Casey's Reaction to Found Remains was Video Taped

[SeriouslySearching]

LE and the SA's office know the laws concerning this tape. Don't we already have a thread for legal debates?

I think it shows Casey knew it was Caylee the minute they reported a body was found. She didn't respond to a possible find in the water at JBP. Why not since it was the last place she supposedly saw Caylee in her fairytale story number two (or was it ten)? She knew where Caylee had been dumped, imo.

 

[LaLaw2000]

Oh yeah, it's cruel and unusual all right!!!

It is cruel and unusual for taxpayers to be paying for any more special treatment of this prisoner.
Other than that I really don't see why it isn't permissible to do what was done :camera: :applause:under existing statutes and case law.:read:
:smiliescale:
Humble Opinion :wolf:

(bolded by me)

Why do I always agree with you????

O/T: Missed you! Good to see you back!

 

[newuser]

I'm really thinking that all this may be for naught - based on the other things JB has wanted to suppress, this may be nothing worth fighting over anyway. They make a big deal out of it and then when we finally see it, it's nothing. So what if she has a fit and doubles over? We've seen her drunk and with her head in the toilet? We've seen her squatted on the parking lot? I really don't care how she reacted - personally I hope it caused her some discomfort. It certainly caused me a great deal of pain!

 

[LaLaw2000]

Heck, I really don't care if I see this tape or not because it will not change my belief that Casey murdered little Caylee. I do not think I can possibly think less of her than I do now.

 

[MiraclesHappen]

(bolded by me)

Why do I always agree with you????

O/T: Missed you! Good to see you back!

:blowkiss:

Love your new avatar. Also loved the old one though! Thank You LA. :highfive:

 

[nancy botwin]

All of this is quite simply conjecture.... everyone is entitled to their own assessment.

Was her Right to Privacy (under HIPAA) violated? We don't know... IF there were/are cameras in an examination room (not a waiting area) then that leaves a very wide open door for privacy issues.

Doe v. Delie; prison inmates have a constitutionally protected right to privacy regarding the confidentiality of their medical conditions.

HIPAA/Right to Privacy; Law Enforcement Agencies are not covered however - Medical Providers are... again, we do not know the exact circumstances of where the camera was...

Regarding Cruel & Unusual Punishment (under the 8th Amendment).. again WE DON'T KNOW... the "special/unspecial" circumstances surrounding the tape or her notification via newscasts.
Trop v. Dulles ruled that it would be cruel and unusual to take away a person's citizenship as punishment (ie; KC does not lose her civil rights prior to or after conviction). It also cited "evolving standards of decency". MOST would not care that KC be treated with any sort of decency and quite honestly neither do I. However, I do care that no one else loses their right to be treated with decency. God forbid that a truly innocent person that is jailed not be treated with such.

I agree! I've followed your posts in this thread and think you've advanced a lot of reasonable and compelling points to ponder. And you're totally right, we do not know the specific circumstances of the taping incident. Without actual knowledge of those circumstances, it's impossible to absolutely determine whether there was a rights violation or whether the tape will be admitted as evidence against Casey.

People were convinced JB would lose his Motion to Stay before the motion was even publicly released. And JB ended up prevailing on his Motion to Stay. Personally, I think there could be 6th Amendment grounds to suppress/exclude the tape from evidence and preclude its public release. I also think it could be more prejudicial than probative.

I was simply trying to discuss hypothetical scenarios where it MIGHT be argued. I respect everyone's position and would have hoped that I be treated with respect in return. I no longer feel that this conversation is constructive. I will not bend to disclosing my credentials to anyone just to state my interpretation and assessment. I am here in an anonymous capacity and prefer to remain as such.

:clap::clap::clap:
Websleuths does not require its posters to disclose personal information about their professional history or credentials. And all members are welcomed to post their opinions within the forums. Everyone has a unique and important perspective to bring to the forums and, IMHO, we shouldn't be asked to prove we're "qualified" to discuss any issue within the forums. I hope you'll keep posting your thoughts and insights, because they are valued! :blowkiss:

 

[LinasK]

I don't see how it would help her. She didn't react when they thought it could be Caylee at JBP during the water search. The only way she would know it was Caylee in that field is if she put her there, imo. Her immediate reaction was telling and is not helping her case.

Exactly, it's info only the killer would know(such as the location of the body). LE does things like that all the time in other cases to get the killers to trip themselves up. They will give them a piece of the information that hasn't been released to the general public and usually the killer reveals the other piece/pieces that fill-in the puzzle with only info the killer would know...
Very telling her reaction when the remains hadn't been identified, and she didn't react to the search and bones found at JB park.

 

[Verité]

Not when compared with the fact that she allegedly showed no emotion/no response to the findings of bones bellieved to be human at JBP, also a locale I deem to be close enough to home that it should have prompted a response from an "innocent" Casey.
The comparison between Casey's reactions to the news reports that bones were found will be HIGHLY relevant and damaging to her defense, too.

But if you flip the coin, the comparison might be highly significant and HELPFUL to a defense which acknowledges the manic-driven, improper burial of a child-decedent in an accidental, wrongful death situation, skillfully emphasized by a defense attorney with nationally-recognized expertise in those areas.

Personally, I can see both sides using it. Pros. showing it was showing guilt and Def. showing it was shock and grief.... 50-50 IMHO

I concur.

 

[Bobbisangel]

15 houses away from her home? I would be hysterical too if a two year old child's bones were found that close by. And I would assume it was probably a family member if one had gone missing.

The video is not important. It can be taken either way.

I have to agree with you. I remember that most of us knew right away that the little body would be Caylee. There were no other missing little girls in that area or anywhere near by. I can understand Casey thinking the same way that we did when Caylee was found even if it wasn't known for sure to be Caylee at that time.

I think a jury could look at the video two different ways. If I was the Pros I would keep that tape out of the trial. Baez is a fool if he uses it in trial too.
It's to big of a risk to play the video for a jury unless they have a video of Casey's reaction when the bag of toys were found in that river. Then a jury could compare the two reactions. There is a difference though in finding a bag of toys in a river and finding the bones of a little child close to the Anthony's home. I don't think I would play either tape. It's to big of a risk to try and second guess the jury.

 

[Pedrosmom]

If JB wants to use this tape, then he had better be prepared to deal with the reaction she had from the JBP search/find. JB had better be careful what he wishes for. IMO it'll only hurt him. The body hadn't been identified for weeks later. If her story is "in my gut she's OK," why suddenly freak out?

 

[Pedrosmom]

But if you flip the coin, the comparison might be highly significant and HELPFUL to a defense which acknowledges the manic-driven, improper burial of a child-decedent in an accidental, wrongful death situation, skillfully emphasized by a defense attorney with nationally-recognized expertise in those areas.



I concur.

I agree but it opens a pandora's box. Her "reactions" come into evidence. I don't think JB wants to go there. Take the 911 call - calm, cool and collected Casey telling the operator how she was using her own resources yada yada yada...

 

[Verité]

I agree but it opens a pandora's box. Her "reactions" come into evidence. I don't think JB wants to go there. Take the 911 call - calm, cool and collected Casey telling the operator how she was using her own resources yada yada yada...

In the Andrea Yates case, the testimony of prosecution expert psychiatrist Dr. Park Deitz helped convince the jury that she was "sane" at the time she
murdered her children--that she'd been motivated to do so by watching a [non-existent] episode of Law & Order regarding infanticide. Because of this
egregious error (which Dr. Deitz explained as his "honest mistake"), her case was overturned on appeal and she was later properly diagnosed as suffering
from a severe psychotic disorder and the insanity defense prevailed.

My point is, despite all the evidence which continues to accumulate and the most brilliant arguments about privacy rights, etc., we're now moving into a
precarious legal arena where experts, often behaving like slight-of-hand magicians, will influence everything from jury selection to final outcome at trial.
Remember the oh-so-damaging prosecution evidence known as the "bloody glove" at the O.J. trial? Only a few minutes of courtroom melodrama was
required to shift perceptions of the glove in the service of acquittal! I'm just saying that from here on in the KC case, expect the unexpected.

 

[suspicious1]

If JB wants to use this tape, then he had better be prepared to deal with the reaction she had from the JBP search/find. JB had better be careful what he wishes for. IMO it'll only hurt him. The body hadn't been identified for weeks later. If her story is "in my gut she's OK," why suddenly freak out?

My thoughts exactly!

 

[essies]

If JB wants to use this tape, then he had better be prepared to deal with the reaction she had from the JBP search/find. JB had better be careful what he wishes for. IMO it'll only hurt him. The body hadn't been identified for weeks later. If her story is "in my gut she's OK," why suddenly freak out?

He also better be prepared to deal with her Blockbuster tape with TonE just hours after Caylee was supposedly kidnapped from JBP! She sure didn't look like a victim while all cuddled up to her bf!:hand:

 

[LLH]

I dont see how this tape would be a violation of Caseys rights, any more than being videotaped in stores and banks, which we are all subjected to, without our consent.

 

[Betty Boop]

Respectfully snipped:

My point is, despite all the evidence which continues to accumulate and the most brilliant arguments about privacy rights, etc., we're now moving into a
precarious legal arena where experts, often behaving like slight-of-hand magicians, will influence everything from jury selection to final outcome at trial.
Remember the oh-so-damaging prosecution evidence known as the "bloody glove" at the O.J. trial? Only a few minutes of courtroom melodrama was
required to shift perceptions of the glove in the service of acquittal! I'm just saying that from here on in the KC case, expect the unexpected.

Very well said, Verite! And having sat on quite a few juries, I will definitely continue to "expect the unexpected". :twocents:

 

[Chilly Willy]

I dont see how this tape would be a violation of Caseys rights, any more than being videotaped in stores and banks, which we are all subjected to, without our consent.

I think it depends what's actually on the tape. If
Casey was being cared for by medical personnel at the time, it's not at all like being filmed in a store or bank, it would compare more to being filmed during a doctor visit.

 

[ecs5298]

I think it depends what's actually on the tape. If
Casey was being cared for by medical personnel at the time, it's not at all like being filmed in a store or bank, it would compare more to being filmed during a doctor visit.

I think you are very close to the crux of the matter but I think a more pertinent item is who was doing the taping. Since there's no expectation of privacy in jail and it seems to be SOP to bring a high profile inmate to the infirmary to receive bad news, the tape is a matter of public record.

Like I said in an earlier post, the application of HIPPA laws falls upon medical personnel and those who have access to medical information. If the reason for OCSO taping all the area's is for security reasons, then it's all fair game.

 

[Chilly Willy]

I think you are very close to the crux of the matter but I think a more pertinent item is who was doing the taping. Since there's no expectation of privacy in jail and it seems to be SOP to bring a high profile inmate to the infirmary to receive bad news, the tape is a matter of public record.

Like I said in an earlier post, the application of HIPPA laws falls upon medical personnel and those who have access to medical information. If the reason for OCSO taping all the area's is for security reasons, then it's all fair game.

I'm not sure that it's accurate to say that there is no expectation of privacy in jail. I know it's been discussed in relation to other matters that medical information is not released. If the OCSO has the obligation to keep medical information private, I don't think it matters who was doing the filming or for what reason.

 

[LinasK]

I'm not sure that it's accurate to say that there is no expectation of privacy in jail. I know it's been discussed in relation to other matters that medical information is not released. If the OCSO has the obligation to keep medical information private, I don't think it matters who was doing the filming or for what reason.

As long as the tape was stopped when Casey received her treatment for asthma/hyperventilation, anxiety meds, how has HIPPA been violated???