Does Jose Baez Think Before He Speaks?

During a hearing on March 3, 2011, defense attorney Jose Baez called to the stand an attorney who had worked at his firm and had interaction with Casey Anthony which is protected by the attorney-client privilege.  The questions of Mr. Baez for his employee can be heard at the following link.

http://www.youtube.com/user/S0meRand0mName#p/c/F7E3498AE219FD95/16/wKx-OT6XY0Q

Jose Baez: “Do you know if it revolved around a meeting with George Anthony and Casey Anthony?”

Gabriel Adam: “That sounds familiar.”

This is not an affirmative answer.  “That” distances Mr. Adam from his statement.  The word “familiar” is not an affirmation Mr. Baez’s question reflects reality.  Mr. Adam did not answer the question.

Jose Baez: “OK.  And on August 14, 2008, did Casey Anthony have a visit with George and Cindy Anthony?”

Gabriel Adam: “I believe there was one scheduled.  I… I cannot remember if it actually happened.”

Another song and dance resulting in a non-answer.  The word “believe” indicates this may or may not be true and is still open to question.  The word “actually” demonstrates a sensitivity to “happened”.  Mr. Adam does not want to state if the “visit” occured or not.

Jose Baez: “Do you recall if prior to that date that… we… that uhhh… that we had instructed Ms. Anthony to stop recieving visits from her family?”

Mr. Baez asks a question violating the attorney-client privilege of both his employee and Casey Anthony.  Mr. Baez is almost unable to verbalize this question.  The excessive use of the word “that” indicates a distancing from the instruction to Ms. Anthony to “stop receiving visits”.  A careful listener must ask if such an instruction had been given “prior to that date”, a “date” which is Mr. Baez again distances himself from with “that”, a sensitive “date”.

We have often seen Mr. Baez stutter and stammer on national television and in local news interviews.  It is understandable in a setting in which Mr. Baez is being asked questions for which he may not have been prepared for him to stumble and rephrase answers on the fly.  However, this is a court hearing.  Mr. Baez called this witness.  Mr. Baez had opportunity to plan his line of questioning in advance.  Mr. Baez could have written his question in the best possible format prior to entering the courtroom.  In other words, Mr. Baez could have adequately prepared for this hearing, but from the verbalization of this question, it is clear he did not.  Mr. Baez’s client and all defendants in the United States deserve an attorney who prepares their cases, strategies, and questioning in advance of the moment of truth.  Mr. Baez’s client does not have such an attorney.

Gabriel Adam: “I’m not really…”

Jose Baez: “If you recall.”

Gabriel Adam: “This is a tricky situation because I’m not really comfortable with answering questions that I… of things that I said to my client at the time.”

Mr. Adam demonstrates through his answer he is a superior attorney to Mr. Baez as Mr. Adam immediately recognizes the danger inherent for the client in this line of questioning.

Judge Perry: “Mr. Baez.”

Jose Baez: “We’re talking specifically about that.”

Mr. Baez verifies he also recognizes the danger to his client from his question and attempts to assure the court he knows what he is doing, even though he planned poorly for this moment.

Judge Perry: “You represented to the court that you were talking about a visit him being there with law enforcement and that’s where you were going.”

Jose Baez: “I am going there.”

Judge Perry: “Now what you are about to do and you need to think about it is you are asking questions about conversation between attorney client.  Remember the following.  You cannot use the attorney client privilege as a shield then turn around and open it up and use it as a sword.  Once you open it, it’s open.  So, you need to think long and hard about the questions you’re asking.”

Judge Perry is also concerned for the best interest of the defendant, going so far as to offer advice to Mr. Baez.

We have learned not only does Mr. Baez not think before he speaks, he does not prepare for court even when his desired line of questioning will open his client’s attorneys to questioning by the state about confidential defense matters.

We have learned Mr. Baez is not qualified to handle a defense of this magnitude, especially with the life of his client hanging in the balance.