Child Neglect Charges Dropped 10/21/08

[trac]

You know, I've been trying like hell to put myself in a defense attorney's shoes with this case. I seriously have NO IDEA what the defense could possibly be?! :waitasec:

If the State did indeed have the forensics tested three times at three different labs that blows poking holes in that. How can anyone resonably doubt evidence tested three times in as many labs all with the same result?

If they tried to say she sold Caylee that is human trafficking. Felony offense.

If they say she gave her to someone why would the person/s not give the child back? Not to mention that Casey and the family said Caylee is in danger and Casey saying she was kidnapped.


As you can all see, any defense I try to come up with I can, not so much shoot holes, as demolish, the entire senerio. Even the defense attorney's on the news networks have said the only defense, and the one they would use, is to attack the evidence. I can't see that as a possibility, and that's only with what we DO know. Not even coming close to what OCSD must have that we DON'T know about, kwim?


Any thoughts?

I seriously think that they will go with the kidnap story - the same with Peterson - actually the prosecution was ready to go to trial and were going to pick up Peterson when they followed him to the US/Mexico border - the body's coming ashore was a boon to the prosecution

Peterson still contends that Lacy was kidnapped and murdered, and his parents support his theory - Casey will do the exact same thing

The only difference in this case really is the amount of lies - Peterson wasn't spouting off a bunch of different stories and his family didn't get involved unless a sound bite at the trial - Casey sealed her fate when she lied to police and her mother helped her with that

 

[Gaia713]

I honestly don't have a clue what angle the defense is going to go for here either. If we didn't have all of the interviews of casey blatently lying to police, I think they'd have a better shot. The lying interviews just makes it seem like she knows exactly what happened to the baby and is purposefully making up a story to cover her butt. She would have been better if she just kept quiet from day one.

They might just try to prove "reasonable doubt" saying there's a possibility someone else did it. Like, "Cindy was the last person to be seen with Caylee..." - but I don't think that'll work because of Cindy's 911 calls where you can tell she really didn't know what was going on.

The 31 days is going to bury Casey. literally perhaps

Someone-else-did-it worked out well for Scott Peterson, maybe JB can make that one fly.

 

[Gaia713]

Could she possibly use post partum depression as a defense? She was obviously young and depending on who you believe wanted to put Caylee up for adoption....

We've seen it with Andrea Yates and such...

Thoughts?

Post partum depression does not usually last until the child is almost 3.

Andrea Yakes had it from her last child who was still an infant.

 

[Gaia713]

I seriously think that they will go with the kidnap story - the same with Peterson - actually the prosecution was ready to go to trial and were going to pick up Peterson when they followed him to the US/Mexico border - the body's coming ashore was a boon to the prosecution

Peterson still contends that Lacy was kidnapped and murdered, and his parents support his theory - Casey will do the exact same thing

The only difference in this case really is the amount of lies - Peterson wasn't spouting off a bunch of different stories and his family didn't get involved unless a sound bite at the trial - Casey sealed her fate when she lied to police and her mother helped her with that

You are correct. It was Mark Geragos who was spouting off a bunch of different stories to the media about who did it - the homesless, the burglars, the Satanists, the mystery woman. We had to listen to that garbage for MONTHS.

It will be GIGO for JB also.

 

[Gaia713]

I think it will be as simple as reasonable doubt..and I really think Casey will say she wasnt the last one to see Caylee..her mother was..jmo..

What a GREAT way for her to get back at her mom!!!!!!

 

[mahoneys07]

I think the death qualified lawyer is Terrance Lenamon

 

[100%Agave]

The defense will be "reasonable doubt".
Minus a body, the first doubt will be about the forensic evidence to determine she is dead. With a body it will be doubt about how it happened, who did it & when.
Heck either way they'll spend two weeks alone in the trial on the "chain of custody" of that car from the time it was picked up from Amscot until July 15th when George retrieved it.

The plan will be a "throw it at the wall & see what sticks" kind of defense.

I disagree about the chain of custody on the car. As far as I can remember at this point, the car was locked when she left it. It was locked when it was towed and it was still locked when GA came to pick it up. With the flys and maggots in the trunk, it seems clear to me that nobody had been in there since at least the time it was left at Amscot. The tow guy was there when the trunk was opened so there was no body in it at that time but the flys, maggots and smell were. Casey said that she parked the car there so it wasn't being used by anyone else at least on that day and since all of her friends seemed to have their own car, I don't think they can prove that someone else used it prior to the 27th.

the only question on the car would be after it was picked up but since there was no body in it at the time, the only question would be if they cleaned it before it was picked up by LE. But I don't think that screws with the chain of custody on the car as it pertains to Caylee being dead in the car and who was in possession of the car during the time.

Does that cover it or am I missing something?

As for the forensic evidence, if they did have it tested 3 times by 3 different places and came up with the same info each time that is going to be hard to disprove.

The hardest part would be did Casey to it or did someone else do it but if they can place Caylee with her and only her before she disappeared, which they can based on statements of others and prove where everyone she contacted was, with whom, and for how long. That just leaves the kidnapped and killed scenario and she has already stated who the kidnapper/nappers were and that has been proven to be a lie. Unless the defense can produce a kidnapper named Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzales, which I doubt they will have to try the I was too scared to name the real kidnapper but I can name them now scenario and that wouldn't stop the trial just postpone it while the new real kidnapper is found and questioned.

I think......heck I don't know.....I am talking like I know what I am doing but I don't know ****e!

 

[Themis]

Someone-else-did-it worked out well for Scott Peterson, maybe JB can make that one fly.

We called it the SODDI defense: Some Other Dude Did It

 

[Janis396]

Could she possibly use post partum depression as a defense? She was obviously young and depending on who you believe wanted to put Caylee up for adoption....

We've seen it with Andrea Yates and such...

Thoughts?

I haven't known too many women with PPD running around stripper-pole dancing at clubs, getting tattoos, shopping up a storm, cooking dinners for the bf, etc etc.

 

[Themis]

The defense will be "reasonable doubt".
<snipped>
The plan will be a "throw it at the wall & see what sticks" kind of defense.

That sounds like a "spaghetti" defense.

Mr. Baez promised us when KC's defense was presented, the "world" would "understand." That means they are not just going to be passive and see if the prosecution can make a case. That shoots down relying on the lack of evidence to support a "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard -- or said another way, "reasonable doubt exists so KC is not guilty." It means they are going to actively present a defense that contains KC's version of things. It means defense is going to actively call witnesses and present things we have not heard.

However, the only source of that is ... (drumroll) ... KC!

Can KC testify. Yes. BUT ... and that's a big BUT ... defense attorneys are forbidden by the rules of professional ethics from putting on evidence they know is false. A defendant can testify. The defense attorney lets the court know that it isn't attorney sanctified testimony and cannot use it in argument or refer to it in argument. They CAN, however, state this to the media. There is no law against arguing false information to the media. So, what Mr. Baez promises in the media and what actually happens in the courtroom may be two entirely different, but subtle things.

From KC's point of view; if she's going down for murder, what's a little perjury -- especially if the perjury can get her off on the murder. With her background, KC is thinking she'd be stupid not to take that risk.

Prosecution already believes they have enough to convict on the murder charge. Finding the body for forensic purposes would only be additional evidence.

At this point, Caylee is deceased and has no more earthly needs; she doesn't have any need to be brought home. Funerals and burials are social customs for the living; to provide emotional closure to the family and community.

 

[LCoastMom]

Could she possibly use post partum depression as a defense? She was obviously young and depending on who you believe wanted to put Caylee up for adoption....

We've seen it with Andrea Yates and such...

Thoughts?

I don't believe anyone saw Andrea Yates making like a rock star at anytime before or after her children's deaths. The poor woman was catatonic at the time of her arrest and prelim.

She has documented proof that she had post partum psychosis, long before her last pregnancy. Doctors warned she should not have anymore children but her husband knew more than the doctors, he didn't follow up with her treatment (took her out of treatment before she was ready) and insisted they wanted more children, when she didn't have the capacity to make such a decision. She was locked up in a converted bus 24/7 with 4 babies, finally to appease the doctors he bought a brand new house to go with their brand new baby girl and his mother took an apt near by to help out.


If ever a spouse was negligent in the deaths of his children, Andrea Yates husband goes to the head of the line. Sadly our laws don't allow for such charges.

What happened to those beautiful children was a tragedy of the worst sort, but what happened to Adrea Yates before and after their death was a tragedy too.

I just can't see any comparison to KC and Andrea.

 

[LCoastMom]

That sounds like a "spaghetti" defense.

Mr. Baez promised us when KC's defense was presented, the "world" would "understand." That means they are not just going to be passive and see if the prosecution can make a case. That shoots down relying on the lack of evidence to support a "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard -- or said another way, "reasonable doubt exists so KC is not guilty." It means they are going to actively present a defense that contains KC's version of things. It means defense is going to actively call witnesses and present things we have not heard.

However, the only source of that is ... (drumroll) ... KC!

Can KC testify. Yes. BUT ... and that's a big BUT ... defense attorneys are forbidden by the rules of professional ethics from putting on evidence they know is false. A defendant can testify. The defense attorney lets the court know that it isn't attorney sanctified testimony and cannot use it in argument or refer to it in argument. They CAN, however, state this to the media. There is no law against arguing false information to the media. So, what Mr. Baez promises in the media and what actually happens in the courtroom may be two entirely different, but subtle things.

From KC's point of view; if she's going down for murder, what's a little perjury -- especially if the perjury can get her off on the murder. With her background, KC is thinking she'd be stupid not to take that risk.

Prosecution already believes they have enough to convict on the murder charge. Finding the body for forensic purposes would only be additional evidence.

At this point, Caylee is deceased and has no more earthly needs; she doesn't have any need to be brought home. Funerals and burials are social customs for the living; to provide emotional closure to the family and community.

At this point who's to say what JB believes and doesn't believe. If he drank enough of the Kool Aid he could put her on the stand to testify aliens came down out of the clouds and wisked Caylee away. All the while he sits there with that smile on his face that makes everyone want to slap him!
Even death row inmates and indigents are treated with respect after death (maybe more than they got in life), their bodies are cleaned and interned according to their religious beliefs. I believe Caylee too deserves a final resting place in accordance with current customs.

 

[Friptzap]

Oh I agree...

He can file anything he wants. But to do this motion, he'd pretty much be lying to the Court.

FL Rule 3.191-Speedy Trial:
...A demand for speedy trial binds the accused and the state. No
demand for speedy trial shall be filed or served unless the accused has a bona fide desire to obtain a trial sooner than
otherwise might be provided. A demand for speedy trial shall be considered a pleading that the accused is available
for trial, has diligently investigated the case, and is prepared or will be prepared for trial within 5 days. A demand
filed by an accused who has not diligently investigated the case or who is not timely prepared for trial shall be
stricken as invalid on motion of the prosecuting attorney.

I don't think a team that is just assembled can file this motion this early in the case...

HAH! 5 days, I give him 5 years and he still will not be ready!

 

[impatientredhead]

I disagree about the chain of custody on the car. As far as I can remember at this point, the car was locked when she left it. It was locked when it was towed and it was still locked when GA came to pick it up. With the flys and maggots in the trunk, it seems clear to me that nobody had been in there since at least the time it was left at Amscot. The tow guy was there when the trunk was opened so there was no body in it at that time but the flys, maggots and smell were. Casey said that she parked the car there so it wasn't being used by anyone else at least on that day and since all of her friends seemed to have their own car, I don't think they can prove that someone else used it prior to the 27th.

the only question on the car would be after it was picked up but since there was no body in it at the time, the only question would be if they cleaned it before it was picked up by LE. But I don't think that screws with the chain of custody on the car as it pertains to Caylee being dead in the car and who was in possession of the car during the time.

Does that cover it or am I missing something?

As for the forensic evidence, if they did have it tested 3 times by 3 different places and came up with the same info each time that is going to be hard to disprove.

<snip>****e!

She also mentions the smell of the car in text messages to Amy, and then states that she parked the car at Amscott.

The text message where she tell Amy there was something dead in the grill of the car and that she got rid of it, right in the window of time that we know the car was dumped, and therefore probably the body the same day won't look good for her.

 

[mysteriew]

That comment by Baez about the world understands has me curious. I think that he is trying to give the impression that something so horrendous happened to KC that snapped and Caylee was the one who innocently paid for it. I don't want to believe it, but incest and or rape comes to mind. And then pressure to keep the child against her will/too much attention to Caylee/kicking KC out of the house. I probably give that theory more attention because LP also kind of gave that impression. If this is the route they are going then there will be a psych defense.

As far as not asking for a speedy defense, I have found that it is common for defense to try to delay the trial. I am always shocked when a case goes to trial in less than a year. And it is usually the defense that asked for continuances. The theory is that the longer it is, the less dependable the witnesses are. Witnesses move, they die, they don't remember details as well. Police officers go to other jobs, lose notes etc. So the longer the wait, the better for the defense. Yes, there is the danger that the body will be found in the meantime, but prosecution is going forward without a body, so that is where they need to concentrate their defense. Since her remains have not been found to date then they may never be found and rushing things won't gain them that much and could lose them a lot.

 

[Just__me]

JB cannot do the speedy trial motion. That is the equivalent of certifying to the Court that he is absolutely ready for trial.

Considering the defense team is somewhat mid-assembly, they are not ready for trial and it would be an idiotic motion, even for JB

Without the motion, the state has 175 days and that clock is ticking.
:clock::blowkiss:

I am under the impression the Baez can not file anything for the Murder charges as he is not qualified to sit first chair, therefore he can make no decisions in the case.

 

[Laece]

IMO unless a body is found, her defense will center around the fact that they still insist she is alive, circumstantial evidence or not.

which IMO is also why the neglect charges were dropped...that way it's all or nothing, and doesn't give a jury an easy out, or a 'charging her with neglect is better than nothing if she's guilty of murder but there's still no body' approach.

 

[Baznme]

That comment by Baez about the world understands has me curious. I think that he is trying to give the impression that something so horrendous happened to KC that snapped and Caylee was the one who innocently paid for it. I don't want to believe it, but incest and or rape comes to mind. And then pressure to keep the child against her will/too much attention to Caylee/kicking KC out of the house. I probably give that theory more attention because LP also kind of gave that impression. If this is the route they are going then there will be a psych defense.

As far as not asking for a speedy defense, I have found that it is common for defense to try to delay the trial. I am always shocked when a case goes to trial in less than a year. And it is usually the defense that asked for continuances. The theory is that the longer it is, the less dependable the witnesses are. Witnesses move, they die, they don't remember details as well. Police officers go to other jobs, lose notes etc. So the longer the wait, the better for the defense. Yes, there is the danger that the body will be found in the meantime, but prosecution is going forward without a body, so that is where they need to concentrate their defense. Since her remains have not been found to date then they may never be found and rushing things won't gain them that much and could lose them a lot.

Very good post........I agree.

 

[Macushla]

LOL I just got a panic call from a friend of mine who is on a business trip. She was watching Headline news and a crawl across the bottom said "charges dropped in Casey Anthony Case"! She knew exactly who to call to find out what was going on. I assured her there was no reason to foam at the mouth and say bad things, which she was about to do, and it was only the neglect charge that was dropped. She felt much better after talking to me but is still pretty steamed at Headline News for not putting all the info in!

 

[Baznme]

"Sometimes there just aren't enough rocks"