CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods ...
JOSEBAEZ4CONGRES S

United States

#501504 Mar 10, 2013
civil cases wrote:
some lawyers take on cases in the public for publicity. all free of charge
When MorganMorganMorgan brought this suit on behalf of Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez, Casey was sitting in jail, facing the death penalty.

95% of the population who followed the case didn't think Casey would ever see freedom again.
This meant she would forever be broke.

Just what kind of "settlement" did MorganMorganMorgan think they were going to get from inmate Casey Anthony -- much less collect on?

Morgans were trying to rush the civil case so fast - they didn't want to wait for the death penalty case to conclude.

They couldn't have possibly had the expectation that they would ever see a monetary payoff from Casey unless they were banking on her acquittal.
civil cases

AOL

#501506 Mar 10, 2013
Rambler wrote:
<quoted text>
Pro bono
The problem of chronic underfunding of legal aid traps the lower middle class in no-man's-land: too rich to qualify for legal aid, too poor to pay an attorney in private practice. To remedy the ongoing shortage of legal aid services, some commentators have suggested that mandatory pro bono obligations ought to be required of all lawyers, just as physicians working in emergency rooms are required to treat all patients regardless of ability to pay.[8] However, most such proposals have been successfully fought off by bar associations. A notable exception is the Orange County Bar Association in Orlando, Florida, which requires all bar members to participate in its Legal Aid Society, by either serving in a pro bono capacity or donating a fee in lieu of service. Even where mandatory pro bono exists, however, funding for legal aid remains
severely insufficient to provide assistance to a majority of those in need.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_aid_in_the...
very good, there u have it.

some states ask them to take on at least one a year!

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501509 Mar 10, 2013
DianeAx wrote:
<quoted text> It's important to be discerning about sources.
I would not classify scribd as an legitimate source.
It's also in the discovery pages released.

Doc# 2014

I can't link my saved docs, but I can link what's available online.

Prior to this page, and ONLY this page, suddenly being deleted, the text is verbatim to the text in doc #2014.
civil cases

AOL

#501510 Mar 10, 2013
JOSEBAEZ4CONGRESS wrote:
<quoted text>
When MorganMorganMorgan brought this suit on behalf of Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez, Casey was sitting in jail, facing the death penalty.
95% of the population who followed the case didn't think Casey would ever see freedom again.
This meant she would forever be broke.
Just what kind of "settlement" did MorganMorganMorgan think they were going to get from inmate Casey Anthony -- much less collect on?
Morgans were trying to rush the civil case so fast - they didn't want to wait for the death penalty case to conclude.
They couldn't have possibly had the expectation that they would ever see a monetary payoff from Casey unless they were banking on her acquittal.
u have no objection from me, lol. i saw it as a win for her from the start and stated so imo.

maybe u missed my question. i asked u where ca said that caylee had a half brother and was it in the recent case? where can i read it? thanks

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501512 Mar 10, 2013
JOSEBAEZ4CONGRESS wrote:
<quoted text>
That was one expensive black jack!!!!!!
It must have been, considering the check she wrote on Amy's account which bounced the day after she was arrested, was for
$574.60.
JOSEBAEZ4CONGRES S

United States

#501514 Mar 10, 2013
ngrace wrote:
<quoted text>
So no, DAYS, the State didn't suborn perjury because they NEVER asked George during trial what Caylee was wearing.
YES THEY DID!!!!!

During the prosecution's case-in-chief, George testified specifically to what Caylee wore when she left the house at approx. 1:00pm on June 16, 2008.
And they aren't the clothes Caylee was found with!!

Judge Perry instructed the jury that George's trial testimony was consistent with his Grand Jury testimony.
I guess you are dumb because you're the only idiot who doesn't get it.

Why would Baez be so critical of George's testimony about what Caylee wore -- if George didn't testify about what Caylee wore?

George absolutely did testify about what Caylee wore -- and he testified that it wasn't the clothing found at the recovery site.

Stop with your bullshit.

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501516 Mar 10, 2013
JOSEBAEZ4CONGRESS wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe you and I agree with you about settlement agreements.
But this isn't ever going to be a settlement.
Someone set up a Paypal account to accept "donations" for Zenaida's "legal expenses".
Perhaps you remember this from the marathon deposition?
Now, I'm not saying that MorganMorganMorgan would bill ZofK for actual out-of-pocket costs when she eventually loses.
I'm just saying they COULD if they wanted to.
It's a misconception to assume that they can't.
You are partly right.....an account was set up, but to help with her living expenses.

http://www.forthepeople.com/casey-anthony-cas...

M&M require their clients to sign an agreement regarding their fees prior to commencing any action. If the client pulls out prior to settlement/verdict, they potentially could be held liable for costs.

In short, "ya' pays your dues", one way or the other.

But for most people, this option is better than nothing, as most people can't afford to pay for their own costs in civil litigation.

But sometimes, the client is "gently persuaded" to settle a case rather than take it to trial....and the pressure to do so is pretty intense.

Unlike Charles Greene, who does what is right, even without getting paid.

“Don't Worry Be Happy”

Since: Apr 09

Happytown, USA

#501517 Mar 10, 2013
ngrace wrote:
<quoted text>
George Anthony told the FBI she was wearing a SKIRT....and not only did he reaffirm it was a SKIRT when LE asked him "A SKIRT?", he also described the SKIRT as being a blue jean SKIRT.
DOC #2014 PAGE 10
http://www.scribd.com/doc/66336485/Casey-Anth...
Additionally, in the December 11, 2008, Search Warrant, Yuri Mellich wrote: "George recalled that Caylee was wearing a pink top and a blue jean SKIRT".
The autopsy report describes SHORTS.......there is no mistaking shorts and a skort. A skort has a panel in front to give the effect of a skirt.......shorts do not.
This skort rumor is another piece of misinformation floating around the Internet.
Stipped shorts in no way can be mistaken for a blue jean skirt.
http://www.google.com/imgres...

Whatever ngrace. I am very tired. Maybe he lied. Maybe he didn't. You admire Cindy for lying for her. You hate him for some reason is one of my points. The man was certainly broken-hearted when he was on the witness stand being badgered about whether he would do anything to save his daughter. That WAS apparent to me.

I have a daughter. When she was little I bought her a pair of shorts that ended up looking like a skirt on her they were so big. She wore those shorts FOREVER. I was kind of embarrassed that she wore them so long. They were never too big in her waist. They were just to big in the legs always. When everyone was arguing about the size it struck me kind of funny because clothes sizes differ, depending on who the manufacturer is.

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501519 Mar 10, 2013
JOSEBAEZ4CONGRESS wrote:
<quoted text>
YES THEY DID!!!!!
During the prosecution's case-in-chief, George testified specifically to what Caylee wore when she left the house at approx. 1:00pm on June 16, 2008.
And they aren't the clothes Caylee was found with!!
Judge Perry instructed the jury that George's trial testimony was consistent with his Grand Jury testimony.
I guess you are dumb because you're the only idiot who doesn't get it.
Why would Baez be so critical of George's testimony about what Caylee wore -- if George didn't testify about what Caylee wore?
George absolutely did testify about what Caylee wore -- and he testified that it wasn't the clothing found at the recovery site.
Stop with your bullshit.
DID I SAY GEORGE TESTIFIED THAT THE CLOTHES FOUND AT THE REMAINS SITE WERE THE SAME CLOTHES SHE LEFT HOME IN???????

I DID NOT EVER say this!

I was making a point about skirt vs shorts.

And asking WHY Baez let him get away with changing his description.

If you would calm down, you might read my posts correctly as to their meaning.

When it comes to talking anything having to do with George, you become raging bull! Why is that????
JOSEBAEZ4CONGRES S

United States

#501521 Mar 10, 2013
ngrace wrote:
<quoted text>
You are partly right.....an account was set up, but to help with her living expenses.
http://www.forthepeople.com/casey-anthony-cas...
M&M require their clients to sign an agreement regarding their fees prior to commencing any action. If the client pulls out prior to settlement/verdict, they potentially could be held liable for costs.
In short, "ya' pays your dues", one way or the other.
But for most people, this option is better than nothing, as most people can't afford to pay for their own costs in civil litigation.
But sometimes, the client is "gently persuaded" to settle a case rather than take it to trial....and the pressure to do so is pretty intense.
Unlike Charles Greene, who does what is right, even without getting paid.
Casey was sitting in jail - no income - facing the death penalty - when the suit was brought.

The plaintiff's lawyers tried feverishly to get the civil suit rolling before the criminal trial even started.

What type of settlement did they really expect?

What type of monetary award did they think they were going to win, much less collect?

Casey didn't have $15 bucks when Zenaida sued her -- much less in excess of $15,000.00.

Morgans knew that going in.

They spent hundreds, if not thousands out of pocket to sue a broke girl who was supposed to be sitting on death row right now.

That doesn't make sound financial sense no matter how you spin it -- unless they knew Casey wouldn't be convicted.

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501522 Mar 10, 2013
tribe mom wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.google.com/imgres...
Whatever ngrace. I am very tired. Maybe he lied. Maybe he didn't. You admire Cindy for lying for her. You hate him for some reason is one of my points. The man was certainly broken-hearted when he was on the witness stand being badgered about whether he would do anything to save his daughter. That WAS apparent to me.
I have a daughter. When she was little I bought her a pair of shorts that ended up looking like a skirt on her they were so big. She wore those shorts FOREVER. I was kind of embarrassed that she wore them so long. They were never too big in her waist. They were just to big in the legs always. When everyone was arguing about the size it struck me kind of funny because clothes sizes differ, depending on who the manufacturer is.
The video of Casey playing with Caylee on the floor where she's hoisting her on her legs up into the air, shows the shorts very well.

They weren't too big.

But I do know what you're describing about kid's shorts.

Tears, though, TM, do not mean someone is being truthful. I'm sure he does miss his granddaughter very much. But in my world, unless he knew his daughter killed his granddaughter, he shouldn't have been throwing her under the bus. That's just unnatural for a parent to do, and probably one of the reasons the jurors didn't believe his testimony.
JOSEBAEZ4CONGRES S

United States

#501523 Mar 10, 2013
ngrace wrote:
<quoted text>
DID I SAY GEORGE TESTIFIED THAT THE CLOTHES FOUND AT THE REMAINS SITE WERE THE SAME CLOTHES SHE LEFT HOME IN???????

I DID NOT EVER say this!
Oh...okay. You're off the hook then.

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501524 Mar 10, 2013
Rambler wrote:
<quoted text>
What's the mystery?
Not too long ago you said you have ALL the discovery documents saved in numerical order.
The big mystery is, the very page I linked a few hours ago, suddenly is blank.

So someone is not liking what I am posting, because I'm posting what wasn't brought out in trial, but is in the docs.

Probably I'll find another dead squirrel, or worse, on my door-step real soon.
civil cases

AOL

#501525 Mar 10, 2013
ngrace wrote:
<quoted text>
The video of Casey playing with Caylee on the floor where she's hoisting her on her legs up into the air, shows the shorts very well.
They weren't too big.
But I do know what you're describing about kid's shorts.
Tears, though, TM, do not mean someone is being truthful. I'm sure he does miss his granddaughter very much. But in my world, unless he knew his daughter killed his granddaughter, he shouldn't have been throwing her under the bus. That's just unnatural for a parent to do, and probably one of the reasons the jurors didn't believe his testimony.
i agree. tears don't mean truth. tears can mean guilt or shame. it can mean many things.

in a way i think he might have allowed himself to be thrown under the bus for his daughter. it makes sense and he didn't sue for defamation or fight back. he stayed very quiet about it all.

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501526 Mar 10, 2013
JOSEBAEZ4CONGRESS wrote:
<quoted text>
Casey was sitting in jail - no income - facing the death penalty - when the suit was brought.
The plaintiff's lawyers tried feverishly to get the civil suit rolling before the criminal trial even started.
What type of settlement did they really expect?
What type of monetary award did they think they were going to win, much less collect?
Casey didn't have $15 bucks when Zenaida sued her -- much less in excess of $15,000.00.
Morgans knew that going in.
They spent hundreds, if not thousands out of pocket to sue a broke girl who was supposed to be sitting on death row right now.
That doesn't make sound financial sense no matter how you spin it -- unless they knew Casey wouldn't be convicted.
Obviously, DAYS, I wasn't talking case specific....I was describing their normal everyday way of doing things for the little people.

High profile cases are vastly different.

And Mr. Greene has told you the reason why in the ZOK case.

However, I did give them props the other day for taking on the case involving Michelle Parker. It will take someone with their resources to find the answers for that family, considering it's a cold case to LE. I hope they spend every dime they have, if it will help solve this case and give her family some much needed help, and/or, closure.

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501528 Mar 10, 2013
civil cases wrote:
<quoted text>
i agree. tears don't mean truth. tears can mean guilt or shame. it can mean many things.
in a way i think he might have allowed himself to be thrown under the bus for his daughter. it makes sense and he didn't sue for defamation or fight back. he stayed very quiet about it all.
Yes, I see your point and have considered it myself.

But then I thought back to day 1, and could find no reason he would throw Casey under the bus in the beginning.

So I crossed that possibility off my list.

I wonder if the real reason they all gave the wrong date, and the real reason he came up with that convoluted 12:50 PM EXACTLY story, was because June 16th was not actually the day in question.

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501530 Mar 10, 2013
Rambler wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd like to assume you're not serious.
Why?

If you read George's State depo, he certainly alludes to the tape being planted in that he said it when it was seized by LE, it didn't have that tape on it, but when they returned it, it did.

Leaves 2 choices: if you believe him, or if you don't.

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501531 Mar 10, 2013
GN
civil cases

AOL

#501532 Mar 10, 2013
ngrace wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I see your point and have considered it myself.
But then I thought back to day 1, and could find no reason he would throw Casey under the bus in the beginning.
So I crossed that possibility off my list.
I wonder if the real reason they all gave the wrong date, and the real reason he came up with that convoluted 12:50 PM EXACTLY story, was because June 16th was not actually the day in question.
i could not find any reason either. he was jus too quiet about all the sin being talked about and his wife stayed with him afterwards. so i think they knew it was not true and planned is the only answer for a woman to stay with the man.

during tragic stress the memory can play tricks on the mind. i put that towards all the dates and stuff.

i only hope more comes out and solves the childs murder.

Level 7

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#501534 Mar 10, 2013
Holy crap....has anyone see this thread?

Caylee Marie Anthony's Biological Father

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/orlando-fl/TH...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Orlando Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Let's Chat (Jan '12) 25 min HELL ON EARTH 19,213
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Into The Night 54,626
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 hr Yeah 1,279,007
Alphabet Game (Apr '12) 5 hr Princess Hey 9,526
5000 post wins (Feb '13) 5 hr Princess Hey 4,656
Song Title Game 5 hr Princess Hey 167
Word Association 2 (Jul '10) 5 hr Doug77 22,516
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Orlando Mortgages