*UPDATE *INFO CAN BE RELEASED ANY TIME 'Casey Pros Allowed To Keep Evidence Secret

[notthatsmart]

The defense team is not on a fact-finding mission to find the truth. Actually, that is not even their job. They are supposed to protect their client's constitutional rights and do their best to minimize the time she spends in prison DESPITE the truth. Even if their client TELLS them the truth, they are not permitted to tell the judge or us, unless it will help their client.

So much for the Johnny Cochran speech in the Oj trial. Lol
I think Marcia Clark tried to say we know this or something to that matter. haha

Well I respectfully disagree: The defense has indeed deposed and investigated, so yes they are on a fact finding mission. They have the right to investigate and look at all discovery so yes it is their job.

Yes all those other things too.

And of course the Court is on a fact finding mission (defense is part of the court) , because none of us were there. None of us really know what happened. So it is a fact finding mission for all of us. IMO

 

[LambChop]

So much for the Johnny Cochran speech in the Oj trial. Lol
I think Marcia Clark tried to say we know this or something to that matter. haha

Well I respectfully disagree: The defense has indeed deposed and investigated, so yes they are on a fact finding mission. They have the right to investigate and look at all discovery so yes it is their job.

Yes all those other things too.

And of course the Court is on a fact finding mission (defense is part of the court) , because none of us were there. None of us really know what happened. So it is a fact finding mission for all of us. IMO

And unfortunately it is the facts that gives defense a problem. And at this stage of the game a lack of a witness list is a problem. JMO

 

[notthatsmart]

I will agree to stop at this point about the fact finding mission. Sort of agree to disagree. I want to avoid circular arguments. I am the only minority out here posting these days and expect to be challenged. I want to keep it kind. There are many posters and viewers here who have respect for both sides. Thats what keeps me here.

 

[LambChop]

I will agree to stop at this point about the fact finding mission. Sort of agree to disagree. I want to avoid circular arguments. I am the only minority out here posting these days and expect to be challenged. I want to keep it kind. There are many posters and viewers here who have respect for both sides. Thats what keeps me here.

I think for a lot of us NTS you keep our blood flowing. Keep up the good work. Almost as good as a brisk walk. LOL

 

[Intermezzo]

I bet you are looking forward to hearing the darn good reason for the Judge to do this, because in essence, he is saying that the equally respected officers of the court (The Defense) that is on this fact finding mission to find the truth with us, can not be trusted. That shows me that the Judge may not respect the Defense. How could she possibly get a fair trial?

The SA filed a proper legal motion...the Defense did the same a few months back...the Judge ruled on both Motions. He denied the Defense's motion and he only granted part of the Prosecution's motion.

The Judge granted the State a delay in releasing discovery to the Defense so to you this equals disrespect to the Defense and that by granting such a motion Casey can't get a fair trial.?

Are you implying that the Judge's decision is biased?

 

[truckengirl]

I agree that the silence from the defense team on JS granting the 30 days is very telling. Either the defense have an ideal what it is and its NOT good for their client OR maybe they have no ideal what it is and are scared to death and figure that if they keep quiet maybe it will just go away. I have total confidence in the SA that this is something very big that is not in KC's favor.

Yes I do believe that is crickets that I hear on the defense side, nothing but silence and crickets!

 

[zadari]

i think we all know what happened .. she killed her .. her parents found out .. deny everything .. this is a big fat farce and a lot of money for something we all know already ..blah

 

[hroark2112]

I bet you are looking forward to hearing the darn good reason for the Judge to do this, because in essence, he is saying that the equally respected officers of the court (The Defense) that is on this fact finding mission to find the truth with us, can not be trusted. That shows me that the Judge may not respect the Defense. How could she possibly get a fair trial?

I think the Court has stated, on at least one occasion, that the Truth and Ms. Anthony are total strangers.

The defense does not have to find the truth. If they are truly defending an innocent client, and they find the truth, all the better for them. In a case like this one, they're not looking for the truth, they're looking for reasonable doubt. They're looking for that glove that does not fit. Frankly, JB and team don't care about the truth, they just care that they can get the jury to have enough reasonable doubt to bring in a Not Guilty verdict.

 

[chefmom]

I will agree to stop at this point about the fact finding mission. Sort of agree to disagree. I want to avoid circular arguments. I am the only minority out here posting these days and expect to be challenged. I want to keep it kind. There are many posters and viewers here who have respect for both sides. Thats what keeps me here.

You hang in there and keep on posting your opinion, NTS. You are one of us and even if we don't all see things the same, we still enjoy reading each others opinions. You have given me food for thought on more than one occasion, and though you may not have changed my opinion of whether KC is guilty or not, you have given me reason to look at things in more ways than one. Stay the way you are. :blowkiss:

 

[Aedrys]

Y'know, if it were JUST a solid, fact finding mission and not playing the media and slandering people and evidence, I would have a lot more respect for the defense. There are quieter and more ethical ways to fully protect your clients interests and try to get them less jail time or no jail time at all. This hearing would not have even had to happen if the defense was QUIETLY doing their job - but they haven't been, and that's the whole darn problem.

Unfortunately, the defense's first reaction is get the media involved and taint the jury pool as much as possible, and then whine and moan about the overexposure in the media and how Casey can't get a fair trial. You can't have your cake and eat it too. They are going about this whole case the wrong way, and I think this should be a model to defense attorneys on how NOT to defend your client correctly.

Our justice system may be flawed, but there are defense attorneys who don't go to the length this defense team has and still very much so defend the rights and interests of their clients. How do I know this? Because VERY FEW cases are as notorious and in the media as this one. The defense only has themselves to blame for SA having to get this evidence delayed from them. Judge Strickland is only trying his darndest to make this fair so there's no retrial. And that means fair on BOTH sides of this case. I don't think Judge Strickland would just sign off of this motion without considering it carefully, and I believe it will stand up to scrutiny in the future.

At some point, all the hijinks and drama was going to get them in trouble. They can't possibly expect to act outrageous time and again, and do underhanded things behind the scenes and not have that bite them in the butt. Their very loud silence tells me that they're feeling those teeth sinking in hard and deep right now...

All IMO

 

[doogiesgirl]

I think for a lot of us NTS you keep our blood flowing. Keep up the good work. Almost as good as a brisk walk. LOL

If NTS's opinions only kept off the pounds as well as a brisk walk----then I'd be golden!! moo

 

[LolaMoon08]

22 more days! :banghead:

This is killing me!

 

[truckengirl]

22 more days! :banghead:

This is killing me!

I have the feeling the defense may be having the same reaction.

 

[beach]

22 more days! :banghead:

This is killing me!

me too! :banghead:

they could at least throw us a bone and release the docs the defense got a few days ago.

 

[LolaMoon08]

I know I was really upset to know that Casey would not be going to trial until at least May 2011. I've been thinking though. If Cindy, George or Lee (or all three) are officially charged with crimes related to the murder of Caylee, then they could plead the 5th at Casey's trial, correct?

What if the SA didn't want to take that risk and decided that it would be better for them (the Anthony's) to go to trial for their crimes first?

If they are convicted of crimes related to Caylee's murder (I'm talking after the fact crimes) it would help with the case against Casey because why would her own family commit crimes to protect her if she was not guily? We already know that Cindy and George are going to perjure themselves. We already know, that at least Cindy, is going to be declared a hostile witness.

So, the SA needs time (until May 2011) to get all this accomplished.

Think about it. The day Casey pleaded guilty to the fraud charges, JS told the SA to hold an investigative interview with DC. JS also told the SA to hand in a good estimated time that they would be ready for trial, within 10 days. The SA submitted May 2011. I think the interview with DC took place in those 10 days. The SA needed a little more time to investigate DC claims.

Wouldn't it be sweet, if even before we get to see this discovery, we witness the Anthony's being handcuffed and taken to jail?

Edit to Add: Plus, if this information that is being with held does prove the Anthony's comitted crimes to help Casey get away with murder, then you know that once it is released to the public, that we would demand that they would be arrested. I always thought the SA would wait to press charges against the Anthony's until after trial, but what if this information is so awful, that they have no choice but to charge them now. And that also played into the May 2011 date?

 

[ZsaZsa]

me too! :banghead:

they could at least throw us a bone and release the docs the defense got a few days ago.

Or at least mention when they will be available. Nothing on WFTV or Orlando Sentinel, I'm tired of looking..... nada

 

[hroark2112]

I know I was really upset to know that Casey would not be going to trial until at least May 2011. I've been thinking though. If Cindy, George or Lee (or all three) are officially charged with crimes related to the murder of Caylee, then they could plead the 5th at Casey's trial, correct?

What if the SA didn't want to take that risk and decided that it would be better for them (the Anthony's) to go to trial for their crimes first?

If they are convicted of crimes related to Caylee's murder (I'm talking after the fact crimes) it would help with the case against Casey because why would her own family commit crimes to protect her if she was not guily? We already know that Cindy and George are going to perjure themselves. We already know, that at least Cindy, is going to be declared a hostile witness.

So, the SA needs time (until May 2011) to get all this accomplished.

Think about it. The day Casey pleaded guilty to the fraud charges, JS told the SA to hold an investigative interview with DC. JS also told the SA to hand in a good estimated time that they would be ready for trial, within 10 days. The SA submitted May 2011. I think the interview with DC took place in those 10 days. The SA needed a little more time to investigate DC claims.

Wouldn't it be sweet, if even before we get to see this discovery, we witness the Anthony's being handcuffed and taken to jail?

Edit to Add: Plus, if this information that is being with held does prove the Anthony's comitted crimes to help Casey get away with murder, then you know that once it is released to the public, that we would demand that they would be arrested. I always thought the SA would wait to press charges against the Anthony's until after trial, but what if this information is so awful, that they have no choice but to charge them now. And that also played into the May 2011 date?

You don't have to be charged with a crime to plead the 5th. The jury isn't allowed to use that pleading against you in deliberations, either, so there would be no harm in them pleading the 5th if they were asked a direct question on the stand about their involvement.

 

[RR0004]

I know I was really upset to know that Casey would not be going to trial until at least May 2011. I've been thinking though. If Cindy, George or Lee (or all three) are officially charged with crimes related to the murder of Caylee, then they could plead the 5th at Casey's trial, correct?

What if the SA didn't want to take that risk and decided that it would be better for them (the Anthony's) to go to trial for their crimes first?

If they are convicted of crimes related to Caylee's murder (I'm talking after the fact crimes) it would help with the case against Casey because why would her own family commit crimes to protect her if she was not guily? We already know that Cindy and George are going to perjure themselves. We already know, that at least Cindy, is going to be declared a hostile witness.

So, the SA needs time (until May 2011) to get all this accomplished.

Think about it. The day Casey pleaded guilty to the fraud charges, JS told the SA to hold an investigative interview with DC. JS also told the SA to hand in a good estimated time that they would be ready for trial, within 10 days. The SA submitted May 2011. I think the interview with DC took place in those 10 days. The SA needed a little more time to investigate DC claims.

Wouldn't it be sweet, if even before we get to see this discovery, we witness the Anthony's being handcuffed and taken to jail?

Edit to Add: Plus, if this information that is being with held does prove the Anthony's comitted crimes to help Casey get away with murder, then you know that once it is released to the public, that we would demand that they would be arrested. I always thought the SA would wait to press charges against the Anthony's until after trial, but what if this information is so awful, that they have no choice but to charge them now. And that also played into the May 2011 date?

...and here I thought they chose a day so far in the future because they knew how long it would take for the defense to hand over their witness list.

 

[LolaMoon08]

You don't have to be charged with a crime to plead the 5th. The jury isn't allowed to use that pleading against you in deliberations, either, so there would be no harm in them pleading the 5th if they were asked a direct question on the stand about their involvement.

What I mean is this...

If George and Cindy Anthony are charged with crimes involving the murder of Caylee, it wouldn't matter if they plead the 5th regarding their involvement or not because wouldn't it be evidence in the murder trial if they were convicted of covering up for Casey or even destroying evidence?

I know Cindy and George are going to lie on the stand. I know that they are going to refuse to answer questions about their involvement and the jury can't hold that against them. But, if they have been charged and convicted, then the jury would know what they did without the question being asked.

I do believe that DC spilled the beans and I believe that it puts the Anthony's in a bad position... but, one that will ultimately convict their daughter for the murder of Caylee. Which is a good thing!

But, the SA needs to keep this information from the defense and the public because

A) If it is as bad as what we all have imagined the Anthony's of doing to cover for Casey and there is direct proof of such crimes, then we, the public would be demanding that the Anthony's be arrested ASAP.

The SA would need this time to make their case air tight before arresting the grandparent/s (or Uncle) of a murdered toddler.

B) They can't let the defense know this infomation because it may just involve them.

Or, they know the defense would leak this infomation to the public, and repeat "A."

This is all just speculation on my part. It's also something I wouldn't mind see happen because there is no doubt in my mind that Cindy, George and Lee have all commited crimes after Caylee's murder to protect Casey.

 

[Just Jayla]

You don't have to be charged with a crime to plead the 5th. The jury isn't allowed to use that pleading against you in deliberations, either, so there would be no harm in them pleading the 5th if they were asked a direct question on the stand about their involvement.

In and of itself, that is a good reason to charge them now-They may end up being of little use at KC's trial, and to try CA/GA after KC's trial is risky because a jury may feel more sympathy for a couple whose daughter has been sentenced (perhaps) to death. Not to mention how costs could be effected, witnesses are fresher now, etc.
Furthermore, the Anthony's could dump the house and leave Florida, making things all the more muddied as far as process.
On the other hand, AL could use KC's parents' conviction to show, in penalty phase, that KC is from a family of vipers, somewhat mitigating KC's behavior.