Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Casey Anthony trial -- Proceedings outside the presence of the jury, 6/18/11

Casey Anthony trial -- Proceedings outside the presence of the jury, 6/18/11

Ratings: (0)|Views: 552 |Likes:
Published by David John Wellman
Unofficial transcript, not an actual court document. Jose Baez has his ass handed to him by Judge Belvin Perry.
Unofficial transcript, not an actual court document. Jose Baez has his ass handed to him by Judge Belvin Perry.

More info:

Published by: David John Wellman on Jun 19, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





CASEY ANTHONY TRIALPROCEEDINGS HELD OUTSIDE PRESENCE OF THE JURYJUNE 18, 2011Transcribed by DJWVersion 1.0Acronyms:JP: Judge Belvin PerryJA: Jeff AshtonJB: Jose BaezBR: Dr. Bill RodriguezJP: All right Mr. Ashton, would you state your objection and, so thatwe can go through it by the numbers.JA: Yes, sir. The objection is that the opinion that is being offeredby the witness is not contained in his report of February 21stof2011, which provided pursuant to the court order which specified thatany opinion that the witness was going to give must be included inthe – just a moment, I wanna try and quote it. It had to be includedin the report as well as the factual basis for that opinion. There isno opinion in this report that references to duct tape. It ismentioned as a fact of the case, but there is no opinion thatreferences any interpretation of the duct tape or any backgroundinformation as the witness has just discussed about duct tape inother cases.JP: Mr. Baez?JB: Our position is, and our clear understanding of what the court'sorder was, is that if it was not submitted in the report or includedin the witness's deposition, it would be precluded from trial.JP: Mr. Baez, pull out the court's order and read that portion thatyou are talking about.(long pause)JP: And while you're trying to find that, let me ask the doctor somequestions. Dr. Rodriguez, what opinion you were about to expressdealing with the duct tape?BR: In reference to this particular case, Your Honor?JP: Yes, sir.
BR: That the positioning of the duct tape as it was found you can seein the photos there in the scene and the medical examiner's officethat the duct tape is in two different positions, and a completelyskeletonized remains, unless it is in a buried context, once cannotmake a absolute finding as to the exact positioning of the duct tapeas has lost its effectiveness, and stickiness, one cannot make adetermination as to the restriction of that duct tape, and certainlydecomposed remains which they have skeletalized that soft tissue towhich that duct tape was attached, and the movement of those remainsby animals basically precludes anyone from making any scientificconclusion as to the actual position of that duct tape, whether itwas around the areas of the eyes, did it cover the areas of the noseand the mouth, did it just cover the area of the mouth... I in casesthat I've had have only been able to conclude the actual positioningof that duct tape in a case of a burial in which basically it is heldin context by the soil, or in a mummified body in which the softtissues have basically dried out and the duct tape is still adhering.JP: Okay. Doctor, when did you formulate that opinion that you'vejust shared with us?BR: Early on when I saw the pictures.JP: Okay. Specifically what do you mean by early on?BR: When I received the first pictures by Mr. Baez.JP: I don't know the date, Doctor, so I--BR: The photographs were given to me earlier this year, right priorto my report, which was dated February 21st.JP: Was there any particular reason why you did not include thatportion that you've just told us about in your report, sir?BR: I didn't mention it because I just, it wasn't, a non-issue.Because in looking in these types of cases, you just, there's noscenario where you can make a definitive answer, so basically itwasn't asked at that time anything about the duct tape It was justsomething that I noted in my examination.JP: You noted it in your examination, but you didn't include it inyour report.BR: That's correct, sir.JP: Okay. Did you share that opinion with anyone on the defense team?BR: I did.
JP: Who?BR: Mr. Baez.JP: When?BR: It was at one of the telephone conversations that we had, aftermy report.JP: Was it in January or February of 2011?BR: I believe it was February of 2007.((note: BR most likely meant to say 2011 instead of 2007.))JP: Okay. Were you ever informed by the defense team, or Mr. Baez inparticular, of this court's order requiring all opinions that expertsare to give in this case to be placed into their reports?BR: I was not aware of that, sir?JP: Okay. Were you ever shown a copy of this court's order, orinformed of this court's order, the one that I've just mentionedabout experts being required to put all opinions that they wouldtestify to within a written report, or face the possibility of havingthat opinion not be given in court?BR: No sir, I was not made aware of that.JP: Okay. So Mr. Baez never informed you of this court's order.BR: That's correct.JP: Okay. Thank you, Dr. Rodriguez.JB: Judge, (inaudible)JP: Go ahead.JB: Dr. Rodriguez, do you recall getting some emails from me justbefore you were, asking you to submit a report?BR: That's correct.JB: And if you can recall, or can you tell the court if I hadinformed you that the court had issued an order requiring all expertsto give their, to issue reports expressing all their opinions?

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->