintain confidentiality of visitors to the Defendant prohibits the defense from being able to properly prepare her case for trial in that the mere identity of some expert witnesses that the defense desires to visit with Miss Anthony, if revealed, will cause unfounded speculation, as well as investigation and "google" inquiries about said visitor, thus, severely hampering the Defendant's preparation for trial and her entitlement to due process, equal protection of law, and effective assistance of counsel.
During the April 30 hearing, most of the expert witnesses were publicly acknowledged. There was one expert that was discussed at sidebar. I have to wonder if this is the one the defense doesn't want us to identify and investigate. The mention of Google makes me think that this is another blast at us nasty, threatening, evil bloggers!
To bolster his argument, Mason indicates in paragraph 5 that the prosecution is taking no position on this matter! That's nothing new! Every time the topic arises, the State's Attorneys have taken the exact same position. With the exception of the video of Casey in the infirmary at the time of the discovery of the remains, Judge Strickland ruled that he had no authority to tell the jail to violate their standard policies which are governed by the Sunshine Laws.
Indeed, in her response, Gappen states that
7. A criminal Defendant's desire to "maintain confidentiality of visitors" in high profile case does not fall into any category of lawful exemption. In fact, Defendant does not provide andy statutory exemption or legal authority for this court to legally "seal" public records that are open for public inspection pursuant to F.S. 119.07, and Article 1, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution.
What we are waiting for now are possible replies from TES attorney Mark NeJame and the State.
If they are filed and become available prior to the hearing, I will post about them.
Lacking that, stay tuned for the hearing. Since InSession ends at 3 P.M. and the hearing begins at 2:30 P.M., check out the local feeds for coverage.
I am looking forward to hearing Judge Perry on the TES issue.
Thanks to Muzikman for links to the visitation motions!
UPDATE!
No sooner had I posted this article, the Orlando Sentinel has reported that:
Earlier, Orange-Osceola Chief Judge Belvin Perry set a hearing for June 1 to hear arguments on the defense's requests to seal jail-visitation logs and to have Perry reconsidered earlier rulings by the initial judge on the case.
One of those items to be discussed involves documents belonging to EquuSearch, the group that helped organize large volunteer searches for Casey Anthony's daughter Caylee, before the toddler's remains were found.
NeJame stated that Casey Anthony's defense team scheduled the hearing without coordinating with him, and he had a pre-planned family holiday that day.
NeJame stated his office is coordinating a new hearing date with Casey Anthony's defense, and that he was filing the conflict notice simply to assure his portion of the hearing be cancelled and rescheduled.
Check back at Trials and Tribulations for further information as it becomes available.
Yesterday's hearing conducted by Judge Belvin Perry proved to be as quick-moving and decisive as all the legal experts had been predicting. It was also a test. Being tested were the attorneys, the defendant, the Anthony family and all the onlookers. We can be sure that Perry was listening carefully and taking mental notes.
Cindy and George Anthony passed the test. They weren't chomping on gum or swigging on water bottles. However, Cindy seemed nervous at times without her crutches.
Casey Anthony passed the test. She sat as still as a stone statue throughout the proceedings. She stopped fixing her clothing and fiddling with her hair from the moment Judge Perry entered the courtroom.
Cheney Mason didn't say a word to the court other than his name and seemed to be sitting off a bit by himself observing and thinking throughout.
Jose Baez passed, but not with flying colors. Baez stated that he would "attempt" to contact the JAS people with a propose budget when Perry cut him off by asking if he would be available next week for the hearing as opposed to June or July as originally scheduled with Judge Strickland. Once a hearing date was set for May 6, lacking his agenda, he couldn't schedule a time for a hearing with the JAC. Judge Perry then stated that that would give Baez an opportunity to call the JAC today! I do hope that the defense has its budget ready prior to that hearing "yesterday"!
When Judge perry asked Baez how many defense motions aside from those concerning the death penalty were not yet resolved, he responded "a handful" and that he had a comprehensive list he could send "his honor". (Hello! Why didn't you bring it to the status hearing?) He then went on to say that to give a "comprehensive answer" he would say there were 3-5, excluding the death penalty motions. He did mention the motion regarding spoliation which still needs depositions.
Judge Perry then reworded his question to Baez. "How many motions that are ripe are pending to be heard?". At this point, Baez digressed to mention that Judge Strickland had not made the prosecution respond to all the motions as the defense had asked. Baez said they wanted the case law that the prosecution would use to defend their position.
Jeff Ashton (who will be handling the death penalty motions) stated that most of the motions to which Baez was referring were death penalty motions which Andrea Lyon had stated she would still want to argue before the court and not have them ruled on pleadings. He felt it was not a wise use of his time to respond to motions which would still be argued in court but that, if ordered to do so, he would do so. He also indicated that he had responded to some of the motions so they would not require a hearing in open court.
At this point in the hearing, Judge Perry set about setting a schedule for the hearings. He was looking at May 10, 11, 12, 13, and the morning of the 14th for the non-death penalty motions.
During the hearing, Baez also slipped and addressed His Honor simply as "JUDGE" a couple of times.
Perhaps his biggest faux pas was in addressing Judge Perry at the very end to inform him of the proper way to pronounce Lyon ("roar like a lion"). That is an issue which should have been addressed in a more diplomatic manner, considering that both Ashton and Drane used Lyons as well!
Linda Drane (I'll leave off the Burdick since that is what the judge is saying) passed the test with a minor slip on how many witnesses had been deposed. When asked by the judge, Jose Baez had been able to give the answer, 36. However, she scored a perfect "10" when she rose to speak to the number and nature of the pending motions. She started by saying that she had a motions log that Ms. Lyon had been "kind enough to provide". (That's the information Baez left back at the office.) She read from Lyon's log that there are 7 non-death penalty motions outstanding and read them off.
As she was doing so, Baez made the big boo-boo of getting out of his seat and going to the assistant who loudly snapped open his briefcase for him to peruse. He rooted around among the papers and withdrew something and sat down again. This drew a curious look from Cheney Mason and a short, whispered discussion between the two defense lawyers. I wonder what was discussed!
As for Jeff Ashton, he got an a for his efforts in court today. When asked, he got up, succinctly presented his point of view, and sat down.
Andrea Lyon didn't fare very well. She phoned in her appearance and apparently had a hard time hearing. The clerk finally had to repeat the questions directly into the phone so she could hear. I'll hold off grading her until she comes into court to argue the penalty motions.
Having graded all the participants in attendance, I'd like to briefly cover the issues I missed while grading the parties.
The Defense Quest For TES Records
On Friday, April 23, ClickOrlando reported that Mason and Baez had showed up to view the TES records at Mark NeJames' offices. Apparently, when the station's news cameras arrived, they left quickly.
On April 26, WFTV reported that NeJames is planning to file a motion to break a deadlock on the issue.
At the hearing, Jose Baez stated to Judge Perry that the defense had already filed three motions to get copies of all the records and that they planned on filing yet another one. He briefly mentioned that he and Mason had been to NeJames' office and "we will be, again be seeking to modify the order" because "we were unable to accomplish what we wanted to." He also insinuated something (although I do not know exactly what) by stating that he would speak no more of it because "Mr. NeJames is not here to defend himself".
What Baez wants to accomplish here is probably to find personal information of some searchers so they can send their PI's out to dig the ground out from under them! Judge Strickland ruled more than once concerning the privacy of searchers who were no where near the site. Both Brad Conway and Linda Drane were able to find what they were looking for in a matter of hours. I'm looking forward to see the new motions and what Perry will rule.
Oak Ridge Labs and other forensics
It would seem that the defense is having problems with getting proprietary information from the lab. Jeff Ashton stated that the intricacies of inter-state depositions were being worked on and that they were being scheduled for July.
When it came to defense experts examining the evidence, Baez stated that the hold-up in having his experts coming in was that the evidence was in various states including Tennessee (Oak Ridge) and Virginia (Quantico). It has all now been returned and they are ready to inspect it. He stated he would request a Special Master to oversee the process. Jeff Ashton said that the issue had only come up recently and, at this point, it could be discussed at another time. This issue led to the next.
Money, money, money
Judge Perry then asked when Baez would be meeting with the JAC. This issue had to be dealt with "YESTERDAY"! When Baez indicated that Strickland had it tentatively scheduled for June or July, Perry asked him what day NEXT WEEK would be good for him. They settled on May 6th, at a time of Baez' choosing. I certainly hope the defense has it's budget outlined prior to then.
Change of Venue
Perry indicated that he will hear the motion on change of venue next week. He made it abundantly clear that he would like to choose a location which would be kept secret to the last minute and sequester the jury in Orlando. He indicated that there were acceptable locations both known and unknown that would be appropriate. I'd assume the "known" locations are those which Baez mentioned in his motion. If sequestered in Orlando, Perry indicated he would try the case 5 1/2 days a week!
He cited the cost issues involved with so many witnesses in the area. It would be far less expensive to bus in 12 jurors plus alternates and put them up in a nice hotel with DVD's and games chosen by both the prosecution and the defense.
Both during the hearing and later on InSession, Baez mentioned some of his problems with a sequestered jury. He cited possible demonstrators outside the Anthony home and the courthouse. He cited the terrible hardship on the jurors in being confined without TV and families. He mentioned that certain demographics would be left out of the jury pool.
What Baez wants is a change of venue to South Florida (Miami, Palm Beach) and have the jurors home and comfy during the trial. Then they will be with their families and their TV's (where coverage of the case will be non-stop).
Somehow, I think the judge will get his way in the end.
Witness Depositions
The judge was no-nonsense when it came to depositions. Linda Drane mentioned that the defense and prosecution had set up a schedule to meet once a week to meet for depositions. She believed they were on track with the April 5 order from Judge Strickland.
She also pointed out that there were some defense witnesses whose lawyers were having scheduling difficulties or stone-walling her. When she said that, Perry told her that if a witness did not show up for a deposition, she was to give a courtesy call to reschedule. After that, an order for contempt of court could be issued and that the sheriff would be glad to help bring the witness in.
Length of Trial
In summary, the case should last from 3-4 weeks for the prosecution's case-in-chief. The defense estimated their case could last for 3 weeks. There was no discussion of the possibility of a rebuttal case at this point.
The most dramatic moment came when Perry asked for the length of the penalty phase "should Ms. Anthony be found guilty of 1st Degree Murder. There was silence in the court. Jeff Ashton stated his case would take one day. After a bit of waffling and conferring with Andrea Lyon, the defense estimated a week for their case.
Judge Perry now has his ducks in a row and the process leading up to the trial will be moving on steadily towards May 9, 2010. As he said during the hearing, he will issue an order on the trial date and it will be SET IN STONE.
I'll be watching the Clerk of the Court site for specific hearing dates and times and will keep you updated.
The entire hearing took place in just under an hour. It's well worth watching if you haven't seen it already.
I would also recommend you read Donchais' article about the hearing. She can say in 10 words what I say in 100!
This has been quite a day in court. Tempers flared, complaints were made. It was a showdown. Blogger ate my article!
Towards the end of the hearing, in his rebuttal to Mark NeJames, Baez placed all blame of defending the case on the documents. He wants them, and he wants them all. They are critical to the case. "They" are trying to kill Casey Anthony and "we" are trying to save her life! Judge Strickland pointed out that this hearing is not before a jury, but there are a lot of people on TV watching!
And so we were.
This was a very long hearing and, according to Mark Eiglarsh on InSession, it could have been wrapped up in five minutes.
Apparently, Baez had contacted Joseph Jordan's attorney who said he would bring in his client as a witness. Jordan never appeared.
Jose Baez opened the hearing by stating that he had two arguments for the SubpoenaDucesTecumhe had filed. First, the documents in question were subject to ducestecum. He then asserted that Texas Equusearch was conducting business in Florida and even opened an Orlando chapter, and was clearly an agent of the state. Finally, the documents are in Florida.The defense had discovered 4 additional searchers that had not been provided by TES. They were Laura Buchanan, Joseph Jordan, Danny Iberson, and an unknown K-9 officer from Panama City (referring to Cpl. Edwards interview with Jordan).
Baez went on to say that there were many photographs and videos taken at that site and others which showed searchers. After a very long pause so that everybody could view the pictures, Baez said that there was a great deal of materiality in the pictures and finding the names of the people in them. As an example, he showed Judge Strickland one with Danny Ibison with his dog taken with Detectives Melich and Allen. When asked by the judge how he knew they were all TES people, Baez pointed to the caption in the picture that said so.
For me, the most astounding thing Baez said in the hearing was:
It just takes one person to believe that those, that the remains of Caylee Marie Anthony, were placed there after Casey Anthony was locked up in jail, to reach a reasonable doubt, which of course would, require Ms. Anthony's acquittal.
Alas, if there were true, the defense would have a slam-dunk case!
Baez then got into the meat of his argument.
He brought out TES form #08895 and pointed out that the signature at the bottom was illegible and that the name of the team leader was cut off of the top left-hand side.
There was a cure for that problem, just shoot an e-mail over to NeJame's office and ask for the name!
He also said that he learned Joseph Jordan's name through Laura Buchanan who possessed forms that weren't in the package.
It would seem that Ms. Buchannan must have contacted the defense since they didn't have her name.
Jordan had searched the area along the stockade fence and found a baby blanket and cooler that Ibison was sent to check out. Baez pointed out those items were found in the area near where the remains were found. Unfortunately, the two didn't go into the woods due to water.
Hello! If they didn't go into the wood where Caylee's remains were found due to water, why are we here today?
Baez then dropped his personal "BOMBSHELL". Jordan had sent an e-mail to Allen and Melich just after the remains were found. It said he thought the body could have been placed there after they searched. The State didn't include it in disclosure! They didn't call Jordan in and interview him at the time. Baez started talking Brady (disclosure) violation and Linda DraneBurdick got up to object, since Brady violations are not part of the motion.
Baez then moved on to complain that Tim Miller wasn't on the witness list. Mark NeJames objected that this issue isn't relevant to the motion.
Judge Strickland reminded Baez that they were discussing the motion to modify the TES order.
Jose Baez then offered "several" actions:
1. Compel the State to subpoena the documents 2. Grant his motion
After a bit more irrelevancy concerning Tim Miller being on the witness list, Baez then stated that the court is allowing Mr. NeJames to say what is relevant to the defense. He allowed Brad Conway to view the documents! He allowed the media to view the documents!
Baez then argued that when the original order was made, he NEVER thought he'd find other names. These documents are CRITICAL to the defense. Somehow, this ended up being an issue that Ms. Anthony was unable to face her accusers.
Let me think, not having all 4000 names means they can't call them all and ask if they were at the site, and if they were, to be confronted in a court of law if they didn't find the remains?
Baez then explained that it's possible that people who searched elsewhere may have talked to others who were there at TES meetings, or wherever.
Isn't that heresay?
Again, Why isn't Miller on the witness list? Why are THEY going to Texas to meet with him? Why is he traveling back here to meet with detectives?
I can answer that! You haven't done his deposition yet!
Strickland interjected that the State doesn't ask him who to put on their witness list, that it's who they intend to call.
Baez argued this yet again. I was waiting for him to get back to his own motion!
Strickland reminded Baez that witness lists and discover aren't the same thing.He told Baez to continue.
Baez went back over details, the map with the blanket and cooler. They were in the area, you know. Baez indicated there just may be other "bombshells" out there.
Finally, it was Mark NeJames' turn to speak. He stuck to the topic, thankfully. He pointed out that he had agreed to present Tim Miller for deposition. The defense never bothered to schedule him for a deposition since August 27, 2009. He said he didn't understand how the defense could say he was unavailable.
NeJame then went through the information he listed in his motion. He went through how he allowed Conway to review the information first out of respect for the Anthony family. He wasn't allowed to take pictures or write anything down. He tabbed the items to be released. He offered the same opportunity to Baez, who didn't show up, just sent a copying company to do the job for him against the court ruling. NeJames spoke up for the volunteers who did now want their information made available to subject them to threats, lawyers, bloggers, etc.
NeJame first raised his voice as he said:
And how they can jump to this ridiculous conclusion of these "bombshells" when they haven't even taken a moment, I mean, not even a 5 minute inquiry, to inspect the 4000 documents, if they're all that important, is beyond me.
He also read from the defense motion that the defense had said that the court had placed a "burden" on them to go to NeJames' office to inspect the documents. He ranted on a bit more about this and the "burden" it was for the defense. He compared the 10 minute walk to his office to the time the defense had spent on TV interviews and drives to the TV stations.
Suffice it to say that I have never seen Mr. NeJames so exercised! His voice kept getting louder and louder as he voiced his opinion of the defense team's efforts to identify important, crucial even, material for their cause.
Finally, he shouted: COME BY TO MY OFFICE! AFTER COURT! as he looked towards the defense table. At that point, the judge commented and Mr. NeJames apologized to the court. Baez just smirked.
Nejames then went back to the TES form signed by Joseph Jordan. NeJames pointed out that it was unclear if the copy provided to the court was one copied by his office or by Baez' office.He also pointed out that they could have seen the original at his office if there were a problem. He also noted that the form also included people who searched with Jordan and some had phone numbers. The defense could have contacted them. In essence, there were more than 32 names released to the defense.
He also addressed the issue of Laura Buchanan. She searched Blanchard Park and her document wasn't part of the 32. TES could not know that she was at the other site. Nejames also pointed out that hers was an unsworn statement which he readfor the record.
NeJames cleaned up a few details we've already heard in his motion (including the details of Longo's notice to Baez that he hadn't seen the documents) and sat down after saying that this motion was in very, very bad faith and that the defense's problems with the documents were due to laziness or sloppiness by the defense team.
In his rebuttal to NeJames, Jose Baez stated that the reason that they hadn't done the deposition with Tim Miller was that they didn't have all the information they needed until they had the proper documents on which to base a proper inquiry of him. He went on to complain that finding Mr. Jordan, finding Ms. Buchanan, finding the others, is very important information that is critical to their case. He repeated that the map he showed the judge of the blanket and cooler was taken very near the place where Caylee's body was found. He complained that the documents are in no particular order, one page doesn't relate to another. (Funny how Conway and DraneBurdick could do it.) He was outraged when he insisted that he and his people could not do a proper job if they went in with no pen (holds up a pen), no pad (holds up a pad of paper), and flag them for NeJames.
NeJames objected to this since it was a re-argument of what was heard the first time.
Baez stated that the 32 people whose documents were released were being called and warned that the defense would be calling them.
NeJames objected that this was information not in evidence. Baez countered with... like Mr. Longo's statement?
Baez then went on to claim that NeJames was injecting himself voluntarily into the case and holding news conferences.! Nejames objected that there was no relevancy. Baez sites a press release inviting reporters to his office where he stated there was standing water where the remains were found.
Strickland pointed out that he was commenting on the evidence and NeJames spoke next. He explained his role as attorney to TES and was obviously not pleased with Baez's terms that he "injected" himself into the case. He said Baez' statements were "dismissive" and "incorrect".
Strickland then pointed out that this was not in front of a jury and that he wasn't concerned although there were millions of people watching! Judge Strickland sure knows how to get to the heart of the matter.
Baez got up and started pacing and talking again. Smack down from the judge was that he (and NeJames, probably) were just griping.
As the judge calmed the tension level in the courtroom, Baez stated that the facts were clear. He believed that they are entitled to the information and that there was no privacy issue since Conway had inspected all the documents as well as the State. He pointed to information he was getting a year late (Joe Jordan's e-mail). He asked why anyone would have a problem with his uncovering "the truth"! Add on lack of cooperation! Everyone is out to get the defense (in my own words).
I must say, this is good defense attorney rhetoric here...
Here is my favorite line from Mr. Baez He states that...
...they're trying to kill Ms. Anthony, and we're trying to save her life here, and we can't do it if, if we're handcuffed at every twist and turn we take!
Baez suggested that the defense get all the documents UNDER SEAL. He could copy all the documents and get any clarification of documents by going to NeJames' office. Baez stated that the defense hadn't leaked any sensitive information in the case. (As in the photos of the remains). The defense has a good track record on this.
NeJames quickly replied that the judge had already done the balancing act on the issue and that they had not seen any new case law cited in the motion. He indicated that the release of information does and could cause harassment of people who were nowhere near where Caylee was. He essentially said the judge had already ruled on the system that would work the best. The door had been open for many months and was still open. He also added that he wouldn't want the state to pay the financial portion of his motion.
With this information, the discussion of the motion ended.
There was other discussion involving a motion Jose Baez had filed to unseal the Joseph Jordan audio tape which was acquired illegally. The judge had not read it yet, although there was some discussion about it.
Linda DraneBurdick indicated that if the judge ordered it unsealed, it would force the States' Attorneys to commit a 3rd degree felony.
Cheney Mason mentioned something about a decision that it would not be so. DraneBurdick responded that if there was such a ruling, she would like to see it. Nothing was decided about the issue in court today, I'll spare you the details until we see the motion and hear the arguments.
JUDGE RULES ON MOTION
Late this afternoon, Judge Stan Strickland denied the defense motion. In his decision, he stated that:
Having now reviewed all of the exhibits submitted, this Court sees no reason to modify its original Order of August 27th, 2009. the files are still available for review at the office of Mr. NeJames, and, if flagged for review and no agreement can be reached, this Court remains able to schedule an in camera review followed by a ruling.
T&T is always happy to make a correction, if warranted, upon request. Correction requests or demands received from a lawyer will be referred to our counsel and will, unavoidably, slow down the correction review process. We consider corrections to be a matter of journalistic integrity and not legal compulsion.
Posts
