2011.04.12 Casey Anthony trial: Focus group 'acquits' Anthony on CBS show

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
All I can say is that if Jose isn't disbarred after this, I will simply not understand it. And, I really want to know what HHJP thinks about this.
 
Sadly, IMO, a few folks boycotting a network or media agency won't effect a change of the magnitude that is in order to make a difference.

I believe that real and lasting changes in checkbook journalism, will only come after a continual effort to expose the practice. Do I propose vigilante efforts to "out" the "checkbook practices"? No...they won't work, and will interfere with the businesses as a whole. Messy territory there.

IMO, the very first place to start.....the laws regulating photo licensing fees. We see photos taken by a point and shoot camera being purchased by the media for tens of thousands of dollars, yet professional photographers sell photos for much less.

One of the easiest ways for media to "cover their tracks" is to "buy the rights to photos". Where real impact can begin, is determining fair use value of those photos as compared to photos available for purchase via agencies and stock sites.

Start with the photos and slowly the change will happen.

Additionally, if companies are required to disclose line items more specifically (read as name of recipient and $$ amount paid), it will be harder to hide. Stockholders have the power there.....but remember.....they want their stock value to remain high...why would they complain?
 
eileenhawkeye said:
Do photo agencies own any pictures of Caylee or were they all sold directly to the media outlets by the Anthonys? I know in JonBenet's case, all of her pageant pictures and videos are owned by photo agencies so whenever the media wants to use a picture/video of her, they have to pay a licensing fee to the photo agency. There is no media outlet that actually owns JonBenet's pageant videos/pictures; they have to pay the fee every time they show a picture or video. However, it seems that in Caylee's case, her pictures were just sold to the media outlets directly from the Anthonys, for them to use on any of their shows. I guess the Anthonys figured they could get a better deal licensing out Caylee's photos themselves, instead of selling them to a photo agency, or perhaps they didn't think of that option.

Also, does anyone know how many pictures and videos that 200k covered?
Click to expand...

Hope this was not already answered, but I just read this article earlier and caught this:
"
The new hour draws on old interviews with George and Cindy Anthony, Casey's parents. There are no new Caylee photos in the hour, and CBS News paid no new licensing fees for material, Zirinsky said.
In 2009, CBS News paid $20,000 to George and Cindy to license photos and video to provide visuals for the story, a standard industry practice. The material appeared on "48 Hours Mystery" and "The Early Show," and it belongs to CBS in perpetuity."
*********
in perpetuity adj. forever, as in one's right to keep the profits from the land in perpetuity. From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/In+Perpetuity

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...os-casey-anthony-cbs-20110412,0,5029059.story
 
A_News_Junkie said:
Hope this was not already answered, but I just read this article earlier and caught this:
"
The new hour draws on old interviews with George and Cindy Anthony, Casey's parents. There are no new Caylee photos in the hour, and CBS News paid no new licensing fees for material, Zirinsky said.
In 2009, CBS News paid $20,000 to George and Cindy to license photos and video to provide visuals for the story, a standard industry practice. The material appeared on "48 Hours Mystery" and "The Early Show," and it belongs to CBS in perpetuity."
*********
in perpetuity adj. forever, as in one's right to keep the profits from the land in perpetuity. From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/In+Perpetuity

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...os-casey-anthony-cbs-20110412,0,5029059.story
Click to expand...

Lol! I bet CA will be trying to get more money out of them at some point! I certainly wouldn't put it past her. moo
 
ZsaZsa said:
Here is Richard Gabriel, his website says he is currently working with Casey Anthony's Attorneys.

http://www.decisionanalysisinc.com/...abriel&catid=39:consultant-profiles&Itemid=55
Click to expand...

From the above website:
"Mr. Gabriel is the President of the American Society of Trial Consultants Foundation, which is currently funding a national study with the ABA on jury comprehension, juror satisfaction, and participation in trials."

By the sound of the previews, they got their answer to the COMPREHENSION question! That being, if you pick the right jury, they will not COMPREHEND the evidence. JMHO, etc.....
 
I think this is a great thing. The Prosecution Team is going to eat popcorn and take notes on the BEST arguments that the DT can come up with. Meanwhile, that mock jury will NOT have heard the actual evidence which will be laid out during the trial. So the DT is going to show their hand in an act of desperation, imo.

I can tell you right now what the DT argument is going to be; the very same thing they tried to sell in the earlier 48 hours:

--There is no direct evidence tying Casey to the body, no DNA or fingerprints. And there is a stranger's DNA left on the tape.

--There are no witnesses or confessions and no cause of death determined.

--Other people had access to the car trunk and to the home and anyone else could have tried to frame her.

When an uninformed jury is given the 'facts' in this way then they would be hesitant voting for the Death Penalty. That makes sense to me too. HOWEVER, the mock jury was only privy to a 'mock' trial. They have not had the benefit of hearing Yuri, and the Prosecution team yet.
 
You know...as unethical as I find this "television airing" of a mock trial PRIOR to the real trial beginning.....I see it as NOTHING more than a very sad attempt by the DT to get their "story" out while they can.

What really convinced me is the "off the wall comments" by the DT regarding bananas, Febreze, dryer sheets, those killer coconuts, and deadly cheese combined with the attempts to discredit the forensic experts retained by the SAO, and now the focus of the mock trial....forensics.

KC locked herself and her team into a SODDI argument by using her Nanny story. She can't go back and shwallow (sp intended) her words.

I suspect that this mock case is a red herring.....intended to garner attention and drama right before trial. I suspect that the DT wishes to have the SAO focus on the forensics as a priority...when IMO...they intend to push the SODDI defense to the limit of reason.

Really, anything the the DT has made issue of.....should be ignored.
 
Dear Mock Jurors:
If you are not blurred out and otherwise non-distinguishable, and REALLY are just random folks (not actors or aspiring actors) and............ESPECIALLY those of you whom said you would acquit ICA --------> I suggest a radical hair color makeover, new style of dress and voice lessons if you are not moving from Orlando before Sunday. I fear once you really learn of the facts in this case, the only mock - will be the mockery played on you.
Sorry, JMHO
A_News_Junkie
 
I'm looking on the bright side and thinking of how this meaningless, contrived 'verdict' spares us from an outpouring of aggrieved whinging and posturing and filed motions from the defendant and her DT, and in exchange all we have to do is suffer a few temporary smug facial expressions glowing in the dishonest light of a false dawn.

In fact, I'm almost enjoying my vision of ICA strutting around her cell singing, 'Costa Rica, here I come,' because I want her to feel really shocked and disappointed and be grounded in hard cold reality when the true verdict comes in.
 
sleutherontheside said:
I have to add that it looks like a very fine line that the DT is walking.

According to the JAC.....

A due process provider is prohibited from paying, offering or giving anything of value to counsel including a gift, loan, reward, promise of future employment, favor, or service, as consideration or other remuneration for providing services in court-appointed or indigent for costs cases other than the services rendered on behalf of the indigent client.

Counsel and due process providers waive compensation for due process services in any form whatsoever where either indigent for costs counsel or the process provider has engaged in these aforementioned prohibited practices.

http://www.justiceadmin.org/ind_for_cost/IFC%20P&P.pdf


Now...my question is.......does a jury consultant qualify as a "due process" provider?

Regardless, JB should have covered his arse by having Richard Gabriel file a "Notice of Appearance".....but even so......did he disclose confidential priviledged info to others?
Click to expand...

That would be a good question for the lawyer thread. Very interesting post.
 
sleutherontheside said:
You know...as unethical as I find this "television airing" of a mock trial PRIOR to the real trial beginning.....I see it as NOTHING more than a very sad attempt by the DT to get their "story" out while they can.

What really convinced me is the "off the wall comments" by the DT regarding bananas, Febreze, dryer sheets, those killer coconuts, and deadly cheese combined with the attempts to discredit the forensic experts retained by the SAO, and now the focus of the mock trial....forensics.

KC locked herself and her team into a SODDI argument by using her Nanny story. She can't go back and shwallow (sp intended) her words.

I suspect that this mock case is a red herring.....intended to garner attention and drama right before trial. I suspect that the DT wishes to have the SAO focus on the forensics as a priority...when IMO...they intend to push the SODDI defense to the limit of reason.

Really, anything the the DT has made issue of.....should be ignored.
Click to expand...

I guess I haven't seen that many 48 Hours before, because I don't ever remember seeing a mock trial focus group BEFORE the trial. Usually the episodes have involved interviews, timelines and outcomes after the trial, or when issues are brought forth involving an appeal. This seems to be a real departure from their normal fare.

Who knows, if any potential jurors do view this episode it may backfire on the defense if they are chosen because of the quality of the evidence that will be presented at trial--are they willing to take that risk? At the very least it appears to be interfering with the judicial process.
 
I'm confused. Sitting here wondering if HHJP didn't have more up his judicial sleeve Friday other than his arm. He makes the statement about coming back to OC to possibly select a jury and then lo and behold, 48 Hours announces the 'mock' Orlando jury segment the following Monday.

If he goes to the trouble of going out of town to select a jury, why bother to come back to the same area that he's trying to avoid knowing that Baez has petitioned for a change of venue? IMHO, That's asking for a reversal on appeal.
 
Wagara said:
SNIPPED:

In 2009, CBS News paid $20,000 to George and Cindy to license photos and video to provide visuals for the story, a standard industry practice. The material appeared on "48 Hours Mystery" and "The Early Show," and it belongs to CBS in perpetuity.

In 2008, ABC News paid $200,000 to Casey Anthony to license video and photos of the toddler. Later that year, Casey Anthony was charged with the child's murder. The ABC deal ignited a furor over ethics, and the high amount stunned the TV industry.
If never before, there it is in black and white.
Click to expand...


bumping this to page 3 :cool:
 
A_News_Junkie said:
Hope this was not already answered, but I just read this article earlier and caught this:
"
The new hour draws on old interviews with George and Cindy Anthony, Casey's parents. There are no new Caylee photos in the hour, and CBS News paid no new licensing fees for material, Zirinsky said.
In 2009, CBS News paid $20,000 to George and Cindy to license photos and video to provide visuals for the story, a standard industry practice. The material appeared on "48 Hours Mystery" and "The Early Show," and it belongs to CBS in perpetuity."
*********
in perpetuity adj. forever, as in one's right to keep the profits from the land in perpetuity. From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/In+Perpetuity

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...os-casey-anthony-cbs-20110412,0,5029059.story
Click to expand...

Thanks. So ABC owns 200k worth of pictures and CBS has 20k worth of pictures, but what about the other channels? Did the Anthonys sell photos to them too (and it just hasn't been revealed in the press) or do they get their Caylee pictures from a photo agency? Also, the news networks got a pretty good deal because if they had to license Caylee pictures every time they used them on their channel or on their website from a photo agency, it would probably go way over $20k and $200k.
 
kaRN said:
We are the consumers and we have the power. Just saying.
Take a walk. Play with your dog. Give your kids a bath. Type a blog post here but do not tune in.
Boycotting CBS until Caylee sees justice and then some. Care to join me?
Click to expand...

See this is where I become part of the problem. As mad as I am about this "mock" jury and CBS, part of me wants to watch it to see what cards the defense plans to play on trial day. We have seen hints, but I want to know how he plans to lay out the evidence. This could be a good thing for the state.

Plus, so what? Let KC think she is going to be aquitted. Can't wait to see her crockadile tears when the REAL jury after hearing the REAL evidence says..."GUILTY" and she is arrested on a f - ng whim again. :seeya:
 
katydid23 said:
I think this is a great thing. The Prosecution Team is going to eat popcorn and take notes on the BEST arguments that the DT can come up with. Meanwhile, that mock jury will NOT have heard the actual evidence which will be laid out during the trial. So the DT is going to show their hand in an act of desperation, imo.

I can tell you right now what the DT argument is going to be; the very same thing they tried to sell in the earlier 48 hours:

--There is no direct evidence tying Casey to the body, no DNA or fingerprints. And there is a stranger's DNA left on the tape.

--There are no witnesses or confessions and no cause of death determined.

--Other people had access to the car trunk and to the home and anyone else could have tried to frame her.

When an uninformed jury is given the 'facts' in this way then they would be hesitant voting for the Death Penalty. That makes sense to me too. HOWEVER, the mock jury was only privy to a 'mock' trial. They have not had the benefit of hearing Yuri, and the Prosecution team yet.
Click to expand...

:rocker:

I agree. This makes total sense ... the DT cannot try to "pin it on" Zanny the Nanny or the Meter Reader or JG or GA or "someone else" that they can come up with ... they are all out !

I will watch the show ONLY because I want to see what the DT has "up their sleeve" ...
 
dog.gone.cute said:
:rocker:

I agree. This makes total sense ... the DT cannot try to "pin it on" Zanny the Nanny or the Meter Reader or JG or GA or "someone else" that they can come up with ... they are all out !

I will watch the show ONLY because I want to see what the DT has "up their sleeve" ...
Click to expand...

Whatever they have up there is soon going be sharing the space with the long arm of the law.
 
QUESTION:

In the trailer the moderator says [paraphrasing] " If you jurors could ONLY vote between Capital Murder and Acquittal, how many would acquit?"

So is the state giving the jurors ONLY that option in the upcoming trial?

What if the majority decide that she was probably covering up a drowning? Is acquittal their ONLY option in that scenario?
 
Troy Roberts goes inside the KC case.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7362272n&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CBSNewsTheEarlyShowBooks+(CBS+News%3A+The+Early+Show%3A+Books)

Here's an interesting article with some quotes by Roberts..not related to the KC case.....

http://www.danshamptons.com/content/danspapers/issue03_2008/14.html


While this type of story is a departure from the more frequent murder mysteries covered on "48 Hours," there's certainly no lack of interest on the part of the viewing public for programming built around crimes and misdemeanors, whether reality based or fictitious.From the days of "Magnum, P.I." to "Hill Street Blues" to the ludicrous "Cops," shows about bad guys have lured viewers for decades. "There seems to be a hunger for criminal procedural kinds of shows," Roberts said. "I see a relationship between '48 Hours' and 'CSI' or 'Law & Order' - we're a real, live CSI."
 
Well ... If you slant the mock trial presentation with a Baez bias and skew the question to the opposing extremes ... You engineered an expected result. This is silly.

If it isn't fair and balanced with the Prosecution presenting their case then it means less than nothing and, I am confident the Defense only reveal selective tidbits.

The Defense get better feedback floating theories in the blogs and media. This was done purely to make money and get some spin out there. However, it can and will backfire.

The Defense really needed a mock trial that was highly analytical and critical to test their strategy and refine it, not one skewed to favor them and limit the options -- it does not help identify the flaws and holes and creates an over-confidence ... A recipe for failure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 204 more.
Total: 2,676 (members: 205, guests: 2,471)

Online statistics

Members online
205
Guests online
2,471
Total visitors
2,676
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,753
Messages
17,958,457
Members
228,603
Latest member
megalow
Back
Top