Caylee Marie Anthony #160 4/09/10 - 4/28/10

[Wyks]

http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1004/19/ijvm.01.html
Issues With Jane Velez Mitchell
Transcripts 04/19/10

Trimm ~ thanks so much for these transcripts!  It's the only way I can keep up with JVM and NG anymore.  Reading transcripts rather than watching their shows is an insurance policy for my son's wide screen tv.   

 

[KittyMom]

Has anyone read that the new judge is not a proponent of cameras in the courtroom? I saw this on another forum and for the life of me can't find anything to back this up.

I found this...
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2004-01-30/news/0401300273_1_margaret-waller-belvin-perry-chief-judge/2
`Reality' Tv Isn't For Court, Judge Says
Belvin Perry Decided Internet Video Feeds Would Undermine Judicial Integrity.

Thank-you

Here's a little something else.
http://www.soundblock.org/archive/Volume3-2003/Index.htm
b] "A Florida Judge" [/b]

The Ninth Judicial Circuit Court Judges have always worked to ensure that the media, as well as the public, is accommodated to the best of the Court’s abilities, while ensuring the right of the litigant to a fair and orderly trial and ensuring the operational integrity of the Court. Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr., stated, “The most important thing to the media is that they have access to the proceedings.” Circuit Judge Lawrence R. Kirkwood added, “I clearly support the openness of the Court to the media and the public. We, as Judges, should try to ensure that there is adequate access to all.”

Today’s news organizations provide instantaneous updates to the world. Normally, pursuant to Florida Supreme Court order, only one television camera, one still camera and one audio system for radio is allowed in a courtroom, with approval of the presiding Judge.
 

[no rose colored glasses]

Thanks KittyMom 

[TURBOTHINK]

Has anyone read that the new judge is not a proponent of cameras in the courtroom? I saw this on another forum and for the life of me can't find anything to back this up.

I found this...
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2004-01-30/news/0401300273_1_margaret-waller-belvin-perry-chief-judge/2
`Reality' Tv Isn't For Court, Judge Says
Belvin Perry Decided Internet Video Feeds Would Undermine Judicial Integrity.

The way I read this is he is not opposed to TV in the courtroom, but feels it needs to be carefully considered on a case by case basis to protect the integrity of the victims and the ones testifying.

Perry opposed cameras at the time, writing in a May 1998 letter that they could cause problems including compromising courtroom security, giving accidental access to closed hearings involving juveniles or police informants and damaging attorney-client privilege.

In his latest opinion Thursday, Perry repeated that cameras could erode the court's authority. "Although most proceedings are open to the public, the judges of the Ninth Judicial Circuit are not prepared to broadcast all proceedings to the world," he wrote.

"Every rape case, divorce case, and domestic-violence injunction should not be aired for all to see. We must never allow the dignity of the court [to] be sacrificed to technology."

[Wyks]

And wouldn't you know, marinadedave has a blog post about Judge Belvin Perry dated March 3, 2006 :

http://marinadedave.wordpress.com/2006/03/03/judge-belvin-perry-jr-little-black-boy/

 

Oh for the love of GOD..would someone please assist marinadedave in stepping away from the computer and turning the dam* thing off.

Agreed!  Am thinking that's the least marinadedave can do, after helping to ensure the removal of a highly respected judge, a man of absolute integrity.  And all for what?  Marianadedave's ego, that's it.  For him to say now, 'oopsy, guess I shouldn't have said that'.  Pfffffffft.  He needs to bow out of blogging as gracefully as the judge bowed out of this case.  IMO. 

[no rose colored glasses]

Has anyone read that the new judge is not a proponent of cameras in the courtroom? I saw this on another forum and for the life of me can't find anything to back this up.

I found this...
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2004-01-30/news/0401300273_1_margaret-waller-belvin-perry-chief-judge/2
`Reality' Tv Isn't For Court, Judge Says
Belvin Perry Decided Internet Video Feeds Would Undermine Judicial Integrity.

The way I read this is he is not opposed to TV in the courtroom, but feels it needs to be carefully considered on a case by case basis to protect the integrity of the victims and the ones testifying.

Perry opposed cameras at the time, writing in a May 1998 letter that they could cause problems including compromising courtroom security, giving accidental access to closed hearings involving juveniles or police informants and damaging attorney-client privilege.

In his latest opinion Thursday, Perry repeated that cameras could erode the court's authority. "Although most proceedings are open to the public, the judges of the Ninth Judicial Circuit are not prepared to broadcast all proceedings to the world," he wrote.

"Every rape case, divorce case, and domestic-violence injunction should not be aired for all to see. We must never allow the dignity of the court [to] be sacrificed to technology."

And the question is will the judge allow cameras in the courtroom in this case? Also have to wonder about a gag order, little late, but he might do that if the issue is brought up again.

[trimmonthelake]

http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1004/19/ijvm.01.html
Issues With Jane Velez Mitchell
Transcripts 04/19/10

Trimm ~ thanks so much for these transcripts!  It's the only way I can keep up with JVM and NG anymore.  Reading transcripts rather than watching their shows is an insurance policy for my son's wide screen tv.   

 

I know what you mean.   

[KittyMom]

Has anyone read that the new judge is not a proponent of cameras in the courtroom? I saw this on another forum and for the life of me can't find anything to back this up.

I found this...
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2004-01-30/news/0401300273_1_margaret-waller-belvin-perry-chief-judge/2
`Reality' Tv Isn't For Court, Judge Says
Belvin Perry Decided Internet Video Feeds Would Undermine Judicial Integrity.

The way I read this is he is not opposed to TV in the courtroom, but feels it needs to be carefully considered on a case by case basis to protect the integrity of the victims and the ones testifying.

Perry opposed cameras at the time, writing in a May 1998 letter that they could cause problems including compromising courtroom security, giving accidental access to closed hearings involving juveniles or police informants and damaging attorney-client privilege.

In his latest opinion Thursday, Perry repeated that cameras could erode the court's authority. "Although most proceedings are open to the public, the judges of the Ninth Judicial Circuit are not prepared to broadcast all proceedings to the world," he wrote.

"Every rape case, divorce case, and domestic-violence injunction should not be aired for all to see. We must never allow the dignity of the court [to] be sacrificed to technology."

And the question is will the judge allow cameras in the courtroom in this case? Also have to wonder about a gag order, little late, but he might do that if the issue is brought up again.

I do wonder how he'll handle things with the drama queens Casey has on her team.  He may decide to take their audience away.  Or let us stay to see just what a talented lawer Baez is.   

[TURBOTHINK]

Has anyone read that the new judge is not a proponent of cameras in the courtroom? I saw this on another forum and for the life of me can't find anything to back this up.

I found this...
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2004-01-30/news/0401300273_1_margaret-waller-belvin-perry-chief-judge/2
`Reality' Tv Isn't For Court, Judge Says
Belvin Perry Decided Internet Video Feeds Would Undermine Judicial Integrity.

The way I read this is he is not opposed to TV in the courtroom, but feels it needs to be carefully considered on a case by case basis to protect the integrity of the victims and the ones testifying.

Perry opposed cameras at the time, writing in a May 1998 letter that they could cause problems including compromising courtroom security, giving accidental access to closed hearings involving juveniles or police informants and damaging attorney-client privilege.

In his latest opinion Thursday, Perry repeated that cameras could erode the court's authority. "Although most proceedings are open to the public, the judges of the Ninth Judicial Circuit are not prepared to broadcast all proceedings to the world," he wrote.

"Every rape case, divorce case, and domestic-violence injunction should not be aired for all to see. We must never allow the dignity of the court [to] be sacrificed to technology."

And the question is will the judge allow cameras in the courtroom in this case? Also have to wonder about a gag order, little late, but he might do that if the issue is brought up again.

My guess is it will be televised because that barn door has been open too long to get the horses back in the stable now.

[no rose colored glasses]

Kind of hard to pull the cameras away now, and gag them all.

[KittyMom]

Kind of hard to pull the cameras away now, and gag them all.

How about leaving the cameras and just gag Baez?       I've got a bath towel we could use.

[Wyks]

I challenged him once for posting photos of a minor charged with murder - before LE had confirmed the minor's name.

He published in the comments my email address and IP address.

Nice.

as far as I'm concerned, the guy is an intellectual midget with a small d*ck complex.

    

[Wyks]

I challenged him once for posting photos of a minor charged with murder - before LE had confirmed the minor's name.

He published in the comments my email address and IP address.

Nice.

as far as I'm concerned, the guy is an intellectual midget with a small d*ck complex.

    

Jill.. can you report him to the.. the.. I don't know who.. for publishing those?   

[Cappuccino]

http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1004/19/ijvm.01.html
Issues With Jane Velez Mitchell
Transcripts 04/19/10

Trimm ~ thanks so much for these transcripts!  It's the only way I can keep up with JVM and NG anymore.  Reading transcripts rather than watching their shows is an insurance policy for my son's wide screen tv.   

 

Its also a lot less nauseating to read than enduring Ms Whinetraub blubbering nonsense for the sheer sake of being oppositional as well as JVM going for an Emmy with her dramatics & abuse of a gavel.  NG has been on a roll with being equally difficult to hear or see while often being a day late and a dollar short with "breaking news."    Nonetheless, I find myself compelled to watch or read so its known what is being said and by whom.   There are moments that I hate that Caylee & Haleigh's cases have turned into a media circus full of pundants, nutjobs & dipsnits because the fact that they were murdered gets lost in all the ego jostling & sideshow behavior.  At times it indeed weighs heavy against the "need to know" but then again there are many things we would not be aware of if people didnt put their foots in their mouths.   Everything is a balance, just some days you need more Ibuprofen and Mylanta to get ya thru it.

[SunnyinTX]

And wouldn't you know, marinadedave has a blog post about Judge Belvin Perry dated March 3, 2006 :

http://marinadedave.wordpress.com/2006/03/03/judge-belvin-perry-jr-little-black-boy/

 

Oh for the love of GOD..would someone please assist marinadedave in stepping away from the computer and turning the dam* thing off.

Agreed!  Am thinking that's the least marinadedave can do, after helping to ensure the removal of a highly respected judge, a man of absolute integrity.  And all for what?  Marianadedave's ego, that's it.  For him to say now, 'oopsy, guess I shouldn't have said that'.  Pfffffffft.  He needs to bow out of blogging as gracefully as the judge bowed out of this case.  IMO. 

Agree 100%........

[Wyks]

I have been getting alot of questions about this issue, as apparently Jean Cesarez from TRU TV reported Jose Baez is considering filing a complaint against Judge Strickland..

Who is JQC?

Judicial Qualifications Commission.

It would be a complaint filed against a Judge, to be heard by them, and has no attachment to the Supreme Court or Federal judges.

http://www.floridajqc.com/


How badly does Baez want off this case to be heralding his disdain for the court?

  

True that Blink!  And Baez is a great one to be filing complaints for inappropriate conduct etc.
IMO.  Kettle <---> black. 
 

[Cappuccino]

Has anyone read that the new judge is not a proponent of cameras in the courtroom? I saw this on another forum and for the life of me can't find anything to back this up.

I found this...
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2004-01-30/news/0401300273_1_margaret-waller-belvin-perry-chief-judge/2
`Reality' Tv Isn't For Court, Judge Says
Belvin Perry Decided Internet Video Feeds Would Undermine Judicial Integrity.

The way I read this is he is not opposed to TV in the courtroom, but feels it needs to be carefully considered on a case by case basis to protect the integrity of the victims and the ones testifying.

Perry opposed cameras at the time, writing in a May 1998 letter that they could cause problems including compromising courtroom security, giving accidental access to closed hearings involving juveniles or police informants and damaging attorney-client privilege.

In his latest opinion Thursday, Perry repeated that cameras could erode the court's authority. "Although most proceedings are open to the public, the judges of the Ninth Judicial Circuit are not prepared to broadcast all proceedings to the world," he wrote.

"Every rape case, divorce case, and domestic-violence injunction should not be aired for all to see. We must never allow the dignity of the court [to] be sacrificed to technology."

And the question is will the judge allow cameras in the courtroom in this case? Also have to wonder about a gag order, little late, but he might do that if the issue is brought up again.

My guess is it will be televised because that barn door has been open too long to get the horses back in the stable now.

At first blush, my instinct is that since the defense & the defendants parents were against a gag order, the cameras will remain.  I agree, that ship sailed long ago. I also doubt highly that the defense want one now considering they are there for the cameras to begin with.   I'm a supporter of cameras in the court room minus a few exceptions in some cases, yet I can respect & appreciate judicial opposition on a few points as well.

[Gypsy DD]

I think that Judge Perry will keep the cameras and reporters in the court room if for nothing else then to validate what takes place. 

Baez get your dancing shoes on ..it's going to get very slippery and trippy from here on out.  You just put your whole legal team under more scrutiny.   

[Cappuccino]

I think that Judge Perry will keep the cameras and reporters in the court room if for nothing else then to validate what takes place. 

Baez get your dancing shoes on ..it's going to get very slippery and trippy from here on out.  You just put your whole legal team under more scrutiny.   

ITA

[mizjay]

I think that Judge Perry will keep the cameras and reporters in the court room if for nothing else then to validate what takes place. 

Baez get your dancing shoes on ..it's going to get very slippery and trippy from here on out.  You just put your whole legal team under more scrutiny.   

DD    I agree. Baez operates on a adolescent brain wave.  It looks like he gets  close to stomping his feet and screaming I'm gonna tell my mama sometimes.  JS was extremely patient with his churlish attitude and lack of procedure.  Right now bozo prolly thinks he's a brilliant stealthy atty because he finally won something , dream on dufus.