Mitigating Factor: Casey's Parents

I have become increasingly worried that Cindy and George will end up being the main mitigating factor the defense goes with. What is scary to me is the thought that Casey's family may be the most successful of the mitigators with a jury. A jury could give her somewhat of a break considering the disorders that abound within this family. I don't think she will be let off the hook because of this, but it could work with the right jury in sentencing.

Just a thought to throw out there...

I totally agree with you. I think this is one of the reasons that JB opposed the gag order. By allowing the family to go on TV and spout their claims, it creates an opportunity to demonstrate the difference between their actions and their "soundbites". Additionally....some of their bizarre behavior could serve as proof of the dynamics in the family. From day one...I have stated that JB is either a complete buffoon, or a genius. I think we are beginning to see that a number of things could POSSIBLY have been planned from the get go. Including.........some of the behavior, public statements, and I will go as far as to say.......changes in counsel. The family, IMO, is the biggest piece of this plan.

I'll put it to you this way.
Lee and Jackie Peterson.

I don't think they made a lick of difference.

JBean said:

I'll put it to you this way.
Lee and Jackie Peterson.

I don't think they made a lick of difference.

Click to expand...

Yes, Lee and Jackie were good, but Cindy and George are a defense attorneys dream. Add in the pretty, young female factor and I'm just saying...there might be compromises in the sentencing phase of this trial. I hate to play the devils advocate here, but if its for the good of the team, I must stay the course.

Searchfortruth said:

Yes, Lee and Jackie were good, but Cindy and George are a defense attorneys dream. Add in the pretty, young female factor and I'm just saying...there might be compromises in the sentencing phase of this trial. I hate to play the devils advocate here, but if its for the good of the team, I must stay the course.

Click to expand...

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=464998&postcount=21"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

How many times can I thank you for this post?

I LOVE S-on-the-side's comment: "From day one...I have stated that JB is either a complete buffoon, or a genius." Brilliant! The A's have created so much drama and have made themselves look completely horrible.

How do we perceive the A's, aside from grieving grandparents? (May I be blunt?)
Both: liars, in denial, wafflers, inablers.
GA: weak, indecisive, hen-pecked/whipped, lacking common sense, shadey.
CA: overbearing, manipulative, insecure, cruel, deceptive

Doesn't paint a pretty picture, does it? The more they go on saying that Caylee isn't dead, the worse it makes them look. The more they claim KC is innocent, the worse it makes them look.

What can I say? If I was on the defense team, I'd be ALL OVER THAT. I would say that "poor KC" just never even had a chance, she was psychologically scarred from being being raised by this couple. "Have mercy on her ladies & gentlemen of the jury!! She's a VICTIM!!"

MOO!!

Oh, and PS, KC would throw them both under the bus in a friggin' heartbeat!

I have always thought that CA and GA's behavior throughout this entire ordeal points to the guilt of KC.

mmm yes and no. I could see it, on one hand. But on the other, I would venture a guess that a great many criminals have a messed up and dysfunctional family. They are still responsible for their actions and as a juror I would be infuriated if I were told that Casey is a victim! :banghead:

Considering my own long life, so too would I be infuriated. KC had advantages that many, if not most kids, in this country would give anything to possess. While to outsiders, CA appears overbearing, she was also a mother who shouldered practically all the childcare and financial burdens of her daughter. KC was a spoiled brat who rebelled when her mother finally demanded she grow up and face her responsibilities for Caylee. Is the family dysfunctional? What family is not, to some degree, especially when viewed in a catastrophic circumstance? For the most part, I think the Anthonys were a pretty average family, with typical problems revolving relationships and finances. Until, of course, their daughter killed her baby. I believe that in their minds and in their hearts, they know that. They're living their dark night of the soul and trying desperately to believe an alternative exists to their child being a monster. They failed to recognize her demons and poor Caylee paid the ultimate price. So they deny, deny deny...their guilt must be overwhelming.

PaulaF513 said:

Considering my own long life, so too would I be infuriated. KC had advantages that many, if not most kids, in this country would give anything to possess. While to outsiders, CA appears overbearing, she was also a mother who shouldered practically all the childcare and financial burdens of her daughter. KC was a spoiled brat who rebelled when her mother finally demanded she grow up and face her responsibilities for Caylee. Is the family dysfunctional? What family is not, to some degree, especially when viewed in a catastrophic circumstance? For the most part, I think the Anthonys were a pretty average family, with typical problems revolving relationships and finances. Until, of course, their daughter killed her baby. I believe that in their minds and in their hearts, they know that. They're living their dark night of the soul and trying desperately to believe an alternative exists to their child being a monster. They failed to recognize her demons and poor Caylee paid the ultimate price. So they deny, deny deny...their guilt must be overwhelming.

Click to expand...

All valid points, and well thought out. However, if you are sitting on the defense team, and a guilty verdict was inevitable, wouldn't you pull all the punches you could?

ITA, what family isn't dysfunctial? I would guess all of them, in varying degrees. My own little family unit just drove around 2000 miles so my dad could drive us all batty for the holidays. I wanted to run screaming out the door about once every couple of hours, but it's family.

It's lovely that you can sympathise with the A's, and I really do mean that. In my more humane moments, I can sympathise with them too. However, in the courtroom, things could get ugly. There will be blows beneath the belt, even at their expense. JMO

I don't believe that Cindy and George's behavior will provide any chance of Casey getting out of a guilty verdict, but during the sentencing phase, their behavior, could be used to lessen her punishment. I think back on the many interviews done by Cindy and George, and can not forget how infuriated I became with these people. It's sad to say, but there were times I debated over who I was more mad at, them or Casey. Casey will be held responsible for this crime, I feel sure...but if a jury reacts to Cindy and George like many of us have, in the sentencing phase, I worry that may be Casey's ticket out of the Death Penalty.

I've been waiting for this forever it seems. I felt the start of it was Casey's letter/statement to the public regarding her unhappiness over Caylee's cremation.

I felt that was the start. Didn't seem to go anywhere. But I can very well see the "Cindy drove her to this" defense and have been patiently waiting for it.

I actually think it might work!

Her parents are going to seal her fate imo, the raw words of her parents early on while speaking to LE. No one is going to feel sorry for Casey that she was coddled and over indulged.

Every criminal has parents they throw under the bus at sentence phase. It will fail.[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEO_GQElPvA[/ame]

But in order for the parent's to play a role in the "Cindy drove me to this", Casey has to admit what this is..... Which means she would have to confess. Or I guess she could say, "Cindy drove me to not tell for 31 days that my daughter was missing" as a way to explain her behavior. I just don't see how they can bring in any mitigating factors without explaining what Casey did to Caylee. If she is innocent and didn't do anything wrong except not report for 31 days then what's the point of bringing in excuses?

:waitasec:

I can see the defense throwing anyone and everyone including KC's parents and brother under the bus during the trial and I can almost see it being confusing. However I think the prosecutors will lay out a case in a manner that the jury will see through any smoke and mirrors.
I also can't help but wonder if CA wont blow up on the stand as she has a hard time holding her tongue. Plus the fact that there are lies and contradicting words to deal with during trial.
I don't know but I tend to think that in todays world there was no need to murder Caylee when there were so many other avenues that KC could have taken. So IMO whether she receives the DP or Life it dosen't matter to me as long as she never walks beyond the gates of a prison and I hope the jury will feel the same way.

Most people who meet and spend any amount of time with CA have liked her to the extent that they say she is hospitable and her emotions seem real. Most of the people involved with this case had little contact at all with GA or found him to be the more introverted of the two.
While the A's drive me nuts and I see them as insipid, they may be able to draw jurors in to the notion that they are just out of their minds with confusion and grief. Even when CA went bonkers on JM, she wold snap back into moments of soft spokeness, and would always remind him of her situation.
CA/GA may not make good mitigating factors-Especially given the fact that they provided all of these material things to KC and Caylee, as well as life's necessities. AD and MichelleM both said there may have been an issue at Caylee's 2nd birthday party, but nothing major-And while AD may have thought it was annoying that CA called KC everytime they were out, she also noted that CA probably wanted KC back home with Caylee-normal.
The conversation that TraceyM had with CA about overbearing moms could work for CA-She was embarrassed at the idea that she could be like that, worried to think that KC might have been reacting to her overbearing ways-Maybe CA has a concience and could not have passed on/ingrained sociopathy in KC.
Even though the A's behavior is flamboyant (to be nice), I don's think it is as malignant on the face as Jackie Peterson's behavior-She gave Scott money to flee, flat out aiding and abetting. Unless we find out that the A's helped her cover for sure, I am with JBean in that they will be as much or less of a factor than even the Petersons were.
JMO

comomx3 said:

But in order for the parent's to play a role in the "Cindy drove me to this", Casey has to admit what this is..... Which means she would have to confess. Or I guess she could say, "Cindy drove me to not tell for 31 days that my daughter was missing" as a way to explain her behavior. I just don't see how they can bring in any mitigating factors without explaining what Casey did to Caylee. If she is innocent and didn't do anything wrong except not report for 31 days then what's the point of bringing in excuses?

:waitasec:

Click to expand...

"NO" to the "Angel of Death Row"
I have been stewing about Andrea Lyon in her dismal attempt to get the Death Penalty removed in the Casey Anthony Case. I am sure we haven’t heard the last from her but I can’t see where she can or will be successful.

In the State of Florida v Michael King the mitigating factor of no significant history of criminal activity did not prevent King from getting the Death Penalty. In a nutshell, the aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating factors and he was sentenced to death for the murder of Denise Amber Lee.

http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2009/...death-penalty/

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article...-penalty&tc=ar

In North Carolina State v Brown: “Accordingly, the 1986 Virginia conviction does not fall under the exclusionary provisions of .... (1) defendant has no significant history of prior criminal history, ... to any case in which this Court has found the death penalty disproportionate…”

He murdered an infant for God’s sake. What could be worse? Nothing IMO and he got the Death Penalty.

http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/publi...3/145-02-1.htm

Although the circumstances in these cases are different than Florida v Casey Anthony, I believe that the aggravating factors, which I posted above, (my comment #34) will far outweigh the mitigating factors. Should Casey Anthony be found guilty of Murder 1, and I believe she will, I think that she will be put to death. I think that the factor of no significant history of criminal activity (even conviction of check fraud and lying to Law enforcement) will make one iota of difference or any of the other mitigating factors for that matter. I truly believe that Andrea Lyon has run out of arrows in her quiver to get the DP off in this case. IMO, there are too many of the aggravating factors that will convict Casey Anthony and be her final demise of death by lethal injection.

=============================

I posted this on a different thread. I think it has relevance here. My comment 34 is on this link.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93183&page=2

Doc B said:

"NO" to the "Angel of Death Row"
I have been stewing about Andrea Lyon in her dismal attempt to get the Death Penalty removed in the Casey Anthony Case. I am sure we haven’t heard the last from her but I can’t see where she can or will be successful.

In the State of Florida v Michael King the mitigating factor of no significant history of criminal activity did not prevent King from getting the Death Penalty. In a nutshell, the aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating factors and he was sentenced to death for the murder of Denise Amber Lee.

http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2009/...death-penalty/

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article...-penalty&tc=ar

In North Carolina State v Brown: “Accordingly, the 1986 Virginia conviction does not fall under the exclusionary provisions of .... (1) defendant has no significant history of prior criminal history, ... to any case in which this Court has found the death penalty disproportionate…”

He murdered an infant for God’s sake. What could be worse? Nothing IMO and he got the Death Penalty.

http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/publi...3/145-02-1.htm

Although the circumstances in these cases are different than Florida v Casey Anthony, I believe that the aggravating factors, which I posted above, (my comment #34) will far outweigh the mitigating factors. Should Casey Anthony be found guilty of Murder 1, and I believe she will, I think that she will be put to death. I think that the factor of no significant history of criminal activity (even conviction of check fraud and lying to Law enforcement) will make one iota of difference or any of the other mitigating factors for that matter. I truly believe that Andrea Lyon has run out of arrows in her quiver to get the DP off in this case. IMO, there are too many of the aggravating factors that will convict Casey Anthony and be her final demise of death by lethal injection.

=============================

I posted this on a different thread. I think it has relevance here. My comment 34 is on this link.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93183&page=2

Click to expand...

Should Casey be sentenced to death, I think the odds favor a resentencing to LWOP. There have only been two women ever put to death in Florida, all of the remaining ones who were sentenced to death had their sentences reduced to life.

http://www.dc.state.fl.us/oth/deathrow/women.html

Trying to find a definition of "mitigating factors" and ran upon this.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/2007 Penalty Phase Materials2.pdf

Pgs 83-94/160 detail this definition: "Factors in fairness or in totality of the defendants life or character may be considered as extenuating or reducing degree of moral culpability for crimes committed". (Consalvo vs. State FL '96)

Mitigating circumstances include statutory and non-statutory which neither carry greater weight but a Judge is required to weigh both deservedly. There doesn't have to be a "nexus" between the crime itself and these factors. But the non-stat. factors have to be mitigating and to this specific case and without a "nexus" can be used to reduce the weight of the mitigating factors.

Mitigating factors related to this case could include:
emotional, intellectual, or behavioral immaturity
family background problems
employment issues
alcoholism
"emotionally crippled" defendant due to being brought up in a negative family setting and PTSD secondary to (sexual abuse in one case)
domination by another person
parental abuse of the defendant
quality of the defendant being a caring parent
religious devotion

I suppose they could show control or domination by another person (CA), but overall, I think any plan to use G and C as mitigating factors is not going to go very far. Despite it all, despite her gum chewing and yammering and obvious lack of superior intellect, there really isn't a paper trail or concrete proof that I know of that shows them to be emotionally or physically abusive to Casey (other than the throtteling, which in my mind, I can't say I wouldn't be tempted to do the same if my kid stole from my elder parents). But all we really have about abuse is a lot of he said / she said speculation (of course, it might very well be true that C is a push-around, helicopter mom) but who's gonna come forward and say she was a terrible influence on Casey to the point she'd kill her own child? All the state would have to do to knock that out of the water is hold up a picture of Caylee's room, show the website that she wrote about her being missing, and point to the memorial video that she put together (which, lets not forget, she was generous enough to share with the public, the very same public that's been beating her like a dog since the very beginning of all this. If I were her, I'd have told everyone to go blow, and I'd have had a closed door private ceremony). I don't think it's gonna fly. She may not be a brilliant shining star of a mother, she may have her faults (and although we are quite sure her faults were damaging to Casey) there's simply no real proof of the kind of abuse or neglect that would drive someone to murder their own child. The fact that to this day, she's still sitting behind her daughter in court every time she's brought in, shows something. There are a lot worse parents out there than G and C. JMO.