Should SA seek to prove that "the murder was committed for pecuniary gain"?

[manatee]

Does anyone remember the thread about a car dealership, missing children and KC? Was that determined to be a myth? I can't find that thread now

 

[ynotdivein]

I'm wondering about the fight Cindy and ICA had the night of the 15th. Did Cindy tell Casey she would no longer pay for any of Caylee's support, or care and did she also give Casey an ultimatum or a timeline when both she and Caylee needed to be out of the parent's home?

If that was the case, I think those two factors could be considered a reason why causing Caylee's death could be for financial gain. ICA would only be concerned with her own needs after she allegedly killed Caylee.

Have to give props for sparking this idea in me wee brain to denjet and logicalgirl and one poster long ago in a thread far far away whose name escapes me at the moment... but if Cindy had actually taken custody of Caylee from KC, as she apparently threatened to do more than once and quite possibly during the Big Non-Existent Fight the 15th, would/could the courts have mandated that KC pay some kind of child support to assist with her upbringing?

Was the thought of losing her daughter to her loved/hated mother AND having to pay CA for it enough to push KC into murder when perhaps in the past she stopped short at Benadryl ODs?

Personally though, I voted no. And if the theory above is true I can't imagine how the SA would prove it unless they have some amazing evidence we just haven't seen yet...

 

[CuriousTwo]

I think that the family didn't hesitate to take money for anything they could related to Caylee, but I do not think that KC used this as a motive for the murder.

 

[logicalgirl]

Have to give props for sparking this idea in me wee brain to denjet and logicalgirl and one poster long ago in a thread far far away whose name escapes me at the moment... but if Cindy had actually taken custody of Caylee from KC, as she apparently threatened to do more than once and quite possibly during the Big Non-Existent Fight the 15th, would/could the courts have mandated that KC pay some kind of child support to assist with her upbringing?

Was the thought of losing her daughter to her loved/hated mother AND having to pay CA for it enough to push KC into murder when perhaps in the past she stopped short at Benadryl ODs?

Personally though, I voted no. And if the theory above is true I can't imagine how the SA would prove it unless they have some amazing evidence we just haven't seen yet...

I guess I'd want to know what precisely is meant by financial gain. Does the law mean for a specific sum, such as life insurance, robbery, inheritance, or does it mean because of money or the cause was a money dispute? I'm actually unclear about that. Because if it was to gain some money - that's one thing, but if it was because of money or to avoid paying money - well that's a whole other shoebox.

Ot - just bought a couple pairs of Fluevog shoes, so got boxes on my mind.:blushing:

 

[ynotdivein]

I guess I'd want to know what precisely is meant by financial gain. Does the law mean for a specific sum, such as life insurance, robbery, inheritance, or does it mean because of money or the cause was a money dispute? I'm actually unclear about that. Because if it was to gain some money - that's one thing, but if it was because of money or to avoid paying money - well that's a whole other shoebox.

Ot - just bought a couple pairs of Fluevog shoes, so got boxes on my mind.:blushing:

IMO (which is different from WIMWTBT or "what I might wish to be true"), the financial gain item is meant in a strict sense, like for those folks one sees on undercover cam, conspiring to off their spouse and collect the life insurance. Think I will take this over to the Verified Lawyers thread if no one else has yet.

And kudos on the Fluevogs! :thumb: (We need better "footwear" smilies, I see.)

 

[Leila]

Not in relation to the photos. If Casey is the guilty party and the murder was committed on or about June 16th. she had no way of knowing there would be future financial gain from selling Caylee's photos.

I voted "no" for exactly this reason. The financial gain came after the fact, not something considered at the time of the murder.

 

[impatientredhead]

They may have documentation of Casey saying that Caylee was the reason she could not afford to move out of Cindy's house.

If you have that in a verifiable source and then you can show that the single life was exactly what Casey did as soon as she was free of the burden the two tie together quite nicely.

 

[rhornsby]

My personal theory is that the State is seeking the death penalty because they found out during the "sealed" hearing on Baez's potential conflict of interest that while everyone was busy looking for Caylee under the false pretense that she was still alive, Casey was selling the picture of her daughter for $200K.

So while I think the State was on the fence about whether to seek the death penalty, I have a feeling that finding out that the person that they think killed Caylee (regardless of the reason) was selling her pictures for $200K and maintaining the position that the nanny kidnapped her was the straw that broke the "prosecutor's" back. Thus why we saw a Notice of Intent to seek the Death Penalty shortly after the hearing.

I just feel that this was the last straw for the state, and while their anger about her "subsequent" actions are not admissible aggravating factors of pecuniary gain - that does not mean the state cannot consider that in determining if she is worthy of the death penalty based on the other factors which do qualify her for the death penalty.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

My personal theory is that the State is seeking the death penalty because they found out during the "sealed" hearing on Baez's potential conflict of interest that while everyone was busy looking for Caylee under the false pretense that she was still alive, Casey was selling the picture of her daughter for $200K.

So while I think the State was on the fence about whether to seek the death penalty, I have a feeling that finding out that the person that they think killed Caylee (regardless of the reason) was selling her pictures for $200K and maintaining the position that the nanny kidnapped her was the straw that broke the "prosecutor's" back. Thus why we saw a Notice of Intent to seek the Death Penalty shortly after the hearing.

I just feel that this was the last straw for the state, and while their anger about her "subsequent" actions are not admissible aggravating factors of pecuniary gain - that does not mean the state cannot consider that in determining if she is worthy of the death penalty based on the other factors which do qualify her for the death penalty.

:wave: Hi Richard!

Nice to 'see' you, thanks for that input and I think you're right, as usual.

BRAVO for the State!

It's time Casey's feet were held to the fire for her games, selling Caylee's pictures for financial gain while lying to the rest of the world being one of them. Casey has never once behaved as though her baby was kidnapped, never once worried, cried or begged LE or the FBI to help her find Caylee. Instead, she "toyed" with them, giving stupid "clues", as though that is the time to be playing "guess again!" games when your baby is missing?

Casey deserves death, exactly what she issued to Caylee, except that Caylee's was carried out in a much more inhumane, heartlessly cold method.

 

[RainyGirl]

My personal theory is that the State is seeking the death penalty because they found out during the "sealed" hearing on Baez's potential conflict of interest that while everyone was busy looking for Caylee under the false pretense that she was still alive, Casey was selling the picture of her daughter for $200K.

So while I think the State was on the fence about whether to seek the death penalty, I have a feeling that finding out that the person that they think killed Caylee (regardless of the reason) was selling her pictures for $200K and maintaining the position that the nanny kidnapped her was the straw that broke the "prosecutor's" back. Thus why we saw a Notice of Intent to seek the Death Penalty shortly after the hearing.

I just feel that this was the last straw for the state, and while their anger about her "subsequent" actions are not admissible aggravating factors of pecuniary gain - that does not mean the state cannot consider that in determining if she is worthy of the death penalty based on the other factors which do qualify her for the death penalty.

You share the same the same opinion as my hubby and his assistants in the SAO here! Not even two hours ago, this was the precise topic of discussion at their "office #2"---Starbucks. I know....I know...how perfectly cliche for Seattle, right? It's actually amazing how much work they accomplish there......... BTW, you have a following here~and not just cuz you're so dang cute in a suit and tie. :angel:

 

[logicalgirl]

IMO (which is different from WIMWTBT or "what I might wish to be true"), the financial gain item is meant in a strict sense, like for those folks one sees on undercover cam, conspiring to off their spouse and collect the life insurance. Think I will take this over to the Verified Lawyers thread if no one else has yet.

And kudos on the Fluevogs! :thumb: (We need better "footwear" smilies, I see.)

Mega thanks re new purchases....also bought the angel pendant but the darn thing keeps falling off my neck - the back reads "satan resistant" LOL Er...thought it said "satin".

Was just reading some information re Florida pecuniary gain, and the statement reads " held to apply only where the murder is an integral step in obtaining some sought-after specific gain."

Sooo - to me this again asks the question - was the release from the responsibility of Caylee - which would include financial responsibilities - a motive for her murder? I have to ponder more....wish I was a fly on the wall during that fight.

Posted this before we saw RH's comments ....however...I'm not sure if the 200K can be showed as an integral step in the murder since Caylee was already dead and I doubt ICA had the sale in mind when she allegedly murdered Caylee. But I do understand why the SA may have wanted to move to the DP after finding out.

 

[AZlawyer]

IMO (which is different from WIMWTBT or "what I might wish to be true"), the financial gain item is meant in a strict sense, like for those folks one sees on undercover cam, conspiring to off their spouse and collect the life insurance. Think I will take this over to the Verified Lawyers thread if no one else has yet.

And kudos on the Fluevogs! :thumb: (We need better "footwear" smilies, I see.)

I think you're right about how it's meant to be applied--although the State could try to get creative if they really had evidence that Casey killed Caylee to be free of the expense of raising her. But there is no such evidence here.

 

[logicalgirl]

I think you're right about how it's meant to be applied--although the State could try to get creative if they really had evidence that Casey killed Caylee to be free of the expense of raising her. But there is no such evidence here.

Are you saying you think C&G didn't care if ICA had a job or not and they expected to raise Caylee and support both of them until Caylee was of age?

 

[Bobbisangel]

I agree, I assume because Casey never paid for anything in her life,that
Cindy would have been paying for the policy,and may have listed Casey
as beneficiary (at the time of birth,a generous gift to her,pymts were
probably minimal) JMO

I think it would be known by now if there was a insurance policy on Caylee.

I think the only thing that the pic's should be used for is to show that after Caylee disappeared Caylee was out dancing and having a good time...she wasn't looking for Caylee and didn't seem to be the least upset that she was missing..in fact..she hadn't even told anyone that she was missing at the time she was out at the clubs. Not the normal behavior of a good mommy. I hope the Pros picks out three pics of Casey at the clubs so that the judge will allow a few in. Those pic's are important to this case...big time. The pics before Caylee went missing don't matter at all in my viewpoint. I hope they get the video of Casey and Tony at the video store in too. That one is important.

I don't think the Pros should even mention #5 unless they use it as #68 suggested if that is actually the case. Makes sense though.

 

[Phumi]

KC did tell some people that she had 15,000.00 in the bank. Then George stated in his LE interview that he had opened a bank account for Caylee and KC's name was on it also but I believe the amount was 100.00 or so. He stated KC cleaned out the bank account and Caylee's piggy bank.

Thanks, Strach. I remember about that small account and Casey stealing money out of Caylee's piggy bank, but I have it in my head that in some interview either George or Cindy mentioned a "Trust Fund" for Caylee that was around $15,000. At the time, I thought this must be the money KC was telling friends about and that she figured if Caylee were gone, her parents would give her the money. I can't find anything about it anywhere though, so I may be imagining it. :crazy:

 

[BondJamesBond]

FWIW, you won't find an explanation re: computer searches on missing children anywhere in the released docs. You WILL find an explanation in the computer forensics thread.

The short version, IIRC, is that the media made an error interpreting the date of when a webpage/image that was on a site Lee visited (when working on the Caylee Myspace page 7/16PM) was originally loaded to ITS page. Media 100% muffed it. They reported the date that image/page was created instead of the date it was visited by the Anthony computer.

HTH.

 

[Intermezzo]

KC did tell some people that she had 15,000.00 in the bank. Then George stated in his LE interview that he had opened a bank account for Caylee and KC's name was on it also but I believe the amount was 100.00 or so. He stated KC cleaned out the bank account and Caylee's piggy bank.

BBM

George(and Cindy) knew Casey stole money from Caylee, from her piggy bank from her bank account...
They knew she stole from the Grandparents, she stole from Lee...
They knew she lied about working at Sports Authority, and the money(check) Casey was supposed to deposit that disappeared..

And they consider these as traits of a good mother...lies, deceit and stealing.

 

[Lanie]

I voted "no", because IMO, with no known life insurance policy, it would be too hard to prove. Casey had no job for at least most of Caylee's life (her last date of employment escapes me, and I am too lazy to look it up :blushing and IMO she had not contributed a dime to raising Caylee, so it makes no sense to me there would be a motive of avoiding financial responsibility in the future raising of Caylee. I also don't believe anyone could have predicted at the time Caylee was killed, or even at the time it was revealed Caylee was 'missing', the massive public interest which created a 'Caylee market', so that flies out the window for me, as well.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

My personal theory is that the State is seeking the death penalty because they found out during the "sealed" hearing on Baez's potential conflict of interest that while everyone was busy looking for Caylee under the false pretense that she was still alive, Casey was selling the picture of her daughter for $200K.

So while I think the State was on the fence about whether to seek the death penalty, I have a feeling that finding out that the person that they think killed Caylee (regardless of the reason) was selling her pictures for $200K and maintaining the position that the nanny kidnapped her was the straw that broke the "prosecutor's" back. Thus why we saw a Notice of Intent to seek the Death Penalty shortly after the hearing.

I just feel that this was the last straw for the state, and while their anger about her "subsequent" actions are not admissible aggravating factors of pecuniary gain - that does not mean the state cannot consider that in determining if she is worthy of the death penalty based on the other factors which do qualify her for the death penalty.

Interesting theory, and it very well could be correct.

If KC sold the pictures prior to the state removing the DP, then the sale of the pictures occurred when her life was hanging in the balance of the outcome of the pending trial.
How can anyone who is facing a DP charge be faulted for trying to obtain anything they can possibly get to defend themselves, when their life may be ended if convicted. The state of Florida has far more resources than KC can ever obtain and has used many of those vast resources in preparing for the trial.
If the state had been on the fence about reinstating the DP in this case, after dropping the DP shortly before Dec. 11th, and the deciding factor for the reinstatement of the DP, was the last straw that KC obtained money to defend herself in court, I would have to ask what does this money obtained by KC have to do with committing an alleged premeditated murder that occurred several months prior to the sale?
As JA said, she is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and as of yet, she is still presumed innocent. KC is not a media mogul who turned this into a high profile media circus. She does not, and never has had any control over what the media has done in turning this case into a big money machine for the media. I would guess that the media has generated millions upon millions of dollars by turning this into a circus. The money train will continue till the end of the trial, and for the media, the money is in a guilty KC. If at any time prior to the actual trial, a plea is made, and or indisputable exculpatory evidence came out that proved KC’s innocence, the media money train would come to an abrupt halt. In the meantime, someone in the media offered KC 200,000 for pics which she accepted to defend herself against the DP. If the media had limited its involvement in this case, to that which is usually covered, the purchase of the pics would have not occurred. KC would have been declared indigent, and remained indigent throughout the whole process. Seems kind of like the SA is angry that KC obtained money to defend herself, and is trying to punish her by reinstating the DP.
To even entertain the thought that KC somehow anticipated that she could murder her child, and it would become one of the most high profile cases in history, and she could make lots of money, is utterly ridiculous.
Whether or not she is guilty of the charges, to reinstate the DP based on her selling pictures to defend herself, seems fundamentally wrong to me. As always everything in the above post in MOO.

 

[denjet]

Great thought, denjet. I hadn't thought of it that way. I had always considered Caylee to be a financial asset to casey. When she had caylee, she (casey) was able to mooch off her parents longer than she might otherwise have been able to. George and Cindy might have kicked casey out long ago if there wasn't a baby involved, you know? Caylee was an additional expense, but not for casey. I don't know.

When I think of pecuniary gain as a motive for murder, my mind jumps to insurance policies, wills, expensive health care, etc, so thanks for adding this!

hmmm ... you've got me re-thinking this now and I think you're absolutely right that KC was able to mooch off of the A's longer because of Caylee ... which makes me think my theory is not a definition of pecuniary gain but rather eliminating a burden to the lifestyle KC wanted that was mostly the burden of parenting ..

I suppose the only way I can see Caylee's death as being for pecuniary gain would be if she staged a kidnapping and tried to extort a randsom out of the A's and something went horribly wrong resulting in Caylee's death ... but that's not what happened ....

(can I take back my vote? :doh