735 users online (78 members and 657 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    156

    Could Casey Change Her decision to testify?

    When Casey decided not to testify, she was in a fairly good position with her mom taking the fall for the chloroform searches.

    Now things have changed. The records from CA's work computer may negate this.

    Can she change her mind and decide to testify anyway?

    I have changed my theory about how all this relates to competency. I now think she never wanted to testify - and the DT probably said "You need to because you are in deep doo-doo." Since she refused they covered themselves with the competency tests.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    265
    She can't testify now as the defense has rested. Too late. That is why the judge specifically asked her (they always do) if she, herself, made that decision.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,806
    It is too late. She was asked 6 different ways yesterday by Judge Perry if she wanted to testify and she said no.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by JenniferTx View Post
    It is too late. She was asked 6 different ways yesterday by Judge Perry if she wanted to testify and she said no.

    Yes, I saw that...but the possible negation of CA searches, to me, would have a major impact on that decision, to me.

    Guess there is no remedy that the courts provide if serious incriminating information comes out in rebuttal, after the defense rests?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Penn's woods
    Posts
    17,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Ambiance View Post
    Yes, I saw that...but the possible negation of CA searches, to me, would have a major impact on that decision, to me.

    Guess there is no remedy that the courts provide if serious incriminating information comes out in rebuttal, after the defense rests?
    It's called a surrebuttal. It's basically a rebuttal to the state's rebuttal.

    It's very rare and I've never seen it done in any of the murder cases I've followed so far.

    So defense can rebutt what the state says if they want to, but not by testimony of KC is my understanding. The defense rested it's case. No new witnesses introduced to court is my understanding?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Penn's woods
    Posts
    17,195

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    15,410


    I was "shocked" and "surprised" that ICA did NOT take the stand ...

    In My Opinion, it was obvious that she wanted to because in her narcissistic mind, it is her "show".

    I would think she surely REGRETS it now ....


    MOO MOO MOO
    JMSSO = Just My Super Secret Opinion

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    112
    well, the defense should have known that CA's testimony on the chloroform searches would have been rebutted. if they had expected the state to just let it slide and not try to rebut that, and casey's decision was made expecting the state NOT to rebut, then they are even more ridiculous than i thought.

    plus, CA's testimony was that she searched for chloroform (which was looked up on march 17 of 08). she did not admit to doing the "how to make chloroform" search (the alleged 84 times - i'm not sure if that confusion there was ever cleared up but i hope they do clear that up!), or any of the other searches performed that were done on march 21 of that year. someone in the anthony home on that computer searched "how to make chloroform," and if it wasn't cindy or george, logic would follow that it was casey and so i don't think CA's testimony was very useful even if they prove it to be wrong. whether CA was lying or not (IMO she was), she didn't admit to searching how to make chloroform or neck breaking (someone SEARCHED it and she said she did not but saw a youtube - well that isn't searching it and someone did so if it wasn't her then we can guess who it was) or how to make household weapons... so even without impeaching CA's testimony the state can still point to that as premeditation. looking up chloroform is one thing. looking up how to make it is another.

    still though it does seem that they appear to want to rebut that.... which is great! and if any of the people involved really thought the state would let that slide, and for that reason alone decided casey wouldn't testify... well, they made their own bed and will lie in it, she can't go back on it now and say "wait i didn't realize you were going to try to rebut false testimony, now i need to testify."
    *******

    casey anthony on 7/16/08.



    pretty much everything i post is my opinion only

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    1,486
    Quote Originally Posted by dog.gone.cute View Post


    I was "shocked" and "surprised" that ICA did NOT take the stand ...

    In My Opinion, it was obvious that she wanted to because in her narcissistic mind, it is her "show".

    I would think she surely REGRETS it now ....


    MOO MOO MOO
    The only thing she regrets is not hiding Caylee's remains in a better place.That's ALL.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    46,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Ambiance View Post
    Yes, I saw that...but the possible negation of CA searches, to me, would have a major impact on that decision, to me.

    Guess there is no remedy that the courts provide if serious incriminating information comes out in rebuttal, after the defense rests?
    That just happened. Cindy's testimony was absolutely proven to be FALSE. Too late for Casey to speak now but she can during the penalty phase I believe.

    Also, over on the sidebar thread, [look at posts from about 2pm] there are discussions about the MYSPACES of River cruz and her sister. Apparently the sister told people that RIVER HAD BRAIN CANCER. So it looks like George may have been telling the truth about that after all. imoo
    “Every day that they don’t find something is good for me.“ Billie Dunn


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,247
    I think Cindy's testimony being impeached was probably already factored in her decision not to testify. LDB said she had informed the DT earlier this week that they were going to get those documents in the rebuttal phase and unless the DT is filled with total doofuses they must have known that the Gentiva documents and the phone records would debunk Cindy's lies. Even I knew that they would and I've only followed the case during this trial, they've been at it for three years. They could see the writing on the wall, that's why JB was so busy trying to fight this testimony getting in.

    IMO, if Cindy's testimony being rebutted had any effect on the decision they already had that information when Casey informed the judge she wouldn't.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    153
    She cannot decide to testify, but I suppose she could try to plead guilty before the jury comes back from deliberation, but please somebody correct me if I am wrong on that.

    Of course, I don't believe she will ever plead guilty because she does not think she did anything wrong.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    426
    Quote Originally Posted by dog.gone.cute View Post


    I was "shocked" and "surprised" that ICA did NOT take the stand ...

    In My Opinion, it was obvious that she wanted to because in her narcissistic mind, it is her "show".

    I would think she surely REGRETS it now ....


    MOO MOO MOO

    I'm willing to bet a large sum that it's one of her appeals.


    “Re-examine all that you have been told...dismiss that which insults your soul.” ~ Walt Whitman


  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,044
    No. Besides, how could she ever explain the phony babysitter story? That's the elephant in the room. The jury has watched those tapes and every bit of JB's defense team finagling & stalling with a pair of 3's, won't trump that Royal Flush.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    156
    thanks for the link..I have searched on this subject -- if the defendant can change their mind on testifying in some subsequent phase and couldn't find anything. Didn't see an answer in your link either.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Will Casey Testify?
    By Jomo in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 972
    Last Post: 06-30-2011, 02:30 PM
  2. Why Did Judge Perry Change His Decision about the Myspace posting?
    By whiteangora in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 05-29-2011, 03:26 PM
  3. Who would testify on Casey's behalf?
    By Wagara in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 05-18-2011, 06:45 PM
  4. Judges decision on if Casey can search will not be made today(Monday).
    By WillenFan21 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 10-13-2008, 03:41 PM
  5. George Anthony will testify against Casey next week before the grand jury
    By Truth Seeker in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 251
    Last Post: 10-13-2008, 12:58 AM