Oh I agree...I believe he is trying to be zealous in his defense but I do not believe Mr. Baez is qualified for a death case. In Washington State an attorney must become "death qualified" in order to provide representation in a capital murder case. Basically an attorney must show there competency in criminal defense work at the highest level, years of experience and expertise in mitigation. I think FL has the same system of “qualifying” attorneys but it appears that they will commit public funds for attorneys that are not death qualified and will not disqualify attorneys that do not have that designation.
Jose Baez barely graduated from a third tier law school…He was a lexisnexis rep before starting his own firm (i.e. he has no experience practicing under skilled attorneys). The motions I have read that he has already filed are perhaps well grounded in existing law but he has not properly supported them. He has missed deadlines as you point out. I also think that strategically he has made huge missteps. By introducing such a wild alternate theory in conjunction with the sex abuse allegations Baez has almost relieved the State of its burden of proof. He now is in a position where he has to prove these things…Not a good position to be in. Given the truly bizarre nature of this case and the lack of strong motive evidence for Casey to kill her own child, there might have been a defense ability to pause at accidental death but what happened is that in the opening, the defense went too far, raised other sensational allegations that they don't seem to have any evidence to backing them up.
The defense performance at a Frye hearing in May gives me even more pause…They filed a motion for a Frye hearing the proceeded to question the witness way outside the scope and seemed to believe that she could get other testimony excluded without filing a motion. The correct procedure would be to have the Frye hearing deal with the scientific issues then file a motion to exclude the prior testimony at the hearing, the witness or file a motion in limine at some point…The defense could’ve won that Frye hearing had they understood its scope and purpose. Instead, the judge had to instruct them on this and the findings of the expert in regards to hair banding indicating the presence of a dead body in the trunk of the car routinely driven by only the Casey during the time frame Caylee was missing, but unreported as missing to authorities was admitted for trial.
What bothers me the most is that the judge throughout has been essentially offering the defense attorneys legal advice and they have not been taking it. It is apparent from the fact the court must instruct the defense when they need to file a motion, the defense is not aware of this on their own. A lack of understanding about routine court matters such as when and why to file a motion demonstrates a frightening lack of legal knowledge on the part of the defense.
It is really just a circus and a set up for an ineffective assistance of counsel appeal. However, you see those in every single death case. So really this is no additional burden on tax payers. Though with missed deadlines, things of that nature they may get a little more thought from an appeals court…
As for the book deal well Marsha Clark was a prosecutor…The relationship to the case is entirely different. A defense attorney can write a book about some experiences working on a case but the attorney client privilege would likely prevent all the juicy stuff from coming out. That privilege belongs to Casey Anthony it is sacrosanct. Baez cannot violate it. Any book a defense attorney could write is worth far less than $4 million…Look at the book by the attorney for the Green River Killer, so interesting it sold like 2000 copies…A book about representing the most prolific serial killer of all time was that unsuccessful. |