2010.06.09 Prosecutors File for 911 Calls to Come into Trial

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
The World According

The World According

Inactive
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
3,720
Reaction score
-33
Thanks to SPQR from the today's current news thread!

"These fabrications demonstrate consciousness of guilt on the part of the defendant …" Read the document:

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/23858915/detail.html
www.orlandosentinel.com

Prosecutors in the Casey Anthony case filed a document Wednesday laying out arguments for letting jurors hear 911 calls made at the very start of the child murder case in July 2008.
But in Monday's nine-page filing, Assistant State Attorney Linda Drane Burdick argues that the 911 calls made by Cindy Anthony, the defendant's mother, should be heard. The prosecutor contends that the calls help show the progression of stories Casey Anthony told to explain the disappearance of her daughter Caylee Marie.

By the third call, Cindy Anthony is crying. "I found out my granddaughter has been taken," she tells the dispatcher. "She has been missing for a month. Her, her mother finally admitted that she's been missing."
Later in that call, she says, "There's something wrong. I found my daughter's car today and it smells like there's been a dead body in the damn car."

The calls show how "the defendant 'created' the kidnapping story after denying there was any problem locating Caylee Marie Anthony," Burdick states. "These fabrications demonstrate consciousness of guilt on the part of the defendant …"
We know that Cindy will not behave in Judge Perry's courtroom as she has in the civil depo, not for two seconds!!! [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA29r-frllI[/ame]
 
Once the good folks on the jury hear this excited utterance from the grandmother...it is over!
There is no way this is not coming in. No way.
Interesting, the stark contrast to Cindy's near nervous breakdown tone, to Casey's flat affect once she reluctantly takes the phone. That sent chills down my spine. People tell on themselves.

( Flat affect: A severe reduction in emotional expressiveness.) Yep , that is Casey. She scares me.

document
http://www.wftv.com/pdf/23858915/detail.html
 
The World According said:
Once the good hardworking, taxpaying , average American ,common sense folks on the jury hear this excited utterance from the grandmother...it is over!
There is no way this is not coming in. No way.
Click to expand...

It would be a crime against justice if these were not allowed in. This is the first and last time we hear the unadulterated truth from CA. And I completely agree - it is over.
 
The World According said:
Thanks to SPQR from the today's current news thread!

"These fabrications demonstrate consciousness of guilt on the part of the defendant …"
www.orlandosentinel.com

Prosecutors in the Casey Anthony case filed a document Wednesday laying out arguments for letting jurors hear 911 calls made at the very start of the child murder case in July 2008.
But in Monday's nine-page filing, Assistant State Attorney Linda Drane Burdick argues that the 911 calls made by Cindy Anthony, the defendant's mother, should be heard. The prosecutor contends that the calls help show the progression of stories Casey Anthony told to explain the disappearance of her daughter Caylee Marie.

By the third call, Cindy Anthony is crying. "I found out my granddaughter has been taken," she tells the dispatcher. "She has been missing for a month. Her, her mother finally admitted that she's been missing."
Later in that call, she says, "There's something wrong. I found my daughter's car today and it smells like there's been a dead body in the damn car."

The calls show how "the defendant 'created' the kidnapping story after denying there was any problem locating Caylee Marie Anthony," Burdick states. "These fabrications demonstrate consciousness of guilt on the part of the defendant …"
Click to expand...

I would be really surprised, and disappointed if the jury were not allowed to hear the 911 call. What reason would there be given for not allowing it?
 
Without these 911 calls, the authorities would never have known Caylee was missing in the first place. I think this judge will rule in favor of the prosecution.
 
These calls go to the crux of why Casey was suspect in the first place. The "my granddaughter has been taken" is the first (foundational) lie told (by Casey to CA) and the sole reason LE knew there was a child missing.

No way in h*ll those tapes are gonna be squashed. No way, no how, they are in. How can they not be?

ITA w/poster who stated CA first excited utterances are the first, last and only time she has been genuine and truthful since this whole farce began. And what a damning excited utterance it was.
 
Wisteria said:
Without these 911 calls, the authorities would never have known Caylee was missing in the first place. I think this judge will rule in favor of the prosecution.
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see how may objections JB and co will be filing.
 
I think the words "finally admitted" have relevance in that kc was holding off authorities to the very last possible moment she could (let alone the 31 days). These calls were how many hours apart?
 
The World According said:
Once the good hardworking, taxpaying , average American ,common sense folks on the jury hear this excited utterance from the grandmother...it is over!
There is no way this is not coming in. No way.
Click to expand...

Do you think there is 12 people in the United States, let alone Florida, that does not know that Cindy called 911, and claimed that Casey's car smelled like a dead body?

I don't want to play the idiot here, but if I was called on the jury, and the judge didn't allow that into evidence, I would still consider it. You can't "unknow" something.
 
Cassata11 said:
Do you think there is 12 people in the United States, let alone Florida, that does not know that Cindy called 911, and claimed that Casey's car smelled like a dead body?

I don't want to play the idiot here, but if I was called on the jury, and the judge didn't allow that into evidence, I would still consider it. You can't "unknow" something.
Click to expand...


The good news is, even if this question is asked of potential jurors, if they have heard these 911 tapes, they can still sit on the jury if their answer is yes. The threshold can't be have you any knowledge of the case, it is can you set that aside and decide the case based only on the evidence presented to you in the trial.

As you say, human nature is what it is. How many winks and smiles do we share on any given day, right?


http://www.wftv.com/pdf/23858915/detail.html

By the way, welcome here. We are glad to have you!:Welcome-12-june::Welcome-12-june::Welcome-12-june:
 
This trial is going to be about Casey, and the victim Caylee. Part of it is going to be about how Casey intentially tried to keep anyone from knowing that Caylee was dead. How Casey lied to her mom, how Casey lied to her friends, about how Casey lied to LE about the whereabouts of Caylee. "consciousness of guilt" ....maybe most of the distractions (and attempts by CA and GA to mislead LE) that have taken place since Casey was arrested, will never be heard by a jury.

The State will most likely want the jury to be sympathic towards the grandparents that have lost a grandchild. And, will stress that Casey was responsible for this loss.
 
Sun said:
This trial is going to be about Casey, and the victim Caylee. Part of it is going to be about how Casey intentially tried to keep anyone from knowing that Caylee was dead. How Casey lied to her mom, how Casey lied to her friends, about how Casey lied to LE about the whereabouts of Caylee. "consciousness of guilt" ....maybe most of the distractions (and attempts by CA and GA to mislead LE) that have taken place since Casey was arrested, will never be heard by a jury.

The State will most likely want the jury to be sympathic towards the grandparents that have lost a grandchild. And, will stress that Casey was responsible for this loss.
Click to expand...

Hi Sun! If it is within the rules, I would have only the emergency 911 operator on for two seconds to authenticate the call.
If they do call Cindy to the stand, I expect she indeed will be deemed hostile within the first five questions. THEN they can rip her to shreds,she is so easily discredited. I could make them a list of her contradictory accounts one to one hundred on my lunch break. It will be pretty obvious she is lying to save her daughter. There is no other explanation for the radically , ever changing stories. The jury may visit her being dishonest on Casey. The dots are pretty close together to connect, the parents are lying for their daughter, one may venture to guess they have something to lie about. Right? [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae5J_ObjkTw[/ame]
I enjoy watching Mrs. Drane-Burdick, she knows her stuff. My favorite hearing was when the defense was trying to get charges dropped, Mrs. DB , holding the document in her hand argued to the judge. ( paraphrasing ) ...it is legally insufficent, it doesn't even come close to the legal requirements, it is wrong on the facts and wrong on the law, areas within the document contradict one another, it is replete with errors, from top to bottom, .....it is a farce! Can you imagine the field day she will have with Cindy if she ventures off her initial statements?
You just can't make this stuff up!!
http://www.wftv.com/pdf/23858915/detail.html
 
If the defense tries to call Cindy to the stand as a character witness for Casey then will that not open the door for all of the things that Cindy has said about Casey to be allowed to be heard? For instance, her comments to Amy, Tony, etc.

Cindy displayed her true fears during that final 911 call. As others have said it was the first and last time that Cindy has ever spoken the truth about what happened to Caylee.
 
Cassata11 said:
Do you think there is 12 people in the United States, let alone Florida, that does not know that Cindy called 911, and claimed that Casey's car smelled like a dead body?

I don't want to play the idiot here, but if I was called on the jury, and the judge didn't allow that into evidence, I would still consider it. You can't "unknow" something.
Click to expand...

I have many friends in FL, a few know a little about this case, but some know nothing other then the fact Caylee was a missing child from there. I know that sounds impossible, but it's true. I live in AZ, no one I know knows anything about this case. I thought the same as you, everyone had to have heard those 911 calls made by Cindy.

I guess many people live in their own little world, for the most part. I will say most do know a little about the JB case, but this case and Haleigh's not so much.
 
The World According said:
Hi Sun! If it is within the rules, I would have only the emergency 911 operator on for two seconds to authenticate the call.
If they do call Cindy to the stand, I expect she indeed will be deemed hostile within the first five questions. THEN they can rip her to shreds,she is so easily discredited. I could make them a list of her contradictory accounts one to one hundred on my lunch break. It will be pretty obvious she is lying to save her daughter. There is no other explanation for the radically , ever changing stories. The jury may visit her being dishonest on Casey. The dots are pretty close together to connect, the parents are lying for their daughter, one may venture to guess they have something to lie about. Right?
Click to expand...

I'd like the jury to be able to hear all three 911 calls made, because I do think that it is important. If CA had never made those calls, it's likely that LE would never have known that Caylee "was missing." While Caylee was Casey's daughter, and her responsibility, Caylee did live with both CA and GA. The defense may attempt to get a jury to believe that either CA or GA could have committed the crime, and not his client. The fact that CA did call 911, leaves me with a fairly solid impression that she wasn't responsible for Caylee's death.
 
Is there any way we can get AZLawyer to comment on what reasons the 911 call could not be brought into evidence? To exclude it doesn't make any sense to me because this was the first contact with law enforcement that in fact "the child" was "missing". It's the beginning of the case - how could it be excluded?:waitasec:
 
Yeah, I too would be interested in reading under what theory of law or grounds COULD the 911 calls be excluded? I personally don't see how they could and just wondered if any of our certified attys could play devil's (casey's) advocate and explain under what argument JB could prevail with a motion to exclude. What cases is he citing to support this motion?
 
Strictly opinion here.....I am not an attorney nor do I play one on TV, but I am married to a Prosecutor. Hubby told me he will eat my stinky ballet shoes if that last 911 call (with clear "excited utterance") is not allowed in. Of course its just opinion, but I feel a whole heck of a lot better about it.
 
After reading the State's response I must say how reassuring it is to read their response bursting at the seams with case law citations and references.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 101 more.
Total: 3,900 (members: 102, guests: 3,798)

Online statistics

Members online
102
Guests online
3,799
Total visitors
3,901
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,529
Messages
17,953,932
Members
228,522
Latest member
Cabinsleuth
Back
Top