imsirius
Prolific Pea
Call it as I see it.
Posts: 7,661
Location: Floating in the black veil.
Jul 12, 2014 19:59:28 GMT
|
Post by imsirius on May 27, 2016 14:07:57 GMT
|
|
oh yvonne
Prolific Pea
Posts: 8,111
Jun 26, 2014 0:45:23 GMT
|
Post by oh yvonne on May 27, 2016 14:13:25 GMT
I read the headlines but I don't even want to read it. Such a disgusting, disgusting travesty of justice.  |
|
|
|
Post by annabella on May 27, 2016 14:14:25 GMT
It's actually hearsay from the investigator, 5 years later. Jose Baez posted a letter on twitter refuting the claims.
|
|
|
|
Post by femalebusiness on May 27, 2016 14:16:14 GMT
It's actually hearsay from the investigator, 5 years later. Jose Baez posted a letter on twitter refuting the claims. Well, of course he did. I hope no one ever forgets he got that monster off. |
|
imsirius
Prolific Pea
Call it as I see it.
Posts: 7,661
Location: Floating in the black veil.
Jul 12, 2014 19:59:28 GMT
|
Post by imsirius on May 27, 2016 14:16:34 GMT
I think it's a travesty that he knew for sure she did it, and he still tried to pin it on the meter worker and her dad. I mean, yes, defend your client of course, but SHIT, try to put the blame on someone you know damn well is innocent and had absolutely NOTHING to do with any of it? That's evil....really fricken evil.
|
|
imsirius
Prolific Pea
Call it as I see it.
Posts: 7,661
Location: Floating in the black veil.
Jul 12, 2014 19:59:28 GMT
|
Post by imsirius on May 27, 2016 14:17:52 GMT
It's actually hearsay from the investigator, 5 years later. Jose Baez posted a letter on twitter refuting the claims. I read it's actually in court documents. If that's true, then could that be considered perjury on Baez part? For making up a story about the meter guy? Could he be disbarred over that? Of course he's going to refute it....this is his livelihood on the line. |
|
|
|
Post by SweetieBugs on May 27, 2016 14:31:18 GMT
Wait, I'm confused. I thought Casey Anthony was the woman who stabbed her boyfriend in the shower and for some reason there were some photos of the event (maybe a cell phone was on record or something like that). That is all I know and apparently I don't know anything.
|
|
scorpeao
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,524
Location: NorCal USA
Jun 25, 2014 21:04:54 GMT
|
Post by scorpeao on May 27, 2016 14:33:44 GMT
Wait, I'm confused. I thought Casey Anthony was the woman who stabbed her boyfriend in the shower and for some reason there were some photos of the event (maybe a cell phone was on record or something like that). That is all I know and apparently I don't know anything. That's Jodi Arias....she's another monster |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 20:12:12 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2016 14:37:34 GMT
I think it's a travesty that he knew for sure she did it, and he still tried to pin it on the meter worker and her dad. I mean, yes, defend your client of course, but SHIT, try to put the blame on someone you know damn well is innocent and had absolutely NOTHING to do with any of it? That's evil....really fricken evil. I know there a decent defense attorneys but I could never be one. I could never live with myself knowing that I could've possibly gotten someone off who committed a heinous crime...or crime at all. But I'm sure that as a defense attorney, they have to set things up a certain way in their head to not think that way. (Gosh, I hope that came out the right way..) |
|
uksue
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,597 
Location: London
|
Post by uksue on May 27, 2016 14:42:03 GMT
I saw this discussed on Crimetime last night- the investigator is launching a book and is looking for a sensational claim to launch it. I'm very sceptical under those circumstances . youtu.be/dxgNozNean4 |
|
JustTricia
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,894
Location: Indianapolis
|
Post by JustTricia on May 27, 2016 15:06:49 GMT
I think it's a travesty that he knew for sure she did it, and he still tried to pin it on the meter worker and her dad. I mean, yes, defend your client of course, but SHIT, try to put the blame on someone you know damn well is innocent and had absolutely NOTHING to do with any of it? That's evil....really fricken evil. I know there a decent defense attorneys but I could never be one. I could never live with myself knowing that I could've possibly gotten someone off who committed a heinous crime...or crime at all. But I'm sure that as a defense attorney, they have to set things up a certain way in their head to not think that way. (Gosh, I hope that came out the right way..) I know it's fiction, but The Escape Artist (it's on Prime) is a great story about a defense attorney getting a criminal off. Psychological thriller. |
|
|
|
Post by BoilerUp! on May 27, 2016 15:30:24 GMT
I read the article yesterday and the entire time just kept thinking "there is a special place in hell for her!"
|
|
CeeScraps
Pearl Clutcher
~~occupied entertaining my brain~~
Posts: 4,063
|
Post by CeeScraps on May 27, 2016 16:26:27 GMT
I saw a clip of this on some channel. They showed her and commented about her and her new car. How in the world can she afford a new car. Now, what I don't know is if it was a used new car or new. They didn't show the car.
I hope George and Cindy are ok.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 20:12:12 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2016 17:28:59 GMT
I saw a clip of this on some channel. They showed her and commented about her and her new car. How in the world can she afford a new car. Now, what I don't know is if it was a used new car or new. They didn't show the car. I hope George and Cindy are ok. I couldn't care less about George and Cindy. They were a big part of the problem. |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on May 27, 2016 17:35:34 GMT
I know you guys all think I'm a flaming liberal but I could never be a defense attorney, either. I think the Constitution guarantees a FAIR trial, not the right to be acquitted of a crime you actually did commit, no matter how horrendous it was.
That said, if this is just coming from an investigator trying to sell a book, and Jose Baez is denying the story (I haven't clicked the link yet, but I will) then I would take it with a grain of salt.
ETA I read the story and I feel like I need a bath now. ugh, just so slimey in every respect.
|
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on May 27, 2016 17:36:05 GMT
I saw a clip of this on some channel. They showed her and commented about her and her new car. How in the world can she afford a new car. Now, what I don't know is if it was a used new car or new. They didn't show the car. I hope George and Cindy are ok. I couldn't care less about George and Cindy. They were a big part of the problem. oh yeah. I meant to say that, too. |
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
|
Post by Rainbow on May 27, 2016 17:56:37 GMT
Even monsters get a defense attorney. He was just doing his job.
|
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on May 27, 2016 17:59:52 GMT
Even monsters get a defense attorney. He was just doing his job. Well, we finally found the issue I'm to the right of Rainbow on.  (JK, I understand and accept defense attorneys are "just doing their job" ... it's just that I don't like their job.) |
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on May 27, 2016 18:02:58 GMT
I know you guys all think I'm a flaming liberal but I could never be a defense attorney, either. I think the Constitution guarantees a FAIR trial, not the right to be acquitted of a crime you actually did commit, no matter how horrendous it was.That said, if this is just coming from an investigator trying to sell a book, and Jose Baez is denying the story (I haven't clicked the link yet, but I will) then I would take it with a grain of salt. ETA I read the story and I feel like I need a bath now. ugh, just so slimey in every respect. I agree Lucy I love learning about law and the legal system and I do understand that everyone has the right to a fair trial and legal representation. But like you, I can not understand how as a person, I could defend someone that I knew was guilty of a crime. Are you supposed to be happy if as a defense lawyer you got a mass murderer off on technicalities? I struggle to wrap my brain around things like that. |
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on May 27, 2016 18:04:13 GMT
I know you guys all think I'm a flaming liberal but I could never be a defense attorney, either. I think the Constitution guarantees a FAIR trial, not the right to be acquitted of a crime you actually did commit, no matter how horrendous it was. That said, if this is just coming from an investigator trying to sell a book, and Jose Baez is denying the story (I haven't clicked the link yet, but I will) then I would take it with a grain of salt. ETA I read the story and I feel like I need a bath now. ugh, just so slimey in every respect. OMG, I spent a lot of time arguing with our family lawyer about defending the known to be guilty and totally understood the point that everyone deserves to be represented, but I know I could never be the one to do it. I am either the most conservative liberal or the most liberal conservative you will ever meet, and I understand the need for a defendant to be fairly represented-but gosh, when you KNOW they are guilty? I have a hard time with that...probably one of the biggest reasons I didn't go to law school. |
|
imsirius
Prolific Pea
Call it as I see it.
Posts: 7,661
Location: Floating in the black veil.
Jul 12, 2014 19:59:28 GMT
|
Post by imsirius on May 27, 2016 18:15:59 GMT
I know you guys all think I'm a flaming liberal but I could never be a defense attorney, either. I think the Constitution guarantees a FAIR trial, not the right to be acquitted of a crime you actually did commit, no matter how horrendous it was.That said, if this is just coming from an investigator trying to sell a book, and Jose Baez is denying the story (I haven't clicked the link yet, but I will) then I would take it with a grain of salt. ETA I read the story and I feel like I need a bath now. ugh, just so slimey in every respect. I agree Lucy I love learning about law and the legal system and I do understand that everyone has the right to a fair trial and legal representation. But like you, I can not understand how as a person, I could defend someone that I knew was guilty of a crime. Are you supposed to be happy if as a defense lawyer you got a mass murderer off on technicalities? I struggle to wrap my brain around things like that. This is how I feel too. I know he was doing his job, I know his job is to defend her. However, how can he (or any other defender of murderers) knowingly defend her when she is obviously guilty. I couldn't do it...especially child killers or serial killers. I just couldn't morally feel right about it. I guess that's why they get the big bucks. But Baez came off as creepy/slimy anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by mimi3566 on May 27, 2016 18:20:22 GMT
To me a defense attorney's job should be to defend their client IF they have been wrongfully accused of something and are truthfully innocent of the crime charged.
To defend a client that is being charged with a crime they are actually guilty of defeats the whole system in my opinion.
Now that may not be the actual way our laws are written and I understand that but it should be and that is a problem with our system. It's not really justice is it??
|
|
|
|
Post by myshelly on May 27, 2016 18:30:01 GMT
To me a defense attorney's job should be to defend their client IF they have been wrongfully accused of something and are truthfully innocent of the crime charged. To defend a client that is being charged with a crime they are actually guilty of defeats the whole system in my opinion. Now that may not be the actual way our laws are written and I understand that but it should be and that is a problem with our system. It's not really justice is it?? But how in the world do you know who is wrongfully accused and truly innocent BEFORE a trial? You can't have a system in which only the wrongfully accused get representation bc no one knows who is wrongfully accused. |
|
|
|
Post by mimi3566 on May 27, 2016 18:43:45 GMT
To me a defense attorney's job should be to defend their client IF they have been wrongfully accused of something and are truthfully innocent of the crime charged. To defend a client that is being charged with a crime they are actually guilty of defeats the whole system in my opinion. Now that may not be the actual way our laws are written and I understand that but it should be and that is a problem with our system. It's not really justice is it?? But how in the world do you know who is wrongfully accused and truly innocent BEFORE a trial? You can't have a system in which only the wrongfully accused get representation bc no one knows who is wrongfully accused. Because by the time you actually get to trial, there has been so much discovery, research, pre-trial hearings, depositions, etc....that the attorney's and judge involved are already aware whether or not a person is guilty or innocent. At the time of the actual trial with a jury, it's like a game of chess being played out between the 2 sides. There have been so many cases that would have been decided completely different had the jury known certain facts that were omitted...but again...they play a game. This works both ways...there have been plenty of innocent people convicted of crimes due to the way the DA is allowed to present certain evidence or omit certain things. |
|
~Lauren~
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,876
|
Post by ~Lauren~ on May 27, 2016 19:03:18 GMT
I believe, from the defense attorneys I've known over the years, that defense attorneys put a great deal of faith in the id.ea that it is the burden of the prosecution to "prove" beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed the crime they are charged with even if everyone "knows" the individual is guilty. They do not consider the actual guilt of their client; they focus on whether or not the prosecution can prove it.This tenet that the prosecution must prove guilt is what keeps us all safer
|
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on May 27, 2016 19:11:32 GMT
I believe, from the defense attorneys I've known over the years, that defense attorneys put a great deal of faith in the id.ea that it is the burden of the prosecution to "prove" beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed the crime they are charged with even if everyone "knows" the individual is guilty. They do not consider the actual guilt of their client; they focus on whether or not the prosecution can prove it.This tenet that the prosecution must prove guilt is what keeps us all safer Thank you Lauren ETA - that actually does make sense |
|
uksue
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,597
Location: London
|
Post by uksue on May 27, 2016 19:13:03 GMT
I believe, from the defense attorneys I've known over the years, that defense attorneys put a great deal of faith in the id.ea that it is the burden of the prosecution to "prove" beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed the crime they are charged with even if everyone "knows" the individual is guilty. They do not consider the actual guilt of their client; they focus on whether or not the prosecution can prove it.This tenet that the prosecution must prove guilt is what keeps us all safer The prosecution certainly didn't prove she did it and should never have opted for 1st degree murder Imo. Lauren I'm glad there are people who can defend someone despite public opinion or 'certainty ' over their guilt- how many cases are the Innocence project currently dealing with , I wonder? |
|
|
|
Post by myshelly on May 27, 2016 19:21:48 GMT
But how in the world do you know who is wrongfully accused and truly innocent BEFORE a trial? You can't have a system in which only the wrongfully accused get representation bc no one knows who is wrongfully accused. Because by the time you actually get to trial, there has been so much discovery, research, pre-trial hearings, depositions, etc....that the attorney's and judge involved are already aware whether or not a person is guilty or innocent. At the time of the actual trial with a jury, it's like a game of chess being played out between the 2 sides. There have been so many cases that would have been decided completely different had the jury known certain facts that were omitted...but again...they play a game. This works both ways...there have been plenty of innocent people convicted of crimes due to the way the DA is allowed to present certain evidence or omit certain things. But there are *reasons* that evidence is excluded at trial. Judges and attorneys (no apostrophe, btw) are not without bias. |
|
|
|
Post by myshelly on May 27, 2016 19:24:29 GMT
I also think the thread of this title is misleading.
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say
Man trying to sell book alleges Casey Anthony's lawyer knew she was guilty.
|
|
|
|
Post by peano on May 27, 2016 19:30:31 GMT
I believe, from the defense attorneys I've known over the years, that defense attorneys put a great deal of faith in the id.ea that it is the burden of the prosecution to "prove" beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed the crime they are charged with even if everyone "knows" the individual is guilty. They do not consider the actual guilt of their client; they focus on whether or not the prosecution can prove it.This tenet that the prosecution must prove guilt is what keeps us all safer Yes. For once, I completely agree with Lauren. |
|
My original pea date was November 1999 and my number was 1803
