What Is the Defense Strategy?

[Macushla]

If the defense tries to point out how many other people 'could' have killed Caylee, I think it will backfire on them. Throwing one person under the bus (George) might have a chance, but saying well it could be A, B, C or D - we are not sure exactly who, but it wasn't KC would make me laugh out loud if I were a juror.

With the release of TonE's defense deposition, where he says KC told him George physically abused her, it seems they are settling in on George. However, they can not put TonE on the stand to say this, because it is hearsay. they will have to find someone who actually witnessed the abuse, whatever that abuse was. Would Cindy do it? Would Lee? Having her friends say they saw bruises or she told them....won't work. I don't see how they are going to make any kind of George or someone else did it type of defense work, I really don't.

 

[sleutherontheside]

I just saw that the defense team in the Brad Cooper case are accusing investigators of "tampering" with his computer. In that case...Cooper allegedly visited a google earth page showing the area where his wife's body was found.

I can't help but wonder it KC's team will allege that the chloroform searches were planted by LE. After all, CA said SHE was the one searching for chlorofil........

I put nothing past these parents or defense members.

 

[joypath]

In the jail visit where GA came alone, he said he should have been a better father and she says I can't say this strongly enough...you were the best father and especially the best grandfather...

:twocents: AND Bolded,italicized & underlined for emphasis by moi (heck, I :innocent: would have translated :waitasec: them just to make the point even more DRAMATIC, if possible!:banghead: )...................She:loser: just happens to "say these remarkable words" EX TEMP with FULL CLARITY AND DICTION as she is soooooooooooo known to do great::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::great.............while she is a "few" miles away from "her "IVAN THE TERRIBLE" and safely ensconced behind thick glass, stone walls, razor wire, and protected by armed guards! DUH!....YEAH, wicked "fearful".....oh, but I forgot, she's living a "scripted" existence!:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[krimekat]

Of course there's no bathing suit! Just like there's no nanny, no kidnappers threatening everyone's safety, no job at universal or anywhere else for that matter, blah blah blah. Never, in the annals of criminal events, has there been such a convoluted history and story, especially emanating from a very simple scenario--young single mother sick of being young single mother wants to snare young single guy that doesn't want kids either, so young mother kills kid. End of story.

And what ever happened with the car seat ? Just Joking!!! I remember going 'round & 'round for DAYS about this earlier on . . . :floorlaugh:

Again, I cannot wait to see DT fumble through this trial !!!

 

[deedeeknowit]

After reading Tony's defense depo, I do believe the defense is depending on reasonable doubt. Especially since they asked him when he was at KC's home and if it was before or around June 23rd. They are trying to establish that he (along with a list of others, I'm sure) had the opportunity to access the Anthony's home computer.
I know it seems ridiculous on so many levels but all the DT needs is a sympathetic juror who disregards the facts and goes with his/her emotions. Let's face it. A lot of people don't want to believe a mother would intentionally end the life or her child.

I am seriously concerned that despite all the facts presented, there will be those who will be willing to acquit her or want to go with a lesser charge, because they would rather believe it was an "accident" or that KC must have had a reason to leave her home on 6/16 and make up convoluted reasons for why she and Caylee couldn't come back when Cindy wanted them to return, or that there were too many opportunities for others to have done something to poor Caylee and that KC couldn't cope with the situation in a healthy manner because she was allegedly abused...blah blah blah.

We are living in the age of "it's not my fault, it's because of my past"...and I'm concerned someone is going to agree with the defenses multiple, murky and muddled excuses because it's easier than dealing with the truth.
I don't want this to happen...I'm just very concerned it will.

 

[WolfmarsGirl]

Having fallen victim to a sociopath in my life, I can say that I did see it and chose to ignore it because I wanted this person to be my friend. There was something about her that I liked, and I thought we had so much in common. It was all a lie, and I felt like such a fool later on. They saw the real Casey, they just to chose to ignore the signs for the sake of friendship, or in her boyfriends cases, for the sake of having sex with her. They were all young and not able or not willing to see the monster in their midst. I bet they know a lot better now. I know I do.

It'll be interesting to see these same friends on the stand. Being interviewed for a deposition is not the same thing as being asked questions on the stand in front of a courtroom and knowing the trial is being televised. Also, having Casey sitting there and glaring at them no matter what they say is not going to help either. I think they may sound a bit different with the harsh glare of the trial and Casey in their eyes. The defense is sunk already, but if they are depending on these friends to support Casey's claim of abuse by her dad, it is not going to work and may backfire on them.

Yes, I had a boyfriend like that in college. Silly little girl that I was kept him around for a year and a half. I knew what he was about, but I looked the other way.

I thought for sure, by now, he would be on trial for murder himself. Still (20 years later), I am mildly afraid of him knowing where I am.

But, alas, he has fooled his way into being some kind of fairly-famous short-film producer...Go figure. :waitasec:

 

[LancelotLink]

The DT is going to spend the entire trial trying to poke holes in the SA case. That's a hole per point and given the points against her, that's a lot of holes. I hope the jury picks up on this. I mean, if you can poke a hole in one or two pieces of evidence, I think it would be more convincing than trying to have an explanation for each one. This didn't work for CA or GA and it certainly won't work for ICA. Do we have a thread for ready explanations given by CA, GA, JB, CM, et al?

 

[Aedrys]

The DT is going to spend the entire trial trying to poke holes in the SA case. That's a hole per point and given the points against her, that's a lot of holes. I hope the jury picks up on this. I mean, if you can poke a hole in one or two pieces of evidence, I think it would be more convincing than trying to have an explanation for each one. This didn't work for CA or GA and it certainly won't work for ICA. Do we have a thread for ready explanations given by CA, GA, JB, CM, et al?

Good point. I've always been the most suspicious of defendants who have an explanation for every little thing, even things they don't really need an explanation for, and the explanations are usually wild and don't make any kind of sense except to the defendant and the defense. That kind of defense drives me crazy, and it seems only the most guilty people do that too. You can tell that they think having something to explain everything away, even if it's illogical or doesn't sound right, makes them think they're trumping the prosecution. I hope the defense makes this mistake at trial. It's surely going to rub a jury the wrong way and get Casey closer to a needle.

 

[Panda's eye]

I don't see how they can try to throw GA under the bus, when he is the only one that ever tried to get ICA to tell the TRUTH....( not CA her re-invent the truth Mother, not LA her lets play detective brother and not Baez her fame and fortune seeking lawyer who zipped her mouth shut and put duct tape on it ). JMO
With the few jailhouse visits GA had, telling ICA collectively " she is the BOSS " like a corporation everyone works for her and tells her ( as BOSS ) " don't let this go on for much longer or things are going to start coming out " ! If ICA is innocent and a victim here...." what are the things that will start coming out, that ICA is BOSS and in control of " ? If GA was guilty he would never encourage her to open her mouth about one thing. GA doesn't want ICA to die or rot in prison with LWOP so he encourages her to do the right thing and tell the TRUTH, while CA is diligently working overtime re-inventing the TRUTH..... so precious, as always, takes no responsibility for her evil deeds. CA is Boss in her house, GA always loses.
Maybe they should try to throw CA under the bus, she is so eager to throw somebody else under there!
ICA elected herself the BOSS and in control of what happened to her daughter, the disposal of her and the 31 days that followed, when she took Caylee and left her parents residence, after the final altercation with CA. This is just a possibility .....and JMO

 

[Panda's eye]

I don't see how they can try to throw GA under the bus, when he is the only one that ever tried to get ICA to tell the TRUTH....( not CA her re-invent the truth Mother, not LA her lets play detective brother and not Baez her fame and fortune seeking lawyer who zipped her mouth shut and put duct tape on it ). JMO
With the few jailhouse visits GA had, telling ICA collectively " she is the BOSS " like a corporation everyone works for her and tells her ( as BOSS ) " don't let this go on for much longer or things are going to start coming out " ! If ICA is innocent and a victim here...." what are the things that will start coming out, that ICA is BOSS and in control of " ? If GA was guilty he would never encourage her to open her mouth about one thing. GA doesn't want ICA to die or rot in prison with LWOP so he encourages her to do the right thing and tell the TRUTH, while CA is diligently working overtime re-inventing the TRUTH..... so precious, as always, takes no responsibility for her evil deeds. CA is Boss in her house, GA always loses.
Maybe they should try to throw CA under the bus, she is so eager to throw somebody else under there!
ICA elected herself the BOSS and in control of what happened to her daughter, the disposal of her and the 31 days that followed, when she took Caylee and left her parents residence, after the final altercation with CA. This is just a possibility .....and JMO

 

[Just Jayla]

Good point. I've always been the most suspicious of defendants who have an explanation for every little thing, even things they don't really need an explanation for, and the explanations are usually wild and don't make any kind of sense except to the defendant and the defense. That kind of defense drives me crazy, and it seems only the most guilty people do that too. You can tell that they think having something to explain everything away, even if it's illogical or doesn't sound right, makes them think they're trumping the prosecution. I hope the defense makes this mistake at trial. It's surely going to rub a jury the wrong way and get Casey closer to a needle.

That's pretty much what Amy said about how she formed her conclusions about KC. In addition to CA's input, Amy knew that KC having a detailed answer for everything was getting a little carried away.

 

[RR0004]

After reading Tony's defense depo, I do believe the defense is depending on reasonable doubt. Especially since they asked him when he was at KC's home and if it was before or around June 23rd. They are trying to establish that he (along with a list of others, I'm sure) had the opportunity to access the Anthony's home computer.
I know it seems ridiculous on so many levels but all the DT needs is a sympathetic juror who disregards the facts and goes with his/her emotions. Let's face it. A lot of people don't want to believe a mother would intentionally end the life or her child.

I am seriously concerned that despite all the facts presented, there will be those who will be willing to acquit her or want to go with a lesser charge, because they would rather believe it was an "accident" or that KC must have had a reason to leave her home on 6/16 and make up convoluted reasons for why she and Caylee couldn't come back when Cindy wanted them to return, or that there were too many opportunities for others to have done something to poor Caylee and that KC couldn't cope with the situation in a healthy manner because she was allegedly abused...blah blah blah.

We are living in the age of "it's not my fault, it's because of my past"...and I'm concerned someone is going to agree with the defenses multiple, murky and muddled excuses because it's easier than dealing with the truth.
I don't want this to happen...I'm just very concerned it will.

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Anthony_Indictment.PDF

As reference...lists all charges.

As far a I know, you would need proof of an accident, before considering it, wouldn't you? I'll pray that the jurors will view the evidence and rely on proof, not personal feelings before considering guilt or innocence.

 

[Macushla]

Friends and I have been talking about what the defense is up to with trying to get 'someone else' to tell KC's story. According to the State, whatever happened was 'remote in time' to the crime and should not be introduced. We were trying to come up with new ideas as to what the incident could be. How about an attempted suicide? It is something that George, Cindy and Lee could all testify to witnessing without throwing anyone under the bus. It would also be something that Cindy would never mention to anyone because it would destroy the 'perfect family image'. She would not bring it up to LE for the same reason. It could also explain the family never seemed to rein KC in no matter what she did, they were afraid she would try it again and succeed. The defense doesn't even have to give a motive/reason for the suicide attempt - just make vague insinuations. The attempt left her emotionally shattered, emotionally stunted, etc. etc. and I am sure they could connect this to the reason she did not report Caylee missing. They can even stay with KC didn't do it but when she found out it triggered her ....well whatever it is they say she is suffering from.

So what do you all think? plausible or busted - hope Mythbusters doesn't mind me quoting them.

 

[chefmom]

Friends and I have been talking about what the defense is up to with trying to get 'someone else' to tell KC's story. According to the State, whatever happened was 'remote in time' to the crime and should not be introduced. We were trying to come up with new ideas as to what the incident could be. How about an attempted suicide? It is something that George, Cindy and Lee could all testify to witnessing without throwing anyone under the bus. It would also be something that Cindy would never mention to anyone because it would destroy the 'perfect family image'. She would not bring it up to LE for the same reason. It could also explain the family never seemed to rein KC in no matter what she did, they were afraid she would try it again and succeed. The defense doesn't even have to give a motive/reason for the suicide attempt - just make vague insinuations. The attempt left her emotionally shattered, emotionally stunted, etc. etc. and I am sure they could connect this to the reason she did not report Caylee missing. They can even stay with KC didn't do it but when she found out it triggered her ....well whatever it is they say she is suffering from.

So what do you all think? plausible or busted - hope Mythbusters doesn't mind me quoting them.

Ya know, Mac, that makes more sense than anything I've heard so far. I wouldn't buy it, or aquit because of it if I were a juror, though. But, still, it is a better explanation for the A's allowing her to run all over them, steal and lie for so long. I would just have a big problem with them knowingly allowing her to be responsible for a baby/toddler knowing that she had tried to kill herself. If they knew she was unstable and still put such a huge responsibility on her, then I would have no words to describe my feelings about them. I mean, "we did't want to upset her because she tried to commit suicide, so we looked past her stealing tens of thousands of dollars from us, yet we allowed her to watch the grandbaby we loved so very much." is probably not going to fly. But, it's the best excuse I've heard so far. MOO

 

[Tracey276]

Hello everyone. It's been quite awhile since I have been here. But I was watching NG from last night, again today. And something hit me hard. I was wondering if anyone else thinks this may happen. With LKB's statement on 48 hours mystery, regarding KC lied because of the "way she was brought up", etc. And with KC's letters to the inmate accusing her father of abuse, and her mother not believing her, I wonder if the defense will try one of two things here, a. the accident theory but afraid to tell because she was afraid of her parents or b. she did not want to leave Caylee with her father or family because of the abuse she went through and was afraid for Caylee.
I don't know in what context she can use this defense. A thought just ran across my mind that she will try and use some type of way to say her father abused her, her brother abused her, he mother didn't believe her. How could she ever leave Caylee, with "those kind of people"? It's just curious to me, with JB trying to get information in the trial, by mental health experts, if they are wanting to use some type of she wasn't thinking clearly and felt she couldn't ever leave Caylee with them but also felt trapped.
Not solid in thought yet. It's just I cannot imagine how this defense has anything to defend her at all. Throwing stuff around my head and nothing really sticks....

 

[ZsaZsa]

A light just went off in my head and I think I know what they are going to do, at least in the opening statement.

First of all,there was that poster around here a while ago who was so pro-KC. I think I quoted her in one of my recent posts, so I will go back and check.

But this person said KC partied and didn't worry about Caylee during those 31 days because she didn't know the child was missing. I think the DT is going to lead with this information and follow up by explaining the fact (word used loosely here) that KC gave her baby to someone she trusted for all of those days.

She also told her pen-pal :banghead: she had given Caylee away to zanny so KC could make plans for the great move away from C&G.

It will be someone we all know, I think. But the poor guy/gal chosen will be the one with a shaky alibi and someone she has not talked to in a long time.
Like, maybe Dante, Annie, the other girl who looks like Annie in the burrito-eating-in-a-car fiasco photos.

LKB has stated on National TV that ICA lied about there being a Zanny, so how can any new version of events include her?

 

[ZsaZsa]

Friends and I have been talking about what the defense is up to with trying to get 'someone else' to tell KC's story. According to the State, whatever happened was 'remote in time' to the crime and should not be introduced. We were trying to come up with new ideas as to what the incident could be. How about an attempted suicide? It is something that George, Cindy and Lee could all testify to witnessing without throwing anyone under the bus. It would also be something that Cindy would never mention to anyone because it would destroy the 'perfect family image'. She would not bring it up to LE for the same reason. It could also explain the family never seemed to rein KC in no matter what she did, they were afraid she would try it again and succeed. The defense doesn't even have to give a motive/reason for the suicide attempt - just make vague insinuations. The attempt left her emotionally shattered, emotionally stunted, etc. etc. and I am sure they could connect this to the reason she did not report Caylee missing. They can even stay with KC didn't do it but when she found out it triggered her ....well whatever it is they say she is suffering from.

So what do you all think? plausible or busted - hope Mythbusters doesn't mind me quoting them.

They could all sit down and concoct a story as to how ICA is not at fault, but at the end of the day who would believe her/her Attorney/her family?
They can all be proved diabolical liars.

 

[LancelotLink]

Diabolical describes them perfectly.

 

[lowens1975]

ICA could not wait to make bail and go home . There are plenty of witnesses as to her apparent moods and actions when she went home ,the same home where George lived.

At that time she probably could have stayed with any number of people,but she went home.

ICA is not afraid of GA or CA. It won't be hard to prove.

She's not afraid of them. She hasn't been for awhile. Probably from since Caylee was born. If she was afraid, then she would have been *very* afraid of them them finding out she wasn't working and that lie went on for 1 and half years. She would have been afraid of what her mother would do if she took the liberty of using her credit cards or transferring money out of her bank account to pay that sky high cell phone bill she ran up every month. She would have been afraid that food that she took from the house while GA and CA was working would be missed. And that's not mentioning what she did to her grandparents. At some point, her 'fear' would have stopped her and it didn't.

 

[strach304]

The DT is going to spend the entire trial trying to poke holes in the SA case. That's a hole per point and given the points against her, that's a lot of holes. I hope the jury picks up on this. I mean, if you can poke a hole in one or two pieces of evidence, I think it would be more convincing than trying to have an explanation for each one. This didn't work for CA or GA and it certainly won't work for ICA. Do we have a thread for ready explanations given by CA, GA, JB, CM, et al?

Up to this point it was all based around the nanny and Casey's lies now they are admitting all of that was a farce so what is the new strategy?