2010.12.21 Stream of Motions - General Discussion

New Posts

I predict that KC and/or CA will have a "mini-stroke" when they read this motion. Reality bites. JMO
 
TiaM said:
I also had to laugh at the couple of times the SA used the word "thwarted" in the response.

Anyone think that was on purpose? LOL
Click to expand...

Oh yes. That was definite snark left in that response. And they did it twice to get the point across to Baez. LOL.
 
whiteangora said:
Assuming that Judge Perry rules in favor of the State and allows everything admitted to trial, what will be JB's next move? Can he/will he object to the court's ruling?
Click to expand...

The only thing he could do after the Court entered a ruling would be to file a motion to reconsider. This could go on 4ever. Until the next time Judge Perry :thewhip:
 
You know what? It is so very reassuring to know that us WSrs have been right on the money. From what I read in that motion, the State's analysis of KC's behavior parallels ours here! :)
 
Purple Iris said:
There is no doubt that the state is ready to rock and roll.

As a matter of fact, if memory serves me "half right", I seem to recall a hearing, maybe even as far back as when Judge Strickland was in charge, and a hearing date was brought up.

Either Mr. George or Mr. Ashton, at that time, told that their office was in the middle of handling *advertiser censored* amount of cases, and, that they could be, or, would be ready to make this a "go" at any time.

The defense was again being cry babies about how they needed much more time to get their stuff together.

Anyone else remember that conversation that day?
TIA ~

And, as a side note:
Regarding that "My Caylee is Missing" cryout.

Cindy mentions that Casey claims to want her freedom, etc., and this info came from Casey's friends.
So, Cindy had been on the phone calling and trying to track them down. {which we knew}.

But, it also points to her having telephone numbers, or at least address' that she could track people down that knew Casey ~ But, still no Nanny.
Click to expand...

I also noted when rereading it she said "no money no future". She knew ICA didn't have a job. IMO
 
I have to admit I could not exactly place the thwarted reference when you smarty pantses mentioned it. WHen I googled it and saw "thwarted by traffic" I remembered and LOLed. That is sooooo funny.
 
What a pleasure this is after reading all the trash motions that come from the defense side. Thank you Mr. George. :woohoo:
 
strawberry said:
I have to admit I could not exactly place the thwarted reference when you smarty pantses mentioned it. WHen I googled it and saw "thwarted by traffic" I remembered and LOLed. That is sooooo funny.
Click to expand...

The idea that the State can maintain a sense of humor in the midst of what has to be gut wrenching work makes me love them all the more. I believe Caylee's little star will be twinkling brightly when "her side" of the story is told.
 
Purple Iris said:
There is no doubt that the state is ready to rock and roll.

As a matter of fact, if memory serves me "half right", I seem to recall a hearing, maybe even as far back as when Judge Strickland was in charge, and a hearing date was brought up.

Either Mr. George or Mr. Ashton, at that time, told that their office was in the middle of handling *advertiser censored* amount of cases, and, that they could be, or, would be ready to make this a "go" at any time.

The defense was again being cry babies about how they needed much more time to get their stuff together.

Anyone else remember that conversation that day?
TIA ~

And, as a side note:
Regarding that "My Caylee is Missing" cryout.

Cindy mentions that Casey claims to want her freedom, etc., and this info came from Casey's friends.
So, Cindy had been on the phone calling and trying to track them down. {which we knew}.

But, it also points to her having telephone numbers, or at least address' that she could track people down that knew Casey ~ But, still no Nanny.
Click to expand...

BBM.

Nuff said!
 
What does everyone make of the "little angel" in quotes in reference to Cindy looking for Caylee? Is that a pot shot? Or, I mean, was that necessary? Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the SA, all of them, and this motion is a dream come true for me, but that one little thing, I don't know, it kinda hurt. Could they have said it another way? Or was it supposed to hurt? What do you all think?
 
Gnatcatcher said:
What does everyone make of the "little angel" in quotes in reference to Cindy looking for Caylee? Is that a pot shot? Or, I mean, was that necessary? Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the SA, all of them, and this motion is a dream come true for me, but that one little thing, I don't know, it kinda hurt. Could they have said it another way? Or was it supposed to hurt? What do you all think?
Click to expand...

Definitely a potshot at Cindy since she used those words to describe Caylee in her Myspace post. I think it was meant to show how far she's come, from Caylee being her little angel to nothing. See Cindy, she mattered to you once, you loved her once. What happened to that? It's something she needs to think about.

I think it was also meant to point out that Caylee is an angel now, no matter how much Cindy protests. And yes, it does hurt because we all know how she became an angel, and it was a horrible death by the hands of her own mother, and the SA is not going to let the defense and their smoke and mirrors overshadow that, not one bit.

This is Cindy's wake up call. It's to let her know that no matter what she does in court to cya for Casey, it will be Caylee at the center of the matter, Caylee who was the innocent angel that deserved to have a life, Caylee that matters and not Casey, who doesn't deserve the air she breathes.
 
Gnatcatcher said:
What does everyone make of the "little angel" in quotes in reference to Cindy looking for Caylee? Is that a pot shot? Or, I mean, was that necessary? Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the SA, all of them, and this motion is a dream come true for me, but that one little thing, I don't know, it kinda hurt. Could they have said it another way? Or was it supposed to hurt? What do you all think?
Click to expand...

Oh yeah it was a deliberate shot at the defense and the A's. As we have discussed above, this entire motion has the voice of trial about it. Not simply arguing the law, but finally arguing the crime, the victim and the actions and statements of the participants. Was quoting CA's self published "little angel" and "like a dogged detective" comments a low blow? I'm not sure I would go that far. But they are a strong powerful loud message that the state is no longer playing games. They are here to represent Cindy's little angel when and where no one else will. Yeah it may be overly dramatic, but deservedly so at this point. The SA used the very words that the defense is looking to suppress as an element of their pleading.

The state just fired a major warning shot across the defenses bow. "This is how it is going to go from here. We know where your client has been. We know what she has been doing. We know every lie she told, every dollar she stole, every bed she slept in. We know what her family relations really were. we know what they thought and did. We know who's fault this all is, and we will prove it under a microscope. Now would probably be a good time to truly have that soul wrenching talk with your client about her real chances and options. This is no longer a game in front of the news cameras. This is the murder of a precious little girl named Caylee by her own mother."
 
faefrost said:
Oh yeah it was a deliberate shot at the defense and the A's. As we have discussed above, this entire motion has the voice of trial about it. Not simply arguing the law, but finally arguing the crime, the victim and the actions and statements of the participants. Was quoting CA's self published "little angel" and "like a dogged detective" comments a low blow? I'm not sure I would go that far. But they are a strong powerful loud message that the state is no longer playing games. They are here to represent Cindy's little angel when and where no one else will. Yeah it may be overly dramatic, but deservedly so at this point. The SA used the very words that the defense is looking to suppress as an element of their pleading.

The state just fired a major warning shot across the defenses bow. "This is how it is going to go from here. We know where your client has been. We know what she has been doing. We know every lie she told, every dollar she stole, every bed she slept in. We know what her family relations really were. we know what they thought and did. We know who's fault this all is, and we will prove it under a microscope. Now would probably be a good time to truly have that soul wrenching talk with your client about her real chances and options. This is no longer a game in front of the news cameras. This is the murder of a precious little girl named Caylee by her own mother."
Click to expand...

At what point will KC give up the lie(s) and confess for a plea deal? Standing at the end of the hall at Universal, the very last second she had - that is when she will (if at all). The biggest question here, is it worth maintaining the "image" that KC has been trying to portray of being a victim of Zanny; or is it worth taking the consequences of the death penalty?
 
Gnatcatcher said:
What does everyone make of the "little angel" in quotes in reference to Cindy looking for Caylee? Is that a pot shot? Or, I mean, was that necessary? Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the SA, all of them, and this motion is a dream come true for me, but that one little thing, I don't know, it kinda hurt. Could they have said it another way? Or was it supposed to hurt? What do you all think?
Click to expand...

Hi Gnatctcher,
I didn't see it that way at all. They were directly quoting cindy's myspace, and I found it both very respectful of cindy's feelings (at the time she was missing caylee), and caylee, the true victim in all of this. As I said upthread, what I found most interesting about this motion is it's our first glimpse at how the state will handle cindy. They're quoting her, treating her like a hero (having the "dogged determination of a police detective"), while at the same time, slipping it in there that police detectives are doggedly determined. They're aligning cindy with "good" in this case, and I think she'll play right into their hands. I just don't see the use of the phrase "little angel" was a low blow, quite the opposite actually. They're putting caylee up on a pedestal, IMO. Funny how we can both read the same thing and come away with totally different impressions, huh?
 
Did the defense not understand that the SA were not saying Casey's tattoo, sleeping with Tony, etc. meant she was low brow and therefore a murderer? It was obvious to me the SA were mentioning these things in light of the info Casey volunteered - that she was doing her own investigation? Were the defense being obtuse on purpose, or did they really not get that? Who knows...
 
Gnatcatcher said:
What does everyone make of the "little angel" in quotes in reference to Cindy looking for Caylee? Is that a pot shot? Or, I mean, was that necessary? Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the SA, all of them, and this motion is a dream come true for me, but that one little thing, I don't know, it kinda hurt. Could they have said it another way? Or was it supposed to hurt? What do you all think?
Click to expand...

I didn't see it as a potshot at all! I think they are buttering her up so she will be less hostile. Or maybe to show that with all she's done, she isn't the one who killed Caylee; that ICA is the one that needs to be help accountable. But I am naive so I could be wrong. It's happened.:crazy:
 
Horace Finklestein said:
Did the defense not understand that the SA were not saying Casey's tattoo, sleeping with Tony, etc. meant she was low brow and therefore a murderer? It was obvious to me the SA were mentioning these things in light of the info Casey volunteered - that she was doing her own investigation? Were the defense being obtuse on purpose, or did they really not get that? Who knows...
Click to expand...

I think they were making the only argument they could. They have these facts--these very ugly facts--about their client's behavior while her child was missing/"kidnapped." The ugly coping idea didn't fly; its next iteration is that the SA are making unfounded judgments about KC. In the penalty phase we will see these same actions explained away by blaming them on her upbringing or some mental defect.

I expect the same result from all three variations... IMO, HHJP will allow all but the Rusciano evidence in. This dog won't hunt, no matter what collar you put on it.
 
strawberry said:
I didn't see it as a potshot at all! I think they are buttering her up so she will be less hostile. Or maybe to show that with all she's done, she isn't the one who killed Caylee; that ICA is the one that needs to be help accountable. But I am naive so I could be wrong. It's happened.:crazy:
Click to expand...

ETA: It might have also been an attempt to snap CA back to where she was when Caylee was first missing...wake her out of her denial. Although people thought that would happen after the bond hearing, and when the trunk evidence came in, and when Caylee was found so it's not going to work.
 
^ Yes, their approach with Cindy is to treat her with sympathy, kindness and respect and bring her back in line behind the truth of what happened with Caylee, the 911 Hearing showed how effective this strategy is with her. Brilliant of them.
 
Gnatcatcher said:
What does everyone make of the "little angel" in quotes in reference to Cindy looking for Caylee? Is that a pot shot? Or, I mean, was that necessary? Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the SA, all of them, and this motion is a dream come true for me, but that one little thing, I don't know, it kinda hurt. Could they have said it another way? Or was it supposed to hurt? What do you all think?
Click to expand...

I thought it was unnecessary and was stooping to the defense's level of being snarky. Maybe they didn't mean it that way, but that's how I took it. They could have made their point with out the term, imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 190 more.
Total: 4,086 (members: 191, guests: 3,895)

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
3,895
Total visitors
4,086
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,207
Messages
17,965,032
Members
228,715
Latest member
Autumn.Doe
Back
Top