Page 14 of 156 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14 15 16 24 64 114 ... LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 2337
  1. #196
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16,024

    Oh Boy!

    Yes, I agree I can see this might be going is run George over with the bus.

    But I'm not sure sexual abuse cases get off the ground without more information or hard facts besides "he said - she said". What is going to be really really interesting is how far Cindy is prepared to lie to say ICA's life.

    And if there are any reports,doctor's visits, friends ICA confided in - besides Jesse G in her "looking for a home" conversation, and school counsellors, anything any where except "I had a dream" from ICA. If Baez has no backup besides experts saying her behavior indicates blah blah, I think Ashton and LBK will critique Baez right out of the courtroom.

    And wasn't it ICA who wanted the single visit alone with George? My impression was ICA definitely wanted something and thought she could sweet talk George, where she knew it wouldn't work with Cindy.


  2. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:


  3. #197
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,817
    Quote Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
    Yes, I agree I can see this might be going is run George over with the bus.

    But I'm not sure sexual abuse cases get off the ground without more information or hard facts besides "he said - she said". What is going to be really really interesting is how far Cindy is prepared to lie to say ICA's life.

    And if there are any reports,doctor's visits, friends ICA confided in - besides Jesse G in her "looking for a home" conversation, and school counsellors, anything any where except "I had a dream" from ICA. If Baez has no backup besides experts saying her behavior indicates blah blah, I think Ashton and LBK will critique Baez right out of the courtroom.

    And wasn't it ICA who wanted the single visit alone with George? My impression was ICA definitely wanted something and thought she could sweet talk George, where she knew it wouldn't work with Cindy.
    Yep....as I recall it, ICA mentioned in a jail video that the reason she "chose" George as the one to have the "private alone time" with was because he was the one she had been "most distanced from" (words to that effect)....she mentioned this to him in a jail visit AFTER she wrote the letter to Sheriff Beary requesting the meeting...and then in a subsequent visit, George pushed the point saying he had made all the arrangements with Beary and how now would be the perfect time since Baez was off in New York.....remember the whole "you are CEO" speech?

    But then ICA backed off from meeting with George...

    As far as first bolded paragraph above.....wonder if this is where testimony from Lee is going to come in....especially if Anthony family eventually became aware of relationship (IF it happened) and then worked to hide it.......wonder if this is when Lee will finally throw ole Pop under the bus to save his sister?


  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Kentjbkent For This Useful Post:


  5. #198
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    21,162
    Somewhere amongst the DNA information released in the doc dump LA and GA were both ruled out. Plus KC never said anything happened with GA only that she has a feeling it might have but just a feeling....nothing to back it up. She would know and KC has no problem speaking her mind when she wants to so I do not see her not speaking up. If it gets her attention.....she'll use it. What will be interesting is what the psychologist has to say at the trial about KC's personality and why she lies..... jmo


  6. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


  7. #199
    whiteangora's Avatar
    whiteangora is offline I'm on the right track baby. I was "Born This Way"
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    5,751
    Quote Originally Posted by Kentjbkent View Post
    No, I don't think Baez is going to argue that Cindy was the cause of KC's suggested "extreme emotional abuse".....

    I think the entire mitigation process is going to focus on George and KC's allegations of sexual abuse by him.

    Keep in mind, Nick Savage, a sex crime investigator, was called in from the beginning of the case.
    snipped to address one point.

    This always made me shudder and I still wonder why a sex crime investigator was called in.
    Neighborhood Watch is...
    NOT the Vigilante Police
    http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigati...PowerPoint.pdf






  8. The Following User Says Thank You to whiteangora For This Useful Post:


  9. #200
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,088
    quote respectfully snipped for space
    Quote Originally Posted by Spangle View Post
    An example, the guy that Baez defended who was being accused of killing a child, he was found guilty and got LWOP. No death sentence. I wasn't expecting one for ICA either. Now now days. People have really been fighting to get rid of the death sentence. Folks are ok with it, so long as they know the person really has no chance of getting free. THAT seems to be the issue. Hence, LWOP is considered a big deal.
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    BBM: Difference in this case is that there were two people, the mother of the child and the boyfriend. If jury was not totally sure the mother was not involved they may have opted to not chose the DP because they may have had some doubt he was 100% responsible. jmo
    Baez's other murder was not a capital case. Nilton Diaz was charged with Murder 2 so a death sentence was not even on the table. He was convicted of Manslaughter 2 and received 15 years. I've read a little about the case and am not totally convinced he is guilty. Baez messed up big time in this case. He tried to present some evidence regarding the child's head injury during the trial but had failed to previously disclose it to the prosecution under the rules of discovery. The evidence was disallowed.

    I am totally convinced Casey is guilty from reading every page of discovery, but I still think she deserves a good defense. I'm just not sure she's going to get that with Baez as her lead attorney. Has he provided any discovery to the prosecution yet?


  10. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Dear Prudence For This Useful Post:


  11. #201
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    10,575
    Quote Originally Posted by whiteangora View Post
    snipped to address one point.

    This always made me shudder and I still wonder why a sex crime investigator was called in.
    I would think it was since a small child was abducted, and the possibility that she was abducted by a sexual predator. Or even if not, he is probably an expert on child abductions.


  12. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to strawberry For This Useful Post:


  13. #202
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the prowl
    Posts
    26,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
    (respectfully snipped)

    8. She's too pretty. She's her mother's only daughter. She loves her cat. She's patriotic. The death penalty is unconstitutional. She's a female. Her first boyfriend cheated on her. She has to stay alive to earn enough money to pay her fine for the check penalty. Pork rind companies would go broke. She was molested. She still has to pay back Grandma Shirley. She wants to adopt.

    BBM

    No, no, no....let's leave the felines out of this please.

    The rest of it is hilarious and I'm not too sure JB wouldn't use some of those points. MOO
    Rest in Peace
    Joey, Summer, Gianni & Joseph Mateo



  14. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to panthera For This Useful Post:


  15. #203
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Kentjbkent View Post
    Yep....as I recall it, ICA mentioned in a jail video that the reason she "chose" George as the one to have the "private alone time" with was because he was the one she had been "most distanced from" (words to that effect)....she mentioned this to him in a jail visit AFTER she wrote the letter to Sheriff Beary requesting the meeting...and then in a subsequent visit, George pushed the point saying he had made all the arrangements with Beary and how now would be the perfect time since Baez was off in New York.....remember the whole "you are CEO" speech?

    But then ICA backed off from meeting with George...

    As far as first bolded paragraph above.....wonder if this is where testimony from Lee is going to come in....especially if Anthony family eventually became aware of relationship (IF it happened) and then worked to hide it.......wonder if this is when Lee will finally throw ole Pop under the bus to save his sister?
    That reminds me - I am going to have to back over the threads and the stickies, but I am positive Jolyana has said a number of times with the scientific terms there isn't a rats azz in he77 chance George is Caylee's father. She has laid out the DNA patterns a couple of times.

    Darn, now where is that information? Be back soon (I hope).


  16. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:


  17. #204
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Avalon
    Posts
    12,345
    Quote Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
    That reminds me - I am going to have to back over the threads and the stickies, but I am positive Jolyana has said a number of times with the scientific terms there isn't a rats azz in he77 chance George is Caylee's father. She has laid out the DNA patterns a couple of times.

    Darn, now where is that information? Be back soon (I hope).
    Hi y'all .... its in the mythbusters thread....most recent post at the mo: 'George Anthony. You are not the father.'


  18. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Mrs G Norris For This Useful Post:


  19. #205
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrs G Norris View Post
    Hi y'all .... its in the mythbusters thread....most recent post at the mo: 'George Anthony. You are not the father.'
    Thank you Mrs G, I clearly remember that discussion and you putting it there - there is no doubt at all - George is NOT Caylee's father, as much as Baez cares to spin a story.


  20. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:


  21. #206
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,088
    Quote Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
    LOL - I can see Baez trying these but seriously,

    1) We actually don't know if ICA has any juvenile history but I think six felony counts could be considered significant to indicate at this young age, combined with lying to her parents about having income, and anything the SA may have up their sleeve may add to this one.

    2) Seriously? Baez is going to try to convince a judge a nagging controlling mother, who ICA completely ignored, enough to lie about having a job, who was caring for her daughter - had a fight - a fight? - with her mother the night before or the night she killed her daughter? I don't think any jury is going to buy that as extreme emotional distress or mental disturbance - Andrea Yates qualified - yes - but ICA - the girl who went out and rented videos with her boyfriend that night? MMM - no.

    7) 22 in the legal sense is not young - 13, 14, 16 is considered young. At least according to the information I have.

    And no don't print it out unless you really really want to - I think it is 300 pages long and I skipped the directory of 54 pages or something to shorten it!

    It was interesting to consider some of the mitigating factors listed and the juries who said yes, we see this horrific background or whatever, but it's not enough. That surprised me.

    Just want to quickly add that ICA being uncooperative, and not confessing and probably never will - will also not go in her favor at sentencing. No remorse.
    Yes, seriously, Baez and team are going to present to the jury and judge as many of these mitigating factors as they can. In Florida the jury only has to be "reasonably convinced" of the mitigating factors presented during the penalty phase, as opposed to the aggravating factors which the jury has to believe beyond a reasonable doubt. So, during the penalty phase the prosecution has a much higher burden of proof than the defense. Plus, even if the jury finds that the aggravating factors outweigh the mitigating factors, they are not required to return a death penalty according to the instructions given jurors as ruled by the Supreme Court of Florida. As a juror you're not supposed to base your decision on emotions alone, although that's hard to do as human emotion isn't something most of us can just turn off. That's why the instructions are so important, it gives the juror guidance on how much weight to give a factor to make a decision according to the law.

    Then Florida law gets into mitigating statutory factors and non-statutory factors and the different ways they are treated, but this all starts to go over my head since I am not a lawyer. But from my limited understanding, I believe the statutory factors (the listed items 1 - 8 that we have been discussing) should not be given a greater weight than non-statutory factors, which are basically anything else regarding the defendant's character or circumstances of the crime that are not listed as specific statutory mitigating factors.

    1) According to the statute no significant prior criminal history means prior to the murder. I believe the prosecution will show Casey murdered and disposed of Caylee sometime between June 16 - 24, 2008. She committed the felonies she was convicted of in July 2008. Therefore she has no prior criminal history. Lying to her parents is not a crime. Lying to LE is a crime, but again I believe that was done after the murder.
    2) This one regarding emotional or mental duress at the time of murder could go either way in my opinion. I do think the defense will try to say Casey was in some kind of dissociated state or PTSD because of a traumatic event when she committed the murder. It will be up to the jury and judge whether they believe the testimony from experts such as Dr. Steven Gold if the defense goes with this one, and if they do believe it, what kind of weight they'll give it.
    7) Age - This mitigating circumstance does not apply to someone 17 or younger at the time of the murder because they are ineligible for the death penalty in the first place. It applies to defendants who are 18 years old or older therefore eligible for the death penalty. This is a factor that is considered on a case by case basis. Generally the closer to 17 a defendant is the more weight this factor is given. Between the ages of 20 - 25 the court has frequently held that age is no factor unless it can proven the defendant is emotionally, intellectually, and behaviorally immature.
    8) Other Statutory Mitigating Factors - The existence of any other factors in the defendant’s background that would mitigate against sentencing of the death penalty. Among those that IMO may be part of the defense strategy are :
    (1) Mental problems that do not qualify under other statutory mitigating circumstances. This one has been applied in a case where a psychologist referred to the defendant as an “emotional cripple” who was brought up in a negative family setting. It also applies in cases involving posttraumatic stress disorder as a result of extended sexual abuse. Sounds like Dr. Gold's expertise to me.
    (2) Abuse of defendant by parents (physical, mental or sexual) - Defense could go here but in my opinion it would be hard to establish. This may be another factor where Dr. Gold testifies.

    These are just the statutory factors. There's several more non-statutory factors, one of which is the showing of remorse. Yes it can be a mitigating factor if the defendant shows genuine remorse for their actions and not just sorrow for the victim. If the defense tries to go here with Casey, I think the prosecution will easily be able to show lack of remorse. So unless KC confesses remorse won't be a factor.

    Another non-statutory factor is support of family which seems to be the assignment Cindy, George and Lee have absolutely taken to heart.

    (All of above is based on my own opinion after reading about the Florida laws during the penalty phase of capital cases including this reference: document posted by BeanE in the "Mitigating - Aggravating Factors- General Information the penalty phase" thread - http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Eaton/..._Phase_Mat.pdf)

    I really think a jury could go either way in this case in regards to sentencing. It's going to be so fascinating to watch both the prosecution and defense during the trial. Personally, I don't think the defense has any strong mitigating factors to present, but it only takes a few jury members to make a difference. Since the judge makes the ultimate decision I could see how he'd hesitate giving a death sentence if the jury returned a 9 to 3 vote for instance.

    Mitigation has to be the defense's main strategy in a death penalty case.


  22. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dear Prudence For This Useful Post:


  23. #207
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Dear Prudence View Post
    Yes, seriously, Baez and team are going to present to the jury and judge as many of these mitigating factors as they can. In Florida the jury only has to be "reasonably convinced" of the mitigating factors presented during the penalty phase, as opposed to the aggravating factors which the jury has to believe beyond a reasonable doubt. So, during the penalty phase the prosecution has a much higher burden of proof than the defense. Plus, even if the jury finds that the aggravating factors outweigh the mitigating factors, they are not required to return a death penalty according to the instructions given jurors as ruled by the Supreme Court of Florida. As a juror you're not supposed to base your decision on emotions alone, although that's hard to do as human emotion isn't something most of us can just turn off. That's why the instructions are so important, it gives the juror guidance on how much weight to give a factor to make a decision according to the law.

    Then Florida law gets into mitigating statutory factors and non-statutory factors and the different ways they are treated, but this all starts to go over my head since I am not a lawyer. But from my limited understanding, I believe the statutory factors (the listed items 1 - 8 that we have been discussing) should not be given a greater weight than non-statutory factors, which are basically anything else regarding the defendant's character or circumstances of the crime that are not listed as specific statutory mitigating factors.

    1) According to the statute no significant prior criminal history means prior to the murder. I believe the prosecution will show Casey murdered and disposed of Caylee sometime between June 16 - 24, 2008. She committed the felonies she was convicted of in July 2008. Therefore she has no prior criminal history. Lying to her parents is not a crime. Lying to LE is a crime, but again I believe that was done after the murder.
    2) This one regarding emotional or mental duress at the time of murder could go either way in my opinion. I do think the defense will try to say Casey was in some kind of dissociated state or PTSD because of a traumatic event when she committed the murder. It will be up to the jury and judge whether they believe the testimony from experts such as Dr. Steven Gold if the defense goes with this one, and if they do believe it, what kind of weight they'll give it.
    7) Age - This mitigating circumstance does not apply to someone 17 or younger at the time of the murder because they are ineligible for the death penalty in the first place. It applies to defendants who are 18 years old or older therefore eligible for the death penalty. This is a factor that is considered on a case by case basis. Generally the closer to 17 a defendant is the more weight this factor is given. Between the ages of 20 - 25 the court has frequently held that age is no factor unless it can proven the defendant is emotionally, intellectually, and behaviorally immature.
    8) Other Statutory Mitigating Factors - The existence of any other factors in the defendant’s background that would mitigate against sentencing of the death penalty. Among those that IMO may be part of the defense strategy are :
    (1) Mental problems that do not qualify under other statutory mitigating circumstances. This one has been applied in a case where a psychologist referred to the defendant as an “emotional cripple” who was brought up in a negative family setting. It also applies in cases involving posttraumatic stress disorder as a result of extended sexual abuse. Sounds like Dr. Gold's expertise to me.
    (2) Abuse of defendant by parents (physical, mental or sexual) - Defense could go here but in my opinion it would be hard to establish. This may be another factor where Dr. Gold testifies.

    These are just the statutory factors. There's several more non-statutory factors, one of which is the showing of remorse. Yes it can be a mitigating factor if the defendant shows genuine remorse for their actions and not just sorrow for the victim. If the defense tries to go here with Casey, I think the prosecution will easily be able to show lack of remorse. So unless KC confesses remorse won't be a factor.

    Another non-statutory factor is support of family which seems to be the assignment Cindy, George and Lee have absolutely taken to heart.

    (All of above is based on my own opinion after reading about the Florida laws during the penalty phase of capital cases including this reference: document posted by BeanE in the "Mitigating - Aggravating Factors- General Information the penalty phase" thread - http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Eaton/..._Phase_Mat.pdf)

    I really think a jury could go either way in this case in regards to sentencing. It's going to be so fascinating to watch both the prosecution and defense during the trial. Personally, I don't think the defense has any strong mitigating factors to present, but it only takes a few jury members to make a difference. Since the judge makes the ultimate decision I could see how he'd hesitate giving a death sentence if the jury returned a 9 to 3 vote for instance.

    Mitigation has to be the defense's main strategy in a death penalty case.
    You and I are reading the (very large) identical document and I can see we have varying opinions and that is as it should be.

    I'm going to differ with you on your last point however, which is support of the family. Where George, Cindy and Lee have gone sideways on this one, is they are supporting her in her innocence, not in spite of her guilt, and I believe that will weigh against ICA's favor.

    What do you think? Or did you interpret it differently? And honestly, I think any emotional or mental distress or PTSD they can pull up for ICA is pretty rinky-dink compared to the majority of cases brought up against the SA most of the time. Take Maya's background for example and compare it to ICA - there is no comparison!


  24. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:


  25. #208
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,088
    Quote Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
    You and I are reading the (very large) identical document and I can see we have varying opinions and that is as it should be.

    I'm going to differ with you on your last point however, which is support of the family. Where George, Cindy and Lee have gone sideways on this one, is they are supporting her in her innocence, not in spite of her guilt, and I believe that will weigh against ICA's favor.

    What do you think? Or did you interpret it differently? And honestly, I think any emotional or mental distress or PTSD they can pull up for ICA is pretty rinky-dink compared to the majority of cases brought up against the SA most of the time. Take Maya's background for example and compare it to ICA - there is no comparison!
    Oh wow regarding the family's support, I didn't even think of it that way, you may be right, it certainly gives me more to contemplate.

    And honestly I don't think Casey has a chance with the emotional, mental or sexual abuse causing duress working at all, but I think the defense is darn sure going to try. It's the most important role they have and it's really all they have, kwim?

    The stats in this country regarding death penalty for women and especially death penalty for women who kill their children are heavily in Casey's favor. I will actually be really surprised if she gets sentenced to death. I am a death penalty proponent from Texas, and some rulings in Texas in the last few years have made it harder to seek the death penalty against women committing filicide which just doesn't make sense to me. But, if Casey gets sentenced to life in prison that will be okay with me, at least in Florida it is actually for "life."


  26. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dear Prudence For This Useful Post:


  27. #209
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Dear Prudence View Post
    Oh wow regarding the family's support, I didn't even think of it that way, you may be right, it certainly gives me more to contemplate.

    And honestly I don't think Casey has a chance with the emotional, mental or sexual abuse causing duress working at all, but I think the defense is darn sure going to try. It's the most important role they have and it's really all they have, kwim?

    The stats in this country regarding death penalty for women and especially death penalty for women who kill their children are heavily in Casey's favor. I will actually be really surprised if she gets sentenced to death. I am a death penalty proponent from Texas, and some rulings in Texas in the last few years have made it harder to seek the death penalty against women committing filicide which just doesn't make sense to me. But, if Casey gets sentenced to life in prison that will be okay with me, at least in Florida it is actually for "life."
    Yes, it's interesting to think about the support issue isn't it - but I'm assuming it couldn't possibly be a supportive thing for the jury or judge if the family insists the convicted person is still innocent and it has been a miscarriage of justice. I'm trying to picture Cindy - saying to the jury - yes she is guilty but I promise she's a good person and won't do it again -um-no, that won't work - because first I can't imagine Cindy admitting ICA is guilty.

    The other thing I have on my mind is the prior criminal acts - I was sure the SA was pushing to have the cheque fraud charges completed before ICA went on trial for the murder charges. Are you sure it isn't been convicted before the guilty verdict, not committed before the crime she is charged with. I think we're off on that one because there was quite the brouhaha about it. Thoughts?


  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:


  29. #210
    whiteangora's Avatar
    whiteangora is offline I'm on the right track baby. I was "Born This Way"
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    5,751
    Quote Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
    Yes, it's interesting to think about the support issue isn't it - but I'm assuming it couldn't possibly be a supportive thing for the jury or judge if the family insists the convicted person is still innocent and it has been a miscarriage of justice. I'm trying to picture Cindy - saying to the jury - yes she is guilty but I promise she's a good person and won't do it again -um-no, that won't work - because first I can't imagine Cindy admitting ICA is guilty.

    The other thing I have on my mind is the prior criminal acts - I was sure the SA was pushing to have the cheque fraud charges completed before ICA went on trial for the murder charges. Are you sure it isn't been convicted before the guilty verdict, not committed before the crime she is charged with. I think we're off on that one because there was quite the brouhaha about it. Thoughts?
    Here is the thread that explains all about the use of prior bad acts.

    2009.10.12 Defense's Motions In Limine-Preclude Murder Case Evidence, Prior Bad Acts
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...d+murder+trial
    Neighborhood Watch is...
    NOT the Vigilante Police
    http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigati...PowerPoint.pdf






  30. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to whiteangora For This Useful Post:


Page 14 of 156 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14 15 16 24 64 114 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Access to Casey's Car - Defense Strategy?
    By dreamerlin in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 03-24-2011, 02:09 AM
  2. Defense What is their strategy? #1
    By FIND'HER in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 676
    Last Post: 05-13-2009, 10:31 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •