View Full Version : 2010.05.11 - Casey Anthony Death Penalty Motions Hearing
Motion to dismiss death penalty due to gender bias. - Denied
Two motions to declare Florida's death penalty unconstitutional. - Denied
Motion to require the state to tell the defense which aggravating circumstances they will attempt to prove. - Granted
Reciprocal request asking the defense to provide the state which mitigating circumstances they will attempt to prove. - Denied w/o prejudice
Motion to keep the defense's penalty phase witnesses secret. - Denied (but the judge did say he would consider keeping the witnesses private info secret like their home address, I think)
Motion to dismiss the death penalty due to the defense's claim the state is only seeking it because KC doesn't have enough money to pay for it. - Denied
Thank you so much DearPrudence. I can now catch up, I'm on post 187 or something.
Just a thought not directed at DearPrudence.
The Professor that testified today about DP and gender bias. Although at face value it looks to be a loss for the state. It is very important in the appeal process. IMHO
I am interpreting that right now (could change as we see the defense's moves later on) is that the defense knows they probably aren't going to get an aquittal. But they want to save her from the DP later on.
Also this behooves the state as well because it is one less appeal she can make. KWIM? JMHO thoughts as of post 187.
I'll be back later (much later) after I have had the chance to read all posts :)
strawberry
05-11-2010, 01:07 PM
Ms Lyon(s)
snipped. Your "(s)" cracks me up everytime I see it.
doogiesgirl
05-11-2010, 01:08 PM
Ya know I have to say that when AL spoke of society/or the legal community, having different standards for a mother vs. a father.....part of that rang a bell for me, (not exactly what she was saying though). Even though we are changing as a society, and are now admitting that a father has just as much rights and responsibilities, and can create just as tight a bond as a mother after birth....we are still not completely there yet IMO, as far as holding male and female parents to the same standards. We are trying, have come a long way, but we, as a society, still fall short many times.
But what cannot be disputed is the fact that a mother carries a child for 10 months in HER womb, and that cannot be done by a male. I don't think it can be disputed that that incubating, in most cases, does cause a mother to have an "extra" SOMETHING? with a child. In general I'm talking. Now don't get me wrong.....some woman are just NOT cut out to be mothers and the father is clearly the better parent in some, maybe a lot of cases.
But I think society, while trying to recognize that the father plays just as an important role in a childs life as the mother, still holds on to a belief, (whether it's a misconception or not), that the mother, in particular, should form an extra, unique bond with a child, simply from the fact that the child lived in her body for 10 months. How could that NOT create some kind of attachment that a man can never experience? KWIM?
And when a mother chooses to exploit that unique attachment (such as murdering said child), it should be viewed as deviant, aberrant, unthinkable. But I think this about a father also so.....? When a mother, who is in the highest position of trust and affection when it comes to a child, murders said child......it is sickening, angering, as well as puzzling to the majority of society b/c we hold that belief, whether we want to admit it or not, that a mother should never nor could never, break that highest form of trust. The trust of an innocent child. Esp. when it's the case of a single mother.
Now barring an accident, I would want the DP on the table for either parent who murdered their child, male or female. I would not understand either parent murdering their child, male or female, but I am saying that I do find it harder to understand in a mother.
So even with all I've said, I don't see that I would find it any easier to put to death a mother vs a father......I just think I find a mother murdering her child more baffling.
So with all society's strides we have yet to make.....to me AL's argument doesn't hold water, yet it did hit a cord about "how could she do it?"
moo
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 01:10 PM
I hate this gender bias stuff, it's stupid IMO.
and anyone who visits 'crimes in the news' here can see that women get off easy when they murder there kids (or do nothing while there boyfriend/husband does it). darile is a rare execption. andrea yates and susan smith got life even with the dp on the table. and andrea was later acquitted by insanity anyways.
the darlie comparison is also plain ridiculous, because darlie didnt have her boys rotting in her trunk while she was doing the behavior described.
luvmy4brats
05-11-2010, 01:11 PM
I believe I saw a computer screen at both the defense and prosecution tables, and one at the podium, too.
No, not the computer screens. It looks like a small black binder propped up in front of KC. That was an iPad. I saw him picking it up at the end of today's hearing. He was typing on a bluetooth keyboard.
beach
05-11-2010, 01:11 PM
I don't think it was wrong, I think it was right on..
For right before that, ALyon said she didn't understand what the mitigating factors were in going for a DP sentence..so how could the defense place blame on RKronk as the SOD who dumped Caylee's remains and yet now know what the aggravating factors were...I do think it was appropriate and if it weren't JPerry would have said so to JA...I love JA's fight for Caylee's Justice..
Justice for Caylee
I agree about the remark itself. However, HHJP has admonished BOTH sides that ALL remarks should be addressed to the Court and warned them against addresssing each other. I just wish he wouldn't have turned to look at them.
heh...I'll give credit where credit is due - IMO, AL has mastered the art of playing the 'nasty-nice' game better than JA. He's gotta plenty of time to practice before trial.
Dear Prudence
05-11-2010, 01:14 PM
InSession is replaying testimony from ER. JMO, but AL sure picked a bad witness. No credentials whatsoever other than having read newspapers/media to write her articles and form opinions and no familiarity with this case.
She most likely picked this witness because she is the only person in America that believes women are discriminated against in criminal punishments because of their gender. It's simply not true, especially when it comes to women who kill their children. No one who has even glanced at the statistics would think that women are punished at a higher rate. Men are much more likely to get the death penalty than women.
No, not the computer screens. It looks like a small black binder propped up in front of KC. That was an iPad. I saw him picking it up at the end of today's hearing. He was typing on a bluetooth keyboard.
Oh, you are right... I do remember seeing that now that you mention it. Curious that it was allowed.
logicalgirl
05-11-2010, 01:18 PM
I agree about the remark itself. However, HHJP has admonished BOTH sides that ALL remarks should be addressed to the Court and warned them against addresssing each other. I just wish he wouldn't have turned to look at them.
heh...I'll give credit where credit is due - IMO, AL has mastered the art of playing the 'nasty-nice' game better than JA. He's gotta plenty of time to practice before trial.
I don't agree - I believe AL is transparently manipulative and it is clear to me that HHJP knows it.
The only thing I wish JA would do is read up on feminist beliefs and behaviors. What AL is espousing and representing are not feminist beliefs. And I say that as a feminist who has been marching, demonstrating and living the belief since the late 60's. Primarily it means to be given equal opportunity, in every way. Including the right to be judged.
wonders
05-11-2010, 01:25 PM
I didn't find the remark itself 'childish' at all. In fact, I found it spot on.
The only thing JA did wrong in my opinion, is when he looked at the defense table when he said it. He set himself up for AL to call him out on it, which she did. He should have just kept on looking at the podium. Everyone in the courtroom knew exactly where that pointed barb was aimed.
What I'm trying to say is the prosecution has always conducted themselves in a very professional manner and that snarky remark is what I have come to expect from the defense. To me it just adds to the circus atmosphere that the defense created and was proud that the prosecution never played into it.
Kimster
05-11-2010, 01:29 PM
not trying to be a smart alec but are you talking about the word Bozo?
That's exactly what she means.
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 01:29 PM
" I have no degrees or educational background" I love it!!! GO ASHTON
uh oh!
guess if this is there type of witness i better be looking for a supeaona soon ;)
Pensfan
05-11-2010, 01:30 PM
The more I look at KC on tv, the more certain I am that she is hypotensive. Look at how extremely pale she is. What ever they drugged her with this morning has really lowered her blood pressure. I she were my patient, I'd grab a blood pressure cuff and refuse to let her stand without assistance. IMPO, she is over-medicated.
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 01:32 PM
Tell me ONE thing Casey provided for Caylee?
cholorform?
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 01:34 PM
chloroform
great minds think alike i guess ;)
pamandabear
05-11-2010, 01:36 PM
Does anyone else wonder why JA did not argue about the mitigating factors when he was speaking instead of having another hearing about it? Its been said by JA in a prior hearing with JS, maybe I am missing something.....:confused:
:crazy: now that I have had a chance to review the hearing without screaming toddlers running around I am understanding what was going on!!! :doh:
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 01:37 PM
Ummm possibly Chloroform?
well thinking about it again, if casey says in her letters that cindy bought it, then casey cant even take real credit for that either.
beach
05-11-2010, 01:38 PM
I don't agree - I believe AL is transparently manipulative and it is clear to me that HHJP knows it.
The only thing I wish JA would do is read up on feminist beliefs and behaviors. What AL is espousing and representing are not feminist beliefs. And I say that as a feminist who has been marching, demonstrating and living the belief since the late 60's. Primarily it means to be given equal opportunity, in every way. Including the right to be judged.
BBM
I agree. It is her manipulative-transparency that makes her better at the 'nasty-nice' game, imo.
I love JA's passion and the way he uses it to fight for justice for Caylee. IMO, he just needs to learn how to 'temper' his passion when AL gets under his skin. It gives her far too much satisfaction and only encourages her to do more of it. If he hadn't turned to the defense table when he said the remark, AL would've never been able to say a word. Instead, it gave her the opportunity to ask HHJP to request that Mr. Ashton address his remarks to the Court.
fwiw, LDB is very good at handling it, though.
joypath
05-11-2010, 01:40 PM
Tell me ONE thing Casey provided for Caylee?
Accidentially: 50% of her genetic profile
magnolia
05-11-2010, 01:41 PM
I didn't find the remark itself 'childish' at all. In fact, I found it spot on.
The only thing JA did wrong in my opinion, is when he looked at the defense table when he said it. He set himself up for AL to call him out on it, which she did. He should have just kept on looking at the podium. Everyone in the courtroom knew exactly where that pointed barb was aimed.
I think JA did an excellent job today and will continue doing an excellent job in the future. I think he is very passionate about this case and will do everything within his power to make sure justice is served. However, If I am to speak truthfully, I hope when he approaches future witnesses on the stand, he extends a greeting out of courtesy. I think this is especially important when a Jury is seated. IMO
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 01:41 PM
Damn how many times does JA have to ask a question before she understands what he's asking...3 times before she attempted to answer and still she stammers and stutters.
maybe if he wrote it in a newspaper she could evaluate it.
Dignity4Victims
05-11-2010, 01:43 PM
BBM
I agree. It is her manipulative-transparency that makes her better at the 'nasty-nice' game, imo.
I love JA's passion and the way he uses it to fight for justice for Caylee. IMO, he just needs to learn how to 'temper' his passion when AL gets under his skin. It gives her far too much satisfaction and only encourages her to do more of it. If he hadn't turned to the defense table when he said the remark, AL would've never been able to say a word. Instead, it gave her the opportunity to ask HHJP to request that Mr. Ashton address his remarks to the Court.
fwiw, LDB is very good at handling it, though.
I've been on a 2 hour flight and ready to board again in less than 20 minutes so I haven't been able to watch of today's hearing and don't have time to read the whole thread. I was only able to hear that he denied the gender Motion.
Can someone give me a quick yes or no - has Judge Perry granted any part of the DP Motion as of yet?
Thanks so much!
magnolia
05-11-2010, 01:45 PM
I've been on a 2 hour flight and ready to board again in less than 20 minutes so I haven't been able to watch of today's hearing and don't have time to read the whole thread. I was only able to hear that he denied the gender Motion.
Can someone give me a quick yes or no - has Judge Perry granted any part of the DP Motion as of yet?
Thanks so much!
No~All DP motions argued today were denied.
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 01:45 PM
ER--I'm not familiar with this case, I've read a few press reports
Witness excused
oh good god.
we have more experience on this case then this woman does!
beach
05-11-2010, 01:48 PM
I've been on a 2 hour flight and ready to board again in less than 20 minutes so I haven't been able to watch of today's hearing and don't have time to read the whole thread. I was only able to hear that he denied the gender Motion.
Can someone give me a quick yes or no - has Judge Perry granted any part of the DP Motion as of yet?
Thanks so much!
Here ya go! Have a safe flight!
Motion to dismiss death penalty due to gender bias. - Denied
Two motions to declare Florida's death penalty unconstitutional. - Denied
Motion to require the state to tell the defense which aggravating circumstances they will attempt to prove. - Granted
Reciprocal request asking the defense to provide the state which mitigating circumstances they will attempt to prove. - Denied w/o prejudice
Motion to keep the defense's penalty phase witnesses secret. - Denied (but the judge did say he would consider keeping the witnesses private info secret like their home address, I think)
Motion to dismiss the death penalty due to the defense's claim the state is only seeking it because KC doesn't have enough money to pay for it. - Denied
mitzi
05-11-2010, 01:49 PM
Good grief, AL is bringing up her own history, talking sexism,
says 'sexist attitudes still exist'.
Waaaaay behind here, but must comment...
A. Lyon(s) and the word sex....impossible to use in the same sentence...just sayin'! :crazy:
AZlawyer
05-11-2010, 01:50 PM
IMO the judge is batting 1000 with his rulings on this case.
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 01:53 PM
AL: No proof death was a homicide
caylee spontanously combusted!
passionflower
05-11-2010, 01:54 PM
Am I the only one who thinks it was odd that JB had an iPad in the courtroom today and had it set up in front of KC?
I really can't fathom how that's allowed.
Is it so JB can type stuff and KC can read AND THEY DO NOT TALK IN COURTROOM????
It seemed that she wrote notes to him on paper..........he nodded
mitzi
05-11-2010, 01:55 PM
KC crying, JB comforting her
Bold mine.
Did he bring red licorice? :rolleyes:
When AL said for the umpteenth time that the defense had no idea what 'new facts' the State was talking about when they re introduced the death penalty - I yelled "The duct tape for one" at the computer monitor - anyone else have that same reaction?
yep!!! several other things came out as well.....:blushing:
Dignity4Victims
05-11-2010, 01:56 PM
:blowkiss: ~ Magnolia and Beach
Thank you for your kindness! ~~
Is it so JB can type stuff and KC can read AND THEY DO NOT TALK IN COURTROOM????
It seemed that she wrote notes to him on paper..........he nodded
perhaps he is proving to the court that he does have some computer knowledge after his little presentation yesterday??? Or perhaps he is asking kc to show him how to do it better next time??? I thought it odd as well--he was also typing on it as well
spyhouston
05-11-2010, 01:57 PM
Note to KC: for goodness sake, just don't wear mascara on the bottom, then ALL that wiping/checking wouldn't be necessary.
beach
05-11-2010, 02:00 PM
IMO the judge is batting 1000 with his rulings on this case.
I agree. And he doesn't seem to even break a sweat. :)
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 02:00 PM
That was when AL was saying that there was no kind of torture, abuse, neglect, etc. of a child in this case, Casey was agreeing with her. Then AL went on to say the murder wasn't even particularly upsetting. or somethign like that.:banghead:
well it wasnt particuarly upsetting to casey.
LiveLaughLuv
05-11-2010, 02:01 PM
http://drlillianglassbodylanguageblog.wordpress.com/2010/05/10/casey-anthonys-body-language-in-latest-court-appearance-stil-shows-grooming-behavior-and-detachment/
notthatsmart
05-11-2010, 02:04 PM
Again on this day, I think this Judge is fair. IMO
laura08
05-11-2010, 02:05 PM
When Lyons said they say in blogs she (Casey) is a who** and I should die with her Casey became teary eyed. Video2-4 And seemed to be holding back crying. Then begins to cry Again it is back at Casey crying for herself. I think this is what started her tear moment.
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 02:07 PM
"doesn't' act right...that's her defense "ugly coping" again. Geez!
that pic from the nightclub looks more like 'ugly groping' to me.
http://drlillianglassbodylanguageblog.wordpress.com/2010/05/10/casey-anthonys-body-language-in-latest-court-appearance-stil-shows-grooming-behavior-and-detachment/
Good article. Thanks for posting the link. I completely agree that she is possibly medicated and hates her blouses.:angel:
mitzi
05-11-2010, 02:10 PM
Wondering here if ALyon(s) "Big Blue Suit" is her version of KC's "Little Blue Dress". :)
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 02:10 PM
I'm thinking the defense is gonna go with, 'it was a suicide!'
Blaise
self defense!
mitzi
05-11-2010, 02:13 PM
anyone notice that since those letters came out the "crush" boy hasn't been in court???????:waitasec:
Yup, another career screwed by "One Ms. Casey Anthony."
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 02:15 PM
I felt bad for Cindy today. Yeah, I know she's lied her butt off and it's disgusting; yes, but to sit through that death penalty hearing, with her child's life at stake must have been pure torture. As a mother, my heart hurt for the position she was in today.
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 02:15 PM
AL: hearsay and prejudice in this case have overridden the fact that every witness in this case said Casey Anthony was a good mother
is casey the only witness in this case?
2goldfish
05-11-2010, 02:16 PM
Good article. Thanks for posting the link. I completely agree that she is possibly medicated and hates her blouses.:angel:
none of them fit her. I dont blame her for half the fiddling with too tight badly fitting clothes, who is responsible for bringing her clothes? that should be sorted out.
passionflower
05-11-2010, 02:16 PM
It was quite interesting. 10 minute recess was probably the most interesting.
Jose had his ipad, he'd type something..KC would read it, and she'd respond with a nod. At one point I saw her having to cover her mouth because she was laughing.
During recess I went to the ladies room and Cindy was in there. She looked very sad, I actually felt bad for her. Maybe I'm hormonal, but it made me almost cry - especially when we got back in the court room..and I saw her and KC make an exchange of "mouth movements"..couldn't hear if they were saying anything..Cindy appeared to make a gesture like she was hugging herself or holding herself towards KC and KC legitimately began to cry then, tears falling down her cheeks and her nose and cheeks and eyes got all red. Cindy appeared to be crying as well.
Almost every time I looked over at Cindy she had her head bowed and her hands sort of in a prayer position. Looked like a very rough hearing for her.
Thankyou for 1st hand review..........anyone say anything why GA/LA weren't there to support Cindy????
kbl8201
05-11-2010, 02:16 PM
I loved the way Jeff Ashton spoke with the "witness" who had no reason to be there, IMO. What a crock that was, now anybody can be a witness apparently. She was very annoying.
Joy Wray was there. She brought her kid there and dropped him off at the courthouse daycare to attend the hearing.
When she was leaving, I swear..this kid was pulling her hard as he could to get her to leave. It was lunch time for crying out loud. She kept walking away like she was leaving, but would somehow find her way right back to the media circle before someone finally acknowledged her. Then she said "Oh hey yeah I gotta go the kid's hungry". Well, we know that, his actions are speaking very loudly. Maybe I'm just bitter, but she annoyed me!
hey did you ever find the caylee pin?
passionflower
05-11-2010, 02:16 PM
none of them fit her. I dont blame her for half the fiddling with too tight badly fitting clothes, who is responsible for bringing her clothes? that should be sorted out.
Looks like how Lyon would dress a daughter
Thankyou for 1st hand review..........anyone say anything why GA/LA weren't there to support Cindy????
don't think Lee has been to court since the bond hearings...he is pretty much flying under the radar.....after seeing ga yesterday---don't blame him....
Looks like how Lyon would dress a daughter
iirc ca is the one furnishing the clothing....kc complained in one of the letters how she heated what mom provided....so I'm just guessing....
Astraea
05-11-2010, 02:23 PM
She certainly didn't cry when Caylee went missing, so she must be fake crying about being accused of murder.
I will assume this is simply an opinion. I doubt anyone knows whether Casey cried or not. I tend to think that she did as I am of the opinion that she loved Caylee.
Curious Me
05-11-2010, 02:28 PM
The DP is still on the table. Defense didn't get their way.
Amster
05-11-2010, 02:31 PM
iirc ca is the one furnishing the clothing....kc complained in one of the letters how she heated what mom provided....so I'm just guessing....
Just a way for CA to be in control.
beach
05-11-2010, 02:31 PM
I felt bad for Cindy today. Yeah, I know she's lied her butt off and it's disgusting; yes, but to sit through that death penalty hearing, with her child's life at stake must have been pure torture. As a mother, my heart hurt for the position she was in today.
Thank you for saying this. I totally agree.
I don't approve of 95% of her actions, but I am a mother, so I cannot even fathom what she was going through today.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 02:36 PM
I would love to watch this hearing again in order to form an independant opinion, but have yet to see a link to watch a recording. If there is one I would greatly appreciate it :)
From the posts within the thread though, I can say that I am pleased that JP has finally required the sa to lay out their case. They have yet to provide all the discovery at this point as well, leaving most to wonder what their theory actually is. When bringing a death penalty case, one would think this would already have been made available. I am happy to see JP requiring the SA to start acting a little more professionaly.
I can also say that I do NOT find it odd that a witness was allowed to testify, as it is my personal experience that all courts allow this more often than not. It will surprise many as this progresses I think, to see first hand how the courts REALLY work.
Not sure if it's already been discussed, but Ms. Lyon(s) and the defense were the only ones referring to their client as a deviant and a wh*re.
Of everything that I saw and heard today, this is the one thing I will never forget. The defense brought up the fact that her lifestyle was deviant and she slept around. It was not brought up by anyone but her own defense.
I was glad to meet you today.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 02:40 PM
Not sure if it's already been discussed, but Ms. Lyon(s) and the defense were the only ones referring to their client as a deviant and a wh*re.
I find this VERY hard to believe and feel that putting things into a context that is much different than reality only feeds rumours that can not be substantiated. Could you direct me to the place where AL called Casey either of these things?
believe09
05-11-2010, 02:41 PM
Wow JP just ruled State has to give defense a list of mitigating factors in 10 days. No reciprocal from defense to state
Does the SA have to present a binding list? What I mean, is let's say the SA picks Caylee's age and Casey's relationship as a care giver to her as the mitigating factors...can they add cruel and unusual death later when they go to trial?
Astraea
05-11-2010, 02:43 PM
Of everything that I saw and heard today, this is the one thing I will never forget. The defense brought up the fact that her lifestyle was deviant and she slept around. It was not brought up by anyone but her own defense.
I was glad to meet you today.
From my understanding this is NOT what was said. The comments were made in a general reference about Mothers accused of killing their children, NOT Casey. If I am wrong I would of course love a link, but I find this absolutely absurd on every level.
believe09
05-11-2010, 02:43 PM
I want to thank those of you who went and reported back as well as those of you who kept a running commentary during the hearing. I was gone all day and missed all of it...I appreciate your perspectives!
whiteangora
05-11-2010, 02:44 PM
I would love to watch this hearing again in order to form an independant opinion, but have yet to see a link to watch a recording. If there is one I would greatly appreciate it :)
From the posts within the thread though, I can say that I am pleased that JP has finally required the sa to lay out their case. They have yet to provide all the discovery at this point as well, leaving most to wonder what their theory actually is
snipped
The State will Not be laying out their case. They will be listing the aggravating factors that they feel are death penalty worthy.
Tulessa
05-11-2010, 02:45 PM
Hi Gypsy Road...my tv is large and I sit real close! I could see tears and her nose did turn red....not trying to argue....wish I could send you the image I saw, it could just be your signal is not as clear as mine...but she wipes them away and looks at them still....
As is mine. I saw the tears and the red face but IMO it was tears for herself. She has NEVER shown ANY concern or tears for Caylee. :(
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 02:46 PM
I will assume this is simply an opinion. I doubt anyone knows whether Casey cried or not. I tend to think that she did as I am of the opinion that she loved Caylee.
I agree. She loved Caylee so much that the very moment KC knew Caylee was kidnapped, she frantically dialed 911 and begged for help.
Oh wait...
On a serious note, I really do agree with you. KC may have loved Caylee. Remember Susan Smith? By all accounts, her boys were her world and those who knew Susan were utterly stunned that she could have killed them. But something dark came over her heart and she decided she'd be better off without them. It's baffling.
wonders
05-11-2010, 02:47 PM
When Lyons said they say in blogs she (Casey) is a who** and I should die with her Casey became teary eyed. Video2-4 And seemed to be holding back crying. Then begins to cry Again it is back at Casey crying for herself. I think this is what started her tear moment.
I caught the "blogs should die with her" as well. OOPS, Freudian slip?
logicalgirl
05-11-2010, 02:48 PM
Of everything that I saw and heard today, this is the one thing I will never forget. The defense brought up the fact that her lifestyle was deviant and she slept around. It was not brought up by anyone but her own defense.
I was glad to meet you today.
P.S. Ms Lyon(s) looks disgusting from the backend.
You made my laugh so hard I can barely type!
Amster
05-11-2010, 02:53 PM
Jean C. on In Session says today was WONDERFUL for the defense!
mitzi
05-11-2010, 02:55 PM
14,000 reports.........how can defense read all this????Well IMO most WS have read half of them..........
AL it is called "homework"!!!
Funny how Cheney HAD to get his stiches out today..............huh???
Bold mine.
Perhaps if ALyon(s) had taken a sabbatical to "study" her "landmark" case, get the ball rolling, be available more than just one day a week initially... instead of still continuing to teach, she wouldn't be groping and griping about her so called 14,000 pages of reading material...
is she a teacher or an attorney?...sometimes ya just gotta pick one, Andrea! :furious:
Mamabear1963
05-11-2010, 02:56 PM
Jean C. on In Session says today was WONDERFUL for the defense!
Huh?
All I saw was a bunch of things getting taken care of so it will lessen the appeals process after she is convicted. But maybe that is just me...:waitasec:
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 02:56 PM
Jean C. on In Session says today was WONDERFUL for the defense!
Is Jean C. from backwards world?
Did she expound on her logic?
Amster
05-11-2010, 02:58 PM
Is Jean C. from backwards world?
Did she expound on her logic?
Basically, we all got to see how wonderful that Andrea is. And, all of this sets the stage for appeal. :waitasec:
mitzi
05-11-2010, 02:58 PM
Can we please curtail the negative comments about Ms. Lyon's looks and manner of dress. They're offensive.
Thanks!
BeanE
Oooops! Sorry, BeanE...just got to your post here...won't do it anymore. :blushing:
When AL said that there was no history of torture, abuse, neglect, etc. of a child in this case, I wanted to shout "except ONCE unless you believe in the duct tape fairy".
SondraK
05-11-2010, 03:01 PM
Jean C. on In Session says today was WONDERFUL for the defense!
Yes, the defense got a crumb today,
but the prosecution took the CAKE!!!!
21merc7
05-11-2010, 03:02 PM
There will be the normal, guaranteed appeals if KC is convicted. The only thing is, unless the Judge really messes up, or the defense royally drops the ball, the appeals will not be granted. The appeals process lasts for years, but does not mean that any conviction will be overturned.
So, todays hearing was about formal legality. These motions must be filed and presented to the Court. Just a formality so that any conviction cannot be overturned because of ineffective assistance of counsel. Judge has to hear them, has to deny them. That is why 11 more DP motions are slated.
AZlawyer
05-11-2010, 03:04 PM
Does the SA have to present a binding list? What I mean, is let's say the SA picks Caylee's age and Casey's relationship as a care giver to her as the mitigating factors...can they add cruel and unusual death later when they go to trial?
The SA already filed a document saying that they believe 4 aggravating factors do apply and 2 might possibly apply. All they have to do now is commit. I agree with HHJP that this is necessary for due process. If something NEW comes out, HHJP will likely let the SA add a factor, although he will also make sure the defense has ample opportunity to address it.
strawberry
05-11-2010, 03:05 PM
:angel:Oooops! Sorry, BeanE...just got to your post here...won't do it anymore. :blushing:
I was going to warn you we'd been warned but I didn't want to seem bossy.
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 03:06 PM
Basically, we all got to see how wonderful that Andrea is. And, all of this sets the stage for appeal. :waitasec:
I'm not a lawyer, but I thought today was about lessening the appeals process if KC is convicted. Sure, the defense was allowed a witness who was an expert in word salads, but for the most part, it seemed to be a legal wrangling in which the State came out on top. Perhaps a legal eagle can set me straight.
There will be the normal, guaranteed appeals if KC is convicted. The only thing is, unless the Judge really messes up, or the defense royally drops the ball, the appeals will not be granted. The appeals process lasts for years, but does not mean that any conviction will be overturned.
So, todays hearing was about formal legality. These motions must be filed and presented to the Court. Just a formality so that any conviction cannot be overturned because of ineffective assistance of counsel. Judge has to hear them, has to deny them. That is why 11 more DP motions are slated.
Excellent post 21merc7 and I agree, very much so.
I use a metaphor for trials. Esp. ones that are high profile and capital cases.
They are preparing for the dance. However it's not a duet. A you move I move. It's a dance contest. Who can present the best moves.
We haven't gotten to that point yet. We are still preparing for the dance.
The motions heard are standard and the defense would be remiss if they had not been presented. JMHO.
beach
05-11-2010, 03:12 PM
I would love to watch this hearing again in order to form an independant opinion, but have yet to see a link to watch a recording. If there is one I would greatly appreciate it :)
From the posts within the thread though, I can say that I am pleased that JP has finally required the sa to lay out their case. They have yet to provide all the discovery at this point as well, leaving most to wonder what their theory actually is. When bringing a death penalty case, one would think this would already have been made available. I am happy to see JP requiring the SA to start acting a little more professionaly.
I can also say that I do NOT find it odd that a witness was allowed to testify, as it is my personal experience that all courts allow this more often than not. It will surprise many as this progresses I think, to see first hand how the courts REALLY work.
BBM
They are linked in the Today's News thread stickied at the top. Post #11, I believe.
I find it incredible that you would comment at all in multiple posts doubting what is being said in this thread by people who watched the past 3 hours, considering you admit yourself you haven't viewed a minute of it. I'm not vouching for the entire content of every post/poster, but maybe just go watch for yourself before attempting to refute what people are saying here. :)
As to the witness, the main problem was the defense did not Notice the SA that they would have a witness testifying, affording the SA no time to familarize themselves with the witness or prepare for cross-exam. You should be familiar with that argument since the defense has been complaining about the same thing for the past 20+ months. ;)
Anais
05-11-2010, 03:13 PM
Hi All,
I am just home fresh from a 3 day hospital stay and have been so ill! I missed everything and am completely and utterly wiped out. Can anyone give me a quickie brief of what went on today? TIA!
Justice For Caylee Marie!
suzihawk
05-11-2010, 03:14 PM
Jean C. on In Session says today was WONDERFUL for the defense!
I saw that too and wondered if we watched the same hearing. :waitasec:
AZlawyer
05-11-2010, 03:15 PM
I'm not a lawyer, but I thought today was about lessening the appeals process if KC is convicted. Sure, the defense was allowed a witness who was an expert in word salads, but for the most part, it seemed to be a legal wrangling in which the State came out on top. Perhaps a legal eagle can set me straight.
Yes--the leeway granted to the defense re: the silly expert witness was to make sure that there was no appeal issue. HHJP had to deny the motion because it was groundless, but he didn't want the defense to go to the appeal court and say, "Oh, but if we'd only had a chance to put on our expert witness, HHJP would have had to grant the motion." So he listened to the silly witness and THEN denied the motion. Excellent decision, and it shows why he rarely gets overruled on appeal.
The State definitely came out on top today. Regarding the aggravating factors motion, I think they will ultimately realize it is a good thing they lost that one, because the ruling again removed an appellate issue from the table.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:16 PM
I agree. She loved Caylee so much that the very moment KC knew Caylee was kidnapped, she frantically dialed 911 and begged for help.
Oh wait...
On a serious note, I really do agree with you. KC may have loved Caylee. Remember Susan Smith? By all accounts, her boys were her world and those who knew Susan were utterly stunned that she could have killed them. But something dark came over her heart and she decided she'd be better off without them. It's baffling.
I do not recall her frantically calling 911. I DO remember her frantically calling her parents at one point though. I have yet to read one transcript of those who knew them, wherein it has been stated that Casey showed anything but love for Caylee. This opinion could change if evidence leads me to believe otherwise of course.
lol. :) It was nice to meet you too!!
Yes I thought that was strange, because the state doesn't have that "opinion" really, they don't address that she was "scantily clad" and Jeff Ashton AGREES that a mother can be a good mother and still have a sexual lifestyle outside of her parenting. I don't see why the defense would paint their own client in a negative light when it's obvious to me, a layman, that the state is simply seeking to prove this wasn't a grieving mother nor was it a mother searching for her missing child, as KC states she was doing in her police interviews. As far as ugly coping goes, coping with what? I thought the defense's argument was that Caylee was missing? Is the defense saying that yes ICA in fact knew Caylee was dead, and this was her "ugly coping"?
there have been times these last few hearings when I thought that the defense didn't quite get the reason for being there---more or less "Caylee who??" type thing---IYKWIM---oblivious except that kc may get the death penalty but no concept of why....I guess similar to how the a's reacted to the searches and such....perhaps this is a learned behavior and am pretty glad that I don't have it...I understand the reason for them being there and it just isn't about the death penalty---it is about Justice for an adorable little baby named Caylee that was robbed of her life by the person who gave her life......
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:18 PM
Is this witness a law graduate? From Harvard? If so, I tend to wonder how "silly" she really must be. Could someone refresh me on her credentials? Thanks in advance :)
Macushla
05-11-2010, 03:19 PM
It was quite interesting. 10 minute recess was probably the most interesting.
Jose had his ipad, he'd type something..KC would read it, and she'd respond with a nod. At one point I saw her having to cover her mouth because she was laughing.
During recess I went to the ladies room and Cindy was in there. She looked very sad, I actually felt bad for her. Maybe I'm hormonal, but it made me almost cry - especially when we got back in the court room..and I saw her and KC make an exchange of "mouth movements"..couldn't hear if they were saying anything..Cindy appeared to make a gesture like she was hugging herself or holding herself towards KC and KC legitimately began to cry then, tears falling down her cheeks and her nose and cheeks and eyes got all red. Cindy appeared to be crying as well.
Almost every time I looked over at Cindy she had her head bowed and her hands sort of in a prayer position. Looked like a very rough hearing for her.
Thank you for this vivid picture of Cindy and KC. An extra thank you for your compassion towards Cindy. Whatever she has done since this happened - there is no doubt in my mind that she loved Caylee and I can't help but feel she is trapped somewhere in the 7th level of H*LL and has been since July 16h.
I do not recall her frantically calling 911. I DO remember her frantically calling her parents at one point though. I have yet to read one transcript of those who knew them, wherein it has been stated that Casey showed anything but love for Caylee. This opinion could change if evidence leads me to believe otherwise of course.
take a listen to the inital jail call home --- the one where kc is yelling at ca and saying she got arrested on a "whim"---and that all anyone was interested in was Caylee....figure that one out!
LambChop
05-11-2010, 03:20 PM
I do not recall her frantically calling 911. I DO remember her frantically calling her parents at one point though. I have yet to read one transcript of those who knew them, wherein it has been stated that Casey showed anything but love for Caylee. This opinion could change if evidence leads me to believe otherwise of course.
Since KC was on her phone pretty much 24/7 I'm not sure how you would be able to distinguish what is frantic and what is not.
Whome?
05-11-2010, 03:21 PM
Today's hearing could turn out to be beneficial for JA,he has had an example of how AL intends to play,and it will be playing dirty (not notifying state) IMHO. JA knows now that he has to be on his toes for this opponent.Better
here than at trial.
I still do not understand how the defense can contend KC was a good mother
the well being of that child(food,shelter,clothing,medical care)that they cite
as examples of being a "caring parent" were not supplied by KC.they were the
result of her mother's home,and income. When was the last time KC filed a tax
return,had a job,which is fundamental in taking care of children. I find it baffling that the defense brought in an expert about "good parent skills" when
this defendant,supplied none of the basics of life for this little girl.
Sorry did not mean to rant,but this hearing upset me,and I think if the defense has not realized it I'll tell them,the reason people are so upset about
this case is that there is NOONE,NOONE from that family standing up requesting justice for that little girl,and so the public is standing up for her because she can no longer stand for herself. OK i'm done.:banghead:
Tulessa
05-11-2010, 03:22 PM
I do not recall her frantically calling 911. I DO remember her frantically calling her parents at one point though. I have yet to read one transcript of those who knew them, wherein it has been stated that Casey showed anything but love for Caylee. This opinion could change if evidence leads me to believe otherwise of course.
Wow, have you forgotten the duct tape?
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 03:23 PM
I do not recall her frantically calling 911. I DO remember her frantically calling her parents at one point though. I have yet to read one transcript of those who knew them, wherein it has been stated that Casey showed anything but love for Caylee. This opinion could change if evidence leads me to believe otherwise of course.
I was being facetious. KC never called 911, not once in the entire 31 days her baby was allegedly kidnapped. Cindy did, after she tracked KC down and got some story about Zanny the Nanny. KC has told different versions of the kidnapping. KC probably loved Caylee, as did Susan Smith love her children as well. But Susan murdered her boys. My opinion is that KC is a murderer, too, but when it's all said and done, it's for a jury of her peers to decide her fate.
debbie0604
05-11-2010, 03:25 PM
Of everything that I saw and heard today, this is the one thing I will never forget. The defense brought up the fact that her lifestyle was deviant and she slept around. It was not brought up by anyone but her own defense.
I was glad to meet you today.
P.S. Ms Lyon(s) looks disgusting from the backend.
I noticed that too! (That the defense brought up her lifestyle that is)....
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:25 PM
snipped
The State will Not be laying out their case. They will be listing the aggravating factors that they feel are death penalty worthy.
In my opinion this should help to steer the average follower of this case, as well as the defense, in the route that the SA is going to take.
For example: Whether or not they are ACTUALLY going to say that Casey chloroformed Caylee. I tend to think that they will use the minor clause as the aggravating factor, as the aforementioned seems totally absurd on many levels!
Will be interesting to see. For me at least, as I am very "legal and/or "justice minded, and up to this point I have been very disheartened with the SA.
caylee spontanously combusted!
I don't like all the hugging and physical contact. It's completely inappropriate and I wish JP would put a stop to it.
That bothered me a lot as well. She is not supposed to have physical contact with her attorney. I wish the bailiff would prevent it.
What'sThatClue
05-11-2010, 03:26 PM
Is this witness a law graduate? From Harvard? If so, I tend to wonder how "silly" she really must be. Could someone refresh me on her credentials? Thanks in advance :)
Here's her bio:
http://lawschool.unm.edu/faculty/rapaport/index.php
She stated during the hearing that she bases her papers on what she reads in newspapers and the media. She also stated she knew very little about the KC case except what she's read in a few press reports.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:28 PM
I was being facetious. KC never called 911, not once in the entire 31 days her baby was allegedly kidnapped. Cindy did, after she tracked KC down and got some story about Zanny the Nanny. KC has told different versions of the kidnapping. KC probably loved Caylee, as did Susan Smith love her children as well. But Susan murdered her boys. My opinion is that KC is a murderer, too, but when it's all said and done, it's for a jury of her peers to decide her fate.
I know you were :innocent: Sometimes I think when discussing such a serious case that "jokes" can lead others astray from what is fact though. I agree with the rest of your statement :)
AZlawyer
05-11-2010, 03:30 PM
Is this witness a law graduate? From Harvard? If so, I tend to wonder how "silly" she really must be. Could someone refresh me on her credentials? Thanks in advance :)
Let me clarify...it was her testimony and her pretense of expertise in the area of jury psychology that was silly. In other areas, she may be very intelligent.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:30 PM
Wow, have you forgotten the duct tape?
No I most certainly have not. At this point in time I also can not say with certainty that the duct tape was used to kill Caylee.
AZlawyer
05-11-2010, 03:33 PM
In my opinion this should help to steer the average follower of this case, as well as the defense, in the route that the SA is going to take.
For example: Whether or not they are ACTUALLY going to say that Casey chloroformed Caylee. I tend to think that they will use the minor clause as the aggravating factor, as the aforementioned seems totally absurd on many levels!
Will be interesting to see. For me at least, as I am very "legal and/or "justice minded, and up to this point I have been very disheartened with the SA.
I suppose the use of chloroform might add "planning and premeditaion" as an aggravating factor (otherwise, why would you have chloroform handy?), but remove "heinous and cruel" as a factor (because presumably it was used to prevent suffering).
Who are all the extra women behind the defense table? Geez, everyday it's more.
Those are Andrea's ladies- in- waiting - they came with her and they'll leave with her.
Whome?
05-11-2010, 03:34 PM
I saw that too and wondered if we watched the same hearing. :waitasec:
Sometimes I wonder what Jean C of Tru TV has had for lunch,some of her
comments are :woohoo::waitasec:
Mamabear1963
05-11-2010, 03:34 PM
No I most certainly have not. At this point in time I also can not say with certainty that the duct tape was used to kill Caylee.
Used to kill her or not...
if it was placed before death...let's talk aggravated child abuse
if placed after death...to stage kidnapping...to keep in fluids...come on...does it matter...
duct tape and babies do NOT go together EVER
LambChop
05-11-2010, 03:35 PM
Yes--the leeway granted to the defense re: the silly expert witness was to make sure that there was no appeal issue. HHJP had to deny the motion because it was groundless, but he didn't want the defense to go to the appeal court and say, "Oh, but if we'd only had a chance to put on our expert witness, HHJP would have had to grant the motion." So he listened to the silly witness and THEN denied the motion. Excellent decision, and it shows why he rarely gets overruled on appeal.
The State definitely came out on top today. Regarding the aggravating factors motion, I think they will ultimately realize it is a good thing they lost that one, because the ruling again removed an appellate issue from the table.
Let's hope defense has witnesses that present better than this one. This person appears to have opinions not necessarily based on facts. To say women are not treated the same in DP cases and then in the next breath to say there just are not that many cases to comment on would leave a juror scratching their head.
KC is the one who stated to LE that she was looking for her daughter everywhere she knew ZFG would normally be. The barn door is open on this one. The fact that KC dressed up and decided to join others on the dance floor and have a couple of beers will make the jury wonder why it was necessary to get "partied up" when she was only searching for her daughter. The pictures prove that this, again, is another one of KC's lies. jmo
suzihawk
05-11-2010, 03:35 PM
No I most certainly have not. At this point in time I also can not say with certainty that the duct tape was used to kill Caylee.
I'm curious... how do you think the duct tape factors in then? Do you think it was placed on the face/skull after the fact? By whom?
Macushla
05-11-2010, 03:36 PM
I know you were :innocent: Sometimes I think when discussing such a serious case that "jokes" can lead others astray from what is fact though. I agree with the rest of your statement :)
I bet you just hate it when JB does his comic routine during hearings, just like I do!
Mamabear1963
05-11-2010, 03:36 PM
Those are Andrea's ladies- in- waiting - they came with her and they'll leave with her.
Why did this make me laugh?:angel:
Leila
05-11-2010, 03:37 PM
I didn't get to watch the hearing live, but have watched several of the videos. I haven't had a chance to read this entire thread, but a thought keeps going through my mind and I don't know if anyone here has addressed this.............
George wasn't in the courtroom today. Maybe he's got a job and is working today, or maybe he just didn't want to attend today's hearing. But, I found it interesting that in the past Casey hasn't acknowledged her parents when they've been in the courtroom. And then today, when it was only Cindy and George was absent, Casey did acknowledge her mother.
It makes me wonder if Casey is purposely not acknowledging her parents when George is there. Is it George she's angry with?
whiteangora
05-11-2010, 03:37 PM
In my opinion this should help to steer the average follower of this case, as well as the defense, in the route that the SA is going to take.
For example: Whether or not they are ACTUALLY going to say that Casey chloroformed Caylee. I tend to think that they will use the minor clause as the aggravating factor, as the aforementioned seems totally absurd on many levels!
Will be interesting to see. For me at least, as I am very "legal and/or "justice minded, and up to this point I have been very disheartened with the SA.
The aggravating factors will be listed in broad terms with little or no detail of the State's intended theories. AFAIK, these are the 4 aggravating factors:
The capital felony involved aggravated child abuse
It was premeditated
The victim was under the age of 12
The defendant was the victim's parent (snipped from article)
http://www.wesh.com/news/23488034/detail.html
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:37 PM
BBM
They are linked in the Today's News thread stickied at the top. Post #11, I believe.
I find it incredible that you would comment at all in multiple posts doubting what is being said in this thread by people who watched the past 3 hours, considering you admit yourself you haven't viewed a minute of it. I'm not vouching for the entire content of every post/poster, but maybe just go watch for yourself before attempting to refute what people are saying here. :)
As to the witness, the main problem was the defense did not Notice the SA that they would have a witness testifying, affording the SA no time to familarize themselves with the witness or prepare for cross-exam. You should be familiar with that argument since the defense has been complaining about the same thing for the past 20+ months. ;)
I was not refuting and/or doubting anything that was posted in this thread in the post that you have quoted. It is MY experience that judges OFTEN allow witnesses without notification. Most people seemed very amazed by this fact, and it is not as rare as one may think. That was my point.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:39 PM
The aggravating factors will be listed in broad terms with little or no detail of the State's intended theories. AFAIK, these are the 4 aggravating factors:
The capital felony involved aggravated child abuse
It was premeditated
The victim was under the age of 12
The defendant was the victim's parent (snipped from article)
http://www.wesh.com/news/23488034/detail.html
It WILL make a difference to me, as well as give me a notion of the SAs intended path. The first two you have listed vs the last two are game changers imho!
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 03:39 PM
I'm curious... how do you think the duct tape factors in then? Do you think it was placed on the face/skull after the fact? By whom?
This isn't my position, but one could argue that KC accidentally killed Caylee, and KC used the tape and heart sticker as part of staging to lend credence to her kidnapping story.
logicalgirl
05-11-2010, 03:41 PM
I didn't get to watch the hearing live, but have watched several of the videos. I haven't had a chance to read this entire thread, but a thought keeps going through my mind and I don't know if anyone here has addressed this.............
George wasn't in the courtroom today. Maybe he's got a job and is working today, or maybe he just didn't want to attend today's hearing. But, I found it interesting that in the past Casey hasn't acknowledged her parents when they've been in the courtroom. And then today, when it was only Cindy and George was absent, Casey did acknowledge her mother.
It makes me wonder if Casey is purposely not acknowledging her parents when George is there. Is it George she's angry with?
I thought it was because the words, "guilty" and "death penalty" have mentioned matter of factly in the courtroom several times now, and ICA finally realizes what a serious "spot" she is in.It's not a lark to be in court anymore. And she wants their support.
Whome?
05-11-2010, 03:41 PM
This was noted before but I can't find the post (sorry) I agree all this hugging,and petting on KC is sickening. I want to know who was there to hug and pet Caylee and
tell her everything was going to be alright. I hope someone comntacts the court just like
they did about the bailiff with the note yesterday,and raise that concern that per JP's
rules of decorum this is not allowed. If KC was woman enough to do the crime,stand up and be woman enough to do the time.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:42 PM
I bet you just hate it when JB does his comic routine during hearings, just like I do!
Yes JB gets on my nerves for MANY reasons, as does the SA. I was pleased to read that JP finally admonished JA today I might add! Would love a recording of this hearing, but am only going off the word of posters at this point :)
debbie0604
05-11-2010, 03:43 PM
Let's hope defense has witnesses that present better than this one. This person appears to have opinions not necessarily based on facts. To say women are not treated the same in DP cases and then in the next breath to say there just are not that many cases to comment on would leave a juror scratching their head.
KC is the one who stated to LE that she was looking for her daughter everywhere she knew ZFG would normally be. The barn door is open on this one. The fact that KC dressed up and decided to join others on the dance floor and have a couple of beers will make the jury wonder why it was necessary to get "partied up" when she was only searching for her daughter. The pictures prove that this, again, is another one of KC's lies. jmo Why would her daughter be at a nightclub? That's always bothered me... IIRC, she didn't say she was looking for ZFG at that nightclub, she was looking at places where her daughter would be. Why would Caylee be at a nightclub? :waitasec: Yes it will open the door allright...
beach
05-11-2010, 03:44 PM
Is this witness a law graduate? From Harvard? If so, I tend to wonder how "silly" she really must be. Could someone refresh me on her credentials? Thanks in advance :)
'Quite frankly', no we can't too well. Considering the only one who WAS familiar with her was Andrea Lyon, and possibly CM/JB.
I directed you to Today's News thread where the videos are linked. You can find out as much as we know AND THE SA, about her there. :)
whiteangora
05-11-2010, 03:45 PM
It WILL make a difference to me, as well as give me a notion of the SAs intended path. The first two you have listed vs the last two are game changers imho!
You may be interested in the other 2 factors the State may or may not use:
"There are two other aggravating circumstances the state may or may not try to prove. One of them is that the defendant benefited financially from the victim's death. The other is that the alleged slaying was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel."
http://www.wesh.com/news/23488034/detail.html
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:45 PM
I'm curious... how do you think the duct tape factors in then? Do you think it was placed on the face/skull after the fact? By whom?
I think that there are many different possibilites at this point in time. I do not discount that my opinion may change when the trial is underway though.
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 03:45 PM
Why would her daughter be at a nightclub? That's always bothered me... IIRC, she didn't say she was looking for ZFG at that nightclub, she was looking at places where her daughter would be. Why would Caylee be at a nightclub? :waitasec: Yes it will open the door allright...
Remember the Universal Q&A after KC lied to LE?
'What did you think, she took a cab here?'
Paraphrase, but close enough. Gold.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:47 PM
'Quite frankly', no we can't too well. Considering the only one who WAS familiar with her was Andrea Lyon, and possibly CM/JB.
I directed you to Today's News thread where the videos are linked. You can find out as much as we know AND THE SA, about her there. :)
Thanks, someone already posted the inforamtion for me. She seems very well educated :)
Horace Finklestein
05-11-2010, 03:47 PM
I saw no wet tears, no red face. It didn't appear that she was crying IMO.
Yeah it's not crying at all, it's a very very poor acting job. She jabs her eyes and looks at a kleenex. In today's hearing, she literally went from laughing and smiling to the fake crying several times in a few minutes. It's pretty sad if she can't even remember the fake front she's trying to put on.
KeyboardCat
05-11-2010, 03:47 PM
Hello again!!
I haven't even made it past page eight, yet somehow my seemingly unrealistic expectation of being called as an expert witness has dramatically increased!
Here are my qualifications: I've read hundreds, perhaps thousands of reports regarding this case. In fact, I've written fourteen of them! (Wait I suppose this counts as fifteen ::checks post count::) I have a wonderful understanding of human nature. I am a human, after all.
My testimony: I don't need any sort of degree or education to come to the realization that a mother killing a child would be defined as "particularly heinous" and a jury should have the option, among others, of recommending a sentence of "death."
In all seriousness, I believe the state of Louisiana has set the bar in regards anyone convicted of purposely murdering a child under the age of 12. Death, nothing less.
Edit: My facts are wrong I apologize, Louisiana certainly set the bar in regards to anyone convicted of -raping- a child under twelve, however our supreme court declared that unconstitutional. They came to the decision that rape alone, on anyone of any age could not alone warrant the ultimate punishment.
debbie0604
05-11-2010, 03:50 PM
Remember the Universal Q&A after KC lied to LE?
'What did you think, she took a cab here?'
Paraphrase, but close enough. Gold.
I have never forgotten that.... classic...
Astraea
05-11-2010, 03:52 PM
Making any one of us more qualified to be a witness, IMO.
I have been to College and University and I certainly could not say that I was more qualified than this woman. She deserves some respect for her accomplishments. Just wondering what makes her less qualified than the posters here in your opinion?
snipped from this link: http://lawschool.unm.edu/faculty/rapaport/index.php
"When Elizabeth Rapaport joined the UNM law faculty in 1995, she brought 17 years of experience teaching philosophy and public policy, with ethics as her specialty. After earning a Ph.D. in philosophy in 1971 at Case Western Reserve University, she spent the next 12 years teaching at Boston University, University of Southern California, Brown University, Bennington College and the University of Sydney.
After earning a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1987, she returned to the classroom at Duke University, where she taught in the school of public policy."
As a side note, I think this also changes the assumption that she is 43 years of age as was stated earlier in this thread :)
I didn't get to watch the hearing live, but have watched several of the videos. I haven't had a chance to read this entire thread, but a thought keeps going through my mind and I don't know if anyone here has addressed this.............
George wasn't in the courtroom today. Maybe he's got a job and is working today, or maybe he just didn't want to attend today's hearing. But, I found it interesting that in the past Casey hasn't acknowledged her parents when they've been in the courtroom. And then today, when it was only Cindy and George was absent, Casey did acknowledge her mother.
It makes me wonder if Casey is purposely not acknowledging her parents when George is there. Is it George she's angry with?
George was in the courtroom on Monday with Cindy and Monday was the first day that KC acknowledged her parents in a very long time. It had nothing to do with George not being there. He was sitting right next to Cindy when KC spoke to her mother on Monday, yesterday.
BetteDavisEyes
05-11-2010, 03:52 PM
I watched about an hour of the motion hearing this afternoon on "In Session". I was unable to watch while it was being discussed here and haven't read this entire thread. My apologies if someone has already mentioned the fact that JB wasn't taking notes. What's up with that?
Although it wasn't his show today, and Ms. Lyons was presenting the motions, Baez appeared disinterested and aloof during the proceedings. jmo
beach
05-11-2010, 03:52 PM
Yes--the leeway granted to the defense re: the silly expert witness was to make sure that there was no appeal issue. HHJP had to deny the motion because it was groundless, but he didn't want the defense to go to the appeal court and say, "Oh, but if we'd only had a chance to put on our expert witness, HHJP would have had to grant the motion." So he listened to the silly witness and THEN denied the motion. Excellent decision, and it shows why he rarely gets overruled on appeal.
The State definitely came out on top today. Regarding the aggravating factors motion, I think they will ultimately realize it is a good thing they lost that one, because the ruling again removed an appellate issue from the table.
BBM
I am SO GLAD you brought that up! I thought the exact same. It seemed a little bittersweet that the judge forced them to 'tip their hand', but the payoff was 86'ing any appellate issue, which could be far more serious.
LambChop
05-11-2010, 03:56 PM
In my opinion this should help to steer the average follower of this case, as well as the defense, in the route that the SA is going to take.
For example: Whether or not they are ACTUALLY going to say that Casey chloroformed Caylee. I tend to think that they will use the minor clause as the aggravating factor, as the aforementioned seems totally absurd on many levels!
Will be interesting to see. For me at least, as I am very "legal and/or "justice minded, and up to this point I have been very disheartened with the SA.
See, this is what I do not understand. I respect that you have an opinion, don't we all. But SA has a job to do. There is a victim and there has been a crime. Someone committed the crime and during their investigation the information SA gathered points to one person. If there were more than one person who were suspected they also would be on trial. Blaming SA, or being upset with SA is pointless because the very person who could help them find the killer just is not talking. She will not discuss the case with SA. She does not have to discuss the case with them but if she were truly interested in putting the person who killed her child behind bars she'd be talking non-stop (which we know for KC is not difficult). I believe SA is doing the best they can do given the fact that the child's mother has been anything but cooperative for reasons which apparently are obvious.
SA is there for Caylee, less we forget. KC is not a victim regardless of what her mother says. SA does their job and yes, it is difficult when it involves a child but if KC were male and not related to Caylee we'd all be praising SA for their outstanding work. Just because KC is a woman and a mother to the child does not give her a special pass. jmo
beach
05-11-2010, 03:56 PM
Thanks, someone already posted the inforamtion for me. She seems very well educated :)
I don't dispute that she is 'well-educated'. She is a Harvard grad.
That said, lots of 'well-educated' people make terrible witnesses, and she was one of them. It was the first time she had ever testified in any courtroom (by her own admission), and she did not come across well.
Hopefully, you will be able to WATCH the hearing soon. :)
Dear Prudence
05-11-2010, 03:59 PM
Yes JB gets on my nerves for MANY reasons, as does the SA. I was pleased to read that JP finally admonished JA today I might add! Would love a recording of this hearing, but am only going off the word of posters at this point :)
You can watch the hearing here: http://www.wftv.com/news/23514611/detail.html
Look for the video heading "5/11/10 HEARING: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4
Profile for Ms. Rapaport:
http://lawschool.unm.edu/faculty/rapaport/publications.php
NOTE: that links to the page outlining her articles and other writings.
There are other links to her information located on that page.
beach
05-11-2010, 04:01 PM
I bet you just hate it when JB does his comic routine during hearings, just like I do!
:blowkiss:
PDF of the first article listed on the profile page I posted in #1145.
Mods if deemed inappopriate for thread please delete or move? TIA.
https://repository.unm.edu/dspace/bitstream/1928/6995/1/Rapaport-Mad%20Women%20Desperate%20Girls.pdf
Article Title:
Mad Women and Desperate Girls: Infanticide and Child Murder in Law and Myth (2006)
LambChop
05-11-2010, 04:04 PM
I have been to College and University and I certainly could not say that I was more qualified than this woman. She deserves some respect for her accomplishments. Just wondering what makes her less qualified than the posters here in your opinion?
snipped from this link: http://lawschool.unm.edu/faculty/rapaport/index.php
"When Elizabeth Rapaport joined the UNM law faculty in 1995, she brought 17 years of experience teaching philosophy and public policy, with ethics as her specialty. After earning a Ph.D. in philosophy in 1971 at Case Western Reserve University, she spent the next 12 years teaching at Boston University, University of Southern California, Brown University, Bennington College and the University of Sydney.
After earning a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1987, she returned to the classroom at Duke University, where she taught in the school of public policy."
As a side note, I think this also changes the assumption that she is 43 years of age as was stated earlier in this thread :)
I think it is because her testimony amounted to "apples vs. oranges". Ms. Rapaport was saying how a person is dressed does not mean the person was not a good mother. KC on the other hand had made a statement to LE that she was looking everywhere she thought ZFG would be, searching the whole 31 days herself. The pictures would be brought in for that reason not as a reflection on her being a good mom versus the party girl. jmo
Aedrys
05-11-2010, 04:05 PM
I have been to College and University and I certainly could not say that I was more qualified than this woman. She deserves some respect for her accomplishments. Just wondering what makes her less qualified than the posters here in your opinion?
snipped from this link: http://lawschool.unm.edu/faculty/rapaport/index.php
"When Elizabeth Rapaport joined the UNM law faculty in 1995, she brought 17 years of experience teaching philosophy and public policy, with ethics as her specialty. After earning a Ph.D. in philosophy in 1971 at Case Western Reserve University, she spent the next 12 years teaching at Boston University, University of Southern California, Brown University, Bennington College and the University of Sydney.
After earning a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1987, she returned to the classroom at Duke University, where she taught in the school of public policy."
As a side note, I think this also changes the assumption that she is 43 years of age as was stated earlier in this thread :)
You're missing the point. She said she read newspapers and that was what she based her opinion on. You could be a high school dropout or have 10 PHd's, read newspapers, and have an opinion. ANYONE can do that.
Now if she had cited case studies and reports, you know, SOUNDED like someone who really knows what they are talking about (because really, I was shocked she went to Harvard because of her testimony) THAT would make her a better witness. Just saying she read some newspapers is not enough to make someone an expert, IMO.
That and she was sprung on the SA TODAY. They didn't get a chance to familiarize themselves with her, though JA crossed examined her just fine. The defense would be screaming bloody murder if the SA did the same to them (mostly because they wouldn't cross examine nearly as well IMO).
And btw, MOST of what's in this post was spoken in the hearing. The best thing to do is watch it and listen closely before making opinions, IMO. And it shouldn't be hard to find a link to watch it.
Anais
05-11-2010, 04:06 PM
'Quite frankly', no we can't too well. Considering the only one who WAS familiar with her was Andrea Lyon, and possibly CM/JB.
I directed you to Today's News thread where the videos are linked. You can find out as much as we know AND THE SA, about her there. :)
Beach2yall you have a pm! :o
I'll be back tomorrow if possible!
Justice For Caylee Marie! :balloons:
marspiter
05-11-2010, 04:08 PM
I have been to College and University and I certainly could not say that I was more qualified than this woman. She deserves some respect for her accomplishments. Just wondering what makes her less qualified than the posters here in your opinion?
snipped from this link: http://lawschool.unm.edu/faculty/rapaport/index.php
"When Elizabeth Rapaport joined the UNM law faculty in 1995, she brought 17 years of experience teaching philosophy and public policy, with ethics as her specialty. After earning a Ph.D. in philosophy in 1971 at Case Western Reserve University, she spent the next 12 years teaching at Boston University, University of Southern California, Brown University, Bennington College and the University of Sydney.
After earning a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1987, she returned to the classroom at Duke University, where she taught in the school of public policy."
As a side note, I think this also changes the assumption that she is 43 years of age as was stated earlier in this thread :)
The problem I have with her "expert" testimony is that she was giving her "expert" opinion on a topic that has a more fundamental base in psychology/sociology (which she admitted she has no background or training in). She was not there to give her expert opinion on law or philosophy. She even admitted that her research was based on reading newspaper articles on cases and that she hadn't followed this case. Furthermore what accredited/published research has she done on the topic?
You don't call a plumber to fix your teeth so to speak. No mater how good the plumber is.
whiteangora
05-11-2010, 04:09 PM
I don't dispute that she is 'well-educated'. She is a Harvard grad.
That said, lots of 'well-educated' people make terrible witnesses, and she was one of them. It was the first time she had ever testified in any courtroom (by her own admission), and she did not come across well.
Hopefully, you will be able to WATCH the hearing soon. :)
Fortunately her appearance was a brief one time thing, I don't know what kind of rabbit AL expected this meek woman to pull out of her hat.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:09 PM
As Mr. Ashton pointed out, she has no background in psychology. Philosophy doesn't apply to this case. She said her expertise is derived from reading articles, and she doesn't "know much" about this particular case. Okay, reading articles makes you an expert now, gotcha. So if we read articles, have no background in psychology, and know more about the KC case than she does - from her own words, we are just as qualified if not more so. Since obviously they're just bringing in anybody. I'm sure the State can find people with as much education in at least a related field to be an expert witness as well. JMO.
Reading articles is not what makes her an expert. I am watching the first part of the hearing NOW, where her qualifications are duly noted. In my opinion she is MORE than qualified to testify about gender bias, it has been her area of study for over 20 years according to the hearing. This forum would be a good research place imo :)
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 04:12 PM
Reading articles is not what makes her an expert. I am watching the first part of the hearing NOW, where her qualifications are duly noted. In my opinion she is MORE than qualified to testify about gender bias, it has been her area of study for over 20 years according to the hearing. This forum would be a good research place imo :)
I think you've missed something here. Or I did. The witness is not an expert in the field for which she was called to testify.
Can someone clarify this, please? I'd appreciate it a lot.
suzihawk
05-11-2010, 04:13 PM
As Mr. Ashton pointed out, she has no background in psychology. Philosophy doesn't apply to this case. She said her expertise is derived from reading articles, and she doesn't "know much" about this particular case. Okay, reading articles makes you an expert now, gotcha. So if we read articles, have no background in psychology, and know more about the KC case than she does - from her own words, we are just as qualified if not more so. Since obviously they're just bringing in anybody. I'm sure the State can find people with as much education in at least a related field to be an expert witness as well. JMO.
And to add to that... she has no legal background that I can see. Yet she was attempting to school JA as to what is and is not legally relevant with regards to the cases she's read about in newspaper articles.
(I really enjoy your birdseye view and first hand reports from the courtroom. Thank you!)
Oh my. I'm reading the article by Paraport that I linked back there <<<<<.
Wonder if this shows us a facet of the defense's strategy. Hmm.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:15 PM
You're missing the point. She said she read newspapers and that was what she based her opinion on. You could be a high school dropout or have 10 PHd's, read newspapers, and have an opinion. ANYONE can do that.
Now if she had cited case studies and reports, you know, SOUNDED like someone who really knows what they are talking about (because really, I was shocked she went to Harvard because of her testimony) THAT would make her a better witness. Just saying she read some newspapers is not enough to make someone an expert, IMO.
That and she was sprung on the SA TODAY. They didn't get a chance to familiarize themselves with her, though JA crossed examined her just fine. The defense would be screaming bloody murder if the SA did the same to them (mostly because they wouldn't cross examine nearly as well IMO).
And btw, MOST of what's in this post was spoken in the hearing. The best thing to do is watch it and listen closely before making opinions, IMO. And it shouldn't be hard to find a link to watch it.
I am watching the hearing now, and at 15 minutes in I have already heard more in regards to her expertise on the subject than your post has implicated.
justbeachy
05-11-2010, 04:16 PM
Just got home from today's hearing (had to make a detour to pick up the kiddos from school) and WOW, what a day! My new favorite line is: "This pretense of ignorance is getting old." I actually had to stifle a laugh on that one. Well, that and the Roy Kronk line.
I ♥ Jeff Ashton!
mitzi
05-11-2010, 04:17 PM
I seem to recall KC's response to losing Caylee was nothing at all. Thank goodness Cindy called 911.
No, actually KC did have a response...it was "just give me one more day". :furious:
whiteangora
05-11-2010, 04:17 PM
I think you've missed something here. Or I did. The witness is not an expert in the field for which she was called to testify.
Can someone clarify this, please? I'd appreciate it a lot.
Probably not the answer you are looking for here, jmo.
The entire presentation sucked, questions AND answers.
We will never see her again hopefully, so it's just water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:18 PM
She is an "expert in the area of gender and the death penalty". JP accepted it as being so, and the SA had PLENTY of time to look over her work, and from what I have read quickly her credentials are definitely in line with the topic she is testifying to in my opinion.
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 04:19 PM
Probably not the answer you are looking for here, jmo.
The entire presentation sucked, questions AND answers.
We will never see her again hopefully, so it's just water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned.
I agree as an 'expert' witness, her testimony was a failure. I don't expect to see her again, either.
seagull65
05-11-2010, 04:19 PM
Miss Anthony's child was found..............hey AL, that child has a name!
CAYLEE, remember that Angel's name!!! Justice and prayers for CAYLEE!!!
"Miss Anthony's child" seems correct and normal. The prosecution sometimes also say "the child", I guess meaning "the child victim" or "the child in question/the child in this case" as the defense also sometimes do. I can understand when both sides use this term, but it's true it would be nice to hear her first name used more in the court room. Maybe they sometimes get confused by the similar names Caylee/Casey and have trouble retrieving the name when they're speaking so use these other terms?
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:21 PM
And to add to that... she has no legal background that I can see. Yet she was attempting to school JA as to what is and is not legally relevant with regards to the cases she's read about in newspaper articles.
(I really enjoy your birdseye view and first hand reports from the courtroom. Thank you!)
She has a law degree...
mitzi
05-11-2010, 04:21 PM
And JB said he's going to file yet more motions....
Bold mine.
Which at this point in time, probably means that Mason is going to file more motions. I'm sure that Baez, with his immense knowledge of the law, (note sarcasm) probably can't even come up with any more motions to file, let alone write them succinctly.
beach
05-11-2010, 04:22 PM
I was not refuting and/or doubting anything that was posted in this thread in the post that you have quoted. It is MY experience that judges OFTEN allow witnesses without notification. Most people seemed very amazed by this fact, and it is not as rare as one may think. That was my point.
BBM
Wow. Had no clue. I have worked as a paralegal for the past 13 years, including assisting at trials and arbitrations. I guess ya learn something new every day. :)
Thank you for the education. Are you an attorney?
LambChop
05-11-2010, 04:22 PM
Fortunately her appearance was a brief one time thing, I don't know what kind of rabbit AL expected this meek woman to pull out of her hat.
In my opinion she was ill-prepared. Who comes to testify in a case and has little to no knowledge of what she was testifying to in regards to the case? This is by her own admission. The club pictures have nothing to do with SA saying KC was a bad mother in this case but what KC was doing when she claims to have been looking everywhere for her child. Fusion dance floor, Target getting beer, BOA cashing checks, etc., drinking, dancing all things that are not included in the book of "Dummy's Manual for Finding a Lost Child/Missing."
Obviously Ms. Rapaport had been lead to believe she was testifying for a different reason than what the facts are for this case. This poor woman is probably embarrassed by her performance and has no one to blame but defense. SA did nothing wrong. Isn't it HHJP who said you need to be PREPARED for court? That includes, expert witnesses, especially expert witnesses. Hope she learned a valuable lesson.
jmo
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:23 PM
This hearing is wonderful I must say (only 20 mins in). I have noticed this trend in this case particularly! Poor JA cant object enough to be overruled enough LOL!
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 04:23 PM
At the end of the day, her credentials don't matter because as educated as she might be, she failed to deliver anything convincing in her testimony, obviously since JP denied the motion I'm assuming he wasn't too impressed either.
debbie0604
05-11-2010, 04:24 PM
No, actually KC did have a response...it was "just give me one more day". :furious:
Yes.... and I think CA said that KC "thanked her" for calling 911.. IIRC....
What'sThatClue
05-11-2010, 04:24 PM
She is an "expert in the area of gender and the death penalty". JP accepted it as being so, and the SA had PLENTY of time to look over her work, and from what I have read quickly her credentials are definitely in line with the topic she is testifying to in my opinion.
"the SA had PLENTY of time to look over her work..."
This was a surprise witness. The SA was not informed of this witness and had no time to prepare and said so.
Anyone can call themselves an expert. She presented no credentials that were applicable to this trial other than admitting she writes her papers based on news media articles she reads, along with a few press reports.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:25 PM
BBM
Wow. Had no clue. I have worked as a paralegal for the past 13 years and I guess ya learn something new every day. :)
Thank you for the education. Are you an attorney?
I am a paralegal/law clerk and I also possess a degree in political science and sociology. Graduated top of my class :D If I thought my opinion would EVER matter I would verify with Tricia of course :)
justbeachy
05-11-2010, 04:25 PM
At the end of the day, her credentials don't matter because as educated as she might be, she failed to deliver anything convincing in her testimony, obviously since JP denied the motion I'm assuming he wasn't too impressed either.
I agree. I did not see any value added by her testimony at all. I was not impressed with her as a witness and doubt that we will see her again.
LambChop
05-11-2010, 04:25 PM
"Miss Anthony's child" seems correct and normal. The prosecution sometimes also say "the child", I guess meaning "the child victim" or "the child in question/the child in this case" as the defense also sometimes do. I can understand when both sides use this term, but it's true it would be nice to hear her first name used more in the court room. Maybe they sometimes get confused by the similar names Caylee/Casey and have trouble retrieving the name when they're speaking so use these other terms?
And it will not be lost on the juror's mind that the defence avoids using the child's name.
justbeachy
05-11-2010, 04:27 PM
And it will not be lost on the juror's mind that the defence avoids using the child's name.
I agree since I anticipate that the State will repeatedly refer to her as Caylee.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:27 PM
"the SA had PLENTY of time to look over her work..."
This was a surprise witness. The SA was not informed of this witness and had no time to prepare and said so.
Anyone can call themselves an expert. She presented no credentials that were applicable to this trial other than admitting she writes her papers based on news media articles she reads, along with a few press reports.
This is not true. At the start of the hearing AL points out the SA was notified and JA says they were but not with enough time...and then AL goes on to say he was given her work 7-8 weeks prior. The schedule was changed by JP after JS stepped down :)
Mamabear1963
05-11-2010, 04:29 PM
She is an "expert in the area of gender and the death penalty". JP accepted it as being so, and the SA had PLENTY of time to look over her work, and from what I have read quickly her credentials are definitely in line with the topic she is testifying to in my opinion.
HUH??? what time? I saw no time this morning for them to look over her work....
okay...you answered above...I think I am confused...I think I missed something
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:29 PM
"the SA had PLENTY of time to look over her work..."
This was a surprise witness. The SA was not informed of this witness and had no time to prepare and said so.
Anyone can call themselves an expert. She presented no credentials that were applicable to this trial other than admitting she writes her papers based on news media articles she reads, along with a few press reports.
On another note (sorry I didnt address it in my first response), she HAS many more qualifications than you have listed. What you have written is not at all what was stated. I might also add that JP accepted her as an expert as well :)
justbeachy
05-11-2010, 04:29 PM
And JB said he's going to file yet more motions....
Yes, he did say that, but you'd better not ask him what they are about: "Well, I, um, think there might be a motion about, um, well....."
ecs5298
05-11-2010, 04:29 PM
And it will not be lost on the juror's mind that the defence avoids using the child's name.
It's a defense tactic for de-humanizing the victim (in this case, Caylee), to make the victim an object instead of a person. I think this will fall flat with a jury and will work against the defense and the inmate.
JMHO as always!
LambChop
05-11-2010, 04:29 PM
This hearing is wonderful I must say (only 20 mins in). I have noticed this trend in this case particularly! Poor JA cant object enough to be overruled enough LOL!
I believe this would be JA's job since he is familiar with the case and Ms. Rapaport is not. jmo
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 04:30 PM
Guys, I just finished reading a lot of newspapers about gender bias, women, and bra burning. Also, I have a degree in basket weaving. I'm feeling pretty good about my chances to testify as an expert witness.
Lanie
05-11-2010, 04:30 PM
In my opinion this should help to steer the average follower of this case, as well as the defense, in the route that the SA is going to take.
For example: Whether or not they are ACTUALLY going to say that Casey chloroformed Caylee. I tend to think that they will use the minor clause as the aggravating factor, as the aforementioned seems totally absurd on many levels!
Will be interesting to see. For me at least, as I am very "legal and/or "justice minded, and up to this point I have been very disheartened with the SA.
BBM
Actually, I, for one, do not find that absurd at all. Traces of chloroform were found in the trunk of the car Casey used, and also with a syringe found near the remains. LE, the state, nor the defense, however, have been able to turn up a single trace of the nanny.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:30 PM
HUH??? what time? I saw no time this morning for them to look over her work....
During the hearing within the first few minutes this is discussed. Here is the link :)
http://www.wftv.com/video/23516373/index.html
AZlawyer
05-11-2010, 04:31 PM
BBM
Wow. Had no clue. I have worked as a paralegal for the past 13 years, including assisting at trials and arbitrations. I guess ya learn something new every day. :)
Thank you for the education. Are you an attorney?
I am a paralegal/law clerk and I also possess a degree in political science and sociology. Graduated top of my class :D If I thought my opinion would EVER matter I would verify with Tricia of course :)
No fighting! :)
It is perfectly obvious why the judge allowed the defense to use an undisclosed witness--because the judge was going to deny the "gender bias" motion anyway due to extreme lack of merit, and did not want to give the defense an appeal ticket in the process.
ecs5298
05-11-2010, 04:32 PM
No fighting! :)
It is perfectly obvious why the judge allowed the defense to use an undisclosed witness--because the judge was going to deny the "gender bias" motion anyway due to extreme lack of merit, and did not want to give the defense an appeal ticket in the process.
BBM:
Thank you!
beach
05-11-2010, 04:32 PM
No fighting! :)
It is perfectly obvious why the judge allowed the defense to use an undisclosed witness--because the judge was going to deny the "gender bias" motion anyway due to extreme lack of merit, and did not want to give the defense an appeal ticket in the process.
yes ma'am :blowkiss:
MD MOMMY
05-11-2010, 04:33 PM
I'm just watching now since I am a good mom and accompanied 20 toddlers on a field trip this AM. ANYWAY I find AL to be so boring when she speaks. Her tone is like a person telling a nursery rhyme. The jury is going to be utterly bored. She could be effective if she could stop rambling.
suzihawk
05-11-2010, 04:34 PM
This is not true. At the start of the hearing AL points out the SA was notified and JA says they were but not with enough time...and then AL goes on to say he was given her work 7-8 weeks prior. The schedule was changed by JP after JS stepped down :)
He also said that AL offered to make ER available to him for deposition late Friday afternoon which didn't give him ample time to reasearch her credentials or depose her prior to today's hearing.
Lanie
05-11-2010, 04:34 PM
This hearing is wonderful I must say (only 20 mins in). I have noticed this trend in this case particularly! Poor JA cant object enough to be overruled enough LOL!
Keep watching, he actually has one or two objections sustained, and then the motion this is over is denied by the judge. A little later, during another motion, Ms. Lyon makes an objection or two, and she is overruled. I can't remember which motion that was, but am thinking it is the one the judge grants, and denies the State's reciprocal motion.
Oops, should have said "spoiler alert!"
Brassband
05-11-2010, 04:36 PM
It is perfectly obvious why the judge allowed the defense to use an undisclosed witness--because the judge was going to deny the "gender bias" motion anyway due to extreme lack of merit, and did not want to give the defense an appeal ticket in the process.
He's pretty brilliant eh? I feel like I'm watching an intense chess game. Well, not game, but you know what I mean.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:37 PM
Congrats!
So, to directly answer my earlier question, that would be a NO, you are not an attorney?
I thought the post was obvious in the fact that I am not a lawyer, but would be willing to verify myself for anything paralegal related, but highly doubt that is sufficient or you would be verified already I assume lol :D
suzihawk
05-11-2010, 04:37 PM
Guys, I just finished reading a lot of newspapers about gender bias, women, and bra burning. Also, I have a degree in basket weaving. I'm feeling pretty good about my chances to testify as an expert witness.
Hang on just one second there, sister. Exactly what type of reed do you use for your weaving? I want to make damn sure you're qualified.
KeyboardCat
05-11-2010, 04:38 PM
Regarding the gender bias:
Defense argument seems weak. The number of female offenders currently on death row is negligible, so saying she is eligible for the death penalty simply because she is female flies in the face of logic.
However I do believe the fact that she was Caylee's mother does play a part in why the state decided to seek the death penalty. A mother is a life giver, a care taker. A mother holds and cradles a crying child. A mother can kiss away the hurt of a scraped knee. A mother feeds an infant from her own body. Its a scary thought to know that the lotto of life could have placed any one of us into the arms of a Casey Anthony at birth. Our sons could marry a Casey Anthony. A Casey Anthony could give birth to our grandchildren. Looking back at the tenderness and delicacy of childhood, its a dangerous thought to entertain.
RainyGirl
05-11-2010, 04:40 PM
Who are all the extra women behind the defense table? Geez, everyday it's more.
Those are Andrea's ladies- in- waiting - they came with her and they'll leave with her.
bbm. LMAO Amil!!!!! I wonder what "assignments" Andrea's ladies-in-waiting are engaged in this fine afternoon/evening????? :waitasec:
ETA: Borrowed that pesky crystal ball and I am seeing cloudy visions of furious ladies typing on laptops.......
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:41 PM
No fighting! :)
It is perfectly obvious why the judge allowed the defense to use an undisclosed witness--because the judge was going to deny the "gender bias" motion anyway due to extreme lack of merit, and did not want to give the defense an appeal ticket in the process.
In AZ courts is it your experience that judges sometimes allow witnesses that are undisclosed? I find this slightly confusing as AL and JA both agree that JA knew she was going to testify. I hate to go OT AZ, but are you a qualified death penalty lawyer? I hate to ask which area of law you practise, especially if it makes you feel uncomfortable in any way, but I cant help but wonder if it is related to criminal law :)
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 04:44 PM
Hang on just one second there, sister. Exactly what type of reed do you use for your weaving? I want to make damn sure you're qualified.
I'm behind, or can't handle the technology of reeds, quite frankly.
ecs5298
05-11-2010, 04:47 PM
bbm. LMAO Amil!!!!! I wonder what "assignments" Andrea's ladies-in-waiting are engaged in this fine afternoon/evening????? :waitasec:
Probably get on the blogs and try and spin the defense fantasy!
Just my humble opinion as always! :innocent:
Astraea
05-11-2010, 04:47 PM
I would start a thread, but have never done so. I was hoping that AZLawyer or Hornsby or another verifed lawyer could lay out once and for all what the job of the SA actually IS as I am realizing that many have some differing opinions on that subject. If there is a thread about this already(maybe in the main forum somewhere?) I would truly appreciate some direction there. I am figuring it will be different from my locale, so dont want to comment until I am certain :) Thanks in advance and sorry for the OT :)
marspiter
05-11-2010, 04:51 PM
Guys, I just finished reading a lot of newspapers about gender bias, women, and bra burning. Also, I have a degree in basket weaving. I'm feeling pretty good about my chances to testify as an expert witness.
Yes but are you certified to do your basket weaving under water? :crazy:
I did some research on women and the death penalty earlier in the thread that highlights the rarity of females on death row and executed.....hey maybe JA can call me as a rebuttal expert. I'll work for a box of Florida oranges. :D
AZlawyer
05-11-2010, 04:53 PM
In AZ courts is it your experience that judges sometimes allow witnesses that are undisclosed? I find this slightly confusing as AL and JA both agree that JA knew she was going to testify. I hate to go OT AZ, but are you a qualified death penalty lawyer? I hate to ask which area of law you practise, especially if it makes you feel uncomfortable in any way, but I cant help but wonder if it is related to criminal law :)
My only criminal experience is on appeal, except for one death penalty case I worked on during the penalty phase and creating a database for the Arizona Capital Representation Project of every holding on every death penalty case in Arizona (which unfortunately required that I read every one of them). I am a trial lawyer, however, and have criminal lawyers in the family.
You seem to have 2 questions about the undisclosed witness: (1) was she "really" undisclosed, and (2) in AZ, do judges "sometimes" allow undisclosed witnesses. I can't answer #1. As for #2, I have never seen it happen in AZ--except where one witness is essentially a substitute for another on some minor issue like "yes, these are our business records"--but we have some pretty extensive disclosure rules.
In this case, I think the judge would have let that witness in even if she had no qualifications whatsoever and had been disclosed at 9:00 am that morning, because he did not want any appeal issue related to the "gender bias" motion.
joypath
05-11-2010, 04:53 PM
This expert witness appeared to be vetted as an expert rather quickly to the minimal satisfaction of the Court. (of course, that was after Andrea requested that briefest CV from her, neglecting to honor us with the areas of academic degree awards EXCEPT Harvard Law!). Completely concur with AZlawyer that HHJP was entertaining the defense option to present the witness, perhaps as a "Hail Mary pass", since the defendant in no way resembles Ave Maria in her blue dress! and eliminate any taint of "appealism".
Having been thru the "so you want to be an expert in my court" processs, this lady got off LIGHTLY and now has a "feather" for her resume! However, she really should think thrice over proffering a video copy with her CV! (but that's just my silly :twocents:)
Lanie
05-11-2010, 04:53 PM
BBM
Wow. Had no clue. I have worked as a paralegal for the past 13 years, including assisting at trials and arbitrations. I guess ya learn something new every day. :)
Thank you for the education. Are you an attorney?
You obviously have never watched Perry Mason. He does this all the time, and if the prosecutor even bothers to object, he is overruled. :crazy::crazy::crazy:
On a serious note, I will have to look into this more carefully, as it was my understanding 'surprise witnesses' without a compelling reason are at best frowned upon in real life. IMO, if you turned the situation around and it was a prosecutor pulling this kind of stunt, it might be grounds for an appeal.
Chiquita71
05-11-2010, 04:53 PM
Hello WS :)
I understand having sympathy for Cindy. For Casey. I have a bleeding heart. But, then I find myself having to pull my sympathy back. This post is my thoughts on this subject and not intended as a 'point to others' to prove a side or anything...I have no intention of dissing a loving emotion with my post. The world needs more love, not less, of course! :blowkiss:
I don't want Casey to get the DP. But I also wouldn't argue against the DP. I want violent crime to stop happening so that we don't have to even discuss the DP. I am happy I am not the one making those types of decisions and so it truly is "my opinion only", regarding the DP and I don't judge people for being pro DP.
I don't hate Casey or Cindy(I don't hate anybody), although I feel hate at times for them. But it is their behavior I hate. As I start to feel compassion for either Cindy or Casey, I think back over choice after choice each was given to take another path. Cindy was told repeatedly by LE that she should stop talking to the media, to anyone about the case. She refused, and defiantly did the exact opposite of what she was told would be best for her granddaughter, daughter and herself.
IMHO, MN quit representing the Anthonys because of Cindy's behavior. He saw the damage she was doing. YM tried to help Casey too, IMHO. He told her she was giving them no choice but to think she was a monster. I know how he feels because that is how I feel too. Like they have given me no choice but to think Casey is a monster. I hate that.
When I ask the question in my posts, "if Cindy has said she knows Casey is not lying, if JB says he has proof that Casey is innocent why hasn't Jose come forward with that proof and what is Cindy doing in the bathroom and not out looking for Zanny?" I am asking for real. I am asking out of my sympathy for this family that was so messed up they let Caylee get taken away from them, I am desperately wanting to understand and have been.
IMO, it's because Cindy does know that Casey killed Caylee and just like her daughter she will not admit it. It is easier to go along with the lie, and that is what might get Casey the DP, IMHO: not anything else.
I can see that when YM(LE), while at Universal studios were giving Casey an out, asking of it was an accident. They allude for her: a young mother, not paying attention, distracted, her mother is hard on her about the baby...terrible accident...life can go on but you have to tell us what happened or you give us no choice but to think you are a monster.(All paraphrased).
But, Casey couldn't admit accident because they would ask where she had put Caylee and when they found her, they would find the duct tape and because Casey didn't know the condition Caylee's body was in-even more evidence she was murdered. Everyone would know she had done it purposely. So, she had to stick with her 'story(s)' and hope Caylee was never found. When Caylee's remains were discovered, she truly had to continue with the story, even changing it up in her recent letters.
Cindy made Casey have the baby. Then she ignored Casey's pregnancy(and that is ignoring Caylee too, big time IMHO). Cindy even lied to her mother and father when point blank asked if Casey was pregnant. RP, tried telling Cindy exactly what I would have been saying, but Cindy attacked him. I find it difficult to reconcile caring one wit about money when your granddaughter is missing and then found murdered, yet evidence of Cindy and George's greed abound. Cruises were taken, adornments have been purchased and meals have been eaten all from money that came because Caylee was murdered.
I want to have sympathy, and if I saw Cindy in person I would treat her with respect(although I understand the people that scream things at her too) but I would be saying to myself, "how tragic you are, I am so glad I am not you. you would not do things my way and I would not do things your way. And I am glad about that for me and sorry for you."
I understand those that feel no sympathy for Casey and Cindy and I understand those that do: I feel both ways but mostly I feel they created this for themselves and that is what I have sympathy for. The idea that a baby brought out the worst in this family is evident which is telling in itself, and I have a conclusion that says Casey and Cindy would not have sympathy for others in their position.
I do feel sorry for them if they are just realizing what all their choices and jealously and fighting has gotten them but I wonder if either of them will ever take any responsibility? (Get ready to yell at me) I would even say "let her go" if the whole family would admit to everyone everything that happened. We would all know who they were, and Casey would not be allowed to be a mother ever again. That's not going to happen, so I will stop there, you get the point.
Whatever Casey's fate, I feel it has already been sealed. We are just waiting to see what it is...
FWIW: Not AL, nor anyone could sway or convince me regarding the DP. It's not something anyone else could convince me of because it is a "personal" issue. Which is why I wouldn't try to sway anyone else to my thinking. I guess she has swayed some juries? I have not read the threads regarding AL or the DP and since we have reached that subject with this hearing, I will.
:cow:
AZlawyer
05-11-2010, 04:56 PM
I would start a thread, but have never done so. I was hoping that AZLawyer or Hornsby or another verifed lawyer could lay out once and for all what the job of the SA actually IS as I am realizing that many have some differing opinions on that subject. If there is a thread about this already(maybe in the main forum somewhere?) I would truly appreciate some direction there. I am figuring it will be different from my locale, so dont want to comment until I am certain :) Thanks in advance and sorry for the OT :)
I would be happy to address this, but I'm not sure what you're asking. Wouldn't the job of the SA be the same in any jurisdiction?
justbeachy
05-11-2010, 04:57 PM
accidentally hit post
Lanie
05-11-2010, 05:00 PM
bbm. LMAO Amil!!!!! I wonder what "assignments" Andrea's ladies-in-waiting are engaged in this fine afternoon/evening????? :waitasec:
ETA: Borrowed that pesky crystal ball and I am seeing cloudy visions of furious ladies typing on laptops.......
And all this time I have scoffed at psychics. You are making a believer out of me...
eaglemom
05-11-2010, 05:02 PM
I *think* one of the sticking points about this witness today is not so much that she was allowed but is that JB specifically said in court on 4/30/10 http://www.wftv.com/video/23319255/index.html at about 19:53 that he would notice everyone about which motions were going to require evidence or witness testimony (and as I understand which witnesses would be testifying).
I agree that JP allowed the witness because he already knew his case law in this instance but was willing to hear what this expert had to say. However, given that the SAO didn't even have the CV on the expert and defense had agreed in court to provide notice previously; it was a 'low blow' so to speak.
I am equally as certain that attornies deal with this all the time and it isn't anything unusual and JA was well up to the task. For those of us not in the law world it just seemed not 'quite cricket' since JB had stated in open court they would provide notice.
Not to mention that while this lady has a law degree and has taught for a number of years, her research has not been as 'in-depth' as I would have expected or as 'scientific'. Normally when an 'expert' takes the stand in a high profile case in any field there is some scientific standard and that did not come out on the stand (and it certainly should have if AL was trying to have this woman as an expert in the field). I don't doubt this professor is highly credible and has done research it just wasn't as well represented as it could/should have been and that was AL's job to bring that out.
Obviously I am only me and this is my opinion only.
Solange82200
05-11-2010, 05:04 PM
I think the expert witness made a lot of good points. I just don't think it applies to this case. Like the defense says, this case is "different". The big issue is the fact that no one found out Caylee was missing for 31 days. Except for Casey, who says that she was missing. Instead of looking for her or worrying, she ditched her car, her one method of transportation (why would you do that if you need to look for your child?) and went to clubs, got drunk, and danced, and entered a hot body contest on stage. Like Ms. Burdick said, it goes to disprove that Casey was worried and looking for Caylee.
She wasn't. And the pictures (along with the tattoo, etc.) prove that she wasn't. I respect the expert witness and think her findings are interesting. She has a point. But I just don't that that is what is going on here....
steadychick
05-11-2010, 05:04 PM
BBM
Actually, I, for one, do not find that absurd at all. Traces of chloroform were found in the trunk of the car Casey used, and also with a syringe found near the remains. LE, the state, nor the defense, however, have been able to turn up a single trace of the nanny.
And I, for one, would not be the least bit surprised to see chloroform turn up once again in this case, i.e. perhaps one of Casey's friends will testify that they had some, or that they heard Casey talk about or saw her use it. My opinion only, but wouldn't be surprised. The defense seems to be on a hunting expedition regarding what aggravating factors the State plans on using. Could be that they know something about the use of chloroform, and are trying to figure out if the State also knows about it.
justbeachy
05-11-2010, 05:11 PM
In regards to the relevance of Casey's partying, drinking and general shenanigans, for me personally it is important to separate them into two categories: before Caylee went "missing" and after.
I absolutely think that Casey's activities after Caylee disappeared (was murdered) are relevant. Each and every step she took in those days should be picked apart (IMO).
However, I think it is a slippery slope to judge any mother on their activities prior to an incident (barring a situation where a child is completely uncared for and the mother is neglecting/abusing the child). I say this because, as a mom of 2 wonderful kids, I "routinely" go out with my girlfriends. It's called "Moms Night Out" and just by name alone it implies that all the attendees are moms. Are we scantily clad? Sometimes. Are we drinking? Usually. Are we dancing? Sometimes. But does that make us "bad" mothers? I certainly hope not!
If someone took snapshots of our lives during these MNO events, they would see moms (gasp!) partying. There was even one instance where the bar we were at happened to have an old stripper pole. Needless to say, we took a lot of pics of us being silly on that pole. God help us if someone ever uses those photos to show that any one of us is a “bad” mom. If someone can show a specific time when a mom (Casey or anyone) was out partying and her child was not cared for, I would think that instance would be relevant. But, if a child is being cared for (by a babysitter, father, etc) then I think moms should be able to have some fun.
Let me be clear: I am not condoning Casey's behavior while Caylee was "missing" and she was "looking" for her. Absolutely not. But, if Casey was wearing a short dress, being drunk and partying prior to Caylee's disappearance AND Caylee was in the hands of a capable adult, then I think her activities (as long as they were all legal) are irrelevant.
mitzi
05-11-2010, 05:11 PM
I felt bad for Cindy today. Yeah, I know she's lied her butt off and it's disgusting; yes, but to sit through that death penalty hearing, with her child's life at stake must have been pure torture. As a mother, my heart hurt for the position she was in today.
I find it too difficult to drum up any sympathy for Cindy after all that she has done. Maybe I could if every other day, she would sit on the state side of the courtroom, and show some tears for Caylee. Or even if just ONCE she sat on the state side. What kind of "loving" grandmother would give not one moment of caring about her own grandaughter who was so heinously murdered by KC?
Even dear Caylee's memorial was not one bit about Caylee. It's unfathomable to me. I feel nothing for Cindy or George.
logicalgirl
05-11-2010, 05:18 PM
Hello WS :)
Cindy made Casey have the baby. Then she ignored Casey's pregnancy(and that is ignoring Caylee too, big time IMHO). Cindy even lied to her mother and father when point blank asked if Casey was pregnant. RP, tried telling Cindy exactly what I would have been saying, but Cindy attacked him. I find it difficult to reconcile caring one wit about money when your granddaughter is missing and then found murdered, yet evidence of Cindy and George's greed abound. Cruises were taken, adornments have been purchased and meals have been eaten all from money that came because Caylee was murdered.
Whatever Casey's fate, I feel it has already been sealed. We are just waiting to see what it is...
FWIW: Not AL, nor anyone could sway or convince me regarding the DP. It's not something anyone else could convince me of because it is a "personal" issue. Which is why I wouldn't try to sway anyone else to my thinking. I guess she has swayed some juries? I have not read the threads regarding AL or the DP and since we have reached that subject with this hearing, I will.
:cow:
Respect Chiquita71 post snipped for space.
While agree with you on many of the points in your post, I would argue that Casey did not have to keep her baby. Every single mother is given the option by the hospital/doctor/social worker of keeping their child or putting that child up for adoption. They do not need their parents permission to do so. Plus Casey was of age. Either way, Casey was the sole guardian of Caylee, and had the right to make whatever decision she wanted to.
I believe ICA kept Caylee because she was getting a huge amount of attention from her family and she thought it was a good thing. I doubt the actuality of a child rather than a stunning wee baby actually occurred to her.
mitzi
05-11-2010, 05:18 PM
Jean C. on In Session says today was WONDERFUL for the defense!
Huh? Was Jean in the courtroom, or out on the street where she usually does her commentary and interviews? Cuz it didn't look like a wonderful day for the defense to me. :waitasec:
Whome?
05-11-2010, 05:20 PM
Hang on just one second there, sister. Exactly what type of reed do you use for your weaving? I want to make damn sure you're qualified.
LOL too funny!!!!!:woohoo:
Reagan
05-11-2010, 05:31 PM
Why does this particular issue keep coming back up? (RE: Why DP was put back on the table)
JA laid out the State's theory in open court on a silver platter for crying out loud! Is it just that the defense wants it in writing?
Many, including AL, are pretending to forget that whole speech from JA, that one could conclude that poor Caylee may have looked into the eyes of her murderer, that being her own mother, as she was suffocated via duct tape and restrained by physical and/or chemical means.
How could you forget it?
ETA: I'm sure this was addressed. I read through some of the thread, but it was the part that bugged me the most during this hearing. The state has said plainly what route they are going. Does the defense need their hands held?
steadychick
05-11-2010, 05:33 PM
I find it too difficult to drum up any sympathy for Cindy after all that she has done. Maybe I could if every other day, she would sit on the state side of the courtroom, and show some tears for Caylee. Or even if just ONCE she sat on the state side. What kind of "loving" grandmother would give not one moment of caring about her own grandaughter who was so heinously murdered by KC?
Even dear Caylee's memorial was not one bit about Caylee. It's unfathomable to me. I feel nothing for Cindy or George.
Have you looked at George lately? He looks tired, ill, angry etc. His daughter has accused him and his son of sexual molestation. And Cindy and Casey are saying "I love you" to each other. Huh? IMO that loving grandmother has decided to believe Casey's molestation story and has chosen Casey over George and Lee.
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 05:33 PM
I find it too difficult to drum up any sympathy for Cindy after all that she has done. Maybe I could if every other day, she would sit on the state side of the courtroom, and show some tears for Caylee. Or even if just ONCE she sat on the state side. What kind of "loving" grandmother would give not one moment of caring about her own grandaughter who was so heinously murdered by KC?
Even dear Caylee's memorial was not one bit about Caylee. It's unfathomable to me. I feel nothing for Cindy or George.
I completely respect where you're coming from on this, and your reasoning. CA and GA have behaved horribly, to say the least, and it's hard to feel sympathy for them at this point. I agree that it makes it all the more difficult when they are behaving like Caylee is an afterthought.
whiteangora
05-11-2010, 05:35 PM
Why does this particular issue keep coming back up? (RE: Why DP was put back on the table)
JA laid out the State's theory in open court on a silver platter for crying out loud! Is it just that the defense wants it in writing?
Many, including AL, are pretending to forget that whole speech from JA, that one could conclude that poor Caylee may have looked into the eyes of her murderer, that being her own mother, as she was suffocated via duct tape and restrained by physical and/or chemical means.
How could you forget it?
ETA: I'm sure this was addressed. I read through some of the thread, but it was the part that bugged me the most during this hearing. The state has said plainly what route they are going. Does the defense need their hands held?
bbm
It would appear that the defense is suffering from a convenient case of selective amnesia.
Leila
05-11-2010, 05:39 PM
I thought it was because the words, "guilty" and "death penalty" have mentioned matter of factly in the courtroom several times now, and ICA finally realizes what a serious "spot" she is in.It's not a lark to be in court anymore. And she wants their support.
Good point! I guess we'll have to wait until the next hearing to see if George is there and if Casey has any sort of interaction with both parents.
ICA may finally realize she's in a major jam this time and wants their support. Leading up to the trial, she may come to understand that her parents may be just two of a very limited number who will continue to support her.
Muzikman
05-11-2010, 05:40 PM
Fortunately her appearance was a brief one time thing, I don't know what kind of rabbit AL expected this meek woman to pull out of her hat.
My question is - and it may have been asked already, haven't read the whole thread - WHO PAID TO FLY HER HERE?
If it was the Taxpayers, we got ripped off. :furious:
RR0004
05-11-2010, 05:40 PM
Prof: Deviant mother may be perfectly good mother, but she will get tagged more than a father who is a good father but a gambler etc
Ok...had to chime in while I'm making my way through the thread...are they claiming that Casey was a great deviant mother? Are they thinking she's been sitting in jail almost 2 years 'cause she likes to hang out in bars? Is this some kind of joke?
logicalgirl
05-11-2010, 05:41 PM
Good point! I guess we'll have to wait until the next hearing to see if George is there and if Casey has any sort of interaction with both parents.
ICA may finally realize she's in a major jam this time and wants their support. Leading up to the trial, she may come to understand that her parents may be just two of a very limited number who will continue to support her.
Yes, I think it's all become very real to her - the near and imminent danger she is facing.
When is the next hearing or can someone tell me where the hearing list is posted?
Muzikman
05-11-2010, 05:42 PM
Just got home from today's hearing (had to make a detour to pick up the kiddos from school) and WOW, what a day! My new favorite line is: "This pretense of ignorance is getting old." I actually had to stifle a laugh on that one. Well, that and the Roy Kronk line.
I ♥ Jeff Ashton!
My favorite lines too!
It was hard not to clap today, at times. :)
I think the "Pretense" line is getting added to my sig. :dance:
eaglemom
05-11-2010, 05:42 PM
In regards to the relevance of Casey's partying, drinking and general shenanigans, for me personally it is important to separate them into two categories: before Caylee went "missing" and after.
I absolutely think that Casey's activities after Caylee disappeared (was murdered) are relevant. Each and every step she took in those days should be picked apart (IMO).
However, I think it is a slippery slope to judge any mother on their activities prior to an incident (barring a situation where a child is completely uncared for and the mother is neglecting/abusing the child). I say this because, as a mom of 2 wonderful kids, I "routinely" go out with my girlfriends. It's called "Moms Night Out" and just by name alone it implies that all the attendees are moms. Are we scantily clad? Sometimes. Are we drinking? Usually. Are we dancing? Sometimes. But does that make us "bad" mothers? I certainly hope not!
If someone took snapshots of our lives during these MNO events, they would see moms (gasp!) partying. There was even one instance where the bar we were at happened to have an old stripper pole. Needless to say, we took a lot of pics of us being silly on that pole. God help us if someone ever uses those photos to show that any one of us is a “bad” mom. If someone can show a specific time when a mom (Casey or anyone) was out partying and her child was not cared for, I would think that instance would be relevant. But, if a child is being cared for (by a babysitter, father, etc) then I think moms should be able to have some fun.
Let me be clear: I am not condoning Casey's behavior while Caylee was "missing" and she was "looking" for her. Absolutely not. But, if Casey was wearing a short dress, being drunk and partying prior to Caylee's disappearance AND Caylee was in the hands of a capable adult, then I think her activities (as long as they were all legal) are irrelevant.
I agree with you just beachy on the after pics but for me I don't think the BEFORE pics are so much about categorizing someone as a 'good' or 'bad' mother, it is more about establishing a pattern of care. If it was a pattern for KC to go out and party 5 out of 7 nights during the week and GA and CA were caring for Caylee - to me that establishes a little of where KC's priorities were as a parent and is relevant. She had no job, her parents supported her, she was out most nights at clubs or with boyfriends - where did she get the income? for all I know it establishes motive... her party lifestyle created a problem with her parents and the childcare became too much of a burden for her to adjust to.....
I really don't care WHAT she was wearing at the clubs (I know you didn't bring this up justbeachy but it comes up all the time)- the fact that she was out that much at all as a single parent even living at home makes a difference to me. Yes Caylee may have had a caregiver well able to take care of her while KC was gone but the PATTERN of absence makes a difference..IMO... what happens when KC is left on her own with Caylee during the day starting early in the morning after a night of clubbing and the other caregivers have left for work? She is fine for one day what happens when this goes on 3 days in a row, 3 weeks in a row?
Parenting isn't about a choice you make for one night it is a series of choices one makes starting with conception and it just builds from there
I, too, am a mother of 4 children. I also go out with friends. I was also a single parent with 2 small children for 7 years trying to navigate single parenthood and dating and working full-time and custody arrangements and make it all work. We all look at through our own lens I guess. I just have a hard time knowing that KC had to justify her clubbing as a 'job' as an event planner with universal to her parents because it was so frequent she knew they wouldn't watch Caylee otherwise. The other nights she told CA she and Caylee were 'staying with the nanny' because she 'worked too late' and they were over at some guy's house.
I just think that her behavior is so drastically different than most parents/moms that are in the same situation as her (single parent either on their own or even those living with their parents) - as I believe most parents/moms only go out occasionally to let off some steam-- it becomes relevant in the case.
MOO
Turnadot
05-11-2010, 05:43 PM
Ok...had to chime in while I'm making my way through the thread...are they claiming that Casey was a great deviant mother? Are they thinking she's been sitting in jail almost 2 years 'cause she likes to hang out in bars? Is this some kind of joke?
Listen, all good mothers are jobless, lying moochers who party 'till the wheels fall off. KC is in prison because she's so beautiful.
logicalgirl
05-11-2010, 05:43 PM
Ok...had to chime in while I'm making my way through the thread...are they claiming that Casey was a great deviant mother? Are they thinking she's been sitting in jail almost 2 years 'cause she likes to hang out in bars? Is this some kind of joke?
The Defense was making me laugh with all the names they were calling ICA's behaviors - I don't think the State has said any such thing, but thanks Andrea for telling me to think those names over and associate them with ICA.:waitasec:
RR0004
05-11-2010, 05:44 PM
JA :Partying with male strippers is irrelevant to being a good mother?
Huh...male strippers...where did this come from? Did I miss those pics too?
Astraea
05-11-2010, 05:45 PM
My only criminal experience is on appeal, except for one death penalty case I worked on during the penalty phase and creating a database for the Arizona Capital Representation Project of every holding on every death penalty case in Arizona (which unfortunately required that I read every one of them). I am a trial lawyer, however, and have criminal lawyers in the family.
You seem to have 2 questions about the undisclosed witness: (1) was she "really" undisclosed, and (2) in AZ, do judges "sometimes" allow undisclosed witnesses. I can't answer #1. As for #2, I have never seen it happen in AZ--except where one witness is essentially a substitute for another on some minor issue like "yes, these are our business records"--but we have some pretty extensive disclosure rules.
In this case, I think the judge would have let that witness in even if she had no qualifications whatsoever and had been disclosed at 9:00 am that morning, because he did not want any appeal issue related to the "gender bias" motion.
Thank you AZ. I appreciate your response and your experience! I was a little remiss to ask, for fear of sounding rude in some way, but I hoped that you wouldnt take it as being so :)
It is my experience here that many judges will allow certain impromptu witnesses during motions, amongst other matters. Our law rules of course allow for this and I am going to assume that FLs must as well or JP never would have allowed it. I would be surprised to see such a thing at trial though!
I am still of the understanding after reviewing the beginning of the hearing for a second time that this witness was not a surprise and/or undisclosed witness persay, more so, that the timing was poor and/or inadequate for the SA to prepare as JA stated.
Chat Noir
05-11-2010, 05:45 PM
I thought it was interesting that the tears begun after it was said that Caylee was a happy & healthy little girl. Could that be a sign of guilt?
Mamabear1963
05-11-2010, 05:49 PM
Why does this particular issue keep coming back up? (RE: Why DP was put back on the table)
JA laid out the State's theory in open court on a silver platter for crying out loud! Is it just that the defense wants it in writing?
Many, including AL, are pretending to forget that whole speech from JA, that one could conclude that poor Caylee may have looked into the eyes of her murderer, that being her own mother, as she was suffocated via duct tape and restrained by physical and/or chemical means.
How could you forget it?
ETA: I'm sure this was addressed. I read through some of the thread, but it was the part that bugged me the most during this hearing. The state has said plainly what route they are going. Does the defense need their hands held?
This drove me battywonkers at first today...and I don't have far to go...but the more I have thought about it the more I realize...let's get as much of this heard now as possible...more time now...less time in the appeal process...
Just like allowing the Ms. Rapaport etc...Like HHJP said..."Mr. Ashton, I am just giving them some latitude right now..." almost with a wink and don't worry it will be okay (though he didn't say it)
justbeachy
05-11-2010, 05:50 PM
Huh...male strippers...where did this come from? Did I miss those pics too?
This, I believe, was a reference to Darlie Routier. Her case was used as an example.
whiteangora
05-11-2010, 05:52 PM
My favorite lines too!
It was hard not to clap today, at times. :)
I think the "Pretense" line is getting added to my sig. :dance:
Were you there today Muzikman? If so did anything in particular stand out for you?
Horace Finklestein
05-11-2010, 05:55 PM
I agree with you just beachy on the after pics but for me I don't think the BEFORE pics are so much about categorizing someone as a 'good' or 'bad' mother, it is more about establishing a pattern of care. If it was a pattern for KC to go out and party 5 out of 7 nights during the week and GA and CA were caring for Caylee - to me that establishes a little of where KC's priorities were as a parent and is relevant. She had no job, her parents supported her, she was out most nights at clubs or with boyfriends - where did she get the income? for all I know it establishes motive... her party lifestyle created a problem with her parents and the childcare became too much of a burden for her to adjust to.....
I really don't care WHAT she was wearing at the clubs (I know you didn't bring this up justbeachy but it comes up all the time)- the fact that she was out that much at all as a single parent even living at home makes a difference to me. Yes Caylee may have had a caregiver well able to take care of her while KC was gone but the PATTERN of absence makes a difference..IMO... what happens when KC is left on her own with Caylee during the day starting early in the morning after a night of clubbing and the other caregivers have left for work? She is fine for one day what happens when this goes on 3 days in a row, 3 weeks in a row?
Parenting isn't about a choice you make for one night it is a series of choices one makes starting with conception and it just builds from there
I, too, am a mother of 4 children. I also go out with friends. I was also a single parent with 2 small children for 7 years trying to navigate single parenthood and dating and working full-time and custody arrangements and make it all work. We all look at through our own lens I guess. I just have a hard time knowing that KC had to justify her clubbing as a 'job' as an event planner with universal to her parents because it was so frequent she knew they wouldn't watch Caylee otherwise. The other nights she told CA she and Caylee were 'staying with the nanny' because she 'worked too late' and they were over at some guy's house.
I just think that her behavior is so drastically different than most parents/moms that are in the same situation as her (single parent either on their own or even those living with their parents) - as I believe most parents/moms only go out occasionally to let off some steam-- it becomes relevant in the case.
MOO
Exactly - it shows her priorities and lack of responsibility, especially considering she wasn't working and was stealing and foisting Caylee on other family members so she could do what she wanted. And that does make her a bad mom. She was a ghastly, horrible mom.
RR0004
05-11-2010, 05:55 PM
ER--I'm not familiar with this case, I've read a few press reports
Witness excused
So now she relies on the press to make her assumptions? The same press that she shows such disdain for in their portrayal of women? You'd think that maybe she owed the "mother of all mothers" a little face time...get to know the gal first hand before she was set to testify. My feelings of late...this has nothing to do with Casey and everything to do with AL and her mission. What better stage to publicize herself and her cause? She was drawn to this case for the same reason the press finds it so "titillating".
marspiter
05-11-2010, 05:57 PM
In regards to the relevance of Casey's partying, drinking and general shenanigans, for me personally it is important to separate them into two categories: before Caylee went "missing" and after.
I absolutely think that Casey's activities after Caylee disappeared (was murdered) are relevant. Each and every step she took in those days should be picked apart (IMO).
However, I think it is a slippery slope to judge any mother on their activities prior to an incident (barring a situation where a child is completely uncared for and the mother is neglecting/abusing the child). I say this because, as a mom of 2 wonderful kids, I "routinely" go out with my girlfriends. It's called "Moms Night Out" and just by name alone it implies that all the attendees are moms. Are we scantily clad? Sometimes. Are we drinking? Usually. Are we dancing? Sometimes. But does that make us "bad" mothers? I certainly hope not!
If someone took snapshots of our lives during these MNO events, they would see moms (gasp!) partying. There was even one instance where the bar we were at happened to have an old stripper pole. Needless to say, we took a lot of pics of us being silly on that pole. God help us if someone ever uses those photos to show that any one of us is a “bad” mom. If someone can show a specific time when a mom (Casey or anyone) was out partying and her child was not cared for, I would think that instance would be relevant. But, if a child is being cared for (by a babysitter, father, etc) then I think moms should be able to have some fun.
Let me be clear: I am not condoning Casey's behavior while Caylee was "missing" and she was "looking" for her. Absolutely not. But, if Casey was wearing a short dress, being drunk and partying prior to Caylee's disappearance AND Caylee was in the hands of a capable adult, then I think her activities (as long as they were all legal) are irrelevant.
I agree with your statement. What I do think would be relevant is party pictures before Caylee went missing that show Caylee in them. This could be used to show neglect and bad parenting. For example I don't think it would be prudent if Caylee were at the "anything but clothes" party. I believe some of Casey's friends have testified that Caylee was sometimes at these parties. So for example purposes. If you had a picture of Caylee at a certain party on a certain date and had other pictures of that party showing illicit drug use and other deviant/criminal behavior. Then they would be relevant. Just pictures of Casey partying though I agree would not be relevant until the date Caylee is suspected of being missing/murdered. Then any pictures during or after that date are very relevant indeed.
Astraea
05-11-2010, 05:59 PM
I would be happy to address this, but I'm not sure what you're asking. Wouldn't the job of the SA be the same in any jurisdiction?
Well, to be honest, that is why I asked.
Here, we have directions(a manual persay) that sets out the role of the SA. It is to seek justice in the purest form, it is not to advocate for the victim(as only one example of the confusion/distress that I find here in regards to legal aspects/roles at times). I was wondering if FL had a simlar "policy manual" and/or set of "directives" that would be accessible online. I thought maybe there would be a thread devoted to the different roles of different players in these criminal cases.....if not...maybe one would be helpful.
I will look and see what I can find. Sorry if that post was somewhat confusing :)
ZsaZsa
05-11-2010, 06:01 PM
My question is - and it may have been asked already, haven't read the whole thread - WHO PAID TO FLY HER HERE?
If it was the Taxpayers, we got ripped off. :furious:
I started watching when she was testifying and had no idea who she was.
It seemed to me that she had a big feminist chip on her shoulder. I don't think it would make much difference to JA whether she was unexpected because he soon sized her up - he asked her "Do you have any evidence that there is gender bias in THIS case"? she replied that she didn't know much about the case other than reading some newspaper clippings.
Some expert! :eek:
RR0004
05-11-2010, 06:02 PM
AL: They don't say she's a whore and she should die; well, in blogs they do and they say I should die with her.
:floorlaugh:
Gimme a break...why even bring up this nonsense in Court?
PS- it must have been the other guys 'cause no one would ever get away with saying that here.
Numbers
05-11-2010, 06:03 PM
Why does this particular issue keep coming back up? (RE: Why DP was put back on the table)
JA laid out the State's theory in open court on a silver platter for crying out loud! Is it just that the defense wants it in writing?
Many, including AL, are pretending to forget that whole speech from JA, that one could conclude that poor Caylee may have looked into the eyes of her murderer, that being her own mother, as she was suffocated via duct tape and restrained by physical and/or chemical means.
How could you forget it?
ETA: I'm sure this was addressed. I read through some of the thread, but it was the part that bugged me the most during this hearing. The state has said plainly what route they are going. Does the defense need their hands held?
Yes. A guide dog would be nice, too. They are so much more chic than white canes.
RR0004
05-11-2010, 06:05 PM
AL: hearsay and prejudice in this case have overridden the fact that every witness in this case said Casey Anthony was a good mother
...and the point is?? Only "bad" mothers kill their children? Who's making the gross generalizations now?
Woe.be.gone
05-11-2010, 06:05 PM
Mr. Ashton continues to try to put a lot of words in the witness's mouth.
He keeps asking one question and then when she asks for clarification, he completely asks a different question. Very confusing questioning.
She remains unruffled.
Sticks by her statement that a woman's mode of dress or whether she watched male strippers or used sex toys or other lifestyle questions may be completely irrelevant to her role as a mother. But that the media often cover these issue and even courts sometimes allow testimony regarding these issues.
It's like you and I are watching two different things. She was terrible with his questions, imo.
To be fair to seagull65, the witness(ER) was brought in to testify that a woman who is known to wear sexy clothing and likes to party will be judged as being a bad mother when she may be a good mother. That's all. If we're honest, most of us make quick judgments about people based on their looks, how they are dressed and maybe even their weight, etc. Heck, I'm sitting here thinking 'can't some of these people on T.V. come up with better fitting outfits/suits/hair styles to reflect their professional status'.
Since AL is trying to get the DP removed along with the photos of KC partying, she is trying to show that KC has already been judged guilty based on her dress and party habits whether or not she killed KC.
It's not ER's fault that prejudices exist and we judge people based on looks and dress. She's not saying anything new though.
But here's the thing, because someone dresses sexy and likes to party doesn't mean they didn't kill their child either.
It's a fact that if you go to a job interview in an office in torn blue jeans and a tube top, you'll probably not get the job. We are judged whether we like it or not.
This is pretty lame if you ask me. I have faith that jurors will make decisions based on more than what KC wore while out dancing. To me, the fact that we know KC brought Caylee in the bed with her and RM (a mere stranger) is far more damaging. Also the pictures that we know were taken within the dates of June 16 and July 15, 2008 should be allowed as evidence as it is unusual behavior that KC claims she knew her child was missing and she hadn't told anybody - the jurors need to know her state of mind. Her defense better have an alternative explanation for her behavior imo. Otherwise, it's fair for the Jurors to conclude that KC did not care that Caylee was missing and that would be damaging evidence.
mitzi
05-11-2010, 06:06 PM
Sometimes I wonder what Jean C of Tru TV has had for lunch,some of her
comments are :woohoo::waitasec:
I've noticed when the talking heads get together to rehash hearings, etc. that Jean C., alot of times gets facts wrong. The one who seems to be the most on top of this case is Mark Eiglarsh...then Mike (the former cop-forget his last name), then Vinnie Politan, and the worst of the worst at knowing the facts of the case, is Ryan Smith. As a host, he is so unknowledgable it isn't funny.
suzihawk
05-11-2010, 06:08 PM
Well, to be honest, that is why I asked.
Here, we have directions(a manual persay) that sets out the role of the SA. It is to seek justice in the purest form, it is not to advocate for the victim(as only one example of the confusion/distress that I find here in regards to legal aspects/roles at times). I was wondering if FL had a simlar "policy manual" and/or set of "directives" that would be accessible online. I thought maybe there would be a thread devoted to the different roles of different players in these criminal cases.....if not...maybe one would be helpful.
I will look and see what I can find. Sorry if that post was somewhat confusing :)
http://sa18.state.fl.us/general/duties.htm
Duties and Responsibilities
The role of the State Attorney's Office is to protect the innocent, to prosecute crimes, and to promote the safety and well-being of the public, while seeking out justice. Article V, Florida Constitution, and Section 27, Florida Statutes (http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0027/titl0027.htm&StatuteYear=2008&Title=-%3E2008-%3EChapter%2027), along with various other statutes, set out the authority of the State Attorney to accomplish these goals.
As the representative of the State of Florida in litigation in Circuit and County Courts in Brevard and Seminole Counties, this office is responsible for the screening and prosecution of criminal cases (http://sa18.state.fl.us/prosecute/division.htm) from criminal traffic charges up to first degree murder. We also pursue specific civil cases such as, but not limited to, involuntary commitment of sexual predators, bond validation proceedings, consumer issues (http://sa18.state.fl.us/consume/consumer.htm), and environmental law.
Based upon legislation initially conceived and drafted by State Attorney Norm Wolfinger, the Florida Legislature passed a bill which became law on July 1, 1999, authorizing State Attorneys to allocate resources toward crime prevention (http://sa18.state.fl.us/prevent/crimprev.htm) under Florida Statute 960.001 (http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0960/titl0960.htm&StatuteYear=2008&Title=-%3E2008-%3EChapter%20960). This new law afforded State Attorney Wolfinger the opportunity to realize his long-term vision of working together with citizens, law enforcement, and other agencies and civic groups in identifying crime prevention and quality of life strategies. Crime prevention achieved through working in partnership with residents is a core focus of our office.
The first sentence says it all.
Seeking justice for an innocent two year old murder victim. That's about as pure as it gets.
mitzi
05-11-2010, 06:09 PM
To make sense of my post here...Amil called the ladies behind the defense, Andrea's ladies-in-waiting. LOL.
Why did this make me laugh?:angel:
Maybe like me, it made you picture ALyon(s) and her "flock" in the "frocks" of Shakespearian times. Ah yes, the Taming of the Shrew! :crazy:
SallyLu
05-11-2010, 06:09 PM
I would start a thread, but have never done so. I was hoping that AZLawyer or Hornsby or another verifed lawyer could lay out once and for all what the job of the SA actually IS as I am realizing that many have some differing opinions on that subject. If there is a thread about this already(maybe in the main forum somewhere?) I would truly appreciate some direction there. I am figuring it will be different from my locale, so dont want to comment until I am certain :) Thanks in advance and sorry for the OT :)
There's always a first time.
Sorry Suzi - we posted at the same time.
ZsaZsa
05-11-2010, 06:10 PM
I agree with your statement. What I do think would be relevant is party pictures before Caylee went missing that show Caylee in them. This could be used to show neglect and bad parenting. For example I don't think it would be prudent if Caylee were at the "anything but clothes" party. I believe some of Casey's friends have testified that Caylee was sometimes at these parties. So for example purposes. If you had a picture of Caylee at a certain party on a certain date and had other pictures of that party showing illicit drug use and other deviant/criminal behavior. Then they would be relevant. Just pictures of Casey partying though I agree would not be relevant until the date Caylee is suspected of being missing/murdered. Then any pictures during or after that date are very relevant indeed.
I agree, and there had to be good reason that Cindy would have called Casey an unfit Mother several times, which we know she told Lee, and I am sure it was for the kind of activity we see in the pre June 16 photographs, not for studying late at the Library, so they do have some relevance.
Dignity4Victims
05-11-2010, 06:11 PM
Thank you AZ. I appreciate your response and your experience! I was a little remiss to ask, for fear of sounding rude in some way, but I hoped that you wouldnt take it as being so :)
It is my experience here that many judges will allow certain impromptu witnesses during motions, amongst other matters. Our law rules of course allow for this and I am going to assume that FLs must as well or JP never would have allowed it. I would be surprised to see such a thing at trial though!
I am still of the understanding after reviewing the beginning of the hearing for a second time that this witness was not a surprise and/or undisclosed witness persay, more so, that the timing was poor and/or inadequate for the SA to prepare as JA stated.
AZlawyer has astutely and very adequately explained why Judge Perry allowed her "testimony", (if you'd like to call it that), so after about 40 posts or more appearing on this thread on this issue alone, bottom line is, it doesn't matter!
It's water under the bridge, over, finis, done and most importantly, .....
DEFENSE MOTION DENIED! :D
So perhaps we can finally stop beating this dead horse and move on to other issues?
Chiquita71
05-11-2010, 06:12 PM
Respect Chiquita71 post snipped for space.
While agree with you on many of the points in your post, I would argue that Casey did not have to keep her baby. Every single mother is given the option by the hospital/doctor/social worker of keeping their child or putting that child up for adoption. They do not need their parents permission to do so. Plus Casey was of age. Either way, Casey was the sole guardian of Caylee, and had the right to make whatever decision she wanted to.
I believe ICA kept Caylee because she was getting a huge amount of attention from her family and she thought it was a good thing. I doubt the actuality of a child rather than a stunning wee baby actually occurred to her.
Quote Respect back at ya logicalgirl :)
ITA. And, thank you for saying so. Yes, more choices Casey had that would have kept her from where she now sits.
And, as I read your post I realize a spell that is over this case(one I get dazzled by) is that Casey isn't a grown woman! I really forget that(in a way)with the way she is treated. The way George and Cindy expect that they be treated as though Casey is a minor. To be informed in that way, the excuses they give are for a child, not a adult. You can see you even "caught" me in that in my example. Deep. I said, "Cindy made her have the baby." You're right, no one can make someone keep a baby. There could be dynamics that might keep a girl from getting an abortion, but I also agree that in this case Casey would have enjoyed the attention. I got that feeling, after seeing a picture of Casey I had never seen before that she let herself get pregnant on a whim, as attention and when the attention wore off her and went to Caylee she was done with her daughter. And, if Cindy was denying it then she wouldn't have felt pressure to keep the baby.
With Cindy, it is the Kobayashi Maru: in a no win situation it is a test of character and character is an opinion. I don't think Cindy is (ETA: partly) responsible for Casey's actions because she is her mother but because of the kind of mother she is/was. Cindy has not seemed horrified for Caylee. Those that have sympathy for Cindy have more for her than she has shown for her granddaughter. IMO, she has cared more about herself than Caylee or Casey. If we were talking about Sandra Cantu's parents, we wouldn't even be talking about this...IYKWIM. :innocent:
:twocents:
Muzikman
05-11-2010, 06:13 PM
I am a paralegal/law clerk and I also possess a degree in political science and sociology. Graduated top of my class :D If I thought my opinion would EVER matter I would verify with Tricia of course :)
Aren't you from Canada, where the legal process may be slightly different than in the USA?
SallyLu
05-11-2010, 06:14 PM
azlawyer has astutely and very adequately explained why judge perry allowed her "testimony", (if you'd like to call it that), so after about 40 posts or more appearing on this thread on this issue alone, bottom line is, it doesn't matter!
it's water under the bridge, over, finis, done and most importantly, .....
defense motion denied! :d
so perhaps we can finally stop beating this dead horse and move on to other issues?
thankyou 'cos it's wasting a lot of pen and ink! Enough already!
mitzi
05-11-2010, 06:15 PM
Yeah it's not crying at all, it's a very very poor acting job. She jabs her eyes and looks at a kleenex. In today's hearing, she literally went from laughing and smiling to the fake crying several times in a few minutes. It's pretty sad if she can't even remember the fake front she's trying to put on.
I hope that OneLostGirl will drop by and give us her take on whether she thinks KC could possibly be crying real tears or not. She has been spot on in her assessments of KC in the past, and I value her insight.
Mamabear1963
05-11-2010, 06:19 PM
thankyou 'cos it's wasting a lot of pen and ink! Enough already!
Naw...just bandwidth....and fingers :croc:
Melanie
05-11-2010, 06:19 PM
I didn't read this thread (didn't want to bias myself), but I felt the motion was hogwash. I understand the need to try to get the DP off the table, but hey Casey, why don't you just plead life WOP instead of spending a gazillion dollars on all this nonsense.
I don't think those were real tears either. I was waiting for her to poke her eye out to get someting going there.
She made this mess, and now she has to deal with is.
Oh, can I say the professor who testified was ridic?
MOO
Mel
ZsaZsa
05-11-2010, 06:21 PM
Aren't you from Canada, where the legal process may be slightly different than in the USA?
Wherever it is, they have SA's that do not advocate for the victim...:innocent:
Melanie
05-11-2010, 06:22 PM
The Defense was making me laugh with all the names they were calling ICA's behaviors - I don't think the State has said any such thing, but thanks Andrea for telling me to think those names over and associate them with ICA.:waitasec:
In my respectful opinion, all they did was taint some poor jury pool. Now all I can think about is that blue dress and rubbing bubbies with that girl on the dance floor.
Way to go defense - you scored big today :(
MOO
Mel
but hey Casey, why don't you just plead life WOP instead of spending a gazillion dollars on all this nonsense.
snip and bbm
Good point, mgardner, but since when has Casey ever cared about how other people's money gets spent? lol
Melanie
05-11-2010, 06:26 PM
So now she relies on the press to make her assumptions? The same press that she shows such disdain for in their portrayal of women? You'd think that maybe she owed the "mother of all mothers" a little face time...get to know the gal first hand before she was set to testify. My feelings of late...this has nothing to do with Casey and everything to do with AL and her mission. What better stage to publicize herself and her cause? She was drawn to this case for the same reason the press finds it so "titillating".
Yup - bad move! She should have said she researched the entire defense case before coming to court today.
I beg your pardon?
Sorry?
Could you repeat that please?
Can you broaden your question?
I only read a few articles?
Geezzz...I wonder how much she was paid?
MOO
Mel
flourish
05-11-2010, 06:26 PM
I agree with your statement. What I do think would be relevant is party pictures before Caylee went missing that show Caylee in them. This could be used to show neglect and bad parenting. For example I don't think it would be prudent if Caylee were at the "anything but clothes" party. I believe some of Casey's friends have testified that Caylee was sometimes at these parties. So for example purposes. If you had a picture of Caylee at a certain party on a certain date and had other pictures of that party showing illicit drug use and other deviant/criminal behavior. Then they would be relevant. Just pictures of Casey partying though I agree would not be relevant until the date Caylee is suspected of being missing/murdered. Then any pictures during or after that date are very relevant indeed.
I agree that the pre-photos should be used (some of them), particularly the ones where Caylee was there.
The one photo which stands in my mind as concerning is the one where they are in someone's garage (Lauren C. or Ricardo's maybe?) Anyway, there's a photo with Lauren and Casey and Caylee all wearing candy necklaces. Caylee looks both unamused and a bit "out of it" in that pic, IMHO.
For some reason Lauren C. keep nagging at me...for months...we haven't seen her interview and there must be one!
I will look for photo after work.
ETA: Here's a link to the post where the photo is.
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Casey's Photobucket
Horace Finklestein
05-11-2010, 06:26 PM
AL: hearsay and prejudice in this case have overridden the fact that every witness in this case said Casey Anthony was a good mother
Not true. Rick and Shirley Plesea, the anthony neighbors especially said she was a horrible mother, her friends admitted that the casey they thought they knoew doesn't exist, etc. No one with any credibility said she was a good mom.
ZsaZsa
05-11-2010, 06:28 PM
It seems to me that AL has the same capacity for opening mouth and inserting foot as Baez. She tells the Judge that people on blogs call her client a whore.
I don't know if Casey was actually a whore, but she certainly behaved in a sluttish way. If it's the truth what is her point?
Astraea
05-11-2010, 06:28 PM
http://sa18.state.fl.us/general/duties.htm
Duties and Responsibilities
The role of the State Attorney's Office is to protect the innocent, to prosecute crimes, and to promote the safety and well-being of the public, while seeking out justice. Article V, Florida Constitution, and Section 27, Florida Statutes (http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0027/titl0027.htm&StatuteYear=2008&Title=-%3E2008-%3EChapter%2027), along with various other statutes, set out the authority of the State Attorney to accomplish these goals.
As the representative of the State of Florida in litigation in Circuit and County Courts in Brevard and Seminole Counties, this office is responsible for the screening and prosecution of criminal cases (http://sa18.state.fl.us/prosecute/division.htm) from criminal traffic charges up to first degree murder. We also pursue specific civil cases such as, but not limited to, involuntary commitment of sexual predators, bond validation proceedings, consumer issues (http://sa18.state.fl.us/consume/consumer.htm), and environmental law.
Based upon legislation initially conceived and drafted by State Attorney Norm Wolfinger, the Florida Legislature passed a bill which became law on July 1, 1999, authorizing State Attorneys to allocate resources toward crime prevention (http://sa18.state.fl.us/prevent/crimprev.htm) under Florida Statute 960.001 (http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0960/titl0960.htm&StatuteYear=2008&Title=-%3E2008-%3EChapter%20960). This new law afforded State Attorney Wolfinger the opportunity to realize his long-term vision of working together with citizens, law enforcement, and other agencies and civic groups in identifying crime prevention and quality of life strategies. Crime prevention achieved through working in partnership with residents is a core focus of our office.
The first sentence says it all.
Seeking justice for an innocent two year old murder victim. That's about as pure as it gets.
There is much more to the concept of justice and that first sentence in its totality than that which you have summarized. That is why I have been searching for the SAs Policy Manual, which lays out much more directly those concepts you have listed. Thank you for that information though :)
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
0