Radio host blasts Casey Anthony lawyer Jose Baez in interview screaming "You're gonna burn in hell!"

Radio host blasts Casey Anthony lawyer Jose Baez in interview screaming "You're gonna burn in hell!"



Please post this where ever you can, we need this interview to go viral!

This is a great interview. Where do the get his is the most sort after attorney? What kind of cases has he gotten since he got off a murder? I have seen no proof he is the most sort after attorney.

At the end of my life I'm gonna be proudJose.

How are you gonna be proud Jose?

Was it worth it?

That was great! About time someone didn't mince words with him. Thanks for sharing!

Dearest eva, daahlink~

That made my day.
Thanx!

kh

Jose Baez Roasted, Toasted And Made To Look About As Useful As A Chia Pet

Posted on July 21st, 2012

by Simon Barrett

Jose Baez started his legal career slowly, very slowly. I am too lazy to look up the dates, but Jose did not exactly do well in passing the Bar Exam. Possibly that was due to him drinking Coors Light, but that is pure speculation! One thing is clear, a young attorney needs to get some ‘face time’ with the media.

The key is to find that ‘big case’, one that the HLN harpies will buy into. Jose did that, he went from ambulance chaser to headliner by taking on the Casey Anthony case. I think it is fair to say that Casey Anthony hardly enamored herself to the public. Sure she walked away found not-guilty in the court of law, but she is most definitely guilty in the court of public opinion.

Read more:
http://www.bloggernews.net/128337

I'm now on chapter 11+ of the book and before I really believed that baez knew kc killed Caylee but came up with an alternative story line (which could still be the case). Now I'm not so sure that is the case and think it's possible that he really bought the story she sold him hook, line and sinker.

The problem though is that the story didn't add up during the trial and I can't say that the book has helped me view it differently either - it still doesn't add up.

Is there a thread to discuss the book because there are so many parts where he presents his side but doesn't factor in that the evidence didn't support his theory, plus he glosses over many important aspects that don't support his theory.