| Eye Witness Account of the New York Court Proceedings. - Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 |
| View previous topic
:: View next topic |
Heli
 Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 1:35 pm |
|
|
|
| PerryPeabody wrote: | | victims cry wrote: | I agree with you, and to add to the "extra" affidavit, it seems like a silly silly move to see if it will stick. . . .
duhhhhh he didnt think joe would mention it when the door opened? |
The oral arguments aren't evidential (and shouldn't impact on the decision) but I sure would like to read a verbatim transcript of what occurred in the courtroom. |
Which leads me to ask what I've been thinking about all week.
Is there someone who can contact the Court Reporter and ask for an online copy of the transcript? Much like we obtained transcripts of the Peterson trial in California?
That transcript would be extremely interesting to read. I just don't know how difficult or involved it is to obtain and what the cost would be.
A few hundred $ ?
|
|
Transcription Goddess
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 23516
Location: Puffed Up DimWit
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| JesseLee
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 1:39 pm |
|
|
|
| PerryPeabody wrote: | | Abarth wrote: | | PerryPeabody wrote: | | pax wrote: | | . . . .Ah, yes. The old "throw a bunch of noodles against the wall and see if anything sticks" line of argument. |
Well, since we're talking about noodles, the only ones that stick to the wall are the ones that are done, not the undercooked, "premature" noodles.
Not only was this case filed in the wrong jurisdiction, it was premature.
I've never understood why the fact that there is still an ongoing, active investigation (that Beth's own attorney acknowledges) is not brought up.
Kelley once said that "they didn't want money, they just wanted information" (despite the ad damnum clause in his Complaint) but so long as there is an investigation, they're not going to get any information; IMO Joran has to refuse to answer. So, duh.... |
Has this happened before in other cases ... filing a civil suit before investigation stopped or before criminal case going to court ? |
I've never seen or read about that happening, however, I'm sure I've never seen or read about a lot of things happening--so I don't know. |
Thanks, PerryPeabody! I'm no attorney, but that business of filing a civil suit before an investigation is complete certainly struck me as odd, too! Also, Scott Balber's argument that this is a simple sexual assault case that Joe Tacopina is trying to complicate. That struck me as most peculiar. How can there be a sexual assault case without the person claiming to be assaulted? And without the alleged victim, then how about witnesses to the alleged assault? None of those, either.
I'd also be interested in your opinion, Perry, regarding Scott's attempt at getting the supplemental affidavit into the proceedings. The one where he claims to have another Aruba attorney who will attest to Helen LeJuez's affidavit. (Interesting that it's not Jane Doe herself.) The judge wouldn't take the document but did let Scott tell her about it. And, that opened the door for Joe to rebutt with even more damning information regarding Jane Doe's contention that she was bribed and threatened by the Twitty faction. It all seemed to me to make the plaintiff's case look shoddy and the defense look strong. Your thoughts, Perry?
|
|
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 2458
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PerryPeabody
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 2:12 pm |
|
|
|
| JesseLee wrote: | | . . . . Your thoughts, Perry? |
I'd love to read the transcript.
(As to the "new" affidavit, the judge could have reserved and allowed him to submit it to the Court and Tacopina, permitted Tacopina to file something in response, and then issued a ruling. She permitted only 10 minutes of total argument according to the report. One could think, that says, perhaps, "Enough, already"--but I'd still like to see the transcript.)
|
|
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 1137
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| JesseLee
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 2:33 pm |
|
|
|
| PerryPeabody wrote: | | JesseLee wrote: | | . . . . Your thoughts, Perry? |
I'd love to read the transcript.
(As to the "new" affidavit, the judge could have reserved and allowed him to submit it to the Court and Tacopina, permitted Tacopina to file something in response, and then issued a ruling. She permitted only 10 minutes of total argument according to the report. One could think, that says, perhaps, "Enough, already"--but I'd still like to see the transcript.) |
Me too, and I'm sure we will have access to the transcript at some point and that it will be a great read. In the meantime, I do think the entire issue of Miss Jane Doe and Mrs. Helen LeJuez is fascinating and is one that has "appalled" Joe from the beginning
I remember Joe talking about how bad he thought it was for a lawyer to attest to a Jane Doe instead of having Jane Doe attest for herself. Especially since he seems to have easily located Jane Doe and she has told Joe that she didn't say what Helen says she said. And it does appear to be just the one Jane Doe.
Even if Jane Doe has changed her story, which I don't think she has, the fact that it keeps going back and forth has rendered it moot as valuable to the plaintiffs, it seems to me.
And the fact that the extra affidavit was from another attorney and not Jane Doe, comes full circle back to Joe's original point about the original affidavit in the first place. Or so it seems to me.
|
|
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 2458
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| JennyM
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 3:35 pm |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Has this happened before in other cases ... filing a civil suit before investigation stopped or before criminal case going to court ? |
Certainly has happened many times before a case goes to trial. Some cases never get to criminal court.
Off the top off my head, the parents of that woman killed by her husband in Georgia sued him, and won, years before the criminal trial.
|
|
** Banned **
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 7908
Location: America. Home of the brave and the free
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| JennyM
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 3:38 pm |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | The judge wouldn't take the document but did let Scott tell her about it. |
Since it was not for a jury, and the Judge found out about what it contained, it is just the routine thing that happens in every hearing, everywhere.
A lawyer getting something out there.
|
|
** Banned **
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 7908
Location: America. Home of the brave and the free
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Fiery
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 3:44 pm |
|
|
|
| JennyM wrote: | | Quote: | | The judge wouldn't take the document but did let Scott tell her about it. |
Since it was not for a jury, and the Judge found out about what it contained, it is just the routine thing that happens in every hearing, everywhere.
A lawyer getting something out there. |
I think Judge Kapnick did the correct thing with the request to sneakily add somthing that the other side has not had a chance to rebut. She managed to still ascertain the information and to give Joe T a chance at rebutting said information. It was deftly handled. It may happen everyday but, in a high profile situation things should be handled very carefully. In essence it was fair to both sides and the blance of power remained the same.
|
|
Who died and made YOU Darth Vader?
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 8848
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| JennyM
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 3:49 pm |
|
|
|
Heli--I don't think that you can get an online transcript or from the court reporter.
|
|
** Banned **
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 7908
Location: America. Home of the brave and the free
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Uncle Al
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 3:50 pm |
|
|
|
Sounded like a cheap (yet effective) stun grenade. Throw out a surprise to ensure the Judege doesn't render her decision then and there. Befuddle her to go back and relook at everything. Nip the immediate decision in the bid that there were expecting. Judge may very well have ruled from the bench at that time, and that may have caught her attention to sit back and review it once again. Cheap but effective even if it doesn't or can't pan out it delays and allows the Judge to review every thing once again.
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 67
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| JennyM
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 3:52 pm |
|
|
|
Prolific:
| Quote: | | I'm embarrassed to say I have red nail polish on my toes right now. |
Say it isn't so!!!!!!!!!
I was waiting for my son to get a hair cut this morning and there was an OPI display with all the colors for summer. Every one of them a red or orange.
|
|
** Banned **
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 7908
Location: America. Home of the brave and the free
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Fiery
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 3:53 pm |
|
|
|
| Uncle Al wrote: | | Sounded like a cheap (yet effective) stun grenade. Throw out a surprise to ensure the Judege doesn't render her decision then and there. Befuddle her to go back and relook at everything. Nip the immediate decision in the bid that there were expecting. Judge may very well have ruled from the bench at that time, and that may have caught her attention to sit back and review it once again. Cheap but effective even if it doesn't or can't pan out it delays and allows the Judge to review every thing once again. |
Uncle Al, I think you are absolutely correct. But, I also think that since this decision could bery well be precedent setting that she probably wasn't going to rule from the bench anyway as that is a rare event. I do, however, think it will force her to review everything yet again.
|
|
Who died and made YOU Darth Vader?
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 8848
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| jacqueline
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 3:55 pm |
|
|
|
| JennyM wrote: | Prolific:
| Quote: | | I'm embarrassed to say I have red nail polish on my toes right now. |
Say it isn't so!!!!!!!!!
I was waiting for my son to get a hair cut this morning and there was an OPI display with all the colors for summer. Every one of them a red or orange. |
Different shades of red I like but orange  I think I will pass. 
|
|
"Petit Chou"
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 1813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Abarth
Posted:
Sat May 20, 2006 3:56 pm |
|
|
|
http://www.nycourts.gov/howdoi/transcripts.shtml
| Quote: | Transcription Services
(Records of Court Proceedings)
Many New York State Courts use electronic devices to record court proceedings. To have a transcript produced from an electronically recorded matter, you may contact one of the transcription services listed below. Please note that these services are not employed as transcribers by the Unified Court System; they are independent contractors and establish their own rates. Services on this list have agreed to have their transcripts subject to random auditing by the court system and to follow the Standard Transcript Specifications set forth in the Rules of the Chief Administrator. These lists are provided merely for convenience and do not constitute a recommendation.
Services that provide transcription from the courts' digital recordings (compact discs) are denoted "FTR;" those that can transcribe from 4-track tapes are denoted "Sony BM-246." Services that can handle tapes and discs reflect both designations.
You need to contact the court your case is being heard in to find out the local procedure for getting a tape or cd to your transcriber of choice. |
Not sure if this is only available to the people involved or if this is available to 3rd parties too.
|
|
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 1685
Location: Utreg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| JesseLee
Posted:
Sun May 21, 2006 1:32 am |
|
|
|
Thanks Abarth. I wonder if any of our Legal Eagles could weigh in about this?
|
|
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 2458
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
