Sidebar for Caylee Anthony's forum #15

Status
Not open for further replies.

rossva

George Zimmerman: Innocent until proven guilty.
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,804
Reaction score
9
Tonight at 6 and 7, Mike DeForest sits down with Jeff Ashton to get his take on the judge's comments. WKMG Orlando 6
 

Intermezzo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
10,623
Reaction score
1,675
No, the judge can't decide to charge a witness with perjury. That's up to the state prosecutors.

And Lawson Lamar stated, soon after the trial was over, that he had no intention of charging Cindy with perjury.
He did give some explanation but I have forgotten what it was...
 

Charterhouse

New Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
908
Reaction score
3
I am so glad Judge Perry was on the Today Show.

I agree there were things that I wish he would have done differently.

But, his words about CA will help me to finally start to get over this verdict. That verdict was a life changing event for me.
 

skbsoccermom

Active Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2012
Messages
141
Reaction score
36
I saw the interview/excerpt on HLN (verdict watch for Arias) and was, at first, happy to hear him make it very clear that he thought CA was guilty and would have to answer to a higher judge. BUT, although he made the remarks about JB being like a used car salesman (I agree) I also blame the judge for ALLOWING that behavior. JB repeatedly addressed the jury - morning noon and night - every single day, and the judge did nothing to stop that. IMO, Perry was more concerned about his appeals record than he was about ultimate (earthly) justice. I also agree with the above points made about his errors. No apologies from me.

I am in agreement with you. I was thrilled that he spoke out and said there was enough evidence for a 1st degree murder conviction. Anything that puts those jurors in their place and proves to them they were wrong is a good thing.
On the other hand, there was a lot of things he let baez and FCA get away with. Ashton asked him to stop baez from personally greeting the jury, because it is improper, but Judge P did nothing about it. It was also highly irritating that they lowered her chair, and she sat there shaking her head and mouthing words. If she wanted to make a point, she should have got up on the stand, but since she chose not to, she shouldn't have been allowed to testify from the defendant's chair. I also think jury selection was extremely rushed, and he was too concerned with the budget. I don't think you can put a price on justice for a murdered child. There were a lot of great points made earlier in this thread that I agree with, so I am conflicted when it comes to Judge P. But, I am glad he said what he said today.
 

logicalgirl

Peace Hawk
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
16,024
Reaction score
0
I think history (of sorts) has been made today.....:floorlaugh:

I was poking around ClickOrlando to see if any of Jeff Ashton's comments from his interview late this afternoon were up yet.

No they aren't, but they were running much the same article about HHJP;s interview on "Today" this am with his comments.

And of course they wanted to know what Baez thought about it all.

And I quote: "Local 6 reached out to Baez about Perry's appearance on NBC's "Today" show, but he didn't want to comment."

Bwahahahahaha!!! :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:
 

logicalgirl

Peace Hawk
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
16,024
Reaction score
0
What I'd really like to see with the criticism of HHJP's courtroom handling is some chapter and verse outlining whether or not he could have done many of the things our members are saying "he should have done" without causing a mistrial.

One comment was about Patricia Young sitting in the jury room waiting to be called. What the heck would Judge Perry have to do with which citizens get a jury duty note and how was he supposed to know she was even in there? And if she made it into jury selection, it is the lawyers job to select or chuck jury members. Once again, HHJP was there directing "traffic" and telling Baez he wasn't going to allow him to drag out questioning of each juror for days. It was the lawyers who selected the jury, not Perry.

This was compared to the woman he tossed out of his courtroom for making a disturbance - huge difference standing up yelling in open court - there are laws against it.

Did Perry break laws with FCA making faces and sitting on a lower chair - could he have reprimanded her without infringing on her "rights" at trial.

These are some but not all of my thoughts - I don't mean this to be directed at any particular poster - but do we actually know or did we just not like it? And would we have had the same comments if she'd been convicted?

All IMO
 

my2sense

Me - in the old country
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
1,282
Reaction score
2
Ummm - the jury is who Baez was there to address....that was his job as a defense lawyer.

And yes, I agree that HHJP was concerned about appeal issues - he clearly said a couple of times this was a simple murder case - and now we know he expected her to be convicted.

IMO a criminal death case allows a defense attorney a pretty wide berth of behavior before they step over the line. This judge is not Judge Judy in her silly civil trias who acts out for the camera - he is a tough judge who sentenced the first woman to death in Florida and then watched her execution.

BBM: First, "ummm" is rude. Second, NO it isn't his job to address the jury in the way he did. It was his job to elicit testimony from witnesses who then address the jury. He was deliberately ingratiating himself with the jury, and the prosecution stuck to the rules and it was held against them. It was up to the judge to put a stop to that behavior by JB, and he did not do it.

We can disagree about this, but I'd rather the snark got left out of it. Hope we can agree on that part of it.
 

logicalgirl

Peace Hawk
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
16,024
Reaction score
0
BBM: First, "ummm" is rude. Second, NO it isn't his job to address the jury in the way he did. It was his job to elicit testimony from witnesses who then address the jury. He was deliberately ingratiating himself with the jury, and the prosecution stuck to the rules and it was held against them. It was up to the judge to put a stop to that behavior by JB, and he did not do it.

We can disagree about this, but I'd rather the snark got left out of it. Hope we can agree on that part of it.

I apologize if you think Ummm is snark - to me Umm is not snark at all although your comments in response are. IMO. Perhaps I should have said hmmm, or maybe I just disagree - and I do.

With respect,I disagree. I understand you feel lawyers are there to question witnesses, but ias I said above, I believe the lawyers are questioning witnesses to sway the jury one way or another - i.e. it is always jurors they are directing their comments to.

That's the beauty of Websleuths - we don't need to agree.
 

RR0004

New Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2008
Messages
20,001
Reaction score
16
What I'd really like to see with the criticism of HHJP's courtroom handling is some chapter and verse outlining whether or not he could have done many of the things our members are saying "he should have done" without causing a mistrial.

One comment was about Patricia Young sitting in the jury room waiting to be called. What the heck would Judge Perry have to do with which citizens get a jury duty note and how was he supposed to know she was even in there? And if she made it into jury selection, it is the lawyers job to select or chuck jury members. Once again, HHJP was there directing "traffic" and telling Baez he wasn't going to allow him to drag out questioning of each juror for days. It was the lawyers who selected the jury, not Perry.

This was compared to the woman he tossed out of his courtroom for making a disturbance - huge difference standing up yelling in open court - there are laws against it.

Did Perry break laws with FCA making faces and sitting on a lower chair - could he have reprimanded her without infringing on her "rights" at trial.

These are some but not all of my thoughts - I don't mean this to be directed at any particular poster - but do we actually know or did we just not like it? And would we have had the same comments if she'd been convicted?

All IMO
We'd have to go over way too much...but IMO, there was plenty of conversation here about what was happening in the courtroom...while it was happening. So it's not all Monday morning quarterbacking. jmho
 

ThinkTank

Active Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
3,582
Reaction score
7
We'd have to go over way too much...but IMO, there was plenty of conversation here about what was happening in the courtroom...while it was happening. So it's not all Monday morning quarterbacking. jmho

My personal opinions:

I do not want to put a damper on anyone's good feelings about what Perry said, and agree that it is a good thing that he told the world that he thought Casey was GUILTY.

However, nothing Perry said on the TODAY SHOW changed my opinions of the things he did WRONG in the trial, starting with jury selection. In fact, it frustrates me even more, because the JUDGE could have handled things differently to help obtain a GUILTY verdict.

I find myself distressed and hurt all over again by the outcome of the trial in 2011, because the one person who had the POWER and authority to do things differently, takes no personal responsibility for ANY mistakes or misjudgments. NONE.
If noone acknowledges mistakes in this trial -- there is no reason to expect anything different in future trials and verdicts. We are left wondering WHAT WENT WRONG?

Perry says Baez proved "reasonable doubt" -- but in my opinion, Perry allowed too much into trial that was NOT evidence and which the jury latched onto, and should not have.

In addition to my previous issues with Perry -- I have serious issues with what the JUDGE would allow in by the Defense, and what he would NOT allow in by the prosecutors.

Perry would not let the jury open the cans with the decomp smell in them -- too prejudicial he said. But he let the jury SMELL the rotted cheese containers which Baez said accounted for the decomp smell.

Perry let Baez put LIES into the juror's minds about sexual abuse of Casey AND Caylee and Caylee accidentally getting into the swimming pool, and Kronk moving Caylee's corpse, and Perry says nothing to the jury about ignoring anything that has not been proven with EVIDENCE.

He allowed the Defense to put in photos of Caylee on the swimming pool ladder [with Cindy], and Caylee reaching up to the sliding glass door, even though the prosecutors fought hard to keep them out because they gave a FALSE impression.
Cindy even said on the stand that Caylee could NOT open the sliding door.

Perry could have DENIED the defense line of questioning to George about sexual abuse, because there was NO supporting evidence, but he let all that go in.

I believe Perry's media tour is paving the way for Casey Anthony to now follow with her own media tour to dispute what Perry said. All about the $$$$$.

Nothing Perry is saying now on his media tour is helping to make any changes for future trials.
 

LinTX

New Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2011
Messages
1,063
Reaction score
7
Plus he flat out said the State had "better lawyers". :floorlaugh: :lol:
Yep, and while most are zoning in on the used car salesman description directed to JB, I am taking a bit of satisfaction in noting that he compared the teams. CM, that includes you!
 

logicalgirl

Peace Hawk
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
16,024
Reaction score
0
We'd have to go over way too much...but IMO, there was plenty of conversation here about what was happening in the courtroom...while it was happening. So it's not all Monday morning quarterbacking. jmho

I think you may have misunderstood my question...I wasn't suggesting it was monday morning quarterbacking at all - and yes, I was here darned near 24/7 during those years and yes I remember much of the same comments then.

My question was meant to ask - while I understand these are our personal opinions - is there any legal legitimacy for them at all? Are we speaking from a point of understanding the laws or are we simply venting because of our continued agony about the verdict?

Because if we don't know if our complaints have a foundation of legal legitimacy or foundation in law - how can we suggest things be changed in future trials?

I don't think we know at all. There are just too many examples to list here. But are they facts or some kind of personal wish list that has no basis?
 

rossva

George Zimmerman: Innocent until proven guilty.
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,804
Reaction score
9
BBM 1)It is NOT up to the Judge to help obtain a verdict, either NOT GUILTY, or GUILTY. To even suggest that goes completely against our court system. 2)There is absolutely ZERO evidence to prove that what Baez said about sexual abuse Casey Anthony is a lie. Only Casey and George know whether or not that happened. 3)With all the perjury accusations against Cindy, why believe her now?



My personal opinions:

I do not want to put a damper on anyone's good feelings about what Perry said, and agree that it is a good thing that he told the world that he thought Casey was GUILTY.

However, nothing Perry said on the TODAY SHOW changed my opinions of the things he did WRONG in the trial, starting with jury selection. In fact, it frustrates me even more, #1 because the JUDGE could have handled things differently to help obtain a GUILTY verdict.

I find myself distressed and hurt all over again by the outcome of the trial in 2011, because the one person who had the POWER and authority to do things differently, takes no personal responsibility for ANY mistakes or misjudgments. NONE.
If noone acknowledges mistakes in this trial -- there is no reason to expect anything different in future trials and verdicts. We are left wondering WHAT WENT WRONG?

Perry says Baez proved "reasonable doubt" -- but in my opinion, Perry allowed too much into trial that was NOT evidence and which the jury latched onto, and should not have.

In addition to my previous issues with Perry -- I have serious issues with what the JUDGE would allow in by the Defense, and what he would NOT allow in by the prosecutors.

Perry would not let the jury open the cans with the decomp smell in them -- too prejudicial he said. But he let the jury SMELL the rotted cheese containers which Baez said accounted for the decomp smell.

#2 Perry let Baez put LIES into the juror's minds about sexual abuse of Casey AND Caylee and Caylee accidentally getting into the swimming pool, and Kronk moving Caylee's corpse, and Perry says nothing to the jury about ignoring anything that has not been proven with EVIDENCE.

He allowed the Defense to put in photos of Caylee on the swimming pool ladder [with Cindy], and Caylee reaching up to the sliding glass door, even though the prosecutors fought hard to keep them out because they gave a FALSE impression.
#3 Cindy even said on the stand that Caylee could NOT open the sliding door.

Perry could have DENIED the defense line of questioning to George about sexual abuse, because there was NO supporting evidence, but he let all that go in.

I believe Perry's media tour is paving the way for Casey Anthony to now follow with her own media tour to dispute what Perry said. All about the $$$$$.

Nothing Perry is saying now on his media tour is helping to make any changes for future trials.
 

wonders

My opinion's may not alway's be right but they are
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
3,355
Reaction score
31
I think history (of sorts) has been made today.....:floorlaugh:

I was poking around ClickOrlando to see if any of Jeff Ashton's comments from his interview late this afternoon were up yet.

No they aren't, but they were running much the same article about HHJP;s interview on "Today" this am with his comments.

And of course they wanted to know what Baez thought about it all.

And I quote: "Local 6 reached out to Baez about Perry's appearance on NBC's "Today" show, but he didn't want to comment."

Bwahahahahaha!!! :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:
:floorlaugh: Your kidding me right? :floorlaugh:
Baez hasn't found a camara he didn't like until now???
:floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:
 

wonders

My opinion's may not alway's be right but they are
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
3,355
Reaction score
31
BBM: First, "ummm" is rude. Second, NO it isn't his job to address the jury in the way he did. It was his job to elicit testimony from witnesses who then address the jury. He was deliberately ingratiating himself with the jury, and
1. the prosecution stuck to the rules and it was held against them.
2. It was up to the judge to put a stop to that behavior by JB, and he did not do it.
We can disagree about this, but I'd rather the snark got left out of it. Hope we can agree on that part of it.

BBM:
1. How do you know about my bold above?
2. The Judge cannot do anything about Council or defendant's behavior without the opposite Council lodging a complaint.
 

md89

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
301
Reaction score
22
Casey Anthony trustee withdraws plan to sell her life story in bankruptcy.

"The trustee overseeing Anthony's bankruptcy, Stephen L. Meininger, had filed a motion in March seeking permission to sell "the exclusive worldwide rights in perpetuity to the commercialization of Anthony's life story," including her daughter's death and her high-profile murder trial.

However, on Tuesday the trustee filed a one page notice indicating that he was withdrawing that motion."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-casey-anthony-life-story-no-sale-20130507,0,4391768.story
 

watcher9

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
7,480
Reaction score
8,202
Casey Anthony trustee withdraws plan to sell her life story in bankruptcy.

"The trustee overseeing Anthony's bankruptcy, Stephen L. Meininger, had filed a motion in March seeking permission to sell "the exclusive worldwide rights in perpetuity to the commercialization of Anthony's life story," including her daughter's death and her high-profile murder trial.

However, on Tuesday the trustee filed a one page notice indicating that he was withdrawing that motion."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-casey-anthony-life-story-no-sale-20130507,0,4391768.story

Thanks for posting this info.
This is awful news.
Logicalgirl has brought your post over to the BK thread for discussion.
 

beach

Verified Expert
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
18,372
Reaction score
4,535
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9389352#post9389352"]Nancy Grace interviews Judge Belvin Perry.[/ame]

Topical thread linked above.

Last I heard it was supposed to air tonight. Not sure if the Jodi Arias coverage will interfere with those plans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top