2008.09.14 Casey Enters No Guilty Plea On Fraud Charges - REVISITED

[GameTheory]

Thanks all for time and answers

:blowkiss:

 

[monoxide]

Good I say! She will get more time with a no guilty plea. Why does she continue to give herself more time with no guilty pleas and being bonded out? Oh well

 

[monoxide]

I doubt they'll even need to use those interviews on this one. If they got the video tapes she is as good as screwed

 

[GameTheory]

I doubt they'll even need to use those interviews on this one. If they got the video tapes she is as good as screwed

Yup....but my thinking is this....what if the defense introduces evidence from the missing Caylee case to the fraud charges case? Since she pleaded not guilty with so many evidence against her regarding the fraud charges, is she going for the I HAD TO DO IT TO FIND MY DAUGHTER? And the two cases would be interwined by the defense not the prosecution? Baez will argue that the missing Caylee case is RELEVANT to the fraud charges because this is what made Casey steal? [just to make clear...I don't think this is what made her steal,,,just saying that if Baez tries to relate the two cases if it will cause problems for a future case regarding the disappearance of Caylee]

 

[Themis]

I found this by doing a simple Yahoo search...
"A plea of not guilty means you believe you have not violated the law." "If you plead guilty, you are admitting to the Judge that you have committed acts which violate a valid City law. The judge will then decide what penalty will be assessed. At this time, you will have an opportunity to tell the Judge any special circumstances that you believe lessen the seriousness of the violation" http://www.gocolumbiamo.com/Court/plea.php

My point is that she knows she is guilty, they know she is guilty, so to stand up and say to their faces "I have not violated the law" is definately an insult to everyone's intelligence. Who do you think the judge has more mercy on the thief who says I'm guilty but here was the circumstance? Or the Lying thief who says "I have not violated the law" and then is proven guilty? The sentenceing would depend upon which of the two has a better shot at rehabilitation.

The website you looked at is a court site, but it is a site where someone has tried to take a more complex legal procedure; the plea process, and put a two liner on a public website on "plain English." Please understand, this site is talking about traffic violations and violations of City codes or ordinances, which are, at most, generally misdemeanors. Another communication in a "not guilty" plea on serious charges is the defendant is saying I want to see if the prosecution has all the evidence and can prove each part of each charge against me to the legal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. How many times have we heard the Anthonys say "there's no evidence" or words to that effect? Even if a defendant knows they are as guilty as sin, they have a legal right to a trial and to have the prosecutor put on the government's case and prove it up. There are ethical rules on what an attorney can do in defending a client who is guilty. The defense counsel cannot put on evidence that is not true -- cannot suborn perjury. The defense counsel cannot deliberately mislead the court. The defense counsel cannot put a client on the stand to say they didn't do it. The defense counsel cannot argue the same things. However, the defense counsel can challenge the prosecution's evidence. The defense counsel can cross-examine prosecution witnesses. The defense counsel can put on evidence in defense, extenuation or mitigation. The defendant is still entitled to the assistance of competent counsel Another thing is there are many things that the attorney has the right to decide and control. These are actions and tactics; such as, the attorney decides which witnesses to present and what questions to ask. However, there are certain things the attorney does not get to decide: one of these is whether or not to plead guilty. Mr. Baez may be advising her to plead guilty and make a plea deal. However, if his client (and I mean Casey and Casey alone -- not her parents) tells him she doesn't want to plead guilty, then Mr. Baez has no choice but to enter her plea of not guilty and prepare for trial.

 

[Themis]

Short answer. She has a legal right to plead not guilty even if there is ironclad proof that she is guilty. It is not an insult. It is her legal right to have the case proved by the government.

 

[Themis]

Yup....but my thinking is this....what if the defense introduces evidence from the missing Caylee case to the fraud charges case? Since she pleaded not guilty with so many evidence against her regarding the fraud charges, is she going for the I HAD TO DO IT TO FIND MY DAUGHTER? And the two cases would be interwined by the defense not the prosecution? Baez will argue that the missing Caylee case is RELEVANT to the fraud charges because this is what made Casey steal? [just to make clear...I don't think this is what made her steal,,,just saying that if Baez tries to relate the two cases if it will cause problems for a future case regarding the disappearance of Caylee]

We recognize your point that Casey may use the same story and same emergency defense related to Caylee's disappearance in both cases. However, just because the story is related doesn't mean that what the GOVERNMENT must prove as ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME CHARGED is the same. In other words, when looking at the CHARGES to see IF THE CHARGES are RELATED, we don't look to see if it is the same facts or story. We look to the elements of the offense. In other words, what does it take for identity theft? Are these the same requirements as for child neglect? No. They are not related. However, if you look at premeditated murder and involuntary manslaughter, they could be very much the same with the addition of a few more requirements, such as specific intent for premeditated murder. Therefore, those are related. We call the offense that doesn't need so many elements a "lesser included offense." Those have to be tried at the same time.

 

[Can't Sleep]

We recognize your point that Casey may use the same story and same emergency defense related to Caylee's disappearance in both cases. However, just because the story is related doesn't mean that what the GOVERNMENT must prove as ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME CHARGED is the same. In other words, when looking at the CHARGES to see IF THE CHARGES are RELATED, we don't look to see if it is the same facts or story. We look to the elements of the offense. In other words, what does it take for identity theft? Are these the same requirements as for child neglect? No. They are not related. However, if you look at premeditated murder and involuntary manslaughter, they could be very much the same with the addition of a few more requirements, such as specific intent for premeditated murder. Therefore, those are related. We call the offense that doesn't need so many elements a "lesser included offense." Those have to be tried at the same time.

:clap::clap::clap::clap:

Thanks Themis, for explaining what I could not.

 

[OneLostGrl]

My husband did when he was younger when he ran into some problems. Some may think it stupid but he paid for what he did, it's called accepting responsibility.

I'm glad you wrote this because I was just on my way to post a response to that same post.

Many people plead guilty as they realize that if they went in front of a jury they could/would probably be found guilty and end up in a much worse situation when it comes to sentencing.

 

[OneLostGrl]

Good I say! She will get more time with a no guilty plea. Why does she continue to give herself more time with no guilty pleas and being bonded out? Oh well

She thinks she is smarter than everyone else.

 

[monoxide]

She thinks she is smarter than everyone else.

Yep, Jose must think so as well Steel Magnolia! what a joke

 

[seeker78]

That won't cut it. It is illegal to sign someone else's name on a check or to even sign your own name on someone else's account. Unless someone is a signature on an acct no one can give you permission to use your checks. Plus, I don't think Amy is going to say she gave her permission anyway.

That makes me really happy to know.

 

[GameTheory]

We recognize your point that Casey may use the same story and same emergency defense related to Caylee's disappearance in both cases. However, just because the story is related doesn't mean that what the GOVERNMENT must prove as ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME CHARGED is the same. In other words, when looking at the CHARGES to see IF THE CHARGES are RELATED, we don't look to see if it is the same facts or story. We look to the elements of the offense. In other words, what does it take for identity theft? Are these the same requirements as for child neglect? No. They are not related. However, if you look at premeditated murder and involuntary manslaughter, they could be very much the same with the addition of a few more requirements, such as specific intent for premeditated murder. Therefore, those are related. We call the offense that doesn't need so many elements a "lesser included offense." Those have to be tried at the same time.

THANK YOU very much for your explanation! Very informative and like I said I am only asking cause I have no knowledge of the legal system in US.

 

[GameTheory]

:clap::clap::clap::clap:

Thanks Themis, for explaining what I could not.

Nah, I am sure you explained fine,,,I think I didn't explain my original question well. :blowkiss:

 

[MiraclesHappen]

ther_beatingA_Dead​

Casey's not guilty plea is not a message from Casey nor her attorney.

The not guilty plea is a minor, standard, pretty much meaningless (except it keeps the case alive) procedural step in the cat and mouse game of criminal law.
It is not a crystal ball which indicates any aspect of Casey's or Baez's thinking.

It sets up no particular defense, weakens no part of the case for the prosecution and has no hidden meaning. It contains no ulterior motive.


Quite frankly, many attorneys do not view it as a pronouncement of innocence. It;s just a "thing." It carries no hint, no clue, and no weight.

It is merely a stepping stone to get all parties involved to the next procedural step.
It is not an indicator that Baez is going to put the prosecution to their proof nor an indicator there will be a trial.

For instance, since it is widely believed that there will be more economic crimes filed, Baez would be out of his mind, knowing what he knows, to plead her now. He needs to obtain discovery but he also needs to be sure that if he pleads her guilty , that he is getting her the best "package deal" that he can.

If only a portion of the charges have come to fruition, "packaging into a plea" is shabby and frowned upon.

On the other hand, if Casey is convicted of a serious crime carrying a life sentence, the prosecution would most likely not go forward...in the name of judicial economy.

Many scenes can play out in what I have called a "cat & mouse" game.
The not guilty plea is not part of that game other than to keep it going in a very rote, procedural, ho hum way.

Fear not...Caylee will have justice.

jmo
:smiliescale:

 

[suspicious mind]

I think it is common practice for a plea of not guilt to be entered at this point, they will likely come to a plea agreement and enter a plea of guilty after the prosecutor and baez work out the details of the plea. I have never heard of anyone pleading guilty at their first appearance on any charges. They could show what she bought with the $ , so any defense of her "looking for her daughter" would be laughed out of court.

 

[newuser]

The whole system of charging, indicting, first appearance, arraignment, calendar call, whatever formula the courts use is, well, a JOKE!! They haul people in the court room three and four times to tell them what they are charged with, get an attorney, enter a plea, set a date for trial, then comes the motions concerning the trial and on and on. It's all part of the process that has enormous cost in time and money and no real value. Everyone should know the defendant wants to see the evidence. Once charged, get the evidence to the defense and set a date and go on. But that's too simple and it runs down the billable hours. 'Not Guilty" is a typical plea for the first appearance.

 

[FloridaKatz]

Oh for the love.... how in the world can you plead not guilty when they have your name on the checks and they have you on vid camera?? It just goes to show this girl thinks she can get away with everything and deny, deny, deny, even when the truth is pushed in her face!

I have a feeling that what will happen is, right before she has to go to court for this (November), she will change her plea to these charges to "guilty by reason of temporary insantity", and say that she was trying to get money to track down her missing daughter, and that she was all freaked out about it, and was stealing anywhere or anyway she could to have that money to use to be able to track Caylee down with, and that if she had to do it all over again she would, and blah, blah, blah.....

 

[tiredofthis]

My husband did when he was younger when he ran into some problems. Some may think it stupid but he paid for what he did, it's called accepting responsibility.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

 

[suggie]

Yes I agree with the legal eagles here. But don't forget there are other charges yet to be delivered to KC and JB..and not that it matters, a 911 call where her own mother wanted her arrested for stealing loads of money, and a car. I believe she said "grand theft" and this was BEFORE she knew caylee was missing.

Also, the state only has to disclose evidence of these charges not the child neglect, at this juncture, I think. Please correct me if I am wrong. TY :clap: