The Trial When-Where -What

[Devon]

What gives with the prosecution then? It appeared that they had a 'slam-dunk' case when they charged KC with first degree murder and secured an indictment way back in October with the DP firmly on the table, and that was before Caylee was found. The initial proposed trial date was Jan 5, even without a body. Now they have Caylee's body and allegedly a treasure trove of new evidence that 'proves' KC murdered her child (according to those 'inside' sources whose apparent revelations gripped the media for a few days recently), so why are they now saying (as per discussions in court yesterday) that they won't be ready for trial until late this year, if then? :waitasec:

 

[butwhatif?]

What gives with the prosecution then? It appeared that they had a 'slam-dunk' case when they charged KC with first degree murder and secured an indictment way back in October with the DP firmly on the table, and that was before Caylee was found. The initial proposed trial date was Jan 5, even without a body. Now they have Caylee's body and allegedly a treasure trove of new evidence that 'proves' KC murdered her child (according to those 'inside' sources whose apparent revelations gripped the media for a few days recently), so why are they now saying (as per discussions in court yesterday) that they won't be ready for trial until late this year, if then? :waitasec:

ITA!I've been thinking the very same thing.It makes no sense.

 

[camcneishg]

am thinking they are waiting to arrest a few more people first? MO

 

[zoey]

am thinking they are waiting to arrest a few more people first? MO

I'm thinking that there is so much more we don't know....also keep in mind that the FBI is very invovled as well....perhaps they are doing jb a favor ---- more or less implying that perhaps he should start interview/deposing the witness list instead of pressers.....even seasoned atty's say he needs to concentrate on the case and not everything else....:furious:

I do think there is way more we don't know.....still question how someone knows how to use routing numbers on checks to obtain monies....how someone can do a duplicate of deposit slip so parents think money is deposited in their acct...as ga stated it appeared to be real.....

 

[Devon]

I'm thinking that there is so much more we don't know....also keep in mind that the FBI is very invovled as well....perhaps they are doing jb a favor ---- more or less implying that perhaps he should start interview/deposing the witness list instead of pressers.....even seasoned atty's say he needs to concentrate on the case and not everything else....:furious:

I do think there is way more we don't know.....still question how someone knows how to use routing numbers on checks to obtain monies....how someone can do a duplicate of deposit slip so parents think money is deposited in their acct...as ga stated it appeared to be real.....

There may well be much that WE don't know, but the point is that we have been led to believe that the prosecutors DO know..............or do they?? :waitasec:

I can't see them purposely delaying so as to give the defence more opportunity to prepare properly - if the prosecution really does have all the evidence they need they should be able to go to trial soon, but the prosecutor seemed positively uneasy yesterday when JB was proposing timescales for discussing a venue change and for pre-trial hearings. This leads me to suspect that things are not quite as they would have us believe!

 

[chicagofa13]

Does anyone know (and I apologize if I missed it here) what the long time frame is needed for? I realized they have the forensic testing to do, and the witnesses to line up, etc., but what else am I missing?? They have interviews with the witnesses already, but I think I read that each witness has to have an actual deposition done prior to trial. They obviously have a huge witness list.

I am just anxious for trial I guess.

 

[Rumpole]

What is the hold up?

Seems LE have served all the warrants and interviewed everyone.

I imagine most, if not all forensic testing is done?

Why don't the prosecution just get on with it?

I expect defence to seek time, but even if some is granted the clock needs to at lest be started!

What is the nonsense about trial still a year away?

 

[winston]

Criminal cases can take a long time to conclude. They depend on the seriousness of the charges and whether you're going to accept a plea or go to trial. There are "speedy trial rules" governing the amount of time the prosecutor has to be ready for trial, but it is not uncommon for these cases to take 6 to 12 months, or longer, to go to trial.
Delays can result from any number of reasons; crowded court calendars; busy prosecutors and defense lawyers or delays in getting documents from the prosecutor or police, that your attorney needs in order to prepare for trial. Each case requires different preparation. There are certain procedures that must be followed. Your lawyer can explain this more fully as it relates to your case. The wait is frustrating, but there's little that can be done to speed things up.
One of the biggest delays in the system is due to trial preparation. It's far better to have the delay than go to trial without adequate preparation, even if you're in jail. Your attorney will most probably prepare a Motion for Discovery, requiring that the state turn over to the defense all information and documents that the defense would be entitled to regarding your case. The attorney may also consider filing a Motion to Suppress certain evidence on the grounds that it was obtained in violation of your rights. In addition, there are also certain "dismissal" motions that may be considered, where appropriate. There will usually be hearings on the suppression motions.

http://www.allencowling.com/false04B.htm

 

[Devon]

What is the hold up?

Seems LE have served all the warrants and interviewed everyone.

I imagine most, if not all forensic testing is done?

Why don't the prosecution just get on with it?

I expect defence to seek time, but even if some is granted the clock needs to at lest be started!

What is the nonsense about trial still a year away?

I have a suspicion that the prosecution does not have the 'slam dunk' 1st degree murder case they had expected. I think they charged KC hoping that either Caylee's body would be found early enough to be able to yield up sufficient evidence to support the charge, or that KC would crack after being incarcerated for a while. Neither has happened.

IMO unless they get, or have got, more evidence to support a charge of premeditated murder than we have seen so far, they will struggle to build a convincing storyline that cannot be easily challenged by the defence. In particular, I think they may have initially placed too much reliance on the chloroform evidence (PC searches + forensics from the car) as potential proof of planning and intent, but we have already seen for ourselves how this evidence can be quite convincingly and reasonably explained away. Even the most damning evidence to date (the duct tape) may only prove that KC applied it where it was found, but not the 'when' and the 'why'.

I may be wrong, but my suspicions were aroused when I observed during the last motions hearing that the female prosecutor (can't remember her name) quickly jumped in to delay the next hearing date proposed by the judge and to state that they would not be ready until at least the end of the year, if then. I think they are hoping that the prospect of many more months solitary confinement will make KC crack. In the meantime, there may well be some more pressure applied via 'sources close to the investigation'.

 

[Rumpole]

I have a suspicion that the prosecution does not have the 'slam dunk' 1st degree murder case they had expected. I think they charged KC hoping that either Caylee's body would be found early enough to be able to yield up sufficient evidence to support the charge, or that KC would crack after being incarcerated for a while. Neither has happened.

IMO unless they get, or have got, more evidence to support a charge of premeditated murder than we have seen so far, they will struggle to build a convincing storyline that cannot be easily challenged by the defence. In particular, I think they may have initially placed too much reliance on the chloroform evidence (PC searches + forensics from the car) as potential proof of planning and intent, but we have already seen for ourselves how this evidence can be quite convincingly and reasonably explained away. Even the most damning evidence to date (the duct tape) may only prove that KC applied it where it was found, but not the 'when' and the 'why'.

I may be wrong, but my suspicions were aroused when I observed during the last motions hearing that the female prosecutor (can't remember her name) quickly jumped in to delay the next hearing date proposed by the judge and to state that they would not be ready until at least the end of the year, if then. I think they are hoping that the prospect of many more months solitary confinement will make KC crack. In the meantime, there may well be some more pressure applied via 'sources close to the investigation'.

You may well be right. Sounds like a reasoned evaluation of the situation.

I was exercising my simplistic side.

Even if what you say is so. There must come a point where a delay is not going to help. Prosecution will have to go with what they have got? And surely that can not be a year away, or even very far away at all? It does not look like KC(JB) will break and confess? I am not sure the masses will accept a lesser plea anyway?

 

[radio]

I have a suspicion that the prosecution does not have the 'slam dunk' 1st degree murder case they had expected. I think they charged KC hoping that either Caylee's body would be found early enough to be able to yield up sufficient evidence to support the charge, or that KC would crack after being incarcerated for a while. Neither has happened.

IMO unless they get, or have got, more evidence to support a charge of premeditated murder than we have seen so far, they will struggle to build a convincing storyline that cannot be easily challenged by the defence. In particular, I think they may have initially placed too much reliance on the chloroform evidence (PC searches + forensics from the car) as potential proof of planning and intent, but we have already seen for ourselves how this evidence can be quite convincingly and reasonably explained away. Even the most damning evidence to date (the duct tape) may only prove that KC applied it where it was found, but not the 'when' and the 'why'.

I may be wrong, but my suspicions were aroused when I observed during the last motions hearing that the female prosecutor (can't remember her name) quickly jumped in to delay the next hearing date proposed by the judge and to state that they would not be ready until at least the end of the year, if then. I think they are hoping that the prospect of many more months solitary confinement will make KC crack. In the meantime, there may well be some more pressure applied via 'sources close to the investigation'.

I wasn't shocked when the Prosecution scrambled for a delay -- a big delay. They know they have problems with their witnesses appearing on tv, taking money, etc.... this on top of the apparent evidence issues. I say apparent because we know so few facts at this minute. Lots of "buzz", but few facts. Sources seem to be in the drinking water, but so few facts.

The charges were applied to break Casey Anthony. She didn't break and now they are stuck with them. Arrested too soon. Over charged. What a flop!! imho

 

[Devon]

Yes, it's a risky strategy to play, if that is indeed what the prosecution is doing. The longer they delay, the more risk of witnesses forgetting the finer details of the events/conversations they were privy to. The costs are also mounting. I won't be surprised if we hear of further deal negotiations in the near future.

 

[Rumpole]

Yes, it's a risky strategy to play, if that is indeed what the prosecution is doing. The longer they delay, the more risk of witnesses forgetting the finer details of the events/conversations they were privy to. The costs are also mounting. I won't be surprised if we hear of further deal negotiations in the near future.

It's almost always a downer in a "legal" thread.

I can see, potentially more than enough evidence. I would have convicted on what I knew before the body was found. Lets not be too negative untill we know what else came out of the remains site and the searches of the Anthony home. If there is nothing there, then we can be down?

 

[wanetta]

I have a suspicion that the prosecution does not have the 'slam dunk' 1st degree murder case they had expected. I think they charged KC hoping that either Caylee's body would be found early enough to be able to yield up sufficient evidence to support the charge, or that KC would crack after being incarcerated for a while. Neither has happened.

IMO unless they get, or have got, more evidence to support a charge of premeditated murder than we have seen so far, they will struggle to build a convincing storyline that cannot be easily challenged by the defence. In particular, I think they may have initially placed too much reliance on the chloroform evidence (PC searches + forensics from the car) as potential proof of planning and intent, but we have already seen for ourselves how this evidence can be quite convincingly and reasonably explained away. Even the most damning evidence to date (the duct tape) may only prove that KC applied it where it was found, but not the 'when' and the 'why'.

I may be wrong, but my suspicions were aroused when I observed during the last motions hearing that the female prosecutor (can't remember her name) quickly jumped in to delay the next hearing date proposed by the judge and to state that they would not be ready until at least the end of the year, if then. I think they are hoping that the prospect of many more months solitary confinement will make KC crack. In the meantime, there may well be some more pressure applied via 'sources close to the investigation'.

I don't think they have a 'slam dunk' at all (for 1st degree). I think their odds were much better in beginning when they would have been dealing only with Baez in the courtroom as defense. As the defense team has grown with the high profile experts with experience in this area, I think their evidence will be questioned in ways they never counted on. I'm not even sure they can prove that the duct tape was applied where it was found. In my crazy mind, I'm wondering if the decomposition/body fluids where tape was stuck plus flooding in area wouldn't allow for slippage of the tape somewhat.

I'm in a very small town, had a neighbor a few years back charged with attempted murder, his trial case took over a year to get to trial, so I'm not shocked by the timing on all this. If anything, that case kind of left me with the feeling that "he who lies the most comes out on top in a court of law", so I don't trust either side in a courtroom and tend to question both sides harsher than I would have before. And it sure seems that when the famous experts get involved that old 'slam dunk' goes right out the window.

 

[DesSands]

There may well be much that WE don't know, but the point is that we have been led to believe that the prosecutors DO know..............or do they?? :waitasec:

I can't see them purposely delaying so as to give the defence more opportunity to prepare properly - if the prosecution really does have all the evidence they need they should be able to go to trial soon, but the prosecutor seemed positively uneasy yesterday when JB was proposing timescales for discussing a venue change and for pre-trial hearings. This leads me to suspect that things are not quite as they would have us believe!

I'm baffled too as it usually is the defense who wants to buy time hoping things will settle down and memories will fade.
But the SA wanting to delay? Can't figure out why, except maybe more interviews and possible chgs.? :waitasec:

 

[chicagofa13]

What is the hold up?

Seems LE have served all the warrants and interviewed everyone.

I imagine most, if not all forensic testing is done?

Why don't the prosecution just get on with it?

I expect defence to seek time, but even if some is granted the clock needs to at lest be started!

What is the nonsense about trial still a year away?

I heard one of the talking heads on HLN (Mark E I believe) say in FL they have to depose every witness on both sides. So he feels this will take a lot of time.

 

[mimimama5]

I think it is likely they will be granted a change in venue...which is likely to extend the trial date as well. There are alot of forensics in this case...and I would bet it will take a while to review it all before trial. My guess is that March is way too soon. But one can hope!

This Missouri girl is wishing Tivo was a possibility! I don't even have reliable cable!! Forget TruTv or Tivo, and can't get Dish ( something about our southern exposure-which I cracked up at when the tech said it! LOL) I know I can count on you sleuthers to give me a running play by play...you are such a valuable resource! :blowkiss:

 

[Where's Andre]

I think JB should ask for it to be moved to the moon or perhaps the space station. Either location would be appropriate since the whole bizarre case is already beyond anything we have ever seen on the face of the earth.

I think they should move it to Daytona. I don't believe Casey mentioned anyone from there as being related or part of her story. She has involved Jacksonville and Miami.

Oddly, Daytona is in the Orlando news coverage area.

St. Augustine and JAX are not.

 

[Seebra]

Forgive me if this is a repost, but I searched and cannot find one about it.

I am extremely confused as to why this trial is taking so long to begin - I just heard a news report that it may not be scheduled until 2010?

This upsets me - while in her current "cell", KC is away from general population, and I believe getting special treatment.

I am angry that the trial is so far off, and I can't really find a concrete answer to the standard for criminal trials, although several sites state it can take weeks up to several months to bring to trial - it is already going on 7 months and they aren't planning a trial until at the least September of 09, which is over a year.

I thought #1 that the suspect had a right to a speedy trial, #2 KC would be freaking out that she was spending this much time in jail, #3 that the prosecution would want to have this over with...

what is going on? I am really confused.

OJ's trial began in January of 05, less than 5 months after pleading not guilty on July 22 of '04.

Scott Peterson's trial took a little longer, with pretrial in Sep. 03 and the trial begins June 1 of 04. But now it seems that justice for Caylee is being dragged even through 2010 - no motion for moving the trial, no jury selection processes, was there even a pretrial yet?

What is going on and maybe I am just really naive, but is this typical to have such a long phase between indictment and trial?

 

[JBean]

Go to
search this forum
advanced search
titles only
show threads
use the keyword trial.