What Is the Defense Strategy?

Status
Not open for further replies.
They have no defense and are not working on a defense as they know that Casey is going to be found guilty. What they are working on is the penalty phase. They are simply trying to keep her off death row. Mason had already made comments to the media before he joined the defense team that it was pretty much a done deal (her guilty verdict). Their only hope is that somehow, someway one of their stupid spagetti slinging tricks will by some miracle work.

MOO
 
http://www.deathpenaltyblog.com/in-depth-look-death-in-florida/

Great find here! You could be right, but wouldn't she have just said; 'I have finished what I came to do, I worked to remove the DP and that didn't happen so maybe next time.' or 'I'll see her in appeals, if she needs me.' Instead she claims she can't afford to stay on... Odd to me.


(1) - 4. § 921.141(5)(d): The capital felony was committed while the defendant was engaged, or was an accomplice, in the commission of, or an attempt to commit, or flight after committing or attempting to commit , any robbery; sexual battery; aggravated child abuse....

SNIPPED

(2) - 8. § 921.141(5)(h): The capital felony was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel ("HAC").

(3) - 9. § 921.141(5)(i): The capital felony was a homicide and was committed in cold, calculated and premeditated manner without any pretense of moral or legal justification ("CCP").

(4) - 12. § 921.141(5)(l): The victim of the capital felony was a person less than 12 years of age ("child under 12").

(5) - 13. § 921.141(5)(m): The victim of the capital felony was particularly vulnerable due to advanced age or disability, or because the defendant stood in a position of familial or custodial authority over the victim ("advanced age or disability").

.


Thanks for that link! Have never read at his blog but MANY interesting articles contained there...

Including this one involving Mitigating Factors.....wonder which defense will try to argue (as I believe that is their only focus at this point)


The mitigating circumstances that can apply in any given first degree murder case are those set forth in Florida Statute § 921.141(6):

1. § 921.141(6)(a): The defendant has no significant history of prior criminal history.

2. § 921.141(6)(b): The capital felony was committed while the defendant was under influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance.

3. § 921.141(6)(c): The victim was a participant in the defendant's conduct or consented to the act.

4. § 921.141(6)(d): The defendant was an accomplice in the capital felony committed by another person and his participation was relatively minor.

5. § 921.141(6)(e): The defendant acted under extreme duress or under- the substantial domination of another person.

6. § 921.141(6)(f): The capacity of the defendant to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law were substantially impaired.

7. § 921.141(6)(g): The age of the defendant at the time of the crime.

8. § 921.141(6)(h): The existence of any other factors in the defendant's background that would mitigate against imposition of a death sentence.


http://www.deathpenaltyblog.com/in-depth-look-death-in-florida-2/
 
Thanks for that link! Have never read at his blog but MANY interesting articles contained there...

Including this one involving Mitigating Factors.....wonder which defense will try to argue (as I believe that is their only focus at this point)


The mitigating circumstances that can apply in any given first degree murder case are those set forth in Florida Statute § 921.141(6):

1. § 921.141(6)(a): The defendant has no significant history of prior criminal history.

2. § 921.141(6)(b): The capital felony was committed while the defendant was under influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance.

3. § 921.141(6)(c): The victim was a participant in the defendant's conduct or consented to the act.

4. § 921.141(6)(d): The defendant was an accomplice in the capital felony committed by another person and his participation was relatively minor.

5. § 921.141(6)(e): The defendant acted under extreme duress or under- the substantial domination of another person.

6. § 921.141(6)(f): The capacity of the defendant to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law were substantially impaired.

7. § 921.141(6)(g): The age of the defendant at the time of the crime.

8. § 921.141(6)(h): The existence of any other factors in the defendant's background that would mitigate against imposition of a death sentence.


http://www.deathpenaltyblog.com/in-depth-look-death-in-florida-2/

Thank you for also listing those Kentjbkent. But really, when you look at each of those eight points, none of them apply to ICA.

1) ICA has a prior criminal history.

2)ICA demonstrated a cool and calculated manner during and after committing this crime. Caylee was duct taped and bagged. ICA spoke of the smell in her car. ICA denied knowing the whereabouts of her child and went about her business, renting videos, dancing in nightclubs, and avoiding her parents.

3) this one applies to other situations other than one on one murder, weird sexual events gone wrong, etc.

4) Again, does not apply - her paticipation was major and she acted alone.

5) ICA demonstrated a behavior that did not point to extreme mental distress and no one forced her to kill Caylee. Her life was not at risk, she wasn't defending herself, and no one had a gun pointed at her telling her to kill her child, she wasn't an abused wife who killed rather than be killed.

6)ICA hid her crime and lied about the whereabouts of her child. She knew what she did was wrong, morally and in the eyes of the law.

7) ICA was not a juvenile, she was over the age of 21.

8) ICA's background in a middle class neighborhood, with many advantages, two parents, being supported financially and emotionally does not fit this mitigating factor. Although we severely criticize her parents, their conduct does not rise to the level of criminal or neglect. ICA wasn't held prisoner and could have left her home situation at any time.

I think ICA is stuck with the factors listed by above by LCoastmom in that excellent post. IMO.

I have a binder about an inch and a half thick I downloaded from the Justice Dept of Florida that details these mitigating factors - I will be keeping it close at hand during the actual trial.
 
Thank you for also listing those Kentjbkent. But really, when you look at each of those eight points, none of them apply to ICA.

1) ICA has a prior criminal history.

2)ICA demonstrated a cool and calculated manner during and after committing this crime. Caylee was duct taped and bagged. ICA spoke of the smell in her car. ICA denied knowing the whereabouts of her child and went about her business, renting videos, dancing in nightclubs, and avoiding her parents.

3) this one applies to other situations other than one on one murder, weird sexual events gone wrong, etc.

4) Again, does not apply - her paticipation was major and she acted alone.

5) ICA demonstrated a behavior that did not point to extreme mental distress and no one forced her to kill Caylee. Her life was not at risk, she wasn't defending herself, and no one had a gun pointed at her telling her to kill her child, she wasn't an abused wife who killed rather than be killed.

6)ICA hid her crime and lied about the whereabouts of her child. She knew what she did was wrong, morally and in the eyes of the law.

7) ICA was not a juvenile, she was over the age of 21.

8) ICA's background in a middle class neighborhood, with many advantages, two parents, being supported financially and emotionally does not fit this mitigating factor. Although we severely criticize her parents, their conduct does not rise to the level of criminal or neglect. ICA wasn't held prisoner and could have left her home situation at any time.

I think ICA is stuck with the factors listed by above by LCoastmom in that excellent post. IMO.

I have a binder about an inch and a half thick I downloaded from the Justice Dept of Florida that details these mitigating factors - I will be keeping it close at hand during the actual trial.

I agree with your points.

However, because I do speak a little Baezese, I may be able to point out what he would find as flaws in your analysis. May I?

2. The night prior to the murder, Casey had a serious fight with Cindy. Cindy tried to choke her. This disturbance provoked serious mental and emotional anguish for Casey.

5. Cindy has been shown to be an overbearing, domineering mother to Casey. This caused Casey to act under extreme duress.

8. She's too pretty. She's her mother's only daughter. She loves her cat. She's patriotic. The death penalty is unconstitutional. She's a female. Her first boyfriend cheated on her. She has to stay alive to earn enough money to pay her fine for the check penalty. Pork rind companies would go broke. She was molested. She still has to pay back Grandma Shirley. She wants to adopt.

:D
 
Thank you for also listing those Kentjbkent. But really, when you look at each of those eight points, none of them apply to ICA.

1) ICA has a prior criminal history.

2)ICA demonstrated a cool and calculated manner during and after committing this crime. Caylee was duct taped and bagged. ICA spoke of the smell in her car. ICA denied knowing the whereabouts of her child and went about her business, renting videos, dancing in nightclubs, and avoiding her parents.

3) this one applies to other situations other than one on one murder, weird sexual events gone wrong, etc.

4) Again, does not apply - her paticipation was major and she acted alone.

5) ICA demonstrated a behavior that did not point to extreme mental distress and no one forced her to kill Caylee. Her life was not at risk, she wasn't defending herself, and no one had a gun pointed at her telling her to kill her child, she wasn't an abused wife who killed rather than be killed.

6)ICA hid her crime and lied about the whereabouts of her child. She knew what she did was wrong, morally and in the eyes of the law.

7) ICA was not a juvenile, she was over the age of 21.

8) ICA's background in a middle class neighborhood, with many advantages, two parents, being supported financially and emotionally does not fit this mitigating factor. Although we severely criticize her parents, their conduct does not rise to the level of criminal or neglect. ICA wasn't held prisoner and could have left her home situation at any time.

I think ICA is stuck with the factors listed by above by LCoastmom in that excellent post. IMO.

I have a binder about an inch and a half thick I downloaded from the Justice Dept of Florida that details these mitigating factors - I will be keeping it close at hand during the actual trial.

I do think the defense can argue several of these, doesn't mean the jury will buy it though, but if just a few on the jury do it could influence Judge Perry's decision.

1) The factor states no significant criminal history. Casey had never been arrested before July 16, 2008 so that can easily be argued as no significant criminal history.

2) The defendent commited the crime while under extreme mental or emotional disturbance. I can't guess how all the defense is going to use this one but I'm sure they will - possibly the molestation allegations, and blame her parents. Remember the guy that visited her in jail that wrote about abuse and PTSD or something like that?

I don't think 3, 4, or 5 apply.

6) I agree with you, Casey tried to cover up the crime in many ways so she knew it was wrong.

7) Age of the defendent. Casey was young at the time of the crime, not a juvenille but at 22 and still dependent on her parents, she wasn't very mature and adult-like.

8) Any other factors. Gosh, what all could fall under this one? I haven't an idea what might qualify but I'll bet Baez and team can come up with something.

I'm glad you have that binder because I believe we'll be needing the info after she's found guilty. Think I'll go do some reading on it too, but I really don't want to use all that paper to print it out - too expensive!
 
;)
Thank you for also listing those Kentjbkent. But really, when you look at each of those eight points, none of them apply to ICA.
1) ICA has a prior criminal history.

2)ICA demonstrated a cool and calculated manner during and after committing this crime. Caylee was duct taped and bagged. ICA spoke of the smell in her car. ICA denied knowing the whereabouts of her child and went about her business, renting videos, dancing in nightclubs, and avoiding her parents.

3) this one applies to other situations other than one on one murder, weird sexual events gone wrong, etc.

4) Again, does not apply - her paticipation was major and she acted alone.

5) ICA demonstrated a behavior that did not point to extreme mental distress and no one forced her to kill Caylee. Her life was not at risk, she wasn't defending herself, and no one had a gun pointed at her telling her to kill her child, she wasn't an abused wife who killed rather than be killed.

6)ICA hid her crime and lied about the whereabouts of her child. She knew what she did was wrong, morally and in the eyes of the law.

7) ICA was not a juvenile, she was over the age of 21.

8) ICA's background in a middle class neighborhood, with many advantages, two parents, being supported financially and emotionally does not fit this mitigating factor. Although we severely criticize her parents, their conduct does not rise to the level of criminal or neglect. ICA wasn't held prisoner and could have left her home situation at any time.

I think ICA is stuck with the factors listed by above by LCoastmom in that excellent post. IMO.

I have a binder about an inch and a half thick I downloaded from the Justice Dept of Florida that details these mitigating factors - I will be keeping it close at hand during the actual trial.


Which was EXACTLY my point in posting them! :D

Although we know the defense is going to attempt to try to make a couple of these "fit" at minimum....
 
I agree with your points.

However, because I do speak a little Baezese, I may be able to point out what he would find as flaws in your analysis. May I?

2. The night prior to the murder, Casey had a serious fight with Cindy. Cindy tried to choke her. This disturbance provoked serious mental and emotional anguish for Casey.

5. Cindy has been shown to be an overbearing, domineering mother to Casey. This caused Casey to act under extreme duress.

8. She's too pretty. She's her mother's only daughter. She loves her cat. She's patriotic. The death penalty is unconstitutional. She's a female. Her first boyfriend cheated on her. She has to stay alive to earn enough money to pay her fine for the check penalty. Pork rind companies would go broke. She was molested. She still has to pay back Grandma Shirley. She wants to adopt.

:D

And I also totally agree with you! Keep in mind that the vast majority of time spent by ANYONE with KC while she has been in jail has been with the mitigation specialist and her investigator...I think the defense attention has been totally focused on the penalty phase (mitigation) of the trial for a very long time.

And after spending a considerable amount of time S L O W L Y picking apart all the initial interviews, jail visits, media quotes by family members, I have a theory now of how this trial is going to end with fireworks! Previous comments and statements by the Anthony family members that originally left me :waitasec: :waitasec: :waitasec: are starting to make logical sense.

So in a nutshell, I think Baez is going to offer evidence during mitigation on

#2 - thump thump.....front wheels of the bus roll over George

#5 and #6 - thump thump......back wheels of bus flatten George

# 8 - Bus makes a U-turn and rolls right over Cindy.....but only because Baez is not about to let Cindy make it all the way to the end unscathed.....after enduring her wrath for almost 3 years, he is going to want to launch the final bullet....
 
;)


Which was EXACTLY my point in posting them! :D

Although we know the defense is going to attempt to try to make a couple of these "fit" at minimum....

LOL - I need to lighten up - thought you meant they will be seriously considered.
 
I do think the defense can argue several of these, doesn't mean the jury will buy it though, but if just a few on the jury do it could influence Judge Perry's decision.

1) The factor states no significant criminal history. Casey had never been arrested before July 16, 2008 so that can easily be argued as no significant criminal history.

2) The defendent commited the crime while under extreme mental or emotional disturbance. I can't guess how all the defense is going to use this one but I'm sure they will - possibly the molestation allegations, and blame her parents. Remember the guy that visited her in jail that wrote about abuse and PTSD or something like that?

I don't think 3, 4, or 5 apply.

6) I agree with you, Casey tried to cover up the crime in many ways so she knew it was wrong.

7) Age of the defendent. Casey was young at the time of the crime, not a juvenille but at 22 and still dependent on her parents, she wasn't very mature and adult-like.

8) Any other factors. Gosh, what all could fall under this one? I haven't an idea what might qualify but I'll bet Baez and team can come up with something.

I'm glad you have that binder because I believe we'll be needing the info after she's found guilty. Think I'll go do some reading on it too, but I really don't want to use all that paper to print it out - too expensive!

LOL - I can see Baez trying these but seriously,

1) We actually don't know if ICA has any juvenile history but I think six felony counts could be considered significant to indicate at this young age, combined with lying to her parents about having income, and anything the SA may have up their sleeve may add to this one.

2) Seriously? Baez is going to try to convince a judge a nagging controlling mother, who ICA completely ignored, enough to lie about having a job, who was caring for her daughter - had a fight - a fight? - with her mother the night before or the night she killed her daughter? I don't think any jury is going to buy that as extreme emotional distress or mental disturbance - Andrea Yates qualified - yes - but ICA - the girl who went out and rented videos with her boyfriend that night? MMM - no.

7) 22 in the legal sense is not young - 13, 14, 16 is considered young. At least according to the information I have.

And no don't print it out unless you really really want to - I think it is 300 pages long and I skipped the directory of 54 pages or something to shorten it!

It was interesting to consider some of the mitigating factors listed and the juries who said yes, we see this horrific background or whatever, but it's not enough. That surprised me.

Just want to quickly add that ICA being uncooperative, and not confessing and probably never will - will also not go in her favor at sentencing. No remorse.
 
Legal egos? Lawyers battle in Casey Anthony case
August 21, 2010|By Anthony Colarossi, Orlando Sentinel

What do you get when you mix a heinous child murder with simmering public outrage, an insatiable media appetite and high-powered legal egos?

The Casey Anthony case.

Consider the recent developments in Orlando's infamous crime story:

Attorney Brad Conway appears on national TV to say he no longer represents George and Cindy Anthony. Attorney Mark NeJame, the Anthonys' former lawyer, accuses Casey Anthony's defense team of acting in bad faith and requests a special hearing to debate their conduct. Attorneys Jose Baez and Cheney Mason charge NeJame with harboring an "ulterior motive" in his attempt to "thwart" Casey Anthony's defense and suggest his interest in a book deal is paramount.

Sometimes, between the noise of media appearances, post-hearing press conferences, court filings and personal attacks, it's easy to forget this case is about the murder of 2-year-old Caylee Marie and the life of her mother/murder suspect. The vitriol may subside for the moment after Orange-Osceola Chief Judge Belvin Perry last week called the various parties to a private conference to "discuss the tone of recent pleadings," according to court administration spokeswoman Karen Levey.

Often it seems much more like a clash of egos in a case the public can't seem to get enough of. The cast of characters features some of Orlando's most experienced legal minds – and some of its most ambitious.

more at the link:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...s-jose-baez-caylee-marie-attorney-brad-conway
 
They have no defense and are not working on a defense as they know that Casey is going to be found guilty. What they are working on is the penalty phase. They are simply trying to keep her off death row. Mason had already made comments to the media before he joined the defense team that it was pretty much a done deal (her guilty verdict). Their only hope is that somehow, someway one of their stupid spagetti slinging tricks will by some miracle work.

MOO

also

Regarding your last sentence - bbm
Even if the jury has the same opinion and find the aggravating factors outweigh the mitigating factors, they do not have to sentence Casey to death.


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...death-penalty-20100815,0,3151611.story?page=2

I thought the Orlando Sentinel article was more interesting than Lenamon's blog, especially the quote above. I did not realize that was now part of the jury instructions. Lenamon has written some other blogs about death penalty stats in the US that were quite interesting to me. I think the defense does have a good chance of getting Casey LWOP and that's probably the main focus of their strategy right now. They should know the evidence of her guilt is overwhelming and their strategy should focus on saving her life.

I agree, it seems that seems to be their focus. And I REALLY agree that they HAD a great chance at LWOP. Since it's rare for a women to get the death penalty in FL.

I say HAD, cause I think their own actions has made it worse for ICA. Made this a media nightmare. AND with all the talk of "Florida wants to KILL ICA", that is 'out there' as an expectation. That jury will be seated, thinking that will be the out come. Not a good way to start this.

An example, the guy that Baez defended who was being accused of killing a child, he was found guilty and got LWOP. No death sentence. I wasn't expecting one for ICA either. Now now days. People have really been fighting to get rid of the death sentence. Folks are ok with it, so long as they know the person really has no chance of getting free. THAT seems to be the issue. Hence, LWOP is considered a big deal.

And I think her team don't really expect her to get the death sentence. This whole drama is so that they can claim to 'win' by her getting LWOP, and not the death sentence. Oh my gosh, we SAVED her! Yep, that is what I think they were thinking.

If she gets the death sentence, then it's her own team's fault. I honestly think she only would have gotten LWOP.
 
also



I agree, it seems that seems to be their focus. And I REALLY agree that they HAD a great chance at LWOP. Since it's rare for a women to get the death penalty in FL.

I say HAD, cause I think their own actions has made it worse for ICA. Made this a media nightmare. AND with all the talk of "Florida wants to KILL ICA", that is 'out there' as an expectation. That jury will be seated, thinking that will be the out come. Not a good way to start this.

An example, the guy that Baez defended who was being accused of killing a child, he was found guilty and got LWOP. No death sentence. I wasn't expecting one for ICA either. Now now days. People have really been fighting to get rid of the death sentence. Folks are ok with it, so long as they know the person really has no chance of getting free. THAT seems to be the issue. Hence, LWOP is considered a big deal.

And I think her team don't really expect her to get the death sentence. This whole drama is so that they can claim to 'win' by her getting LWOP, and not the death sentence. Oh my gosh, we SAVED her! Yep, that is what I think they were thinking.

If she gets the death sentence, then it's her own team's fault. I honestly think she only would have gotten LWOP.

BBM: Difference in this case is that there were two people, the mother of the child and the boyfriend. If jury was not totally sure the mother was not involved they may have opted to not chose the DP because they may have had some doubt he was 100% responsible. jmo
 
Legal egos? Lawyers battle in Casey Anthony case
August 21, 2010|By Anthony Colarossi, Orlando Sentinel

What do you get when you mix a heinous child murder with simmering public outrage, an insatiable media appetite and high-powered legal egos?

The Casey Anthony case.

Consider the recent developments in Orlando's infamous crime story:

Attorney Brad Conway appears on national TV to say he no longer represents George and Cindy Anthony. Attorney Mark NeJame, the Anthonys' former lawyer, accuses Casey Anthony's defense team of acting in bad faith and requests a special hearing to debate their conduct. Attorneys Jose Baez and Cheney Mason charge NeJame with harboring an "ulterior motive" in his attempt to "thwart" Casey Anthony's defense and suggest his interest in a book deal is paramount.

Sometimes, between the noise of media appearances, post-hearing press conferences, court filings and personal attacks, it's easy to forget this case is about the murder of 2-year-old Caylee Marie and the life of her mother/murder suspect. The vitriol may subside for the moment after Orange-Osceola Chief Judge Belvin Perry last week called the various parties to a private conference to "discuss the tone of recent pleadings," according to court administration spokeswoman Karen Levey.

Often it seems much more like a clash of egos in a case the public can't seem to get enough of. The cast of characters features some of Orlando's most experienced legal minds – and some of its most ambitious.

more at the link:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...s-jose-baez-caylee-marie-attorney-brad-conway

Isn't this a great article? I've printed it out to read again and again when I need a dose of sanity (which I suspect will be often as we roll closer to the trial date).
 
Maybe the A's are acting so bizarre because of the mitigation stage? Could CA be saying she thinks Caylee is still alive to help KC escape the DP? I would not be surprised. jmo
 
LOL - I can see Baez trying these but seriously,

1) We actually don't know if ICA has any juvenile history but I think six felony counts could be considered significant to indicate at this young age, combined with lying to her parents about having income, and anything the SA may have up their sleeve may add to this one.

2) Seriously? Baez is going to try to convince a judge a nagging controlling mother, who ICA completely ignored, enough to lie about having a job, who was caring for her daughter - had a fight - a fight? - with her mother the night before or the night she killed her daughter? I don't think any jury is going to buy that as extreme emotional distress or mental disturbance - Andrea Yates qualified - yes - but ICA - the girl who went out and rented videos with her boyfriend that night? MMM - no.

7) 22 in the legal sense is not young - 13, 14, 16 is considered young. At least according to the information I have.

And no don't print it out unless you really really want to - I think it is 300 pages long and I skipped the directory of 54 pages or something to shorten it!

It was interesting to consider some of the mitigating factors listed and the juries who said yes, we see this horrific background or whatever, but it's not enough. That surprised me.

Just want to quickly add that ICA being uncooperative, and not confessing and probably never will - will also not go in her favor at sentencing. No remorse.

No, I don't think Baez is going to argue that Cindy was the cause of KC's suggested "extreme emotional abuse".....

I think the entire mitigation process is going to focus on George and KC's allegations of sexual abuse by him.

Keep in mind, Nick Savage, a sex crime investigator, was called in from the beginning of the case.

A subpoena was issued to George for a DNA test, but results of such have never been released (they have for Lee). I will just say it....I am in a very small minority but I am not completely convinced that the results of GA DNA test were not sealed as being too inflammatory against the defendant and DO think it is still a possibility that GA may be Caylee's father but that this information, if ever brought to trial, will not be revealed until the penalty phase to prove "extreme emotional stress".

Within the last couple of months, Baez brought a renowned psychologist who specializes in sexual abuse to the jail to meet with KC for several hours.

Now go back and reread some of the early interviews, jail videos, KC letters, etc and consider if perhaps this is makes some of the previous :waitasec: statements now make sense? And of course, a couple of these odd statements....

1. George was so frantically trying to set up a private jail visit alone with KC and after being unsuccessful, eventually takes off and threatens suicide

2. What does "Don't worry...I haven't said anything!"

3. "Casey, is this like last time?" (Lee)

4. Cindy's statement to KC "So that is why you are a *advertiser censored*"

5. George's VERY ODD letters and statements during jail visits

6. KC hides pregnancy until 7 mos then George is thrown out of house shortly after Caylee is born...

Am NOT saying that I believe 100 % that it is possible molestation at a young age eventually turned into an incestuous relationship (ala Mckenzie Phillips story), but am saying I think it is VERY LIKELY this is what the defense is going to allege and argue loudly and strongly...

It is (imo) the only chance they have for a jury to try to muster up enough sympathy for KC that mitigating factors outweight crime.....

How many jurors would have a difficult time sentencing a young woman to death if they are offered testimony that she was victimized from a young age, impregnated and then controlled not only by her abuser, but a domineering mother determined to keep abuse secret????

This is where I think we are heading....but I don't think Baez is fully aware of the skill and experience of Ashton and Burdick!
 
Yes, I agree I can see this might be going is run George over with the bus.

But I'm not sure sexual abuse cases get off the ground without more information or hard facts besides "he said - she said". What is going to be really really interesting is how far Cindy is prepared to lie to say ICA's life.

And if there are any reports,doctor's visits, friends ICA confided in - besides Jesse G in her "looking for a home" conversation, and school counsellors, anything any where except "I had a dream" from ICA. If Baez has no backup besides experts saying her behavior indicates blah blah, I think Ashton and LBK will critique Baez right out of the courtroom.

And wasn't it ICA who wanted the single visit alone with George? My impression was ICA definitely wanted something and thought she could sweet talk George, where she knew it wouldn't work with Cindy.
 
Yes, I agree I can see this might be going is run George over with the bus.

But I'm not sure sexual abuse cases get off the ground without more information or hard facts besides "he said - she said". What is going to be really really interesting is how far Cindy is prepared to lie to say ICA's life.

And if there are any reports,doctor's visits, friends ICA confided in - besides Jesse G in her "looking for a home" conversation, and school counsellors, anything any where except "I had a dream" from ICA. If Baez has no backup besides experts saying her behavior indicates blah blah, I think Ashton and LBK will critique Baez right out of the courtroom.

And wasn't it ICA who wanted the single visit alone with George? My impression was ICA definitely wanted something and thought she could sweet talk George, where she knew it wouldn't work with Cindy.

Yep....as I recall it, ICA mentioned in a jail video that the reason she "chose" George as the one to have the "private alone time" with was because he was the one she had been "most distanced from" (words to that effect)....she mentioned this to him in a jail visit AFTER she wrote the letter to Sheriff Beary requesting the meeting...and then in a subsequent visit, George pushed the point saying he had made all the arrangements with Beary and how now would be the perfect time since Baez was off in New York.....remember the whole "you are CEO" speech?

But then ICA backed off from meeting with George...

As far as first bolded paragraph above.....wonder if this is where testimony from Lee is going to come in....especially if Anthony family eventually became aware of relationship (IF it happened) and then worked to hide it.......wonder if this is when Lee will finally throw ole Pop under the bus to save his sister?
 
Somewhere amongst the DNA information released in the doc dump LA and GA were both ruled out. Plus KC never said anything happened with GA only that she has a feeling it might have but just a feeling....nothing to back it up. She would know and KC has no problem speaking her mind when she wants to so I do not see her not speaking up. If it gets her attention.....she'll use it. What will be interesting is what the psychologist has to say at the trial about KC's personality and why she lies..... jmo
 
No, I don't think Baez is going to argue that Cindy was the cause of KC's suggested "extreme emotional abuse".....

I think the entire mitigation process is going to focus on George and KC's allegations of sexual abuse by him.

Keep in mind, Nick Savage, a sex crime investigator, was called in from the beginning of the case.
snipped to address one point.

This always made me shudder and I still wonder why a sex crime investigator was called in.
 
quote respectfully snipped for space
An example, the guy that Baez defended who was being accused of killing a child, he was found guilty and got LWOP. No death sentence. I wasn't expecting one for ICA either. Now now days. People have really been fighting to get rid of the death sentence. Folks are ok with it, so long as they know the person really has no chance of getting free. THAT seems to be the issue. Hence, LWOP is considered a big deal.

BBM: Difference in this case is that there were two people, the mother of the child and the boyfriend. If jury was not totally sure the mother was not involved they may have opted to not chose the DP because they may have had some doubt he was 100% responsible. jmo

Baez's other murder was not a capital case. Nilton Diaz was charged with Murder 2 so a death sentence was not even on the table. He was convicted of Manslaughter 2 and received 15 years. I've read a little about the case and am not totally convinced he is guilty. Baez messed up big time in this case. He tried to present some evidence regarding the child's head injury during the trial but had failed to previously disclose it to the prosecution under the rules of discovery. The evidence was disallowed.

I am totally convinced Casey is guilty from reading every page of discovery, but I still think she deserves a good defense. I'm just not sure she's going to get that with Baez as her lead attorney. Has he provided any discovery to the prosecution yet?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
68
Guests online
1,756
Total visitors
1,824

Forum statistics

Threads
590,088
Messages
17,930,023
Members
228,062
Latest member
Countrygirlwv
Back
Top