For those watching the Casey A. trial.....
- Thread starter klmno
- Start date
klmno
Active Member
Ok- I found it- Burdick is her last name, apparently. I went back and watched a video from this morning. It sounds like the judge asked confirmation from Ms. Burdick on her agreement that a legal matter came up that warrants recess until Monday. Then, I heard a man's voice and the judge turned his head so I take it that was Baez speaking and I think he was saying that they might as well, but didn't sound too happy about it. I'm interested if anyone else heard this, interpreted what I did, and what, if anything, you make of it.
I couldn't hear what the defense attorney said when the judge asked if they were in agreement. After court they went back to Mason's office if that means anything.
I'm trying to find a replay of this morning but I remember looking very carefully at Casey during the time she was back in the court room and the attorneys were still in chambers. She was intently (and I mean intently) reading something on her computer screen. Someone said it was a transcript of what happened in the judge's chambers but whatever it was she never averted her eyes from it. Also, Simms was very quiet and staring into space while this was going on. The whole defense table was very quiet and no one was talking to anyone. George left the court room for a short time and when he came back he had papers in his hand that he was reading while sitting there, he looked like he was crying.
The transcript of what went on in the judges chambers is sealed and none of the attorneys are allowed to talk about it. That tells me it's attorney problems. If Mason has asked to be released due to perjuried testimony that would explain the secrecy. Of course this is all speculation but I don't think Judge Perry would ever suspend court today unless it was something that will change the course of this trial.
Nancy
I'm trying to find a replay of this morning but I remember looking very carefully at Casey during the time she was back in the court room and the attorneys were still in chambers. She was intently (and I mean intently) reading something on her computer screen. Someone said it was a transcript of what happened in the judge's chambers but whatever it was she never averted her eyes from it. Also, Simms was very quiet and staring into space while this was going on. The whole defense table was very quiet and no one was talking to anyone. George left the court room for a short time and when he came back he had papers in his hand that he was reading while sitting there, he looked like he was crying.
The transcript of what went on in the judges chambers is sealed and none of the attorneys are allowed to talk about it. That tells me it's attorney problems. If Mason has asked to be released due to perjuried testimony that would explain the secrecy. Of course this is all speculation but I don't think Judge Perry would ever suspend court today unless it was something that will change the course of this trial.
Nancy
klmno
Active Member
The commentators are now doing a whole lot of speculating that this has something to do with the conflict between the defense attnys. I take it you are sayimg just Baez and Mason went to Mason's office- but not the prosecuting attnys, too? If the prosecuting attnys went, too, then maybe it's an even bigger issue. What does your husband speculate?
No the prosecutors did not go, just defense team. I was wondering if they usually went to Baez's office and them going to Mason's office was different today. He thinks it's the attorney rift and that Mason has asked to be released. This is a huge ethical problem for a defense attorney because he cannot support perjury and yet has to be very careful not to leave the defendant unrepresented. He also has to walk a tightrope when discussing what the rift is so he doesn't compromise the defendants right to a fair trial.
I don't know if that's it but I do know that Mason is not happy with what's going on.
nancy
I don't know if that's it but I do know that Mason is not happy with what's going on.
nancy
Last edited:
donna723
Well-Known Member
Did anyone notice when they showed Baez and Mason leaving the court house? They were as far apart as they could get, neither one looking at the other, each acting like the other one wasn't even there!
So if Mason is withdrawing from the case, where does that leave them? If I understood it right, Mason was there because they had to have an attorney with death penalty experience and Baez was still so green? And I thought they were saying that they had to have at least five years as an attorney which Baez did not have at the beginning of the trial? So does this mean that they will have to replace Mason with another attorney before the trial could resume?
So if Mason is withdrawing from the case, where does that leave them? If I understood it right, Mason was there because they had to have an attorney with death penalty experience and Baez was still so green? And I thought they were saying that they had to have at least five years as an attorney which Baez did not have at the beginning of the trial? So does this mean that they will have to replace Mason with another attorney before the trial could resume?
klmno
Active Member
I heard all that, too, Donna. But when I saw the replay it wasn't so much the distance between them I noticed because they each had bags on wheels they were pulling behind them, but I did notice they seemed to be looking in opposite directions, in an extreme, avoiding manner. And Baez apparently called one commentator or JVM to clarify his legnth of experience- but I still heard from others that Baez didn't have the experience on a death penalty case that would be required for Casey's trial in Fl. Mason does. But then they mentioned some lady attny who had been there as part of the team early on, then left, but that they can get her back.
Nancy, you bring up some very interesting things. I wonder what kind of leong term effect on the trial it has if Mason went in there in front of the judge, Baez, and Ashton and said he knew Cindy and/or Lee committed perjury. While the immediate problem is what to do about Casey having a legal defense team and fair trial, and maybe no one really wants to pursue perjury charges under these circumstances but that can be decided later, what on earth do you do to proceed with a trial and be fair to Casey without biasing the jury or starting all over? Something, in some way, just got to be too much for somebody and I think it's more than coincidence that Casey did appear to be upset this morning after Baez went to speak with her, and the commentator said he didn't normally do that right before trial was set to begin. But whatever it was had to have either come out last night or Mason has just been burdened with something for a couple of days and finally felt he couldn;'t continue this way. Then, too, I heard maybe it was Baez that wanted rid of Mason. Mason apparently has astounding credentials and experience but Baez wouldn't let him take much of the case, but then they all feel he botched the questioning with Dr. G, from a defense standpoint.
Then I can't help but wonder if the previous interchange between the defense and Ashoton was the root. Baez or Mason kept insinuating the prosecution didn't do what they should, Ashton got ticked and finally told them if they wanted to challenge it in court (or something to that effect), then "bring it on". And maybe they did.
I bet the judge is about fed up with all this koi. But I also think Baez has gotten to a point where he has almost challenged the judge and looked way less than happy yesterday evening when the judge denied two of the defense witnesses to go on stand then said they would have court today until mid-afternoon. Baez almost looked like "oh no we won't" went thru his mind.
I'll be surprised if this trial ever ends smoothly, like our judicial process is intended, and if there aren't sudden appeals based on inadequacies or mis-judgements, if it ever actually gets finished without a mistrial.
Nancy, you bring up some very interesting things. I wonder what kind of leong term effect on the trial it has if Mason went in there in front of the judge, Baez, and Ashton and said he knew Cindy and/or Lee committed perjury. While the immediate problem is what to do about Casey having a legal defense team and fair trial, and maybe no one really wants to pursue perjury charges under these circumstances but that can be decided later, what on earth do you do to proceed with a trial and be fair to Casey without biasing the jury or starting all over? Something, in some way, just got to be too much for somebody and I think it's more than coincidence that Casey did appear to be upset this morning after Baez went to speak with her, and the commentator said he didn't normally do that right before trial was set to begin. But whatever it was had to have either come out last night or Mason has just been burdened with something for a couple of days and finally felt he couldn;'t continue this way. Then, too, I heard maybe it was Baez that wanted rid of Mason. Mason apparently has astounding credentials and experience but Baez wouldn't let him take much of the case, but then they all feel he botched the questioning with Dr. G, from a defense standpoint.
Then I can't help but wonder if the previous interchange between the defense and Ashoton was the root. Baez or Mason kept insinuating the prosecution didn't do what they should, Ashton got ticked and finally told them if they wanted to challenge it in court (or something to that effect), then "bring it on". And maybe they did.
I bet the judge is about fed up with all this koi. But I also think Baez has gotten to a point where he has almost challenged the judge and looked way less than happy yesterday evening when the judge denied two of the defense witnesses to go on stand then said they would have court today until mid-afternoon. Baez almost looked like "oh no we won't" went thru his mind.
I'll be surprised if this trial ever ends smoothly, like our judicial process is intended, and if there aren't sudden appeals based on inadequacies or mis-judgements, if it ever actually gets finished without a mistrial.
donna723
Well-Known Member
I think Baez is skating on thin ice with Judge Perry, and if he's not careful, that judge will have him for breakfast! He's losing patience with his antics and he's already warned him and threatened to take action several times and Baez keeps on challenging him! Ashton has come close to losing it a few times too but I think his comes from being so frustrated with the nonsense from Baez.
I'm not sure what the womans name was who, for a time, was part of the defense team. But she appeared on TV this morning offering her opinions to the HLN commentators. So I wonder if she would still be eligible to go back as a member of the legal team after she had done that? Now watch, if (when!) Casey is found guilty, they will file an appeal on the grounds that she had ineffective counsel! Well, she was the one who picked him! And she is the one who chooses to keep him, even after he has made error after error. And now it looks like the only one on her legal team who seemed to know what he was doing may be leaving! Maybe picking a green newbie lawyer who hangs around the jail trolling for cases on the advice of another inmate wasn't the brightest thing she could have done.
I'm not sure what the womans name was who, for a time, was part of the defense team. But she appeared on TV this morning offering her opinions to the HLN commentators. So I wonder if she would still be eligible to go back as a member of the legal team after she had done that? Now watch, if (when!) Casey is found guilty, they will file an appeal on the grounds that she had ineffective counsel! Well, she was the one who picked him! And she is the one who chooses to keep him, even after he has made error after error. And now it looks like the only one on her legal team who seemed to know what he was doing may be leaving! Maybe picking a green newbie lawyer who hangs around the jail trolling for cases on the advice of another inmate wasn't the brightest thing she could have done.
DDD
Well-Known Member
I wonder, Donna, how a Defendant gets a pro bono attorney. That's an interesting thing to think about. I know (or at least I think I know) that Baez offered to represent her. There is no doubt that he is a personable guy with a penchant for defense. But...I'd love to know how many choices she had. I've never read anything about that in my years of being an avid reader. Do you suppose that a Defendant with-o independent funds gets to reach out for representation? Obviously OJ had the funds to find his team but what about those who have no assets. Perhaps he was her only choice or perhaps I just don't know how that part of the Court system works...quite possible! Does anyone know? DDD
klmno
Active Member
I think I read somewhere that a good amount of money was there to begin with (around $200,000 but am not positive and can't remember where that came from- oh maybe it was Casey selling a story or photos), when he took the case, then (I'm not sure which happened first), Casey was charged with first degree murder and since he was already her attorney, he got assigned to lead the defense team, and specualtion is that he at least in part, did it for his career and noteriety. Some funds are still available for the defense but are being used for witensses, costs of it all, etc. So now he is considered a court appointed attny.
To me, this point is kind of a wash because I can see both sides. But that's just my opinion. She has a lot better defense attny than someone without the publicity would get from a court-appointed defense attny. If he charged $200 an hour and used that up in 6 mos (or whatever), then decided to stick with it because it will make him a famous attny, that's not unheard of.
What defense attny do you think she should have gotten? Just MHO, I am probably one of the very few that don't believe it was OJ's defense team that won that case for him. I think it was that the prosecution botched it. Would my son ever get a defense attny as good as either Casey's or OJ's- pretty doubtful. Does anyone besides me care- probably not.
DDD, I could consider the "victim" theory for Casey if you, or her attnys could provide something substantial to base it on that would justify her being a mother that could have something to do with this, even if her involvement really was as minor as covering it up, but I just don't see anyone coming up with anything other than emotional people saying "it could be".
To me, this point is kind of a wash because I can see both sides. But that's just my opinion. She has a lot better defense attny than someone without the publicity would get from a court-appointed defense attny. If he charged $200 an hour and used that up in 6 mos (or whatever), then decided to stick with it because it will make him a famous attny, that's not unheard of.
What defense attny do you think she should have gotten? Just MHO, I am probably one of the very few that don't believe it was OJ's defense team that won that case for him. I think it was that the prosecution botched it. Would my son ever get a defense attny as good as either Casey's or OJ's- pretty doubtful. Does anyone besides me care- probably not.
DDD, I could consider the "victim" theory for Casey if you, or her attnys could provide something substantial to base it on that would justify her being a mother that could have something to do with this, even if her involvement really was as minor as covering it up, but I just don't see anyone coming up with anything other than emotional people saying "it could be".
BusynMember
Well-Known Member
Thanks to all of your with legal experience for making this more interesting for me. I still don't understand what may have happened today, but seems like nobody is sure.
I'm going to put in my .02 on the case, which I've watched since the beginning.
If I were on that jury, I would find Casey guilty of murder. I actually am pretty sure she planned to do it and then threw her family under the bus, but because I'm not positive it wasn't manslaughter, I may have voted for that (if this were the end of the trial). I think Cindy, who has blindly supported her daughter in the past, knows Casey did it, but is trying to save her life by making things us up...I personally don't believe Cindy's testimony at all. I haven't forgotten those recorded jail tapes between Casey and her family. Didn't seem like a family cover up to me.
A word about OJ's trial. I won a lot of bets on that trial. I had no doubt he would walk. There was more to OJ than to this Anthony trial. I am not a prejudice person and have adopted and would die for both my asian and my black children. However, I think race was a big part of the OJ jury. They wanted to believe him...he was a black icon who had been accused of murder. I never thought they were going to convict him, evidence or not. Period. This trial with Casey has none of that going on. I think she's going to spend a lot of time in jail, unless it's a mistrial.
I think Baez is terrible. If I were sitting on that jury I would have to fight not to let my personal dislike of him get in the way of the evidence. Maybe it's good I'm not on the jury...lol.
Ok, go back to more informative posting
I read a lot of True Crime, but that is the extent of my legal knowledge.
I'm going to put in my .02 on the case, which I've watched since the beginning.
If I were on that jury, I would find Casey guilty of murder. I actually am pretty sure she planned to do it and then threw her family under the bus, but because I'm not positive it wasn't manslaughter, I may have voted for that (if this were the end of the trial). I think Cindy, who has blindly supported her daughter in the past, knows Casey did it, but is trying to save her life by making things us up...I personally don't believe Cindy's testimony at all. I haven't forgotten those recorded jail tapes between Casey and her family. Didn't seem like a family cover up to me.
A word about OJ's trial. I won a lot of bets on that trial. I had no doubt he would walk. There was more to OJ than to this Anthony trial. I am not a prejudice person and have adopted and would die for both my asian and my black children. However, I think race was a big part of the OJ jury. They wanted to believe him...he was a black icon who had been accused of murder. I never thought they were going to convict him, evidence or not. Period. This trial with Casey has none of that going on. I think she's going to spend a lot of time in jail, unless it's a mistrial.
I think Baez is terrible. If I were sitting on that jury I would have to fight not to let my personal dislike of him get in the way of the evidence. Maybe it's good I'm not on the jury...lol.
Ok, go back to more informative posting
I read a lot of True Crime, but that is the extent of my legal knowledge.
donna723
Well-Known Member
I think the parents paid for it in the beginning but they said on TV the other day that the state had already kicked in over $300,000 for her defense so far. And the longer it goes on and the more they drag it out, the more it will cost the state. I wouldn't think that her parents had that kind of money, a nurse and a retired cop, but besides the money that has come in front licensing and videos, there was also a large amount that had been contributed to be used as reward money when Caylee was still "missing".
And MWM, for my 2 cents worth, I completely agree with you about the OJ trial!
And MWM, for my 2 cents worth, I completely agree with you about the OJ trial!
donna723
Well-Known Member
Something else, it doesn't take much at all to be declared "indigent" and have the state pay for it all, even after they're found guilty and incarcerated. We had over 1,200 inmates at the prison where I worked and almost every one of them was "indigent". Even if the family has money, if they personally don't, they're "indigent". Even if they had a job and a good income before they were arrested, once they're incarcerated and there's no more income, they are "indigent"and can file all kinds of appeals and other court proceedings and the state has to pay for it!
DDD
Well-Known Member
I remember the hearing that took place on behalf of the Defense that the Prosecution had already spent X dollars and that the Defendant couldn't hire experts etc. with-o State funding for the Defense. As I've said before this trail prep has been "news" for three years. Casey did get money and the Court decreed that she had to forfeit the money she got for her Defense.
Even in our small town it costs $1800 to hire a Defense attorney for a violation of probation hearing that does not include violence (for example breaking curfew). That means, of course, that most end up with Public Defenders who are truly overworked and underpaid..although many are dedicated and some are PD's because they want regular employment and State benefits.
My point has never been that I believe Casey is innocent of all charges. on the other hand, if you have a choice of a private practice Defense attorney who is prepared to spend three years fighting to save your life you can't specify that you want a private attorney who has twenty plus years experience and a qualified support staff etc. Jose is inexprienced
(3 years I gather) and like all of us who work needs years to get better...but, he is there and doing his best. He'll never convince me that she is totally innocent but I believe he is doing his best based on his knowledge.
Also the Judge in the case did not assign the case to any less experienced Judges. He took the case himself. Once again proof that experience is key. This case is obviously BIG. I have never heard or read that any other private Defense attorney stepped up to the plate. If I were in private practice I wouldn't either. I believe that Baez is doing his best to save his client's life. Time will tell what his rep is, but he is the one that is trying (albeit sometimes not too effectively). DDD
Even in our small town it costs $1800 to hire a Defense attorney for a violation of probation hearing that does not include violence (for example breaking curfew). That means, of course, that most end up with Public Defenders who are truly overworked and underpaid..although many are dedicated and some are PD's because they want regular employment and State benefits.
My point has never been that I believe Casey is innocent of all charges. on the other hand, if you have a choice of a private practice Defense attorney who is prepared to spend three years fighting to save your life you can't specify that you want a private attorney who has twenty plus years experience and a qualified support staff etc. Jose is inexprienced
(3 years I gather) and like all of us who work needs years to get better...but, he is there and doing his best. He'll never convince me that she is totally innocent but I believe he is doing his best based on his knowledge.
Also the Judge in the case did not assign the case to any less experienced Judges. He took the case himself. Once again proof that experience is key. This case is obviously BIG. I have never heard or read that any other private Defense attorney stepped up to the plate. If I were in private practice I wouldn't either. I believe that Baez is doing his best to save his client's life. Time will tell what his rep is, but he is the one that is trying (albeit sometimes not too effectively). DDD
DammitJanet
Well-Known Member
You guys have some very interesting theories on what has taken place today. I am going to have to turn on HLN and listen because I missed most of it today. All I saw was the fact that they dismissed court early but not the exact reasons why. Now I am really curious. Oh I would love to find out they got the goods on someone I dont like...lol. Finding out that they have proof that Baez has been allowing Cindy to perjure herself would just make my day. or lee..doesnt matter to me.
DDD, Baez has six years experience and I think you give him far too much credit. The man cannot formulate a question that isn't leading even after several tries. He really is not very competent and should be much more so by now. Perhaps he should have joined a law firm that could mentor him along the way but from what I understand he was one of those attorneys that hung around the jail waiting for clients and that's how Casey found him, another inmate said he was good. Even Casey's parents tried to get her to switch but she wouldn't. I think from the very beginning he saw this as his ticket to fame but he has made such a name for himself that judges will be waiting to eat him up. Judge Perry is extremely patient, much more than most other judges who have no tolerance for his tactics and incompetence.
To be successful as a defense attorney you have to be very very good, and have the respect of other lawyers and judges. Judges know when you come into their court room that you are prepared and you know the law. There are many defense attorneys who do defense work because they believe in the system of justice and that it is far worse to send one innocent person to jail than let 100 guilty people go free. I don't see Baez as this kind of lawyer.
In Ohio if you have an attorney and run out of money you can be declared indigent and ask the court to appoint your lawyer so he is paid by the state. We currently have a big county corruption case going on and the client said he was now indigent after paying for his attorney for the past couple years, and wanted his lawyer paid out of state funds. The court said no because he owned several properties which were worth quite a bit and he had to sell those first.
Nancy
To be successful as a defense attorney you have to be very very good, and have the respect of other lawyers and judges. Judges know when you come into their court room that you are prepared and you know the law. There are many defense attorneys who do defense work because they believe in the system of justice and that it is far worse to send one innocent person to jail than let 100 guilty people go free. I don't see Baez as this kind of lawyer.
In Ohio if you have an attorney and run out of money you can be declared indigent and ask the court to appoint your lawyer so he is paid by the state. We currently have a big county corruption case going on and the client said he was now indigent after paying for his attorney for the past couple years, and wanted his lawyer paid out of state funds. The court said no because he owned several properties which were worth quite a bit and he had to sell those first.
Nancy
Last edited:
H
HaoZi
Guest
If it goes all the way to a death sentence, all I can say is I'm pretty sure her appellate attorney will be a lot more competent than Baez.
Similar threads
