The Strange Tale of the Missing Deadlines
Tuesday, February 22, 2011 at 3:11PM …OR, WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE
Last month, Jose Baez was sanctioned and fined $583.73 for not complying with a court order. The Court had granted the State’s request for additional defense discovery on December 3, 2010 nunc pro tunc (retroactive to) November 29, 2010. The order specified what information the defense was to provide regarding expert witnesses they planned to have testify during the trial. What the defense gave the State fell far short of the order and the prosecution filed the motion for sanctions. Ultimately, Judge Perry wrote, “The Court finds that defense counsel Jose Baez has committed a willful violation of the Order to provide additional discovery…¹”
COMES NOW, a new motion was filed by the State requesting the judge to hold Jose in contempt of court for missing yet another deadline. Titled the MOTION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE, it accuses him of failing to comply with paragraph five of the Court’s February 7 order:
Frye Hearings: The motions addressing Frye issues pertaining to scientific evidence shall be held on March 23, 24, and 25, 2011. The court will provide a schedule to counsel as to the order in which each motion will be heard. By February 17, 2011 at 4:00 p.m., defense counsel shall submit to the Court and State in writing, the specific issues that will be objected to in accordance with Frye, including, but not limited to, those objections previously addressed in the motions.
What happened? While there’s no doubt in my mind the defense has been rather flippant about orders and deadlines, why would Jose & Co. ignore this one and plead bewilderment as he did in his e-mail to the judge’s judicial assistant? After all, the order is very clear, isn’t it?
As I mentioned in my last article pertaining to Frye and chloroform evidence, I wrote that I would discuss the scientific and legal aspects of the motion the defense filed and a subsequent rebuttal motion filed by the prosecution, the MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO FYRE [sic] (CHLOROFORM). This new motion filed by the State takes precedent at the moment, but in essence, there were two separate Frye motions filed by defense. The second one pertains to plant and root growth evidence, and that includes another rebuttal by the State, the MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE (PLANT OR ROOT GROWTH). To keep confusion to a minimum, this post will strictly address the contempt motion and the what, the whys and the hows. How and why did the defense let another deadline slip by? My God, what were they thinking?
A LITTLE BACKGROUND
To say that Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton is hot-headed and impatient is sometimes an understatement. He’s also a stickler for detail. Trust me, I’ve had plenty of opportunities to observe him in the courtroom. However, my intent is not to denigrate him in the least, because, at the same time, it’s his convictions and close attention to detail that make him so good at what he does; and every defense attorney who’s ever crossed his path should be well aware of the fact, especially the likes of Cheney Mason, with many years of criminal defense experience under his belt. Ashton is just not going to let things slip by. He’s sharper than a knife. Besides, it’s the job of the prosecution to slam dunk any defense whenever it can in order to achieve justice for the people; especially in this case because of the here and now, the age and innocence of the victim, and the nature of the crime. They don’t charge people unless they think there’s enough evidence to convict. Of course, all crimes are worth fighting and this one is no different, but a prosecutor’s objective is quite clear; JUSTICE, JUSTICE, JUSTICE. A courtroom is a battleground, and it’s up to both sides to keep the opposition on its toes. So far, the State has done an excellent job. The Defense? Well, that’s another story.
By now, most of us would acknowledge that Jose Baez came to this case quite green and wet behind the ears. Cheney Mason, on the other hand, had been around. His Website states that he began his private practice in 1971 after admission to the Florida Bar. That’s 40 years ago. He’s been in Orlando all this time, so he should recognize most of the quirks and traits of district court judges and assistant state prosecutors. He’s no novice in the courtroom, in other words, but from what I have seen and heard thus far from several powerful attorneys and my own careful observations, he is more of a legend in his own mind than he is for real. That’s not to say he hasn’t had his moments, but as much of a leader as he is supposed to be, I haven’t seen it factor in quite yet. To make clear his role in this case, and Jose should understand this because of his naval background, Mason is the seasoned admiral and Baez is at the helm. Just because an admiral boards a ship doesn’t mean he takes control of the vessel, in this case the SS Casey. Baez is the commander until he’s relieved of duty, and that’s not going to happen.
I think it’s safe to say that, from the onset, the defense has had a rough go of things and it goes way deeper than many of the superfluous motions that have been filed and other errors in judgment. Let’s face it, whoever took the mantle was going to be the target of attacks from a hungry public hell-bent on justice. It’s the nature of the beast, and we all know the natives were restless from day 1 and still are. There will be no let-up until Casey is convicted. That’s a given, so no matter what the defense team does, they’re forever wrong. Since Jose is always the fall guy, I’m going to look into the contempt motion through as neutral a stance as I possibly can and let you decide.
CONTEMPT! CONTEMPT! CONTEMPT!
Both of the defense motions requesting Frye hearings were filed on December 30, 2010 - seven weeks before the contempt motion. To be succinct, they have been firmly in the hands of the Ninth Circuit Court since that date. Now, if I filed motions, I reckon it should be a safe bet that unless I make changes, those motions might stand. Stet is the Latin word for it. If I am given an opportunity to make changes and I don’t, why would I ever have to refile the same, meaning identical, motions? In his query to the court after the deadline passed and Ashton called him on the carpet, Baez wrote:
Jill:
Can you please ask the Judge the following:
We are a bit confused. Mr. Ashton just asked me about my objections to Frye. When I read the order from the status hearing. I understood it to mean that if we were objecting to anything not in our motion that it should be in writing, that was also my understanding as to what was discussed at the status hearing. I have also discussed the matter with Mr. Mason and he is just as confused if not more. Our objections are clearly laid out in our motions. If I had any other objections I would raise them after reading the State’s response but they have not filed one yet. If the Court is requesting that we do something additional we would like to be heard in chambers to clear up the matter. Otherwise I think the logical choice would be to wait until the State files their response, so that we can be even more specific as to the issues to be heard.
Sincerely,
Jose Baez
For sure, this is a major failure to communicate, but if we extrapolate, meaning to infer from what we know to be true, there’s an obvious snafu - we are left with a badly confused, ridiculously muddled, situation. BOINK!
Once again, the defense should realize by now that the prosecution is going to jump at the chance of a legal mistake. We have seen it time and time again, and in his contempt motion, Ashton strongly reiterated what the judge said in his order; “… including, but not limited to, those objections previously addressed in the motions.” That’s as clear as day.
Here is where the defense failed to grasp the wording and follow the judge’s edict. Do I understand what went wrong? Of course I do. The bottom line was that the defense interpreted paragraph five as meaning, if there are no changes in the first motions we filed, why file them again? Why not wait until the State files its rebuttal motions and then refile them? Clearly, the defense noted its intent in the original motions, including ISSUES UNDER FRYE and LEGAL ARGUMENTS. To send the same thing over again would be redundant. I concur. However, and that’s a big however, that doesn’t mean the defense is blameless and should be let off the hook. At the same time, should the judge hold the defense in contempt of court? There are a lot of things involved here. The prosecutor is quick on the draw. The defense must know this. The judge is getting sick of the mistakes, too.
Judge Perry made it quite clear in his order, but I believe it could have been written more concisely, given the propensity of this defense to become addled and not follow directions to the letter of the law. When I read and reread the paragraph time and time again, I could see where the defense misinterpreted it, but the following are my words:
If we are going to make any changes to the original motions, then we must rewrite the entire motions and not just attach addenda to the first ones as separate documents. We should wait until the State files its rebuttals, too, then rewrite the entire thing.
Unfortunately, that’s not at all what the judge asked for, and what it tells me, once again, is that the defense is not following up; it’s not paying attention to detail and here’s why - Had I not completely understood what the judge wrote, and I can see where it could be a problem, I would contact his assistant right away for clarification. That’s the first and right thing to do. Hey, Judge, do you mean to file them again even if we have no changes? I mean, after all, we aren’t going to make any changes until we hear from the State.
The only thing is, the State DID file rebuttal motions on February 15 and I said so in my very own paragraph number five. They are the MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO FYRE (CHLOROFORM) and the MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE (PLANT OR ROOT GROWTH). That gave the defense two days to reply or to call the SAO or the judicial assistant for direction. Was that enough time? The judge will decide, and he will have to weigh this new MOTION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE because, in my opinion, it could go either way. Judge Perry must be getting tired of the Mickey Mouse antics of the defense, but he also knows the team is up to its ears in complications, and when the more experienced attorney is more confused than the lesser, well, what more needs to be said?
Dave Knechel | in Casey Anthony, Caylee Anthony, Cheney Mason, Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, Death Penalty, Human Interest, Jeff Ashton, Jose Baez, Linda Drane Burdick, Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Marinade Dave’s Caylee Anthony Posts, Orange County Circuit Court, State Attorney's Office, marinadedave | Share Article 
LEGAL NOTICE
©David B. Knechel. All Rights Reserved. No portion of this site can be reproduced in it's entirety or in part without expressed written permission by the owner/administrator of this site in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Section 512(c)(3) of the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §512(c)(3). The charges against defendants are mere accusations and the subjects are presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law.
Reader Comments (92)
I feel that the defense did not read JP's order. If they had read it they would know that they should have questioned him on what he wrote, especially if it confused them. JP must have had a good reason for wording the order the way that he did and if they had questions they should have made a phone call. Mason has been an attorney for 40 years so he should know by now how to read a judge's order. It isn't saying too much for Mason if he was more confused than what Baez was. If I was Casey I would run as fast as I could away from this defense team. To me, the judge's order would be like an order or a job that you get from your boss that needs to be done. If you were confused by what your boss is asking would you not question him/her on what they wanted done? I think Jeff Ashton had every right to file that motion and I am glad that he is on top of things because this defense team has gotten by with so much stuff already. Baez should know from when he was sanctioned and Judge Perry gave him the warning that he would hold him in contempt if he didn't do what he was supposed to. It seems like they just briefly read over the motion, if even that and are now trying to make up an excuse for why they didn't follow through with the order. They deserve everything they get. They need to start following the rules like everyone else has to. Good job on this post Dave!
Nice write-up, Dave, a real thinker.
OK, so if we factor in the propensity of the defense to be easily addled and not follow the letter of the law we should be able to figure out why the defense is doing what it is doing. Clear as mud! lol Baez invoked Mason's name but I do wonder if Mason approves or that he really is more confused than Baez. This appears to me to be a ruse by the defense but for what reason, I have no idea. Its just seems to be their modus operandi.
Thanks, Mary Jo. Sometimes I think Mason is too busy with other clients and too old to multitask. 20-30 years ago, he probably would have caught this mistake, and in the end, this courtroom is not going to be a school, it's the real deal. No such thing as a dress rehearsal.
Hi Sherry - My guess is that Baez handled the court order and showed it to Mason after Ashton blew his top. Mason took a look at it and in defense of his partner, said it could be open to interpretation. Although the judge's order was quite clear, I do see where it could have been taken wrong, but at first glance, had I had any problems clearly understanding it, I would have called the judge for clarification. That's the big mistake and it shows a lack of experience, if not one of respect for the court.
Thanks. I was hoping it would be a thinker.
I'm convinced it takes a mind like yours to help a mind like mine to understand this court case, Dave. : o
The defense reminds me lyrics to a song "Messed up again" I've messed up again' Using all the facts and evidence I wonder if we can all meet and do a mock up of the position of Judge, state, defense, and a jury just to see what we would do with Casey. It would be a great experience to see what conclusion we come to without any pretrial opinion. Who wants to be Judge Perry? Since
JB is a bumbler, I'll take his role. lol
Dave, what a fiasco..Here comes the parade...Baez, the leader, is confused..Mason, 2nd in command, is showing signs of senile dementia. Then comes the Queen of liars and the woman with no heart..Casey Anthony.. Behind her is Cindi..Still looking for her Grand Child that she attended the memorial for..May find her on one of the TV shows she loves to get on. Behind her is poor George that doesn't have enough backbone to hold his head up...And bringing up the rear is Lee, the only one I can find any sympathy for...If it rains they will all melt.
Do i smell a great big appeal?? Ya think?
New Puppy, you can be prosecutor Frank George. He doesn't say much, but when he does, it's always well worth it.
Thank you, Sherry. I try to keep that in mind when I write.
I got confused trying to interpret the wording on those motions but that is nothing unusual. I foresee an emergency hearing taking place before the first of March to straighten out this complicated mess.
I do not believe that Judge Perry will hold Baez in contempt. I can see Judge Perry lecturing both Baez and Ashton. Baez, for waiting so long before attempting to get the motion clarified and Ashton for being too quick on the draw to retaliate.
Cheney Mason would love to see a mistrial. Actually that is the last straw he has to hang on to. . Judge Perry will do his utmost to avoid a mistrial even if it means bending a bit towards the defense. JMO
Thanks for the post, Dave.
Good article Dave but IMO... Baez is just practicing his way of sneaking around the courts orders to accomplish what he wants.. to meet with his Experts this week at convention and then reduce to writing their precise objections to any Frye evidence. During that last hearing Baez and Ashton were arguing about what those motions contained that the Defense wrote in December and Judge Perry even stated they were vague.. this was the reason for his order that says "SPECIFIC DETAILS IN WRITING ..... by Feb 17th 4PM with COURT and STATE..... How clear does the Honorable Judge Perry need to be... This is BS Jarb by Baez and Mason ...... I sure hope Judge Perry finds them both heavily and in civil contempt of court!!! Justice for the Florida Taxpayers is now being interfeared with IMO.... Justice for Caylee and Children like her!
GLENDA - I just watched Bob Kealing's first report on this fiasco and it seems more like the judge will have to referee a fight instead of sticking to the important issues. Richard Hornsby said it showed the state's frustration over the defense, but fell short of calling Baez a liar. The general concensus was that this motion was an overreaction. I kind of agree, but I didn't want to say it in my article. Besides, it could still go either way.
Do I smell an appeal? Nah, not over this. Not even close.
I really don't think Baez is as confused as he states. I think he had to go to his convention to get the specifics on what to include in his motion before refiling.This is what he emphasized in the last hearing. Judge Perry could just go with the original motion and not let anything else in. If Baez could not get clarification and file/refile the motion he should have ask Judge Perry for more time but then he was planning to leave the state was he not. This date in March has been set for a long time but like so many other times he is not ready.
The thing with playing dumb is that after a while everyone assumes you are dumb. Mr Baez has not proven that untrue.
The defense likes to remind the court that they're fighting for their client's life. Why then are they not even bothering to lace up their gloves? "death is different" after all.
I understand wanting to cut the defense team some slack but it's gotten to the point where the defense isn't even trying anymore, they just thumb their noses and stick out their tongues knowing they'll get what they want and "nah nah boo boo" to the State. This isn't about Casey, this is about a child, a dead child who is still being treated as though she doesn't matter. Only now it's not just her Mother doing it, her Mother's defense team is taking the "ooops I did it again" approach to lawyering.
When do we stop excusing this behavior? when does the Judge need to say "enough"? We're closing in on a trial and the defense team still seems to think this is a bit of a chuckle.
Mr Baez should know better and Mr Mason sure as heck should know better, so why are we still pooh poohing and making excuses for their behavior. Ask yourselves if you'd want these two as your attys should you ever be in a court of law, There's a difference between a failure to communicate and a willful choice to avoid it.
Dave: It was really nice to drop in and discover your new post. I've been really trying to understand these latest happens since last night, but I didn't come up with much.
Is it common for attorneys to make errors like this during the pretrial hearings? I've never followed a case in it's preliminary stages before, so I'm just wondering.
For me, what makes it seem as if it's a little more than an honest mistake is that this was a pretty important issue at the status hearing--Jeff Ashton made his point well. Mr. Ashton is very busy right now--he is currently involved in another trial, there is a two day hearing coming up for the Anthony case the first week of March (although that's mostly LDB motion's), then the Frye hearings the third week of March. He has to have some time to prepare, plus he has motions to write and depositions to take. Whew! (I kinda' feel for him.)
I don't blame him for being short on patience with Mr. Baez. I hesitate to guess what Judge Perry might do with this, I really think he expects a little more from the defense than what they have been giving. It's getting old now, I think.
The SS Casey is going to sink--leaving no survivors, if they are not careful.
Hi, Snoopy - To be honest, I don't think the judge will find him in contempt, either, but one other thing Kealing/Hornsby mentioned was the severe rift between Ashton and Baez, and this close to trial means there won't be any pretrial pleading. That's something I never thought would happen anyway, but it does show what seems to be a genuine disdain that will go to the bitter end.
I think you may be right. A mistrial would help the defense collect its thoughts and regroup, but in order for a mistrial to occur, the case would have to be into the trial, not before, in order for it to occur.
Hey, I'm glad you liked the post. Thank you.
Casey Anthony Plea Deal Unlikely Now Tense Relationship Between Defense, Prosecution Shows In Recent Motion
Hi, jeansee - Great to see you! I understand what you're saying, but even Richard Hornsby stated that what the defense failed to do falls short of contempt. Contempt is a heavy charge. What would happen if the judge let this defense go into a tailspin? It would fall apart and Casey would have to look for a new defense. By then, how many years will have passed? You see, as much as we may hold a personal contempt for Baez, what happens if we let hatred rum amok? This will be tough for the judge to handle, but that's why he's a judge and we aren't. In my opinion, this isn't worthy of contempt. Something else? Maybe, but I don't know what.
If this were the first time Baez and Company were late I would probably buy it. However it is not and it always comes down to we didn't understand or the State did this. I now see why Casey picked Jose, they are a lot alike. Nothing is their fault and they have an excuse for everything. JMO if I were Casey I would be scared for my life.
You know, nika1, when Baez was sanctioned and fined, two attorneys told me it's not unusual for lawyers to do what he did. It kept information out of the hands of the state for an additional month or so. Did Baez plan it that way? I don't know, but it wouldn't have been the first time. I don't recall anything about him leaving the state, but he certainly should have asked the court for more time. That's the part I don't understand. As for being ready, he'd better be because this trial will start without him.
Hi, marshmallow... hmm... hmm... hmm... Would I want either one of them as my defense attorneys? ... hmm... hmm... hmm... NO!
As for your comment, you were quite eloquent and it was written from your heart. As we get closer and closer to the trial, fear will possibly set in and it will get down to brass tacks. Will the defense be ready? Based on today, I'd say no, but once the trial is underway, it will be a whole new ball game.
When I first read this order I wondered what would have happened if Ashton had just let it go and then see what the judge let in or didn't let in because a deadline had been missed. I realize everyone wants the fairest hearing possible for Casey but deadlines are deadlines. Baez was sanctioned, he was warned, and now I think we'll probably hear a dressing down or a "this is the third strike" type of lecture. Judge Perry has already told Baez when he wanted to postpone depostions until after this conference that anything not in before a deadline would not be heard. That should apply to this also.
Reading a document is an interesting thing. Some people don't read in black and white but "read into" what's typed on the page. That's what your take on how Baez saw it seemed to me, and could just be how he read it. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'm 62 and around Cheney Mason's age and I can tell you from experience that the memory is just not what it used to be. It's very possible that Baez didn't SHOW Mason the order and ask him about it, or even email him. It's just very possible he talked to him on the phone and Mason misunderstood what he was saying due to his hearing problem.
An interesting side note. After seeing your link to Cheney Mason's website I went looking for Jose Baez's. On the Baez Law firm website every link leads back to the same/main page. Even a list of lawyers links back to that first page. The only link that worked was the lawyer's area which was restricted. Kinda fits, ya know. All links are dead ends.
I agree with Laurali. If this was their first stalling attempt I might buy it, but Judge Perry has always made it very clear that he is available, or someone on his staff is available, to answer questions. His style in the last hearing was much like someone trying to make it very clear to a child exactly what they expected from them point by point. Heck, he even took on some of Baez's work load by making phone calls for him.
For some reason I hear Twilight Zone music...
Great post Dave!
I do agree with Mr Hornsby, this won't end in a contempt charge but the State is firing a warning shot. They've had enough. They are working hard to take this to trial and to them, and most of us, it appears that the defense is not even trying. The only member of the defense squad who seems to be taking this seriously is the penalty phase atty. Her I respect. Her I'd hire, not that I'd need to :)
Thanks for the article Dave ...When all is said an done .There is no defence for the indefenceable.Caseys insistance on innocence makes her attorneys jobs impossable...Even Johny Cochrane would fail to get a result less than natural life for Casey....We dont know wether her lawers have told Casey her story is B S ..An she is bound to be found guilty unless she fess up .An try to conceive some sort of accident senario or dimminished capacity defence...If they havent had a come to Jesus meeting with Casey then they are not acting in there clients best intrests..Perhaps Baez is an agent of the state........
Dave, who is George Frank? I have never heard of him.
Thank you, nan11. Yes, I guess this post was sort of a surprise, but I thought it was something that needed addressing.
I think everyone makes mistakes, pretrial and during the actual trial. I mean, who could ever forget Christopher Darden asking OJ to try on the gloves? That was not just an error, that was downright stupid.
I know that Ashton is quite busy, but so is everyone else. For certain, he made himself enough time to file the motion and he'll make more time to argue it if necessary. That's not to counter what you wrote, but I just don't think this mistake quite reached the level of contempt of court. We'll see. Even if he isn't held in contempt, that doesn't mean Baez will get off without, let's say, a reprimand of some kind, but the judge must tiptoe delicately here because something may be argued later on if Casey is convicted and up for appeal.
No doubt, the SS Casey is listing, but she hasn't sunk.
Time for NCIS. I'll be back, Laura.
Please feel free to discuss this. I'm sure there are a lot of opinions and valid thoughts.
It's Frank George, New Puppy, not George Frank. He's the third prosecutor who is usually quiet, but he's very, very good.
When I look at the whole picture of what has been taking place for over the past two years plus, I see stall, stall, stall. There has been so many motions filed, a lot of them with errors that had to be rewritten, causing delays.
Up until the time Casey was declared indigent, the only action we saw was the check/fraud trial. Little preparation was needed by the defense for that trial ( which ended up with Casey pleading) because the state had enough evidence that the defense could not dispute.
There was lots of money in the kitty to the tune of close to $300 grand, yet very little was shown, in the way of work product, where all that money was spent. I do believe there will have to be an accounting for all those dollars after this trial is over. Someone will have to reimburse JAC, if this is pursued by an attorney who would like to challenge Baez on the State's behalf.
In my humble opinion, Baez dreads this trial getting under way. He knows he cannot quit this case and he also knows that it will take more than a miracle to get Casey less than LWOP. Baez already knows that he is inexperience and is trying to bluff his way along for as long as he can. My question is; Why isn't Cheney Mason taking a more active role even if he has to back Baez into a corner and lecture him., teach him, show him where he is going wrong?
Cheney Mason is also bluffing his way along. This is with all due respect, it seems that Mason's hearing has worsened and he is having difficulty grasping what has been going on lately. This is sad as he was a very adept attorney in his day but it is not showing now. I noticed when Cheney made his arguments the few times at the hearings, he seemed confused and rambled off in different directions. If Baez used Mason's name without permission in his reponse to the court, I would not be surprised to see Cheney wave bye bye to Baez and get out while he had a good excuse.
I hope my rambling is not driving anyone nuts.... if so, just scroll on by. I just type what comes into the old old old noggin.
I meant to add....as more proof of Baez wanting to delay the trial....he asked Judge Perry for 30 days to be able to object to the judge's choice of county where jury selection will take place. I doubt if it will be any one of the three counties that Baez wanted so it is almost a given, Baez will object. I believe Judge Perry set the date of May 4th to hear any objections re the county.
Hey Dave, amazing post today, can this Defense get any stranger. I do not know if this makes sense but I do not understand why the Defense did not undertand the order? From what I understand about your post is that they "thought" it was OK not to respond to the order because it was a repeat of of the previous one. I now wonder if this is all a ruse to act like idiots so when Casey is found Guilty she can say she did not have adequate counsel. They have to know that they are way over their heads with this case. I believe they have thrown the last of their arsenal to the wall and nothing has stuck. What to do what to do now, not much more is out there. Perhaps they are waiting for the State to offer a plea. But knowing Casey, she would never accept it.
Frank George, see I am better as JB. Having a name wrong would cause another delay.
Anyway, I found out a reason my words do not post sometimes. I was not typing in the security letters before clicking create. Thanks for your tolerance, JB
BTW Good Post Dave, you give us education. A lot of people benefit from reading your facts and takes. You give us reason for great conversations. NP
Casey agreed with the State to share in discovery. Has the Defense ever shared anything? It seems like they are really wanting to do trial by ambush. I know JP said this will not happen but imo that is exactly where all these missed deadlines are going. They are stalling to the very last minute. I will not be surprised if Jose does not lose his license after all of this. I am really wondering if he even has a license. If I were Cindy and George I would be begging Mason to step up to the plate, unless his idea of fun is watching his client get the D.P..
Laura~~I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Judge Perry ask Casey if she is satisfied with her counsel, to date, at one of the hearings. In that way, he can get it on the record.
As he should Snoopy. I am not a fan of Casey's but a fair trial is so important and at this point how can it be fair when her Lawyers seem to be out to lunch. JP really needs to let them know this is it. He did explain this motion in court the last time, Jose just blew this off. I think he has been preoccupied with his "once in a life time trip to Chicago" for the Forensics conference.
Dave, with all due respect, kudos for trying to be fair minded,but I think you are being very kind to the defense. If I had been publicly dressed down and fined for not following the rules, you bet I would have read the Order sideways to make sure it was followed to the tee! I think Baez knows Judge Perry will cut him slack for being so green. You bet I am going to record the next hearing coming up. Sounds like some fireworks are going to happen. Dave, if you get close to Mason please ask him to walk to the podium to address the Court. Really hard to make out anything he says. The poor court reporter trying to make out his mumbling. Is it as bad in the courtroom as it comes across on t.v.? He is starting to look like someone that needed to retire 10 years ago. Maybe by now, he wishes he had!
Dave,
Another great read and more confusing than ever! After reading through all the comments, I found myself sitting here with nothing to say. I don't believe the judge will find him in contempt, nor do I think there will be any plea deals. The best part of all of this Baez/Mason shenanigans is.they reminded me of when I was young and the one program I watched faithfully was the "Three Stooges." I loved those three!! So this whole article brought to mind one of my favorite episodes! "Disorder in the Court" Please watch everyone! I am wondering if anyone else was feeling this way!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZeqHamjyjU
I'm a little bit tired tonight, so I am going to take it easy for a while. I do want to say that the defense has made an awful lot of mistakes and it continues to. As I said in my article, this could go either way with the judge. I happen to lean toward no contempt, but that has nothing to do with any empathy or support for the defense. It's a matter of whether it's reached that level or not, and if the judge questions whether it might benefit Casey on appeal by offering a good reason for one if convicted.
If the judge finds the defense in contempt of court, isn't that tantamount to an admission of ineffective counsel? I will leave you with that thought.
Goodnight Dave,
Get some sleep and we'll see what tomorrow brings.
Dave~~ I will quote you, " If the judge finds the defense in contempt of court, isn't that tantamount to an admission of ineffective counsel? "
This is what makes you great at what you do. You examine all the angles and see how logical or illogical a decision by the judge could be. Bravo! I would never even come close to seeing what the outcome of a contempt charge against Baez might bring. Thank you for another great teaching post and for being right here for us. Have a restful night, Dave.
Very good article Dave. Thank you for your plain talk. I think Baez is just basically lazy and does just enough to satisfy his own conscious. I believe he has just been shuffling along for two years at his own pace, not being too concerned about the actual trial date., The time is short now but the money is all gone, he's getting nothing, having to beg people to get what he wants at JAC rates. I think he has grown tired of Casey and this case, and is going to do as little co-operating as possible. Jeff Ashton knows time is short and he is going to hold Baez feet to the fire to make sure he doesn't delay this trial. Poor Judge Perry is going to have to have the patience of Job,to get this trial to fruition. I believe Baez pays as much attention to Judge Perry orders,as he did to the artcle you wrote about Casey, that brought on the fiasco with Judge Strickland.He only read the headline. One question, no matter the outcome of this trial, will Baez then be qualified as a death penalty lawyer? Thank you in advance. I am an N.C.I.S. fan also. Abby is my favorite.
Wow! So Jose hasn't had the dead-end links on his website fixed since I last checked over there, what, a year ago now? Oh, right, we are talking about Jose here, yeah, check.
Such a fiasco, and it's all going to be televised!
If Baez is found to be in contempt and ineffective counsel is determined, would that result in a new trial, or could Cheney Mason be declared lead counsel and the case continue, uninterrupted, without Baez?
I've been looking back through JB's professional history and find it troubling that he tried his hand at non-profit's such as his Miracles For Children Foundation Corporation. If he'd steal or otherwise misuse money entrusted to him by his clients might he not also misuse funds donated to his own charity?
Was he hoping to make a sizable profit from his own nonprofit organizations? I tend to think so.
Having experience in setting up such nonprofits, did he assist the Anthonys and Milsteads in setting up the Caylee Foundation? Who handled all of the legalities? Was it Baez? Though it would be beyond unethical, was he looking to gain monetarily from the Caylee Foundation, though that may have been limited to the Anthonys better ability to pay his fees via donations made to the Foundation.
Countless are the nonprofits that have been shut down for fraudulent use and abuse of the underprivileged and disabled. I'm so rather suspicious of Baez and his true motives behind starting such nonprofits in light of how he has conducted himself and managed the funds made available to him, throughout this Anthony fiasco.
Karen C. Ha! If he fixed the links there would be direct evidence to support the fact that the man is bold faced (I'll be nice) fabricator of fact. lol
In 2 years what has Jose done? What evidence or discovery has he really shared that could prove his client is innocent? Roy K., Jesse G. and anyone else he attempted to throw under the Casey bus does not count. My question is what would Jose do if the state were doing to him, what he is doing to them? I am guessing he would be just as upset as Ashton. Being a liar or lazy is not an excuse when your client is now fighting for her life. I am starting to believe the Defense team and Casey are living in a fantasy world where she really does not have to answer for her crime. May 9th is the real deal. The last 2 years has been a practice run and if this is the best they can do God help Casey when the real deal starts.
Now isn't that interesting? Miracles For Children Foundation is listed as an inactive FOR profit corporation, in the Articles of Incorporation, not a nonprofit. I don't know if this link will work, but here it is, to the Articles, if anyone's interested.
http://www.sunbiz.org/pdf/80784598.pdf
The Articles list Baez as President, show him living in Kissimmee, though the Corporation was run out of Miami.
Article III dealing with purposes reads "To assist children in need, which includes but is not limited to: Shelter, food, medical, education and development."
Yeah right. I'm just not buying it. Having a disabled child who's reliant upon many such services I have seen first hand the FRAUD that goes on. On more than one occasion the Feds have come knocking to validate services my son has or has not received. I've seen some of Bobby's therapists go to prison for misappropriation of funds. In one case I was paying $150 per hour for services that were also being billed to medicaid for payment.
Is it any wonder that I'm suspicious of a Baez who seems to prefer sitting back and just letting the bucks roll in rather than really working for or at anything. His representation of Casey sure seems to indicate that. He can't even get off his duff to comply with the judge's deadlines, nor even to make a few phone calls.
I'm paraphrasing here, so forgive me, "What I don't understand, Mr. Baez, is why you can't just pick up the phone and make a call ..."
"Well, Judge, it's like this, uh, ummm, I, ummm, she's on vacation you know and I, um, uh"
GM Dave, I have to comment back to Feathers..Having worked for a non profit organization in the past I know the tricks of hows and whys..The name itself is so misleading..The people running it take big salaries, bonuses, free cars. You name it they can get it..And some are NEVER checked out..I began to feel dirty myself as it went on and on and I had to get out..Here's the biggie..They were billing Medicare big fees for services rendered and it was all legal. Nursing Homes played a big part in this...They sign a contract with you and they don't care what you bill as long as they can say they offer the services. I have been retired for several years but know this still goes on.
Baez will find a way to get his pay..It just may be later than sooner. And no doubt it will be legal to.
Everyone has probably already seen this, (because it has been well viewed lately), but I'll put a link up for it just in case someone missed it: The Baez Law Firm
For more info, you can click on the 'home' button when the commercial is over.
Dave, in your response to Nika1, you forgot Baez was going out of town this week for the convention- to meet with the experts. This could well explain the stall tactics.
I don't think they're going for a mistrial so much as simply trying to delay this trial while they continue to wait for the "aha" moment a la an expert who can finally say there's no way Casey could have done this.
Whoa! Nan! I hadn't seen that! Fancy dancy, eh?
The links didn't work though.
I've read here and there, regarding his site when the links did work. He claimed that he won 34 out of 35 cases tried in Miami. The problem with that is that he wasn't licensed to practice law and was only interning at the time, so he couldn't have won the cases he claimed as his own. He could only have assisted the attorney(s) who did.
In nothing I've read does he mention having been an intern when the cases were won. Nor does he elaborate on them. Nor does he mention any other attorneys. He takes all of the credit for the 34 wins and that's rather disingenuous, don't you think?
The ad you provided would have made me laugh, if it wasn't so sad. His pompous backside is showing. Golden lions? Gleaming, what is that, mahogany? Not bad for one who's only been in practice for a few years.
Anyway, talk about (imho) misrepresentation! He talks about IT personnel and the latest technologies but doesn't know how to pick up a phone and make a call? Oh that's right. His interns are supposed to do that for him, right?
Very nice office. I wonder what his rent is, a month. Scary thought for someone who has to rely on the JAC now, for his bread and butter, huh?
Have a great day, all!