Anne Pham and Kasper Jordan...defense witnesses?

Discussion in 'Caylee Anthony 2 years old' started by Aedrys, Feb 16, 2011.

  1. Aedrys

    Aedrys If justice doesn't get you, karma will.

    Messages:
    6,719
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We're already wondering about Kathy Belich, but two more names have caught my eye here. What possible reason could Baez have for wanting to put Anne Pham and Kasper Jordan on the defense witness list? Wouldn't both of these people, who accuse Laura Buchanan of forging their names on a forged TES document only make the defense look worse?

    I am really scratching my head over this one too. Any thoughts?
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Kentjbkent

    Kentjbkent DELETE ACCOUNT

    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I personally think all this is related and think Baez and Mason are still working out a "strategy" for trying to prove the body was moved to Surburban AFTER KC was jailed...(but won't work imo)

    I am taking into consideration the fact that:

    the defense recently deposed WF of TES among others related to the Laura Buchanon issue, ordered expidited transcriptions of the depos

    placed Kathi Belich on the witness list....remember, Hoover took his video up to WFTV and allowed Kathi to view the video but would not allow her to record the audio....

    And now these other two witnesses...

    Still working on my theory of these events, but I am of the mindset that they are all related...
     
  4. strawberry

    strawberry Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    11,803
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So they were among the ones added late along with KB? So weird. If they had been added earlier I would think it was part of their Soddi Shenanigans but now...maybe they are going to say the State coerced them into making those calls to LB?
     
  5. Aedrys

    Aedrys If justice doesn't get you, karma will.

    Messages:
    6,719
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have wondered if the defense is really going to along with the agents of the state thing in the trial, maybe focusing on how unfair this all to Casey and how she can't possibly get a fair trial instead of really defending her in the trial. I guess maybe they're going for the angle that the police never focused on anyone else? That the SA refuses to consider anyone else a suspect? I don't know if that would work, but I can't see any other reason to put two people on the defense list that blew apart the defense's best chance at a TES witness that could say Caylee's body wasn't there. I guess the best they can come up with is stomping their feet and saying "it's not fair!" and "the state is focusing on Casey to the exclusion of anyone else!" the whole trial. And maybe they think it'll cause confusion with the jury? Or make the jury think that this is a grand conspiracy to convict innocent Casey?

    I don't know, though. It seems totally odd that these two people, who have nothing good at all to contribute to the defense in any way would even be considered for being defense witnesses, much less submitted on a list to be added at this late juncture. I don't know what Baez is thinking at this point!

    It does sound like something that Mason would suggest, though. They can put all of their theatrics in this grand conspiracy and unfairness. I can totally see him plotting to make that the focus of their defense now, not actually defending her or showing evidence that she didn't do it, just whining and being dramatic about how not fair this whole ordeal has been to her, and that it's all just a conspiracy to convict an innocent mother whose child was stolen from her. It might actually work in there wasn't a Mt. Everest of evidence against her, and if anyone was willing to say something nice about Casey. At most, what anyone might say is don't kill her. I doubt no one other than Cindy will call her a great mom or mother of the year.
     
  6. shotgun09

    shotgun09 New Member

    Messages:
    390
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    IMO, this is all part of the 'Conspiracy theory'.....remember JB's added questioning towards the end of Anne Phams' interview? The "you know you are now a target..." BS? Obviously, Kathi Belich is in with the 'conspirators' as well. The defense have been accusing the state for some time, and this is just more paranoid BS.
     
  7. TotallyObsessed

    TotallyObsessed New Member

    Messages:
    6,096
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I really think they just don't know how to list "defense" witnesses. They just seem to mirror anyone and everyone on the prosecution witness list. Instead of just knowing they can cross examine the witnesses, they list them on their witness list....??? I don't know anymore...I can't second guess stupidity.
     
  8. LiveLaughLuv

    LiveLaughLuv New Member

    Messages:
    4,721
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    0
    To create "reasonable doubt" about when/who/how Caylee's remains were placed at Suburban??? It appears they still are going to hound at the fact ICA was in custody when Caylee met her demise so it can't be ICA!

    The authorities did look into ICA's 'friends' at the time Caylee was allegedly missing. Many took LDT's, not one person from the Anthony household did. It appears the friends did more to try and find out what could have happened to Caylee than her own family. Not one word was spoken to them about Caylee other than she was with the nanny. Not one of them saw any concern, worry that Caylee wasn't in her care.

    His Honor is well aware of the tactics/antics the defense is putting out there. Just like the, they will never find an impartial jury....His Honor shot back with, “The jurors are not supposed to be deaf, dumb and totally uninformed.”!

    Baez is way over his head with a case of this magnitude, which BTW he did to himself by publicizing himself on network interviews. Seems that's all he did for the first year or so...He himself tried to taint the jury pool and it will come back and bite him HARDER than he's ever been bitten before. There's no doubt in my mind, Baez is using ICA's case as a spring board to stardom, for becoming DP qualified...I just wonder if ICA can see it or is she so self absorbed she sees his "misrepresentations" are a deliberate act to set her free...JMHO

    Justice for Caylee
     
  9. faefrost

    faefrost New Member

    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think that the defense is going to try to claim that some of these parties, such as Maya, Robin, Anne and Kasper (and possibly Kathi Belich?) were recruited to be agents of teh state, and as such are part of some vast conspiracy to convict and "murder" their client.
     
  10. Aedrys

    Aedrys If justice doesn't get you, karma will.

    Messages:
    6,719
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But isn't there going to be hearing on this soon? Why list them as witnesses, along with Kathy B, if a hearing is set to decide who is agents of the state and who isn't? Why not hash this out at the hearing? He couldn't circumvent that hearing by bringing up people later and claiming they're agents of the state, could he? Isn't that hearing supposed to determine once and for all who is and isn't agents of the state (okay, who isn't. No way is anyone going to be determined to be an agent of the state)?
     
  11. Marshmallow

    Marshmallow Member

    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I sometimes wonder if some of these additions and motions aren't just grist for the whine mill. They don't think there's a chance they'll go through but they want to able to whine that they weren't.
     
  12. LolaMoon08

    LolaMoon08 Active Member

    Messages:
    7,128
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    38
    This is what it looks like to me... It seems to me that the defense is going into this trial by putting everyone else and anything else on trial and be damned with the fact that this trial is Casey Anthony against the State of Florida in the murder of Caylee Marie Anthony.
     
  13. spqr

    spqr New Member

    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They are going to have a rude awakening when the words "will the defendant please rise" and only ONE person stands up...KC
     
  14. NoNameLeft

    NoNameLeft New Member

    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You might be right! Cherishtoo posted a docket update today:

    02/16/2011 Motion Amended; to Suppress Statements

    Maybe that's about Anne and Kasper? (IIRC Maya & Robin were already mentioned in the original Defense Motion)
     
  15. Just Jayla

    Just Jayla New Member

    Messages:
    3,198
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Or maybe, and AZ will elaborate where necessary, the defense would ultimately like to question these witnesses under more hostile circumstances. That's a push, but who knows with these peops...Wouldn't JB get to ask the same types of questions under cross that he could if they were declared hostile, though? Maybe I just answered my own question...
     
  16. faefrost

    faefrost New Member

    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Am I wrong in thinking (based on JB's "motion to strike motion to strike the motion to strike the motion...") that JB's latest crop of witnesses (AP, KJ, KB) seem to be more or less targeted at the wrong trial, the wrong crime and the wrong investigation? I mean these are at best witnesses to the witness Tampering investigation or matter. Which quite frankly goes against JB, NOT his client KC. So is he trying to set up witnesses in KC's trial to defend LB (while not being her attorney) or basically try and absolve himself of any hint of witness tampering? and if so is that ethical?

    Because otherwise it makes no sense. The LB matter will not enter into KC's trial unless JB seeks to bring it. The state has no reason to call LB as a witness regarding the death of Caylee Marie Anthony. She is a defense witness, but the state has more than enough ammo to blow her off the stand on rebuttal and then show the tampering. The state will view tha tampering as a separate matter not against KC herself. It will only come in if the defense continues to attempt to use that tainted and tampered with evidence or testimony. And who would be so stupid as to do that? But here we have it. He is calling for more witnesses to rebut the testimony of his own witness or the counters to her testimony that he should be smart enough to never let the jury hear at this point.

    I think tghese witnesses serve some personal agenda for him and not KC.
     
  17. LiveLaughLuv

    LiveLaughLuv New Member

    Messages:
    4,721
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    0

    and hears, GUILTY AS CHARGED!

    I thought I'd finish that sentence Spqr...there is no way she could be found innocent, IMO....there is too much evidence stacked against her.

    Her defense team has nowhere to go, which is why we've seen their strategy is to blame, blame, blame, deny, deny, deny, accuse, accuse, accuse...they should have been going with the evidence at hand instead of trying to create evidence of innocence and trying to recreate history. It's one thing to attack the evidence but to attack innocent people as the ones who "could" be responsible is just ludcris...I believe it shows how shallow and inept they are, with ICA at the helm...JMHO :loser:

    I wonder if CMason is having fun yet???:banghead:

    Justice for Caylee

    Little Miss Anthony, sitting in a cell
    wondering how my life went to hell,
    I thought my ends would justify my means,
    but all that I did brings my means to an end,
    I can't figure out or refute what I've done,
    I guess I'll be sitting here as my bella vita is done....:maddening:
     
  18. Melanie

    Melanie Inactive

    Messages:
    12,328
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    IMHO to put reasonable doubt in the mind of the jurors. Anne seems rather timid (after reading her depos) and doesn't want to be involved. I hope the judge doesn't award this request. From what I can surmise is that Anne will get on the stand and say she wasn't there. JB will follow up with "are you sure". Anne "I think I'm sure".

    THUD - reasonable doubt.

    Not gonna work though - IMHO.

    Mel
     
  19. Melanie

    Melanie Inactive

    Messages:
    12,328
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have my bets on whether JB is going to show up for the verdict. I remember when Geragos bailed on Peterson. Wouldn't suprise me in the least that if she's left alone at the table. She should have gone with a public defender if you ask me.

    MOO

    Mel
     
  20. LambChop

    LambChop Former Member

    Messages:
    21,160
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If I'm not mistaken that was LB's depo. I believe AP's was an investigative statement and also Kasper J. JB was not part of AP or KJ's interview and the phone calls to LB and LB's attorney. And, obviously, their testimony is for another investigation regarding tampering. What was released under discovery for KC's case was to show LB was lying about her statements to JB. I'm sure there are more statements from both AP or KJ that we have not seen because they are part of an ongoing investigation.

    My guess is putting them on the defense list give JB a chance to depose them and maybe try and find out what they know so I'd be surprised if the judge allows them to be added. JB should have added them before because they were listed RIGHT THERE ON LB's FORM. They did not check because they knew the form was false. Nothing AP or KJ has knowledge of will help KC's defense. Nothing. It looks like a form of intimidation to me. But that's jmo.
     
  21. LambChop

    LambChop Former Member

    Messages:
    21,160
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If LB does not show up for court defense gets to read her deposition. So how will SA handle this when they know her statement is false or will HHJP allow it but warn the jury that LB has admitted under oath that the statement she gave to defense if false?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice