Casey Anthony Lawyer Writes George Zimmerman Judge

Jose Baez is angry over the state prosecutor's statement during last week's arguments on the state's second motion for a gag order that he believed Casey Anthony's defense attorney was reprimanded for inappropriate media comments. Never happened, according to this letter from Baez, posted today on the Court's Zimmerman case website.

It has come to my attention that some misrepresentations were made in your court on Friday, October 26,2012. As an officer of the court I feel obligated to bring them to your attention immediately. During oral arguments in the case of State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman, Assistant State attorney Bernie de la Rionda stated that he believed that I had been held in contempt by Judge Perry in the State of Florida vs. Casey Anthony, presumably for violating some rule or order relating to violating the rules of professional conduct involving statements to the media.


These representations are completely false. The only discipline ever handed down in the Casey Anthony case by any judge was a fine for a discovery violation. There was never any such discipline or admonishments relating to comments to the media to ever arise in the Casey Anthony case. (The Prosecution's motion for a gag order was denied by Judge Strickland.) I am available to the court if more clarification is needed. I am certain that Mr. De la Rionda was more careful with his other arguments, however, I will
ask him personally to please verify his facts in the future before recklessly attempting to
tarnish any other members of the Central Florida legal community.

As previously reported, Judge Nelson denied the state's second motion for a gag order. The order is here. The case scheduling order is here.

< Supreme Court: Argument in Two Dog-Sniffing Cases | Wednesday Night Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Jeralyn, (none / 0) (#1)
    by Tamta on Sat Nov 03, 2012 at 12:14:21 PM EST
    Why was Baez's letter filed with the Court? TIA.

    Tamta (none / 0) (#2)
    by LeaNder on Wed Nov 07, 2012 at 12:37:42 PM EST
    Hello, so you don't feel too lonely here.

    If I may speculate, its all about a lawyer's reputation. Considering the case has quite a bit of public attention: Would I find traces that his image needs repair, if I looked closer into it?

    Wasn't he the first that was offered the job and passed it on to O'Mara?

    Strictly media is neutral, never mind that they are considered part of the evil in this case. Their business is news. Only by articulating his objection this way, he could have been sure to make news, like here.;)

    Besides, and no, I am not going back to watch Bernie's ill prepared presentation, which on the other hand hardly any one of his colleagues would have been able to handle, as far as I remember, he articulated it more carefully, somehow like: Wasn't ...?

    Something you can always rely on with the press is that they don't get subtleties. Although I haven't looked into it, have you? Has anyone cared to go back and cite BDLR's exact statement?


    Baez was never offered the job (none / 0) (#4)
    by Redbrow on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 04:15:21 PM EST
    to defend Zimmerman and never passed anything on to Omara.

    Please stop spreading misinformation, LeaNder.


    NeJame - Baez (none / 0) (#7)
    by LeaNder on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 04:23:43 AM EST
    You are correct, Redbrow, I mixed Baez up with Nejame. So, I am not deleted for spreading rumor?

    Strictly Fredrick Leatherman's blog represents  my camp, maybe I got caught up in group dynamics, just as much as the ones over here irritated me sometimes.

    Strictly, I should completely shut of on the web, I know this for longer now.

    Concerning Bernie de la Rionda, well yes, I fear he is not quite up to charming O'Mara. But we'll see.

    What d'ya think O'Mara at al want to ask the guy at 911? Or the medical eximiners?


    shut of (none / 0) (#8)
    by LeaNder on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 04:25:08 AM EST
    copy and past actions, should always be accompanied by paying close attention:

    shut up on the web, I meant of course.


    De la Rionda's Statement (none / 0) (#6)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 01:36:35 AM EST


    De la Rionda: In response to defense c-, or counsel for the media talking about the Casey Anthony, I believe Judge Perry did hold Mr. Baez in contempt. I don't know if it was an outright gag order, but I believe he was held in contempt. But I think the record will speak for itself.

    thanks, perfect (none / 0) (#9)
    by LeaNder on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 04:27:03 AM EST
    so, somehow the "I believe", "I don't know" left a trace of hesitation in my mind.

    Obviously careless of O'Mara.


    de la Rionda (none / 0) (#10)
    by LeaNder on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 04:27:42 AM EST
    not O'Mara but de la Rionda, gone again. ;)

    BDLR made a false statement about (none / 0) (#3)
    by Redbrow on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 04:09:55 PM EST
     a fellow attorney. This false statement will forever be in the record. Baez set the record straight to ensure that anyone reading this case record in the future is aware of BDLR's ignorant misinformation.

    Baez acted correctly in ensuring BDLR's defamation does not go unchecked in the official record. I would not be surprised if Baez files a civil suit against BDLR for damage to his reputation.


    leander22 says: (none / 0) (#5)
    by Redbrow on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 04:27:55 PM EST
    I am relapsing, I know. But an interesting development is that Jeralyn Merrit may have decided that on her front over there, there is no further interest in the case. I already had to respond to a lonely voice asking her a question on her latest contribution, never answered of course. This is really news, since so far she was eager and fast to report on the latest developments. But lately it got more and more lonely in the comment section. Maybe she has other things to do, or she waits till all the material is available. But this still feels unusual.

    I do not see anything that corroborates your claim "that Jeralyn Merrit may have decided that on her front over there, there is no further interest in the case."

    Unlike your favorite hangout, this blog is fact/evidence based. When there is no new evidence available, there is little to discuss. Go back to your fantasyland where biased speculation is prized above facts and evidence.