Depositions and Speculation

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by Watching You, Mar 29, 2004.

  1. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    A poster at another forum has angrily denounced Fleet White for demanding his deposition remain sealed (as has Lou Smit, BTW) and further states that Fleet would most certainly have been asked his opinion on who killed JBR and he is deliberately trying to keep the public from knowing his opinion. This poster seems obsessed with this issue, so maybe we should sort it out for her.

    I strongly disagree with this poster. I do not believe it is proper procedure to ask a witness to speculate on who he believes may have committed a crime. Sworn testimony of a witness is based on facts, not speculation. I would be very surprised if the question were asked in the first place and totally shocked if opposing attorneys allowed White to answer, even if he were dumb enough to answer, which I doubt.

    Maybe someone who knows more about these things could elaborate. I don't think I am wrong.
     
  2. 1000 Sparks

    1000 Sparks Active Member

    ya know

    Maybe he just said "I do know that Burke and John didn't do it"....

    OK, not funny.

    But you are right, they don't ask for opinions..just the facts.
     
  3. Spade

    Spade Member

    Epstein deposition

    Please re-read this depostion. In it LinWad chides Darnay for his ability to take a deposition and specifically mentions FW and Patsy's depositions.

    0001
    1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
    2 ATLANTA DIVISION
    3 ROBERT CHRISTIAN WOLF,
    4 Plaintiff,
    CASE NO. 00-CIV-1187(JEC)
    5 vs.
    6 JOHN BENNETT RAMSEY and

    PATRICIA PAUGH RAMSEY,
    7
    Defendants.
    8 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    9
    VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
    10
    GIDEON EPSTEIN
    11
    12 May 17, 2002

    21 MR. HOFFMAN: Come on, Lin, stop
    22 trying to be a wise guy.
    23 MR. WOOD: Now, I'm not trying to
    24 -- you don't have the right --
    25 MR. HOFFMAN: Stop trying to be a
    0190

    1 wise guy, Lin, which is what you're doing right
    2 now.
    3 MR. WOOD: You do not have the --
    4 MR. HOFFMAN: I'm just analogizing.
    5 I'm treating it as if it were a direct
    6 examination for the purposes of trying to make
    7 this analogy understandable, and, very simply, I
    8 will not go outside the bounds of what was
    9 asked at this deposition as if it had been a
    10 direct examination at trial.
    11 MR. ALTMAN: I think we're on the
    12 same page on that.
    13 MR. HOFFMAN: That's a pretty simple
    14 concept.
    15 MR. WOOD: I thought the question
    16 was whether -- don't you agree you don't have
    17 the right to conduct a direct examination on our
    18 dollar.
    19 MR. HOFFMAN: Absolutely not. All I
    20 want to do is just simply allow him to answer

    21 a few of the questions that he might not have
    22 been allowed to answer more fully that were
    23 asked on your, you know, on your dime, so to
    24 speak.
    25 MR. WOOD: So you do agree that you
    0191
    1 do not have the right to do a direct

    2 examination on our dime.
    3 MR. HOFFMAN: Well, no, no. I
    4 don't agree that there's any law or authority to
    5 that effect so to that degree I don't agree
    6 that you have a legal right to make that as a
    7 requirement.
    8 However, as far as to just simply
    9 what I'm going to do is I'm certainly not going
    10 to try and take advantage of the situation.
    11 You certainly could have gone the full seven
    12 hours. I appreciate the fact that you're
    13 extending my witness the courtesy of letting him
    14 leave so he can catch his flight and also
    15 shorten your examination to give me a little
    16 time to what I hope will be a legitimate
    17 attempt to try and just let him augment some of
    18 the answers that he had given in response to
    19 your earlier questioning.
    20 But you have no legal authority, in

    21 my opinion, to limit it, and in that degree I
    22 don't agree with you. However I'm telling you
    23 that I will simply abide by our gentleman's

    24 agreement that we're making right here that I
    25 will limit it only to those areas that were
    0192
    1 gone into when you questioned him originally.
    2 MR. WOOD: I haven't made any
    3 agreement with you today. I don't think Jim
    4 Rawls has made any agreement with you today.
    5 MR. ALTMAN: Why don't we do this?
    6 Why don't we proceed forward, and if you have
    7 an objection, state your objection as we go.
    8 MR. RAWLS: Let me -- Darnay, I

    9 don't know if we're together. I understand what
    10 I said to you, I'm not sure I understand your
    11 intentions.
    12 But rather than your explaining them
    13 to me, let me say we will object if you
    14 attempt to use any part of today's deposition,
    15 all of which we've paid for, none of which

    16 you've paid for, nor, as I understand the
    17 witness' testimony, are you ever going to pay
    18 for.
    19 So if you attempt to use any part
    20 of this in a way that I consider the subject
    21 of a direct examination designed to get any
    22 opinions of this witness into evidence in the
    23 case, we will not only object, but we're late
    24 in the afternoon on a Friday, we'll need to
    25 call Judge Carnes about that.
    0193

    1 MR. HOFFMAN: You know what normally
    2 happens in depositions?
    3 MR. WOOD: Darnay, we don't need to
    4 hear that. I've been taking depositions for 25
    5 years. You haven't taken depositions -- I bet

    6 you haven't taken five depositions in your whole
    7 life.
    8 MR. HOFFMAN: Hey, Lin, given the

    9 fact that you've never tried a libel case in
    10 front of a jury --
    11 MR. WOOD: Darnay Hoffman, let me
    12 tell you something -- Darnay, you've never --
    13 the only case you ever tried you got hit for
    14 $45 million when Bernie Getz was found guilty

    15 for a crime he walked from in a criminal case.
    16 Listen, I have tried cases for 25
    17 years. I've tried more cases than you could
    18 count in your sleep, big boy.
    19 MR. HOFFMAN: -- your first libel
    20 case, okay.
    21 MR. WOOD: Darnay, I don't have to
    22 try a libel case to know how to try a case,

    23 but after listening to Fleet White's deposition
    24 it was obvious to me that you don't know how
    25 to take a deposition.
    0194
    1 MR. HOFFMAN: That's okay.
    2 MR. WOOD: Why don't you tell us

    3 how many depositions you've taken in your
    4 illustrious career?
    5 MR. HOFFMAN: I've taken plenty.
    6 MR. WOOD: I bet you haven't taken
    7 25.
    8 MR. HOFFMAN: Can I tell you
    9 something? I'm the only --
    10 MR. WOOD: I've tried more cases
    11 than you've taken depositions. So don't lecture
    12 me.
    13 MR. HOFFMAN: Hey, I'm the only man
    14 on the planet that's taken Patsy Ramsey's
    15 deposition, and plenty have tried, so don't --
    16 MR. WOOD: Let me tell you
    17 something, and it was a joke. You didn't know
    18 what you were doing.
    19 MR. HOFFMAN: I hope that's what you
    20 believe because I hope you prepare your trial

    21 case accordingly, underestimating me.
    22 MR. WOOD: You're not going to see
    23 a trial in this case. You're going to get
    24 booted on summary judgment just like you got
    25 booted out in Linda Hoffman Pugh's criminal
    0195
    1 case.

    2 MR. HOFFMAN: Sorry, you're wrong.
    3 I'm sorry, you're wrong. When you went --
    4 MR. WOOD: I'm sure you're 100
    5 percent certain like this guy sitting across the
    6 table is.
    7 MR. HOFFMAN: If I was supposed to

    8 be out of here, I would have been out on that
    9 motion to dismiss, but you guys --
    10 MR. WOOD: You got by that motion
    11 to dismiss by the thinnest of threads, only
    12 because you were willing to plead anything,
    13 despite the fact that you can't prove it.

    14 MR. HOFFMAN: And the judge paid me
    15 the complement of actually quoting extensively
    16 from my brief.
    17 MR. WOOD: I don't think the judge
    18 paid you any complements.
    19 MR. HOFFMAN: Hey, I'm here, and all
    20 I can tell you --
    21 MR. WOOD: You're here and you
    22 haven't even bought the deposition --
    23 MR. HOFFMAN: And you guys couldn't
    24 do what 95 percent of the lawyers in
    25 America --
    0196
    1 MR. WOOD: You're so proud of Patsy

    2 Ramsey's deposition, you haven't even bothered to
    3 pay for it. You haven't even paid the court

    4 reporter for taking it down yet.
    5 MR. HOFFMAN: Come on, who cares --
    6 MR. WOOD: You haven't even paid the
    7 court reporter for taking down Patsy Ramsey's
    8 deposition.
    9 MR. HOFFMAN: All right, so what?

    10 MR. WOOD: You never got a copy of
    11 it. I thought you were proud of it.

    12 MR. HOFFMAN: So what's your
    13 problem?
    14 MR. WOOD: You don't have the money
    15 to pay for it. It's a frivolous lawsuit filed
    16 by a frivolous lawyer and you don't even have
    17 the money to pay to come down and sit with

    18 your own deposition witness. You never even met
    19 your own client.
    20 MR. HOFFMAN: Hey, Lin, don't talk

    21 to me about frivolity and the fact that I had
    22 to go to an expert because your daughter had a
    23 horse show that you had to attend and you
    24 couldn't be a real lawyer over a weekend, you
    25 actually had to twist everything into God knows
    0197
    1 what in order to be able to --
    2 MR. WOOD: I just wanted to make
    3 damned sure that I would be there in Nebraska
    4 to shred Robert Stratbucker.
    5 MR. HOFFMAN: -- your family
    6 outings --
    7 MR. WOOD: I'm going to eat him
    8 alive. Be there. Be there, okay. Guess
    9 what? I'm going to be at my daughter's horse
    10 show and I'm also going to be in Omaha,
    11 Nebraska to rip Stratbucker a new rear end, and
    12 I bet you what, you aren't going to be there.
    13 You ain't going to bother to be

    14 there, neither is Evan Altman, because you don't
    15 have the money and you're not willing to spend
    16 the money on this frivolous case. You got

    17 that? I'll see you in Omaha. Are you going
    18 to be there or are you going to show up by
    19 telephone?
    20 MR. HOFFMAN: How can I not miss
    21 this invitation to be in Omaha? Okay?
    22 MR. WOOD: You be there. You be

    23 there. I bet you a thousand dollars you won't
    24 be there. Want to bet?
    25 MR. HOFFMAN: Lin --
    0198
    1 MR. WOOD: Because you're afraid to
    2 fly.
    3 MR. HOFFMAN: -- I would never,

    4 never bet you, you know better than that.
    5 MR. WOOD: You're afraid to fly;

    6 aren't you? That's what you told Susan Bennett
    7 -- Jamison.
    8 MR. HOFFMAN: I liked the AirTran to
    9 Atlanta, I told you that when I got there.

    10 MR. WOOD: It looked like you were
    11 scared to death.
    12 MR. HOFFMAN: Only of you, Lin.
    13 You frighten me.
    14 MR. WOOD: Well, that may be the
    15 only smart damned thing you've said since I laid
    16 eyes on you the first time. All right, I've
    17 vented enough.

    18 All I'm saying is this: I don't
    19 intend to sit here and listen to you lecture me
    20 one damned second about how to take a

    21 deposition. I know more about taking
    22 depositions on the thumbnail of my right thumb
    23 than you'll ever learn in your damn life. Do
    24 we understand each other?
    25 MR. HOFFMAN: Lin, I'll just have to
    0199
    1 take your word on that one.
    2 MR. WOOD: You can take the word of

    3 anybody that's ever had the opportunity to go up
    4 against me in a courtroom. I'll talk to people
    5 you've -- if we can find somebody.
    6 MR. HOFFMAN: Lin, this sounds like

    7 rank speculation on your part. Just drop it.
    8 MR. WOOD: Let me tell you
    9 something, if I am lucky enough, you will have
    10 your day with me, sir.
    11 MR. HOFFMAN: Oh, I hope so, and I
    12 hope --
    13 MR. WOOD: And it will be the
    14 pleasure of my career when I take you down, and
    15 that day may yet come because you still run

    16 your mouth to the media so much that you're
    17 going to get yourself sued eventually, you're
    18 going to get your experts sued eventually, so

    19 you just keep the business coming, Darnay. It's
    20 really good for my pocketbook. I'm taking a
    21 recess.
    22 MR. HOFFMAN: I know in this case

    23 that the Ramseys aren't paying a penny, the
    24 insurance company is paying you finally, okay,
    25 which is nice --
    0200
    1 MR. WOOD: Hey, I made more money
    2 handling the Ramsey case than you've made in
    3 your whole damn career practicing law, Darnay.
    4 MR. HOFFMAN: -- instead of settling

    5 for chump change, which you've done in all these
    6 other cases, you're actually getting paid a
    7 decent --
    8 MR. WOOD: I've made more money in
    9 the Ramsey case than you've made in your entire
    10 career as a lawyer, you want to bet on that?

    11 MR. HOFFMAN: You mean you've made
    12 more than a hundred dollars?
    13 MR. WOOD: Yes, I have made for
    14 than a hundred dollars, Darnay.
    15 MR. HOFFMAN: -- in this case.
    16 Well, good.
    17 MR. WOOD: I'd just like to know
    18 the poor person that paid you the hundred

    19 dollars. Maybe we'd have a good legal
    20 malpractice claim.
    21 MR. HOFFMAN: All right. Are we
    22 ready?
    23 MR. RAWLS: Do we want to take a
    24 short recess?
    25 MR. ALTMAN: Maybe we ought to.
     
  4. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    I think this is

    despicable behavior by two men who are supposed to be professional attorneys. Lin Wood is a total jerk with his normal threatening, bragging, nasty self, and Darnay is out of his league under Wood's barrage of temper.

    What is really hysterical is that Lin Wood had the nerve to write that sarcastic e-mail to Tricia about internet posters after behaving like a bully in the hood, himself - preserved on the record forever for everyone to see. There is pure hatred in his words, absolutely unacceptable behavior for a man in his position. Guess you can take the boy out of the backwoods, but you can't take the backwoods out of the boy.

    Nice job, Lin.
     
  5. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    So

    Wood tells Hoffman that after listening to FW's deposition, it's obvious Hoffman doesn't know how to take a deposition? I guess I could read into that that Hoffman asked for speculation from FW? I could, but that would only be speculation on my part, right? Then, I could speculate further that Hoffman's sidekick who is so bent on getting White's deposition released already knows that White was improperly asked a question asking him to speculate on who killed JBR, because Hoffman told her about that sealed deposition? It would be purely speculation on my part, and I don't want to speculate, but the biggest speculator of all does it, so why not?

    I read Hoffman's questioning in other deposition transcripts, and I don't think he did so bad if Wood had shut his trap for two seconds to let him ask a question. Wood's purely a bully but what the heck, works for him, I guess. Just look at how rich he's gotten off a six year old's murder.
     
  6. Pybird

    Pybird Member

    WY, I totally agree with your last two posts.

    Mr. Wood is really a piece of work, isn't he? JMO.
     
  7. Deja Nu

    Deja Nu Banned

    First, let me just say this. I am not in my 70's, I'm in my early 50's. And I didn't retire from my legal career 40 years ago, it was just last year. And only because of a work-related injury that turned into a nasty disability. So my legal skills are not rusty, antiquated or out of touch with modern reality.

    Having said that, WY, there is ALWAYS the possibility of some sleazoid lawyer asking questions like, "Who do you think killed JBR?" And there are always deponents who are naive enough to answer, when such information is not only not relevant to the deposition or the case, but pure speculation, which has never had any value. But the sleazeballs still can ask to serve their own litigious intentions (like suing the deponent for slander, especially when those deponents have very deep pockets-cha ching) and the naive deponents can still respond.

    HOWEVER, hopefully those naive deponents have skilled enough lawyers representing them in attendance at depositions who would object on the record to such a stupid question and disallow their clients from responding. But as long as there are Lin Woods and Darnay Hoffmans gracing the halls of American jurisprudence, there will always be opportunities for all sorts of buffoonery.

    Thank God FW is neither naive nor poorly represented. My best guess as to why he wants his depo to remain sealed is to preserve that testimony in the advent of any criminal trial and to protect himself from frivolous libel suits, both of which are wisdom personified.
     
  8. Ginja

    Ginja Member

    Unprofessional, unethical, unskilled

    As to why FW wants his depo to remain sealed is probably due to Ramsey litigiousness. IOW, protection. We know, just from some of the statements Fleet's made that have been publicized that Fleet questioned many actions of the Ramseys that morning and afterwards, from John "finding" the body to the Ramseys decision to go before CNN (and blaming that decision on Fleet).

    Depositions are designed to seek out the truth and get the facts to a case. They DO NOT ask for speculation UNLESS the deponent is an expert witness, and then it's merely an undertaking in trying to determine facts based on what's probably circumstantial at that juncture.

    NOW...as to Wood's behavior in these depositions. It's absolutely despicably underhanded. Hoffman did no better in not filing objections with the court regarding Wood's behavior, not only in the Epstein deposition, but in the others Wood has been involved with as well.

    When you bring in an expert such as Epstein, you pay maxiumum dollars to that expert to appear. The party noticing the deposition is responsible for costs, including air travel, hotel expenses and then whatever the expert charges by the hour, which runs in the hundreds of dollars (per hour). Then there's the cost of the stenographer to transcribe the depo. None of these charges are paid up front. The deponent shows up and then sends his bill, and the steno transcribes the depo and sends the bill with the transcript to the attorney.

    IOW, time is money. When you bring in the experts, it's expected that you will use those experts to get the most information as possible -- NOT WASTE HIS TIME with idiotic, picyune babbling...which is EXACTLY what Lin Wood does at ALL his depositions.

    From all the depos I've read involving Lin Wood...this is his trademark ... to abuse the system and misuse the opportunity at depos to get to the facts. It's absolutely obvious why Wood does this....HE DOESN'T WANT THE FACTS TO COME OUT! And so he disrupts the depo as much as possible so that the expert doesn't have a chance to answer any questions or get on the record with his expertise. Wood fills the day with idiotic babbling and objections to disrupt and dismantle. At the end of the day, the parties have learned absolutely nothing casewise and the party noticing that depo is stuck with huge bills for the deponent's appearance and record of nothing more than Lin Wood BS/objections.

    Perhaps FW sees this and knowing this, realizes that if his depo is unsealed and Wood/Ramseys have at it, they will find a reason to sue and notice Fleet's deposition so they can continue to sue and abuse the innocents in this case...or more importantly, the witnesses who could put Wood's clients before the court.

    If I recall correctly, the ONLY person who's put Wood in his place at these depositions is Mike Kane who threw the book on the table and said the depo was over when Wood began his shenanigans.
     
  9. Spade

    Spade Member

    Ginja

    It is because:
     
  10. Ginja

    Ginja Member

    Spade

    Right you are. However, it's just a real b*tch to think that attorneys like Darnay put up with Wood's BS. We can now see why Hoffman didn't have a chance with any of his suits against the Ramseys.

    If Wood has this much influence on how the process works, one can only imagine what he's done to those in the Boulder DA's office!!!

    I hope Bennett is able to keep this SOB at bay and put him in his place.

    (Wishful thinking) ;-)
     
  11. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    Ginja

    thanks. You have once again hit the nail on the head regarding Lin Wood and his conniving self.

    Spade. Yes.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice