2010.06.21 Cheney Mason Press Conference

BondJamesBond said:

IMHO, Agave, they just hafta play the hand they've been dealt. Which is an extremely carpy one. And they really need a bit of a 'perfect storm' to happen if they have a chance. And that involves getting a juror seated that is predisposed to conspiracies. Some people just cannot resist a conspiracy theory. For me it is kinduva close cousin to chronic victimhood - everyone is a victim and no one is responsible for anything. IF the defense can get a person like this seated...AND IF they can come up with just enough of a tale to tell...they have a chance, IMHO. It is an extremely, incredibly small chance IMHO, but, again...they hafta play the hand they've been dealt.

About the only thing a guilty defendant has going for them is that they don't have to prove they didn't do it. AFAIK, they just have to convince one juror that someone else *might* have done it...do that & its mission accomplished.

Click to expand...

EXACTLY and very well explained.


Agave, what they are hoping for is to seat jurors who think the exact opposite of you. You think logically, level-headed and common sense prevails. Unfortuantely, there are those jurors who can be confused by the smoke & mirrors the defense will use. It happens. I've sat on a jury where it took 4 days to get a verdict because deliberations took that long to get a few confused jurors convinced that what they were confused about just simply didn't add up. Bond is correct in saying it is the defense's best shot at not getting a conviction. Voir dire is going to be a very important aspect of this case, imo.

ynotdivein said:

Hornsby indicated that if KC filed actual charges against them they would be investigated. So her accusation in the letters to her new ex BFF will not result in charges in and of themselves, unless she takes another step and files a report.



Well, if things don't go any further than the jailhouse notes I guess they have seen as much public humiliation as they are going to. But I do hear a bus engine revving up out there and I still bet it's aimed at Lee...

Click to expand...

Just wondering how far allegations of sexual abuse would take her in the court room without proof and without having ever filed charges. If they use this, I assume that it will either be to justify what she did and why she did it during trial or during the penalty phase to lighten her sentence. If they use it, then it won't just be jailhouse letters but stated as fact during a trial. That is going to make it more real in the mind of the public and will be all over the news and the papers.

100%Agave said:

Just wondering how far allegations of sexual abuse would take her in the court room without proof and without having ever filed charges.

Click to expand...

I'd like to think it would take her about as far as every other one of her stories has.

100%Agave said:

If they use this, I assume that it will either be to justify what she did and why she did it during trial or during the penalty phase to lighten her sentence. If they use it, then it won't just be jailhouse letters but stated as fact during a trial. That is going to make it more real in the mind of the public and will be all over the news and the papers.

Click to expand...

I agree, and in relation to this will quote B2Y's statement: Agave, what they are hoping for is to seat jurors who think the exact opposite of you. You think logically, level-headed and common sense prevails. Unfortuantely, there are those jurors who can be confused by the smoke & mirrors the defense will use. It happens.

I don't think it will happen, but the defense is likely hoping to seat a jury that will read CM and AL sympathetically and who maybe will be less aware of their smoke & mirrors strategies than the general population.

100%Agave said:

Just wondering how far allegations of sexual abuse would take her in the court room without proof and without having ever filed charges. If they use this, I assume that it will either be to justify what she did and why she did it during trial or during the penalty phase to lighten her sentence. If they use it, then it won't just be jailhouse letters but stated as fact during a trial. That is going to make it more real in the mind of the public and will be all over the news and the papers.

Click to expand...

...and if there is a juror that was perhaps a victim of sexual abuse or a friend of/ family member of a victim...the proposed/claimed situation might resonate enough w/ that juror to garner support. This stuff surpasses logic...appeals to any aspect possible to achieve their objective. And that is playing by the rules.

BondJamesBond said:

...and if there is a juror that was perhaps a victim of sexual abuse or a friend of/ family member of a victim...the proposed/claimed situation might resonate enough w/ that juror to garner support. This stuff surpasses logic...appeals to any aspect possible to achieve their objective. And that is playing by the rules.

Click to expand...

How do you think that these allegations would be presented in court? Wouldn't KC need to admit guilt to provide this as a reason for what happened?

Trying to picture myself as the defense and trying to figure out a way to bring this into the mix. I could ask GA and LA but they are going to deny it. I could bring it up during opening and closing arguments maybe or maybe by putting a psychiatrist on the stand. But if my stand is that my client didn't do it. Not that it was an accident but that she just didn't do it and is a victim of some mystery kidnapper, how do I bring this up and not make it sound like I am saying she didn't do it but if she did this is why.

I would guess that I would have to leave that until the penalty phase to keep from having to admit that my client might have done it.

If they are already planning what they will use as mitigating circumstances (or whatever it is called) during the penalty phase, maybe they do know that she did it.

If she is convicted, then does the same jury or another jury sit for the penalty phase? This phase comes after the trial itself right? A couple of weeks or something? So if she is convicted the jurors would only have 2 choices to pick from LWOP or death right? Unless the attorneys work out a lessor penalty?

Heck, I don't know....I have only been on a jury once in my whole life and know almost nothing about courtroom procedure but I can't see any other way to bring that up.

What they may be hoping for is to get the jury to imagine someone else MAY HAVE put the body there, if that is true and the jury allows for the idea that the child died on Casey's watch, she turned to someone in an utter panic and they helped her put Caylee somewhere , then that person may have tried to make it look like SODDI by putting the duct tape on.

No duct tape, no death penalty. That is the only thing he can possibly be hoping for, not that she will be found not guilty of the lesser charges than murder one. He has made comments to that effect, that he is not saying as a matter of law, the disposal of the remains does not mean she didn't have something to do with the killing of the child.

"There is substantial evidence that we've found ... that the body or remains of Caylee Anthony was placed there after Casey Anthony was locked up," said Todd Macaluso, an attorney for Anthony. "It proves that somebody else placed the remains in the area." Note he doesn't say if only we had the TES comprehensive copies, including their contact information, to enable us to search their criminal history among other things, we may find evidence. He said they already have found it!!! Since the deadline to produce that was February 1st and they have provided nothing of the kind, I infer that was a lie. If the proof they thought they had was J. Jordan that has been removed, if the proof they thought they had was L. Buchanan, that too has fell like a lead balloon. She imo has been and will be thoroughly discredited, or putting it politely to have a poor recollection of the facts.

Regardless of Casey saying "Tony had nothing to do with Caylee" on her first jailhouse call home, the defense sure has fought for Tony's cell phone records. I remember a hearing when everyone's lawyer was there, Jesse's Amy's, Kronk's and others.Apparently Tony was not served, and his attorney appeared on another date before the judge. In one of those two we learned the defense wants to see where Tony was while Casey was jailed. I have to find it again to get the direct quote but it was clear when they mentioned they wanted to review the cell pings to see if Tony had been anywhere in the relative area of Suburban what they were implying. I remember thinking, I know he is a college student and his parents are going to have to foot the bill, but thank God they got the kid a lawyer!!!!

found it, minute 4:56 Jose: " Caylee Anthony's remains were not found until December. Regarding the cell phone pings it would be very curious to know if Mr. Lazaro actually was at that location post the September date"

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KUNZB-nCH4[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xKOQ56b4FQ[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R__Z7oO9RFI[/ame]

bumping

Video of CM Press Conference 6/21/10