Hearing - 3/18/10 Discussion - LOCKED

I have a feeling that this new guy is going to be GOOD for this case. Judge Strickland doesn't seem to be liking his BS much.

Jack is on the phone...said something about wanting KC to testify re this indigency under oath...Mason said in a few words...NO WAY

Thanks Fysty! InSession is on PST so they are not even to the hearing yet. Still talking about fraud trial.

Oh, do you mean JAC Estee? The agency that monitors indengency funds?

Whoops...looks like Mason was thrown for a loop re getting Fl expert to set CAPS

BTW...Estee...Just a few more days till I come to Florida. I am SO looking forward to meeting you in person! Haven't heard from KariBear. Please let her know I'll be there from Mar 23 to April 7th.

Yeah right Bozo! Shut Up!

I noticed that Spindy tried to get a glimpse of KC as she was being led from the court room. KC on the other hand, never even looked their way.

I'll call Kari tonight ...I had sent her a PM, but she hasn't responded yet....

ABC put $200,000 in a trust fund for Casey!
The fired attorney gave her $70,000!
$5000 from an anonymous donor!

That's 275 thou, minus the 110 admitted paid out, where is the other 95 thou?

And that guy Mason seemed to think he and he alone could deem Casey 'obviously indigent"- What the heck???? kh

I agree, the defense came to this hearing without paperwork to support their case? They are still hiding something! What is it?

My biggie of the day!

Did you all catch Baez saying he was 'retained' by Casey on JUNE 17th? OK, just a misspeak, OR does this explain why he was readily available at the jail when Casey got arrested? There's always been confusion over just how Casey chose Baez! What if it wasn't a misspeak and he screwed up and told the truth by accident?

Great point Lottie. He was certainly squirming. The entire dufense team found the whole morning very amusing. He brought this motion and brought no paperwork??? WTF??? kh

Wow, what a hearing. That was the strangest thing I have ever seen. I don't think Strickland was very amused though.

According to information provided by the State in a motion to block the
judge’s Thursday release of the evidence, “the Orange County Sheriff’s
Office was contacted by an inmate in the Florida Department of
Correction, who stated that she had communications with the Defendant
while in the Orange County Jail.”According to the State’s motion,
“that inmate was interviewed on or about the 22nd day of January 2010
and relayed potentially relevant statements by the Defendant, which are
not in the nature of a confession, and gave the name of another inmate
who also had communication with the Defendant. The second inmate,
presently incarcerated in Federal Prison, was interviewed on or about
the 27th day of January 2010 and reluctantly confirmed communication
with the Defendant adding that she had received approximately fifty
written communications from the Defendant which were then in the
possession of another individual whose identity was provided to the
Orange County Sheriffs Office.”The motion goes on to reveal that
the State believes “the documents ... appear to contain relevant
statements of the Defendant,” but do not include a confession.The
State continues, “In a subsequent the interview with F.D.L.E. on
February 12 2010, the federal inmate detailed how her friendship with
the Defendant began and developed, how the documents came into
existence, were transmitted and were maintained. She stated the
friendship and all communication ended when she was transferred to
federal custody. She stated that the friendship was not at the request
of any law enforcement personnel nor was she asked to relay any
information obtained to any law enforcement personnel. She did imply
that an Orange County Corrections officer may have facilitated the
communication once the friendship had begun but indicated a desire not
to ‘get anyone in trouble.’”The State’s motion asks for an
additional delay in the release of the documents, stating that “it is
anticipated that the investigation should be completed within the next
thirty days and that any premature revelation of these matters could
compromise the integrity of the investigation case.”

That inmate was interviewed on or about the 22nd day of January 2010 and
relayed potentially relevant statements by the Defendant, which are not in the
nature of a confession, and gave the name of another inmate who also had
communication with the Defendant.
3. The second inmate, presently incarcerated in Federal Prison, was interviewed
on or about the 27th day of January 2010 and reluctantly confirmed
communication with the Defendant adding that she had received approximately
fifty written communications from the Defendant which were then in the
possession of another individual whose identity was provided to the Orange
County Sheriffs Office.
(snip)
http://www.wftv.com/pdf/22876634/detail.html

I'm going to go watch the hearing again khintx, but I paid attention after Jose said he was retained on JUNE 17 and Casey went into complete eyeball shock and didn't find anything humorous after that. Lyon looked a bit distracted as well after that remark.

I'm stuck on that slippage of Baez's! Caylee supposedly died on June 16th! If she actually did get Baez involved on June 17th that's very telling! He was right there at the jail house the day she was arrested - supposedly soliciting clients. I'm really thinking karma for Caylee has made Baez screw up and say JUNE 17th! Or maybe he didn't have a choice since he was put under oath in testimony!

Lottie~ So- is this the other show that's gonna drop?! kh

If anyone finds the complete hearing online, please post the link or embed it. Thanks in advance.