What Is the Defense Strategy #2

[LiveLaughLuv]

Back to the drawing board....

I wonder if ICA had a 'sit' down with her attorneys...what the heck happened? You promised me all this evidence would not come in!

I am so grateful His Honor ruled as he did, absolutely great ruling by His Honor...Caylee's last moments alive will be told to a jury of ICA's peers. They will then have all the information as the evidence unfolded...absolutely devasting to the defense...I believe ICA could stop this at any tiime...she might want to rethink her plan of defense for they still have nothing, 3 years later...Good Golly, Miss Molly...13 days to go for jury selections....:seeya: JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[Kentjbkent]

It sure does and IMO you hit the nail on the head because I think this is exactly what she is doing. Her and JB. I think it's a safe bet all other defense lawyers that are now gone tried to get her to plea. They knew what her and JB had planned and are smart and experienced enough to know it won't work. I'm sure they are confident that a DP verdict will be overturned as well. Actually I doubt JB cares as long as he gets his DP qualification out of this madness. They are the million dollar lawyers after all. CM, AF, HHJP, and the SA's will make sure she gets a fair trial. Casey is just that ignorant about life and arrogant enough imo to count on that one rogue juror.

Here is why I am struggling to buy that....

Many have speculated that Casey would NEVER admit to anything, and has the emotional maturity to believe she can get away with ANYTHING....

If that is the case, why didn't she display this same behavior when the fraud trial began?

To assume many are correct in analyzying her behaviors and demeanor, wouldn't she have demanded her "boys" at least attempted to defend her honor????

I would love someone to suggest a possible reasonable scenario on why her demeanor would change now so I can at least ponder the suggestion that there is NO WAY she would consider a plea in this upcoming trial....

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Here is why I am struggling to buy that....

Many have speculated that Casey would NEVER admit to anything, and has the emotional maturity to believe she can get away with ANYTHING....

If that is the case, why didn't she display this same behavior when the fraud trial began?

To assume many are correct in analyzying her behaviors and demeanor, wouldn't she have demanded her "boys" at least attempted to defend her honor????

I would love someone to suggest a possible reasonable scenario on why her demeanor would change now so I can at least ponder the suggestion that there is NO WAY she would consider a plea in this upcoming trial....

She was caught red handed...they have the videos of her so there's no disputing that...but she is once again down the end of that Universal Hallway...when her back is up against that wall, would she consider changing her plea? I bet she would if she can get the aggravated manslaughter sentence and not the felonly murder of LWOP...but again, this isn't on HER terms what her sentence would be...and His Honor would have to go along with this as well...so, I don't believe ICA would admit to any wrong doing involving Caylee for then CA wins that, you've been a neglectful parent argument...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[atthelake]

I believe that the information of taking Caylee away was also corroborated by Sin-dy's mother as shown in the many emails in another thread. Her mother was outlining what SIN-DY had told her.

I think there is more evidence showing Casey as the abuser rather than the other way around. The choking story came from Casey so maybe CA is only telling a half-truth when she denies the argument. The MH info is new also. He got the taking Caylee away as punishment from ICA, not GA, CA.

 

[Solace]

I'm guessing it's the report about the stolen gas cans.

Can't be that because Tony Lazarro already said he and KC took the gas cans.

 

[drip~drop]

Can one even imagine the things that must come out of a " brain-storming " episode for Mr. Baez, for " ways to get a mistrial "?

Perhaps having CA and GA bust into the courtroom, CA swinging her hammer and screaming " free the inmate " while GA runs with his hose and hoses down Jose, while Jose sings a few frames of " wasted days and wasted nights ", while ICA slaps him in the leg with a freeze pop and CM throws pop tarts at the back of his head..........Could this " git err dunn " ?

Then they all run like heck out of the courtroom and head for the airport.:floorlaugh:
moo

 

[Solace]

I think they are going to stay with the nanny story , as stupid as it is ,until the very end . She is never going to admit to anything . I m betting everyday she sits in jail waiting for the money she will get from the books she will write when she is aquitted . being as brilliant as she is . LOL .This nasty little pc of work will never admit to anything and will never take the stand .

Lindy Kenny Baden came out on 48 hours and said the nannie story was a lie. They are not going to use that. I think they are going to name someone else or IMPLY big time that it is George who was someone who maxed out their credit cards to a Nigerian who proceeded to scam him; he took 5,000 from the women who tried to help (forget her name); that he is untrustworthy and also the last person to see Caylee and say that KC was sexually abused.

They cannot use the Nannie anymore; KC is not going to admit she killed her; What else do they have. Nothing. George is the fallguy, possibly.

 

[Solace]

Here is why I am struggling to buy that....

Many have speculated that Casey would NEVER admit to anything, and has the emotional maturity to believe she can get away with ANYTHING....

If that is the case, why didn't she display this same behavior when the fraud trial began?

To assume many are correct in analyzying her behaviors and demeanor, wouldn't she have demanded her "boys" at least attempted to defend her honor????

I would love someone to suggest a possible reasonable scenario on why her demeanor would change now so I can at least ponder the suggestion that there is NO WAY she would consider a plea in this upcoming trial....

The difference is she was caught with the fraud, on camera.

No one has seen her kill Caylee and in her sociopathic mind, if you don't see me, you can't prove it. I didn't do it. IMO

 

[katydid23]

Here is why I am struggling to buy that....

Many have speculated that Casey would NEVER admit to anything, and has the emotional maturity to believe she can get away with ANYTHING....

If that is the case, why didn't she display this same behavior when the fraud trial began?

To assume many are correct in analyzying her behaviors and demeanor, wouldn't she have demanded her "boys" at least attempted to defend her honor????

I would love someone to suggest a possible reasonable scenario on why her demeanor would change now so I can at least ponder the suggestion that there is NO WAY she would consider a plea in this upcoming trial....

Like LLL said above, she was caught on tape at Target spending Amy's money. She could not fight those charges.
Besides that, stolen checks were the least of her worries at the time.

And I don't think she minds being a thief or a liar. She has been a known one for years and never seemed that bothered by others knowing it. She never stopped the behavior.

But 'being a good mom'---that is something she clings to, much like her mother before her.

I think she would consider a plea--for time served, or something ridiculous like that. But I cannot see her ever admitting to the dirty details like the duct tape. She is way past ever doing that, imo.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Can't be that because Tony Lazarro already said he and KC took the gas cans.

Yes, Solace but that was after GA made a police report of the shed being broken into...GA didn't know it was ICA, until after the police were called in...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[Beast]

I think the DT is waiting to see what will be allowed in before they commit to a defense. If it looks like most of the evidence will come in, Jose will admit on opening statements that Casey is guilty of lying because Caylee died from some sort of accident. Probably drowning in the pool which would account for the cadaver dog hits in the back yard and the rest of the evidence.

If it was an accident in the pool there would be no decomp there unless caylee was left lying (buried) the ground in the backyard.

 

[faefrost]

I think the Defense Strategy all along has been...

It is WAY too early to consider a plea before we have even attempted to try to get any evidence thrown out by filing motions and having HHJP rule on what "in in"...

But let's see if we can try to convince the SA that we have a good case to present to a jury of an accident theory and see if we can get them to plea negotiate based on that....

But the sad thing is that there was long rumored to be an "accidental death" plea offer on the table from the SA. Up until the child's remains were found... duct taped and thrown away as trash. The DT and the defendant at that time chose not to entertain such a plea, in large part because the remains had not been found, but also we can speculate that any such plea would require leading investigators to the remains, at which time it would become clear that this was no accident. Yeah at trial the DT can try and sell the theory of accidental death followed by the actions of a panicky and stupid mother fearful of her own family. But the actual physical evidence just does not jibe with that, and chances are extremely high that a jury will not buy into it at this point.

Right now I think that the best that the DT can hope for is to drop just enough doubt or questions or sympathy to keep the DP off the table and instead get her LWOP. As near as I can figure out they are risking the death of their client in order to preserve the ability to appeal in case she gets the DP?

Other than that they are desperate and are pointlessly spinning their wheels. I mean why on earth would CM submit yet another motion asking for reconcideration of something that has already been resoundingly denied? It's not like he needs to preserve his objections for appeal. That would be done with the initial motion and arguments. All of these extra motions do is reduce the risk that the client can make an appeal based on IAC down the road.

 

[affinity]

But 'being a good mom'---that is something she clings to, much like her mother before her.

I think she would consider a plea--for time served, or something ridiculous like that. But I cannot see her ever admitting to the dirty details like the duct tape. She is way past ever doing that, imo.

(respectfully snipped):

On point one...completely agree! Both the Anthony "Mothers" were pretty good at faking what it is to be a good Mother for others. There were signs of a pretty good life (decent if small well kept home with pool) but all of that on just one person's salary (CA's). They were both awful Mothers, however, as evidenced by where they both are today.

One point two...also agree that this is what the DT wants. Time served! Dream on DT!

 

[Softail]

Can't be that because Tony Lazarro already said he and KC took the gas cans.

I am just not sure it is for the gas cans now. :waitasec: It seems to me that the report for that was released a long time ago. Trying to find it.

 

[Solace]

Yes, Solace but that was after GA made a police report of the shed being broken into...GA didn't know it was ICA, until after the police were called in...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

But I thought someone "here" said defense is trying to use this as a defense theory that the kidnapper broke into their house.

I am saying it is useless because Tony already acknowledged doing it with KC.

 

[ynotdivein]

:cow:, there was a very good reason why KC didn't catch the "accidental death" bus when she had the opportunity in the second half of 2008.

Even KC was smart enough to understand that if she claimed it was an accident and she freaked out and hid the evidence, and then led them to a baby that was taped up as Caylee was, she would not be able to realistically add, "Oh, and after the accidental death I put that on to... stage a kidnapping?" Three layers of duct tape across the face was enough--and to consider that Q104 may have been on Caylee's arms, and that KC might have thought that they would still be there--well, seems to me that KC knew this would be all but inexplicable, and VERY incompatible with an accidental-death scenario. So she just hushed up.

IMO the accident theory became a no-fly zone for the DT the minute we learned about how that tape had been applied to Caylee's sweet face.

So then, SODDI. But what SOD had access to this rare type of duct tape? Zanny had a key to the house! Oh, but Zanny doesn't exist. Hmph.

They're stuck with George. And some kind of emotional trauma he caused KC which led her to hide his involvement through 31 days of partying like an animal, followed by years of her sitting in jail to cover for him, the man who abused her and murdered her child.

Quite frankly, while I'm ecstatic that so much other evidence will be allowed in, that duct tape alone explains almost everything about the various strategies that the DT has tried since 2008.

 

[essies]

I cannot even imagine JB giving us that A-HA moment in opening arguments that will make us "understand" what happened and why ICA is innocent!! He can't really afford to come out and present the jury with any story about ICA and Caylee and the 31 days that is too buttoned up or the SA will rip it to shreds!
All I can imagine is a strategy of lobbing back

at the SA and the evidence presented with arguments of "rush to judgement", "junk science", "over-zealous prosecutors", "leaks from LE to the media", etc, etc, etc!!!
Bottom line I think it will come down to - Yeah-She's a liar but that doesn't mean she's a murderer and the State hasn't proved it beyond a reasonable doubt!!! So please don't kill my client!!!:truce:

 

[Gnatcatcher]

Lindy Kenny Baden came out on 48 hours and said the nannie story was a lie. They are not going to use that. I think they are going to name someone else or IMPLY big time that it is George who was someone who maxed out their credit cards to a Nigerian who proceeded to scam him; he took 5,000 from the women who tried to help (forget her name); that he is untrustworthy and also the last person to see Caylee and say that KC was sexually abused.

They cannot use the Nannie anymore; KC is not going to admit she killed her; What else do they have. Nothing. George is the fallguy, possibly.

LKB is no longer on the defense, so anything she says makes no difference whatsoever, I would think, no? I mean, if JOSE said there was no nanny... that would be different. Maybe I"m wrong. I want her to go nanny so badly !! I do love a good train wreck.

 

[logicalgirl]

But the sad thing is that there was long rumored to be an "accidental death" plea offer on the table from the SA. Up until the child's remains were found... duct taped and thrown away as trash. The DT and the defendant at that time chose not to entertain such a plea, in large part because the remains had not been found, but also we can speculate that any such plea would require leading investigators to the remains, at which time it would become clear that this was no accident. Yeah at trial the DT can try and sell the theory of accidental death followed by the actions of a panicky and stupid mother fearful of her own family. But the actual physical evidence just does not jibe with that, and chances are extremely high that a jury will not buy into it at this point.

Right now I think that the best that the DT can hope for is to drop just enough doubt or questions or sympathy to keep the DP off the table and instead get her LWOP. As near as I can figure out they are risking the death of their client in order to preserve the ability to appeal in case she gets the DP?

Other than that they are desperate and are pointlessly spinning their wheels. I mean why on earth would CM submit yet another motion asking for reconcideration of something that has already been resoundingly denied? It's not like he needs to preserve his objections for appeal. That would be done with the initial motion and arguments. All of these extra motions do is reduce the risk that the client can make an appeal based on IAC down the road.

I agree Faefrost and thank you particularly for bringing up the last point - because I have been :waitasec: about that. My thoughts were if you have had a motion about the same item denied three times no matter which way you worded it, isn't the appellate court going to say - Hey! you've done this three times and the answer is still NO. But wondered if it was my lack of legal training:loser: that I did not understand the point of it all.

 

[Solace]

LKB is no longer on the defense, so anything she says makes no difference whatsoever, I would think, no? I mean, if JOSE said there was no nanny... that would be different. Maybe I"m wrong. I want her to go nanny so badly !! I do love a good train wreck.

It is doubtful that LKB did that without Baez' permission.