Lyons' talk of 'Mitigation'

[Brini]

ITA No one has come forward to say they suspected something was wrong in KC's life as she was growing up.No teachers have commented on seeing anything.The only thing neighbors have said was seeing KC screaming at Cindy. Not a single friend has said they noticed abuse ,emotional or physical.
The worst that's come out is that Cindy held Caylee first and KC never got over it

Yep! Abused kids show signs, that can found in school and medical records.

Sexually abused kids act out in specific ways.

As NG says, "Yeah, she had a tough life. They gave her a car. She didn't have to support herself. She had a free babysitter (CA).......

Of course, NG, having been a prosecutor, saw tons of REAL cases of abuse.

 

[Brini]

Not necessarily. She wants to throw them under the bus. If Cindy refuses she will do it on her own, but yes, it will help her a lot if CA will take the stand and say that since all of this happened she has had some time to reflect and has decided that she was too harsh on her in some ways and too controlling, but also an enabler and they want her to admit that it was all her fault, or the fault of she and George. And she will also want to come up with other mitigating factors. They may bring the alledged miscarriage into play since it was right around that time and blame some of it on hormones. They will pick all of it apart. If they can't get CA to agree to take the hit, they will just use examples and stories of her childhood and use them without her to make the case.

Most abuse stories won't impress a jury, that much. A TON of normal, productive people were abused. A lot of 'em are our own posters.

Then, where are the school/medical records?

And, then there would be the problem of getting the whole family to agree, and to cross-x well.

Even fabricating serious abuse would be a tough row to hoe.

 

[Brini]

I am sure Cindy undermined Casey's attempts to parent though, she just has to be in control and the poor kid was in the middle of a permanent power struggle.

Unless she got a job and moved out.. which she was also not willing to do.

Also, if KC is a sociopath, she doesn't HAVE any real parenting skills, because she can't love.

 

[LinasK]

:laugh:

"Dear people of the jury, I ask you to not only find my client not guilty but to chip in for hair, make up, wardrobe for her media photo op. I also ask you appoint someone to bake her a cake & someone else to plan her release party at Fusion. Ladies & gentleman, did my client kill her daughter, YES, but this is a young woman who wanted to party, screw what ever was wearing pants...and sometimes skirts, drink, do dope & had nothing but a mean set of parents who got sick of babysitting her kid & supporting her wicked life style. What was Ms. Anthony to do? With no family supports in place, she had no choice but to kill her daughter, toss her out with her lovers trash so she could be the pretty, free young thing she was meant to be."

You sound just like the lawyer Richard Gere played in the movie, "Chicago"! LOL

 

[HRCODEPINK]

She isn't denied anything.

She can do the same "meetings" in jail and observed as she can out of jail and unobserved. The whole fam and JB can meet with her... through plexiglas.

And, if it's not common and allowable procedure for ALLL the perps, why would it be appeal worthy?

They may appeal over it, but it won't fly. Lots of people worry about appeal going on forever and ever, and unfortunately lots are frivolous but the option has to be there for the legitimate claims. Our founding fathers believed that it was "better that 100 guilty people go free than 1 innocent suffer" and since the use of DNA it has been found that many innocent do suffer. I shudder to think how many innocent there are that don't have the $ or the skills to find attorneys to help them. But one thing that was comforting to me to learn when I started my volunteer work was that the expense is not as great as one would think, because appeals are not full blown trials. They are just like these motions that we have been seeing right and left from the defense. You are merely going before a judge and asking for something. He/She says yes or no. If he says no, it's over and you can't bring it up again. If he says yes, the case goes on, (I believe to a higher court, but now 100% sure. Been a while since I did this stuff. I quit after my son was born because it was too much for me anymore, both physically and emotionally.) but NOT the whole case. Unless they can prove that it somehow made her trial unfair and the conviction is overturned. Otherwise, only the one issue goes up.

Hi everyone. Not to veer off topic but, even if she DID receive the DP, it seems to me, so many DP cases, especially in Florida, are eventually converted into life sentences after a while. I don't understand why? Maybe it's money? I don't know. Why bother having a Capital punishment trial when the chances of it being overturned in to a life sentence anyway? JMO:waitasec:

There are lots of reasons that Dp cases get switched to life. Death is a very serious sentence. It should be looked into far deeper than other cases. I don't know what the figure is in FL specifically, but I do know that the figure nationwide is 68%! 68% of all DP cases in the US are eventually commuted to life sentences. Sometimes it is for mitigating circumstances, sometimes errors in the trial, prosecutoral misconduct, misconduct on the part of LE, evidence tampering, broken chain of custody that was not mentioned at trial, misconduct in the labs ( I think it was in TX, a ton of people ended up being released after a lab tech died and was found to have fiddled with the tests, and stored evidence wrong.) I worked 3 cases here and we got them all commuted. Joe Giarratano was believed to be innocent and even had his death sentence commuted to life with parole due to "overwhelming evidence of innocence" with recommendation for a new trial that the Attorney General never allowed, Robin Lovitt was serving a death sentence and he was believed to be innocent, so the clerk at the courthouse destroyed his evidence before it would be tested, even tho someone else in the courthouse said not to do it because it was still an active case and Earl Washington Jr. His sentence was commuted to life because the DNA did not match him. It still took us another 9 years to get him out. There are alot of reasons that these sentences are commuted, and usually it is very rare that it isn't for a good one. These mitigation specialists also do very good jobs. Part of doing those jobs is to sometimes make a mountain out of a mole hill so to speak and to make things more tragic than they are. Part of why I quit volunteering is I would not work cases where they were doing that. I only would work cases where the mitigating circumstances were enough for me to believe that no matter what they were accused of, they didn't deserve death because something/someone had failed them in such a tremendous way that I couldn't in good conscience walk away. Usually they made me cry.

 

[HRCODEPINK]

After reading all of the incredibly knowledgeable input on this thread it sounds like the mitigation investigation is two-pronged. First to discover and disclose, at the sentencing or DP phase of the trial, why Casey may have done the horrid act (verbal/sexual abuse, dysfunction family, personality disorder, etc). And secondly, to try to present the image that the family is loving, supportive, caring and worried about the penalty Casey may have to pay.

These two goals seem diametrically opposed, at least highly unobtainable. In any case, it's hard for me to imagine that a family meeting (with or without cameras) would prove fruitful for either cause. (And certainly they should not be graced with any exceptions to the rules and provisions that other inmates and family's are held to!!!)

Is Lyon's definition and expectations of a mitigation investigation purely theoretical or is it just me? There must be something I have mixed up or don't understand. Can anyone help me out here?

They aren't necessarily opposed. With the enabling it would be easy, assuming CA will take one for the team to prove that they love her but abused her. Enabling is abuse. If I were AL, and CA won't play ball, I would get the fam on the stand to talk about how much they love her and then once they are off the stand I would then throw CA under the bus. If she jumps up screaming foul in court, then she looks even more nuts (please see Valhall's siggy, which I love love love by the way) and she will be swiftly escorted out for disruption. And the more crazy she looks, the better. "See! This is what our client had to live with!"

Al's expectation for special treatment is not theoretical, it is down right crazy. Her plan for mitigation may be theoretical at this point, without having the ability to have the secret meetings to get the stories straight and find out if CA will play ball at all. But the way I have always seen the law is that it is like a word game. Two lawyers could have the same exact goal of getting something thrown out or labeled unconstitutional and one win and the other lose just based upon the words they use to get there or the cases they cite. Like that scene in Legally Blonde where they were discussing the sperm donor. If CA doesn't want to play nice they will get there by a different route.

 

[Leila]

This "mitigation" crap just hits me the wrong way. I have my OWN little Casey Anthony in my life, a Step-Daughter that I have watched lie, steal, manipulate, forged cheques on her dead mothers estate acct, forged/changed the amount on a birthday cheque from me, stole thousands from her dad, had fake jobs, denied a blossoming belly was a pregnancy (she claimed it was too many donuts and her father believed her), and NOW has shown up, after 3 months missing, with a BABY! Her Father's inability to stick to any consequences and enabling her outrageous lies has fueled the fire...BUT...she IS, imo, a true Sociopath.

I awoke one morning last week to find her and a Boy I have never met, after 3 months missing, sitting in the livingroom of our $500,000 dollar home, doing a WELFARE APP with a social worker! I made it clear she hadn't lived with us for 3 months...and the worker then said "So, you don't know about the Baby"! omg...I worry that little baby, if she gets it back, it's in Childrens Aid, will end up like poor Caylee.

Imo...some people are just plain evil. I'm leaving...it's just too sick and she's not my daughter, I have no power, her father protects her and I need to protect my children from her. George should have done the same.

I'm so sorry about your situation. It's a very difficult situation to have to cope with and I wish you the best.

 

[HRCODEPINK]

First off, I would like to thank you so much for the posts you have made in this thread. They have helped me tremendously in understanding the mitigation process. I agree with you that it is a noble cause. Anyone who truly does have circumstances that may have led to them being so dysfunctional they committed a violent crime, should have those mitigating circumstances presented during the sentencing phase. I have faith in the legal system that whatever is decided by a jury after hearing these issues is acceptable to me.

BUT (there's that big but again!) I don't agree with this part "not hard to prove, I would imagine". Not unless there is some extremely traumatic/abusive secret yet to be revealed. It's going to be a hard sell to go with "she was just so darned spoiled she never learned how to act". While everyone on the jury may conclude CA ought to be tied to the same IV at the end of the day, I'm not sure they'd view this as some "horrible little childhood". It would just confirm what they'd probably concluded by the end of the murder trial - that they were dealing with a tantrum-throwing brat that thought she could just say "I'm a spiteful ***** and by the way - here's my latest lie, don't question it or act like a cop or I'll throw you outta my house!" *stomp feet and cross arms*

You are most welcome. I love it when people learn these things and understand how it all works.

I base my belief that it wouldn't be hard on what I have seen in miles and miles of video footage and my observations here. Look how many people on here have said they don't blame KC for turning out like she is because of the way CA acts. Look how crazy everyone feels this family is (Once again, I would love to get that siggy put on a t-shirt of or a bumper sticker) and how dysfunctional we all see them to be. Not only is it that she is a brat, but how could she really learn how to be a normal person surrounded by these people?

It is NOT always a noble cause. See my post on the mountains out of mole hills. This is a case I would not have worked. I agree with Brini that her problems are very small when compared to others. Possibly bad enough with her weak little mind and inability to feel like a normal person...I'm not buying it, but some might and it would depend on how it was presented and on what else we have not yet seen. It will also depend on if they really go with this nanny business or before trial she decides to come forward and say she accidentally drowned in the pool and she was so terrified of her mother she had no choice. It all depends on how it all goes. In most instances, mitigation specialists don't come into play until after trial and sentencing. It is part of the reason so many death sentences get commuted to life. The investigations are long and sometimes can take 2 years to complete, however, sentencing will not wait on the investigation to be complete, I would not imagine, but all of the cases I worked we were not brought in until sometimes years after the sentence is passed down.

P.S. You've also helped me understand that if KC is proven guilty, but AL manages to get her out of the DP, that AL can claim another victory. I now firmly understand AL's goal here - acquittal or lesser conviction if possible, avoidance of DP when that doesn't work.

BUT (lol there it is again!) I wonder how much longer it will take in this whole "mitigation investigation" before AL realizes she has met her match on this one? I'm figuring the light will come on for her some where about midway into the first hour with CA. That's when she is going to realize that she has no way to disconnect the "ugliness" of her client from the "ugliness" of the family. Their like a big fungal growth of ugliness...all of them are connected and feed off each other's bullcrap.

I will be interested to see how all of this goes. AL may not deal much with guilt or innocence at all and we may see mostly JB for that phase. She may just be focused on saving her life, and I assume that is the plan if the phrase I saw somewhere on here was true. I don't remember the exact wording or where it was but it was something AL said that made it sound like KC is guilty but she doesn't deserve death and she needs to investigate to show why.

No matter how long she investigates, if she is any good she will find a way to get her points across. She will find a different route to it. It is my understanding that she is decent. I recall she had some good numbers, I can't at this minute remember what AL's numbers were, but she touted that she was competent. I wouldn't call her the "Angel of Death Row", her number's aren't that great (and she stole that name from someone else who was given that name and didn't call herself that). But the fact that they can't hide the ugliness may actually work in her favor considering her job.

 

[Leila]

I'm not very good at this, but I made this one for you.

Beautifully done and very artistic!

 

[HRCODEPINK]

Most abuse stories won't impress a jury, that much. A TON of normal, productive people were abused. A lot of 'em are our own posters.

Then, where are the school/medical records?

And, then there would be the problem of getting the whole family to agree, and to cross-x well.

Even fabricating serious abuse would be a tough row to hoe.

I agree that AL has a very tough job ahead of her with this group, but I also see the potential there for people to buy it. People who haven't followed the case like we have may not hear all that we have and all of that influences our feelings about her. I also agree with your posts on real mitigating circumstances and hers not being enough. I have seen cases where people were so severely abused that it amazed me that it was ever allowed to go that far. But not everyone has seen the things that I have. Some people are softer than you or I. And you have to remember that defense experts are going to be allowed to speak. And judging the character of some that I have seen on this team thus far, Henry L. for example, sometimes "experts" will say what they are paid to say. For people who are there because they were forced into jury duty, they may not understand that possibility like we do. It's all really depends on who is there to recommend the sentence.

 

[Leila]

If AL is working on mitigation for the sentencing phase, to show mitigated circumstances that led to Casey killing her child - it would seem that the present circumstances with KC ignoring her parents in the court room and not having visitation with them, would serve that purpose. AL could use that to illustrate that KC, now being separated from the abusive household she grew up in, is angry with her parents for all she had to endure.

I don't see why the defense would need any sort of private, not video taped, meeting in jail between Casey and her family, to discuss mitigation. Mitigation can be discussed privately between AL and KC, and then AL can meet privately in an office with George and Cindy to discuss this.

 

[Brini]

They aren't necessarily opposed. With the enabling it would be easy, assuming CA will take one for the team to prove that they love her but abused her. Enabling is abuse. If I were AL, and CA won't play ball, I would get the fam on the stand to talk about how much they love her and then once they are off the stand I would then throw CA under the bus. If she jumps up screaming foul in court, then she looks even more nuts (please see Valhall's siggy, which I love love love by the way) and she will be swiftly escorted out for disruption. And the more crazy she looks, the better. "See! This is what our client had to live with!"

Al's expectation for special treatment is not theoretical, it is down right crazy. Her plan for mitigation may be theoretical at this point, without having the ability to have the secret meetings to get the stories straight and find out if CA will play ball at all. But the way I have always seen the law is that it is like a word game. Two lawyers could have the same exact goal of getting something thrown out or labeled unconstitutional and one win and the other lose just based upon the words they use to get there or the cases they cite. Like that scene in Legally Blonde where they were discussing the sperm donor. If CA doesn't want to play nice they will get there by a different route.

My fave from Legally Blonde was when the alleged "lover" correctly identified the blonde counsel's shoes as "last year's Pradas."

 

[Brini]

I agree that AL has a very tough job ahead of her with this group, but I also see the potential there for people to buy it. People who haven't followed the case like we have may not hear all that we have and all of that influences our feelings about her. I also agree with your posts on real mitigating circumstances and hers not being enough. I have seen cases where people were so severely abused that it amazed me that it was ever allowed to go that far. But not everyone has seen the things that I have. Some people are softer than you or I. And you have to remember that defense experts are going to be allowed to speak. And judging the character of some that I have seen on this team thus far, Henry L. for example, sometimes "experts" will say what they are paid to say. For people who are there because they were forced into jury duty, they may not understand that possibility like we do. It's all really depends on who is there to recommend the sentence.

True. I doubt that she will get the DP, anyway.

Being young, cute and middle-class. BUT obviously uncaring of her child, I think she'll get LWOP.

She won't get the DP, IMHO, because the average juror will think she's young enough that she might reform.

She won't reform. But, LWOP's fine with me!

As long as she's post-menopausal, when she gets out.

 

[Numbers]

True. I doubt that she will get the DP, anyway.

Being young, cute and middle-class. BUT obviously uncaring of her child, I think she'll get LWOP.

She won't get the DP, IMHO, because the average juror will think she's young enough that she might reform.

She won't reform. But, LWOP's fine with me!

As long as she's post-menopausal, when she gets out.

From what I understand, LWOP actually means just that in Florida. She won't get out, period.

Which works for me.

Unless I'm wrong.

 

[HRCODEPINK]

True. I doubt that she will get the DP, anyway.

Being young, cute and middle-class. BUT obviously uncaring of her child, I think she'll get LWOP.

She won't get the DP, IMHO, because the average juror will think she's young enough that she might reform.

She won't reform. But, LWOP's fine with me!

As long as she's post-menopausal, when she gets out.

ITA with most of this post. I have a hard time seeing a jury giving her the death penalty and if she does I can see it being commuted before it is ever carried out. The only thing I don't agree with is the post-menopausal bit. I don't want to see her get out EVER!! Every time a sociopath is removed from society the world becomes a better place for all of us. I wish more states were like mine. We no longer have parole. You do the time you are sentenced. Not a minute sooner are you released. Life means for the rest of your life. No time for good behavior. If you were sentenced before the law went into effect you can be released by the parole board, but after it went into effect you were out of luck. I want to see KC die there and after a loooooooooong life, so that all of the rest of her family is gone and she ends up in an unmarked grave somewhere.`

 

[lin]

If AL is working on mitigation for the sentencing phase, to show mitigated circumstances that led to Casey killing her child - it would seem that the present circumstances with KC ignoring her parents in the court room and not having visitation with them, would serve that purpose. AL could use that to illustrate that KC, now being separated from the abusive household she grew up in, is angry with her parents for all she had to endure.

I don't see why the defense would need any sort of private, not video taped, meeting in jail between Casey and her family, to discuss mitigation. Mitigation can be discussed privately between AL and KC, and then AL can meet privately in an office with George and Cindy to discuss this.

I think it's more about getting their stories straight without an attorney present cos the attorney has that ethical obligation to not allow them to perjure themselves.

ETA: On the other hand, I also think it's likely that AL is trying to get through to KC and mistakenly thinks her family could help in that regard.

 

[HRCODEPINK]

From what I understand, LWOP actually means just that in Florida. She won't get out, period.

Which works for me.

Unless I'm wrong.

I believe that you are not. If she is just sentenced to Life, if they still have parole in FL then she could get out in 20 maybe 25 years or so if she is a good girl, but if you are sentenced to life without parole you are stuck.

 

[lin]

True. I doubt that she will get the DP, anyway.

Being young, cute and middle-class. BUT obviously uncaring of her child, I think she'll get LWOP.

She won't get the DP, IMHO, because the average juror will think she's young enough that she might reform.

She won't reform. But, LWOP's fine with me!

As long as she's post-menopausal, when she gets out.

I can't dispute your logic but I still think the heinous, atrocious and cruel suffering of Caylee may carry the day.

 

[Brini]

I can't dispute your logic but I still think the heinous, atrocious and cruel suffering of Caylee may carry the day.

Might could!

I always believed that the perp should get EXACTLY the degree of mercy that s/he gave the victim.

Mosaic justice, I guess it's called.

I also learned a new term from a whodunit: "brass verdict."

That's when a murderer gets the death penalty as a matter of street justice, not judicial fiat.

 

[Numbers]

I believe that you are not. If she is just sentenced to Life, if they still have parole in FL then she could get out in 20 maybe 25 years or so if she is a good girl, but if you are sentenced to life without parole you are stuck.

Ah, but we were talking about LifeWithOutParole. If she gets LWOP, there's no chance of parole in Florida. Unlike some other states where LWOP means 10-25 years, Florida is serious.