A Lesson in Respect

As we learned in the previous article, Mr. Baez accepted the position as Casey Anthony’s attorney with the knowledge there would be media exposure for himself.  He attempted to minimize his knowledge and estimate of the amount of exposure, indicating he felt such exposure to be of positive benefit for himself.

In this article, we will examine if media exposure has been a positive experience for Mr. Baez.

The following video is lengthy.  It is all interesting, but we are concerned with the last few minutes which are raw video moments at a press conference Mr. Baez called to discuss the indictment of Casey Anthony in October 2008.

Jose Baez: “Folks, I’m going to ask that you all leave my office now.”

Jose Baez: “You will learn how to respect me and you will learn how to respect my client.  And if… if you all can’t hold each other accountable, I apologize, but I’m just not going to deal with it.”

“Folks” – Mr. Baez is addressing everyone in the room.

“I’m going to ask” – He has not asked them, but plans to.  He has not yet asked “Folks” to leave.

“that you all leave my office” – “that” distances the speaker from having all the reporters leave his office.  Mr. Baez called this conference, he does not want it to end before he makes his speech.

“now” – he uses the word “now”, but continues to talk, in effect not allowing the reporters to do as he is “going to ask”.

“You will learn” – Who is “you”?  In the video, Mr. Baez has a problem with only one reporter and his station.  But he now addresses “you”, which could be only that reporter or everyone as in the previous sentence.

“will learn” – Mr. Baez is instructing.  He is teaching.  The reporters are his students and they “will learn” the lesson he is teaching.

“how to respect me” – Note the reporters will not learn to “respect” Jose Baez, they will learn “how to respect”, which refers to rituals or codes of conduct in regards to “respect”.  A person may show a form of respect to another without respecting the other, as when the cashier at a supermarket calls a customer “sir” or “ma’am”, displaying verbal respect, but not necessarily respecting the customer.

Mr. Baez is telling us at least some reporters have not shown him respect.  We cannot be sure if Mr. Baez also demands the reporters respect him, but they must demonstrate respect in a manner of which he approves.  This allows him to skip over any discussion of whether he has earned respect.

Some of the reporters have not shown him respect and may have shown him disrespect.  Mr. Baez has now verbally taken a position of respect by setting himself up as first authority (Get out of my office) and then teacher.  Throwing the reporters out of the office is part of a lesson plan.  Being thrown out will help them learn “how to respect”.

“and you will learn how to respect my client” – The order in which a person states concerns is important.  The more vital a concern for the speaker, the earlier it will appear in a list.  Mr. Baez tells us that showing respect for him is more important than showing respect for his client.  He also tells us his client has not been shown respect by some of the reporters he is addressing.  He sets up an additional homework assignment.  They “will learn”.

“And if…” – Mr. Baez wants to issue an ultimatum, but is torn because he does not want to cut off the press.  He doesn’t even want the press who are currently in his office to leave.  We assume he is still “going to ask” them to leave “now”, but he hasn’t done so yet.

“if you all can’t hold each other accountable” – “you all” are all the reporters in the room.  Mr. Baez has defined he was not previously addressing everyone in the room, but only those who had not shown him respect, only they “will learn”.

The reporters who have shown him respect are now responsible for the behavior of the reporters who do not show respect.  Mr. Baez feels his statements are of such importance and in such great demand, he can place responsibilities upon people over whom he has no actual control.  He does not employ these reporters.  He does not hold an elected position over them.  He is not in any chain of command over them.  Yet, he does command them and expects them to obey.  If they do not obey, he warns of consequences.

“I apologize” – What is he apologizing for?  We cannot be sure.  His outburst, his demands, his behavior, bringing them to his office for nothing?  We don’t know, but from the placement of the words, he seems to be apologizing for inflicting a punishment.  As if he is saying this hurts me worse than it hurts you, but you have forced me into it.

“but I’m just not going to deal with it” – “but” refutes the previous statement.  Mr. Baez was not serious about his apology.

“I’m just not going to deal with it” – This is the punishment.  Mr. Baez “just” is not going to “deal with it”.  “just” marks this statement as sensitive.  He may deal with it as not dealing with it would cut off his media access.  “going to” is a phrase that marks this as a future action, a consequence.

“deal with it” – “it” refers back to the reporters holding each other “accountable”.  If the reporters cannot do what he wants, he will not “deal”.  We cannot be sure what this means.  It is vague.

Has media exposure been a positive experience for Jose Baez?  About three months into the case, in this clip Mr. Baez tells us he is experiencing a negative press moment and indicates previous demonstrations of a lack of respect, indicating previous negative experiences.

What did the reporters do to show a lack of respect?  We do not know.  From the press coverage by the station in question, we can assume reporting other than as Mr. Baez wished shows a lack of respect.  In this video, the reporter being told to leave asks if Mr. Baez fears the questions of his station.  Mr. Baez does not respond directly to the question.  He avoids answering.  When someone avoids answering a question, they have given their answer.

Do you think Jose Baez’s relations with the media have improved from this point?  Is this a local media problem only?  Did Mr. Baez poison his local media dealings in order to force a change of venue?

Why is Jose Baez Defending Casey Anthony?

Prior to Casey Anthony, no one had heard the name Jose Baez, a man who now appears on television multiple times per week.  For instance, this week he called his own press conference and appeared on Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell.

As an attorney struggling to establish his practice, Jose Baez does not seem a likely candidate for accepting the pro bono position of Casey Anthony’s lead counsel.  Yet, he has stayed with the case for more than two years, during which time multiple other lawyers for the defense have come and gone.

What keeps Mr. Baez committed to this case?

To answer that question, we must look back at past statements Mr. Baez has given to the media.

The following interview took place on July 17, 2009:

http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/anthony_case/071609one_on_one_jose_baez

Holly Bristow:  What did you know about this case when you got to that phone call?

We don’t know what phone call Ms. Bristow refers to by “that phone call”.  No one knows how Casey Anthony found or contacted Jose Baez the first time.  The video states Ms. Anthony was told in the jail waiting area by another detained individual about Mr. Baez, but that story is a rumor.  We don’t even know if there was a first phone call.

Jose Baez: “Absolutely nothing. I knew absolutely nothing.”

Mr. Baez does not address the circumstances of the first phone call, but also does not confirm there was one.  We are still in the dark as to how Ms. Anthony first came into contact with Mr. Baez.

The use of the extra word “absolutely” is indicitave of sensitivity about the answer of “nothing”.  The sensitivity is increased by repeating “absolutely nothing”.  The word “nothing” in this instance would mean a total and complete lack of knowledge.  The essence of “nothing” cannot be increased by the use of a modifier.  Mr. Baez’s answer indicates he knew more than “nothing”.  We don’t know what he knew, but he did have knowledge and he does not want to reveal either his possession of the knowledge or exactly what he knew.

Holly Bristow: Did you know there was a child missing at this point?

The interviewer picks up on Mr. Baez’s deceptive answer.  If she had believed his response, this question would not have been necessary.

Jose Baez: “No I did not.  I will say that as I began to read her police report, it certainly seemed to be more of your standard neglect case.”

Mr. Baez gives a strong response he did not know a child was missing.  However, we do not know the time period to which “at this point” refers.  Ms. Bristow refers to “that phone call”, but any phone call is unestablished.  Mr. Baez was free when answering to place himself at any “point”.  By going on to add an additional comment explaining his lack of knowledge, he shows sensitivity to his denial.

“I will say” – Mr. Baez limits his responses.  There are things he will say and things he will not say.  We do not know why he is limited or what limits him.

“that as I began to read her police report” – The word “that” distances the speaker from the police report, which contains damaging information to the defense which was provided to law enforcement by the defendant.  The police report is one of the most damning pieces of evidence in this case.

“I began to read” – Sensitivity to the reading is shown by use of extra words “I began”.  We do not know if he finished reading or if he did read, only that he “began”.  After denying knowledge of her case, Mr. Baez could be sensitive about revealing he did read her police report which may have been before he spoke with her.

“it certainly seemed” – The word “certainly” is an extra modifier indicating sensitivity to “seemed”, which is a word that implies a personal view, the view of others will differ and this is acknowledged.  This is not a strong statement.  Mr. Baez is not standing behind this statement.

“to be more” – more modifiers indicating sensitivity to the claim of “your standard neglect case”.

“your standard neglect case” – “your standard” are extra words minimizing the  seriousness of “neglect case”.

Throughout the statement, Mr. Baez shows sensitivity and makes efforts not to lock himself into his words.  His sensitivity and probable deception indicate the police report did not represent a “standard neglect case”.  His attempts to minimize the impact of his client’s actions show he believes her crimes are more serious than “standard neglect” and will be perceived by others as such.

Holly Bristow: Did you think ah this will be over in a day or two or did you think a year later this would still be one of the biggest cases in the country?

Jose Baez: “I certainly had no idea in any way shape or form. I’ll be honest I thought as I got more acclimated with the case it would be in the news once or twice but I certainly had no idea it would turn into what it would turn into.”

“I certainly had no idea in any way shape or form” – The strongest statement would have been “No” or “No, I did not”.  Mr. Baez replies with a string of modifiers utilizing the words “certainly” and “in any way shape or form”, a strong indicator of sensitivity and most likely deception.

“I’ll be honest” – A common verbal flag of deception.  This phrase also implies that up to this point in the interview, he has not been honest.

“I thought as I got more acclimated with the case” – Mr. Baez believes his presence in the case makes a difference in the media coverage.  Being in the “news once or twice” is dependent upon his presence.

“it would be in the news once or twice” – An admission by Mr. Baez he did anticipate media coverage while he was involved with the case.  “once or twice” is a phrase used to minimize for the listener his expectations for media coverage.  Mr. Baez believed the case would be have television exposure from the moment he came on board.

“but I certainly had no idea it would turn into what it would turn into.” – “but” refutes the previous statement (Mr. Baez’s belief in limited media coverage).  “certainly” is a sign of sensitivity to “no idea”, meaning he did have an “idea” of what would happen.

Holly Bristow: What has it been like getting all of this media national media attention?

Jose Baez: “It’s a lot of highs and lows. On the high side I’ve had the opportunity to meet a lot of interesting and fascinating people. It’s given me the ability to work with some of the foremost experts in the field.

“On the high side I’ve had the opportunity to meet a lot of interesting and fascinating people.” – A statement of the personal gain experienced by Mr. Baez through taking this case.  What is “interesting and fascinating” about these people to Mr. Baez?  We don’t know.  We do know the “interesting and fascinating people” are not “the foremost experts in the field” as he distinguishes them as a seperate group in the next sentence.

“It’s given me the ability” – An admission of Mr. Baez’s lack of experience.  Prior to taking this case, he did not have the “ability” to “work with” “the foremost experts in the field”. What has changed his “ability” by taking this case?  His experience has not increased.  His win/loss record has not changed.  He has published no books and has made no contribution to his field that would draw the attention of “the foremost experts”.  The only thing that has changed for Mr. Baez is his “ability” to maintain media exposure.

“some of” – Mr. Baez is sensitive about “foremost experts”.  Even now, only some will “work with” him.  Some will not.  Why not?  We don’t know.  Presumably from the language of the statement, he does not possess the “ability” to work with all of them.  Since his “ability” is  publicity, some “foremost experts” will not work with him in exchange for this commodity.

Jose Baez: “One would think a high profile case would give the public the opportunity to learn about the system, our public justice system and the law. Unfortunately I’ve learned that it’s more about entertainment than what actually transpires in the criminal justice system.

“I’ve learned that it’s more about entertainment than what actually transpires in the criminal justice system.” – This is a true statement.  Mr. Baez has learned “it’s” (we don’t know what he is referring to, presumably defending Ms. Anthony) “more about entertainment”.  He learned this by appearing frequently on Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell and his friend Geraldo Rivera’s television show, as well as many local and national televised interviews.  Mr. Baez has even called his own “entertainment” press conferences.  Questions continue to circulate about deals made with the “entertainment” industry by the defense and the Anthonys.  A substantial amount of money is being made from the “entertainment” of this case and Mr. Baez himself received $90,000 from a television network as payment for defending Ms. Anthony.  All of this before anything “transpires in the criminal justice system” as Ms. Anthony has not yet gone to trial.

Holly Bristow: Has it changed your opinion of Florida’s public records laws?

Jose Baez: “I’ll be honest with you, I’ve never gave much thought to public records laws. While I’ve utilized them to gain information on many of my cases I have never realized the double edged sword and the harm it could do to our system. I think what’s important with the Casey Anthony case everyone realized no matter how you feel about the case or its participants you should always remember that what happens in her case, specifically because it’s a high profile case, affects us all.”

“I’ll be honest with you” – a phrase which almost guarantees deception and again implies he has not been honest earlier in the interview.

“I’ve never gave much thought to public records laws” – Taking into consideration the introductory phrase and the following sentence, this is most likely a deception.

“While I’ve utilized them to gain information on many of my cases” – Mr. Baez has given thought to these laws, especially when they worked to his benefit.

“I have never realized the double edged sword” – Now that the public records laws have worked against his interests, they are a “double edged sword”.

“the harm it could do to our system” – Now that the public records laws have worked against his interests, they are dangerous to “our system”.  When he used them to his advantage, no harm was done.

“what’s important” “what happens in her case” “affects us all” – All the other words are extra, showing extreme sensitivity to this statement.  What happens in her case may not affect us all.  Most of us will never be on trial for killing our child.  Most of us will not tell lies to the authorities if our child dissappears.  Most of us will not fabricate police reports and work histories.  This statement is an attempt to persuade the listeners that the defense is working to protect the rights of all people, an outright lie.

The defense is working to prevent the prosecution of Casey Anthony.  That is their only legal objective.  Mr. Baez has revealed within these statements he also has a goal of media publicity as he was aware television exposure would be part of the case.  Exposure which he attributes solely to his involvement.  In other words, he is the one seeking media time.  He actively labors to obtain screen time, which is why he attributes media exposure to his involvement.

Why is Jose Baez defending Casey Anthony?  As he has told us in his own words, he has learned the case is all about entertainment and publicity.  Mr. Baez has profited from entertainment deals by selling pictures to a television network to generate funds to pay his initial fees.  Now that his client has been declared indigent and he is no longer able to generate funds via entertainment, he continues to solicit media exposure.

Mr. Baez also revealed he did have knowledge about this case prior to his first contact with Casey Anthony.  Mr. Baez was evasive about exactly how their first contact took place.  Cindy Anthony in a letter to Casey in jail wrote extensively about attorneys illegally soliciting clients.  Although Mr. Baez did mirror portions of this same letter in his filings against Orlando attorney Mark NeJames, he did not utilize solicitation.

How do you think the first contact happened?  Did Casey Anthony contact Jose Baez or did Jose Baez contact Casey Anthony?