Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #2

[LolaMoon08]

Sorry, I thought your question was for RH. He would probably have a much better idea of how these things normally turn out in Florida. My gut instinct is that a 15-year plea would make sense.

15 years? For what? Would that include mandatory sterilization? She would be 37-years old (time served) or younger (I believe Florida makes them serve a mandatory 85% of their sentence).

Please say something that is going to make me feel better about this?

 

[logicalgirl]

15 years? For what? Would that include mandatory sterilization? She would be 37-years old (time served) or younger (I believe Florida makes them serve a mandatory 85% of their sentence).

Please say something that is going to make me feel better about this?

I have a suggestion. AZLawyer, can you tell us the ship has sailed on this particular plea and it is way too late for the SA to be agreeing to anything so lenient?

 

[AZlawyer]

OK, we're straying from legal questions and answers here.

Plea agreements naturally result in a much lower sentence than the public thinks is reasonable for what the person is suspected to have done. It is not too late for a plea agreement in this case, but IMO neither Casey's team nor Casey will consider any deal that results in her spending most of her life in prison.

 

[LinasK]

OK, we're straying from legal questions and answers here.

Plea agreements naturally result in a much lower sentence than the public thinks is reasonable for what the person is suspected to have done. It is not too late for a plea agreement in this case, but IMO neither Casey's team nor Casey will consider any deal that results in her spending most of her life in prison.

I'm curious AZ, under what conditions do you think the SA would agree to a plea deal/agreement at this point, her simply pleading Guilty, or would they want something more???:waitasec:

 

[AZlawyer]

I'm curious AZ, under what conditions do you think the SA would agree to a plea deal/agreement at this point, her simply pleading Guilty, or would they want something more???:waitasec:

Well, she obviously couldn't plead guilty to first-degree murder, or the judge would still have the option of sentencing her to death, and she'd never bother with a plea agreement if the death penalty was still on the table.

So she'd have to plead guilty to one or more of the lesser charges, or lesser-included charges that are not actually in the indictment but are included within the charges in the indictment. In exchange, she'd presumably be sentenced to prison for a lengthy time period.

What kind of "something more" did you have in mind?

 

[LinasK]

Well, she obviously couldn't plead guilty to first-degree murder, or the judge would still have the option of sentencing her to death, and she'd never bother with a plea agreement if the death penalty was still on the table.

So she'd have to plead guilty to one or more of the lesser charges, or lesser-included charges that are not actually in the indictment but are included within the charges in the indictment. In exchange, she'd presumably be sentenced to prison for a lengthy time period.

What kind of "something more" did you have in mind?

Don't know, perhaps a detailed confession, not sure what else she could offer, but why would the prosecution accept at this point? They got the body.

 

[Bittiness39]

1) Why all of the last minute motion filings by the Defense before the LONG ago scheduled Frye Hearings...(and well the obvious...at least JB has known ICA since 2008)? Just trying to get all they can? Do they fear an adverse ruling...??

and this (posted by nums in Today's News thread)...

2) WTH???

Casey Anthony defense wants to call homicide prosecutor as witness
Several new motions were filed in the Casey Anthony case.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...,6299606.story

Quote:
Casey Anthony's defense team filed a handful of items in her first-degree murder case late Monday, including a motion to add a state prosecutor to their witness list.

Defense attorney Cheney Mason wants Assistant State Attorney Kenneth Lewis, who handles homicide cases, added to the witness list.

Mason's motion said the defense team recently learned that Lewis may have testimony under Brady v. Maryland, which requires prosecutors to fully disclose to the defendant all exculpatory evidence in their possession.

It's unclear why the defense is seeking to put Lewis, who is not prosecuting Anthony's case, on the witness list. A call to Mason's office was not immediately returned.

The defense also wants to call Jeffrey Danziger, a well-known Central Florida psychiatrist who frequently testifies at criminal trials, as a witness.

 

[AZlawyer]

Don't know, perhaps a detailed confession, not sure what else she could offer, but why would the prosecution accept at this point? They got the body.

Who wants another "detailed confession" from a pathological liar? :crazy:

The body is useful, but doesn't make this a slam-dunk case. Unfortunately, most of the information the body could impart was destroyed because (1) Casey waited 31 days, and then (2) Officer Cain failed to investigate Kronk's reports. The duct tape is a huge piece of evidence, but there are definitely potential defense theories that can explain it, and there's always a chance that one juror will say, "well, maybe it could have happened that way..."

Look. I think Casey is guilty of murder. I think the State will get a conviction. I even think they will get a conviction for murder. They might even get the death penalty. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't consider a plea agreement--a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush and all that.

 

[AZlawyer]

1) Why all of the last minute motion filings by the Defense before the LONG ago scheduled Frye Hearings...(and well the obvious...at least JB has known ICA since 2008)? Just trying to get all they can? Do they fear an adverse ruling...??

and this (posted by nums in Today's News thread)...

2) WTH???

Casey Anthony defense wants to call homicide prosecutor as witness
Several new motions were filed in the Casey Anthony case.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...,6299606.story

Quote:
Casey Anthony's defense team filed a handful of items in her first-degree murder case late Monday, including a motion to add a state prosecutor to their witness list.

Defense attorney Cheney Mason wants Assistant State Attorney Kenneth Lewis, who handles homicide cases, added to the witness list.

Mason's motion said the defense team recently learned that Lewis may have testimony under Brady v. Maryland, which requires prosecutors to fully disclose to the defendant all exculpatory evidence in their possession.

It's unclear why the defense is seeking to put Lewis, who is not prosecuting Anthony's case, on the witness list. A call to Mason's office was not immediately returned.

The defense also wants to call Jeffrey Danziger, a well-known Central Florida psychiatrist who frequently testifies at criminal trials, as a witness.

Is your legal question "WTH"? If so, my answer is, "WTH indeed."

The initial motion regarding the botanist was not a bad motion, once you got past the writing and organization (or lack thereof), but I don't see much in the motion to "vacate" (motion to reconsider) that HHJP wouldn't have already considered. I don't think he's the type to reconsider much.

The prosecutor for Maya's case might know something that would cast doubt on Maya's credibility, but IIRC the State already said they were not using Maya as a witness so, um, who cares? I seriously doubt he knows anything that would help prove Casey's innocence. Maybe Maya told him that Yuri confessed to her that he planted the duct tape on the skull. I mean GMAB.

 

[Solace]

Who wants another "detailed confession" from a pathological liar? :crazy:

The body is useful, but doesn't make this a slam-dunk case. Unfortunately, most of the information the body could impart was destroyed because (1) Casey waited 31 days, and then (2) Officer Cain failed to investigate Kronk's reports. The duct tape is a huge piece of evidence, but there are definitely potential defense theories that can explain it, and there's always a chance that one juror will say, "well, maybe it could have happened that way..."

Look. I think Casey is guilty of murder. I think the State will get a conviction. I even think they will get a conviction for murder. They might even get the death penalty. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't consider a plea agreement--a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush and all that.

True, but would the State except anything less than a plea for lwop RATHER than the death penalty and full detailed explanation of just how she did it?

 

[Bittiness39]

Is your legal question "WTH"? If so, my answer is, "WTH indeed."

The initial motion regarding the botanist was not a bad motion, once you got past the writing and organization (or lack thereof), but I don't see much in the motion to "vacate" (motion to reconsider) that HHJP wouldn't have already considered. I don't think he's the type to reconsider much.

The prosecutor for Maya's case might know something that would cast doubt on Maya's credibility, but IIRC the State already said they were not using Maya as a witness so, um, who cares? I seriously doubt he knows anything that would help prove Casey's innocence. Maybe Maya told him that Yuri confessed to her that he planted the duct tape on the skull. I mean GMAB.

TY! And yes, lol, my question was WTH? :floorlaugh:

Lemme guess, the defense could also be trying to thwart YM because they have "exculpatory" evidence that begins with "Casey said/heard/told/wrote or received information that she can no longer produce" and this will show her innocence?

TY again for the answer! Perhaps this is why the State dropped Maya altogether? Credibility issues with Maya override the small amount of information that she could give that was damaging to ICA? the Maya stuff seems to have hit a nerve with the Defense because they want to call the prosecuting attorney in Maya's case, keep YM in court during this weeks hearings and much earlier tried to have KBelich called as a witness...lol...lots of faux fire here!

 

[AZlawyer]

True, but would the State except anything less than a plea for lwop RATHER than the death penalty and full detailed explanation of just how she did it?

If the State expects a plea for LWOP and a full explanation, then there will be no plea deal. I mean, the most likely result if Casey is convicted of the highest charge against her is LWOP, with no explanation from Casey. A plea agreement is a compromise, not a surrender.

TY! And yes, lol, my question was WTH? :floorlaugh:

Lemme guess, the defense could also be trying to thwart YM because they have "exculpatory" evidence that begins with "Casey said/heard/told/wrote or received information that she can no longer produce" and this will show her innocence?

TY again for the answer! Perhaps this is why the State dropped Maya altogether? Credibility issues with Maya override the small amount of information that she could give that was damaging to ICA? the Maya stuff seems to have hit a nerve with the Defense because they want to call the prosecuting attorney in Maya's case, keep YM in court during this weeks hearings and much earlier tried to have KBelich called as a witness...lol...lots of faux fire here!

Yes, something is definitely "up" with Maya. :waitasec: I guess we'll have to wait and see what it is.

 

[strach304]

Not sure if this is the right place to ask this question but here it goes... I always thought LE and the SA were trying to prove that Caylee was drugged with chloroform and of course with the computer searches for how to make chloroform was the obvious conclusion. In one of the reports posted today it says Dr. Vass will be testifying to chloroform being one of the compounds of decomposition. So to me that sounds like more evidence in addition to the other things that prove a dead body was in the trunk. Can it be both that they are trying to prove?

 

[AZlawyer]

Not sure if this is the right place to ask this question but here it goes... I always thought LE and the SA were trying to prove that Caylee was drugged with chloroform and of course with the computer searches for how to make chloroform was the obvious conclusion. In one of the reports posted today it says Dr. Vass will be testifying to chloroform being one of the compounds of decomposition. So to me that sounds like more evidence in addition to the other things that prove a dead body was in the trunk. Can it be both that they are trying to prove?

It is both. But the State's theory is that the amount of chloroform in the trunk was in excess of what one would expect if the trunk contained "only" a dead body and not some additional source of chloroform.

I don't know if the State will pursue that theory at trial. I suspect it will depend on the strength of the evidence regarding the amount of chloroform in the trunk and the amount to be expected from a dead body.

 

[jennyb]

I thought a defendant could plead guilty simply because they want LWOP as opposed to death. Why couldn't that happen in this case?

 

[jennyb]

True, but would the State except anything less than a plea for lwop RATHER than the death penalty and full detailed explanation of just how she did it?

This is pretty much my question too. If the case is strong I'd think the State agreeing to LWOP is a pretty sweet deal. And this case is strong IMO.

 

[AZlawyer]

I thought a defendant could plead guilty simply because they want LWOP as opposed to death. Why couldn't that happen in this case?

This is pretty much my question too. If the case is strong I'd think the State agreeing to LWOP is a pretty sweet deal. And this case is strong IMO.

The case is strong, but IMO not strong enough to make LWOP a "sweet deal." But this is all hypothetical, because Casey and her team certainly don't think it would be a good deal, so it doesn't much matter what you and I think.

 

[ynotdivein]

AZ, I have searched and searched and I just cannot find the post where you laid out the reasons you do not think the jury will be asked to do a "sniff test" of the Pontiac's trunk. Given the upcoming Frye hearings this has become something of a topic again, on a couple of threads. Can you please recap the reasons you do not think it necessary/reasonable for jurors to take that field trip to sniff the car? Thank you sooo much (and I'm sorry to make you repeat yourself--better tagging in the future I promise!)

 

[AZlawyer]

AZ, I have searched and searched and I just cannot find the post where you laid out the reasons you do not think the jury will be asked to do a "sniff test" of the Pontiac's trunk. Given the upcoming Frye hearings this has become something of a topic again. Can you please recap the reasons you do not think it necessary/reasonable for jurors to take that field trip to sniff the car? Thank you sooo much!

Basically because (1) the smell has likely dissipated to some extent so the SA is unlikely to ask, and (2) the jurors are presumably not all familiar with the smell of human decomposition, so what information would it provide to them? It is more helpful for them to hear from people who can compare the car smell to the smell of human decomp.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

Sorry, I thought your question was for RH. He would probably have a much better idea of how these things normally turn out in Florida. My gut instinct is that a 15-year plea would make sense.

Surely you jest! "Make sense"?!?

When murdering mothers who toss their murdered babies into the woods to rot away with the help of an animal feast, only to get a 15 yr. punishment, then we just released a pass of approval for all disgruntled mothers to do the same as Casey Anthony.

Where did you get the leniency of 15 yrs. from?