The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Page 2 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:04 pm

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Judge Belvin Perry set new deadlines in the case against Casey Anthony on Friday as he moves the case toward a May trial. Anthony was not present at the hearing.
Anthony defense attorney Jose Baez filed a motion asking for more time to submit several expert witness reports. Baez asked for an additional 45 days for two of the expert reports.
"It's just too late," said prosecutor Jeff Ashton. "I can't wait on other people's convenience to prepare my case."...
Perry set deadlines for each of the four remaining defense experts that range from Feb. 15 to March 11.
Perry said if the defense does not submit reports from the experts by the timelines he set, they would not be able to testify at the trial...
Recently released evidence documents show FBI testing was done on Casey Anthony's diary to determine when entries were written. While the diary has a date of 2003, the test revealed the diary itself was only sold in 2004...
Perry told Baez to file a motion to exclude.
Perry revealed Friday that he would inform attorneys of the location of jury selection on May 2. They will then have several days to inform Perry of any objections.
Baez argued that he wanted 30 days notice of the location....

Read more at:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Last edited by lisette on Thu Feb 17, 2011 10:40 pm; edited 2 times in total

lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by Guest on Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:20 pm

lisette wrote:I saw the part where Jeff Ashton presented copies of Reichs' twitters to prove that she HAS been available to do a report recently...It was hilarious. Bozo was so ticked! I think these experts are avoiding Bozo because they don't want ANYTHING to do with him and this case!
Baez claims two of his experts are not even returning his calls.
Supports my claim! la la la crazy3
That stuck out at me as well.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by LRT on Fri Feb 04, 2011 5:19 pm

lindamarie wrote:I see the members have welcomed you with open arms LRT. I want to join them in welcoming you to VH. I suspect grand ma ma is CA. Trying to gain some sympathy for KC. By a few facts only known to the person who dumped little Caylee there at the time that was posted. I am sure CA and GA totally believe this was an accident that went out of control. No one else is buying that. Sassy you are so right on with your post. I was proud of how you expressed in writing your thoughts about grand ma ma post. I agree with what you said. KC knew Caylee would not be coming out of that trunk alive. She made sure of it with the duct tape. Again lets hope she did knock Caylee out with chloroform before she put that duct tape over her mouth and nose. That vision of KC putting the duct tape over her daughters mouth and nose is disturbing.
No, as I stated in my earlier post Grand MaMa is for real...one of the posters speaks to her on the phone in Mo. Many of us become friends over the last 2 1/2 Yrs....I had a poster and her hubby come stay with me a week last summer.
BBL. Just got in.

LRT

Join date : 2011-01-03

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by Guest on Fri Feb 04, 2011 5:42 pm

Has Grand MaMa had these kind of dreams before?
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by LRT on Fri Feb 04, 2011 6:18 pm

lindamarie wrote:Has Grand MaMa had these kind of dreams before?
yes...I have a couple more post I saved, I will try to locate...if you keep reading on that forum there are more post.

BB if I can find..

That dream was also sent to some attorney's involved in the case.
You can bet they checked out all they could about her.

LRT

Join date : 2011-01-03

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by LRT on Fri Feb 04, 2011 6:21 pm

lindamarie wrote:Has Grand MaMa had these kind of dreams before?
Here is another...



Nov 10, 2008
Those maps are great. I did contact two different search teams. I tried websluths but I could not figure out how to use it. If it was the correct one.
Thanks for all your knowledge. I am not an physic. I was never allowed to talk about it when I was young. Its my Indian Heritage. Thats what my Grandmother told me and she had the same things happen.
I do hope they find something.

Could any one of you tell me how to locate their road or let me know some road that is close to their house. I can't read the map.
You all are computer savvy. I am not.

May God Bless The Our Little Angel

LRT

Join date : 2011-01-03

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:13 pm

wftv.com has the raw video - my god Baez is completely inept. Im so glad its Judge Perry up there - Strickland would have been a disaster - much to easy going for this kind of case, even Perry is exasperated and Baez's whining that his client is indigent and how he pays out of pocket and that the
experts are not getting paid and doing this out of the goodness of their hearts - yeah right at THEIR convenience
and when they have nothing more interesting to do, apparently. Makes Reichs look really bad.
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:29 pm

It was a rough day in court for Casey Anthony’s defense team. The television reports today highlighted how Chief Judge Belvin Perry repeatedly criticized the defense during a status hearing. It was a memorable day, all right. Did you ever see scenes like this on “Perry Mason” or “L.A. Law”?

“It appeared in this hearing that Judge Perry was taking an opportunity at every turn to make sure the Case Anthony defense team was doing what it’s supposed to,” WESH-Channel 2’s Greg Fox reported. “Over Jose Baez’s strong objections, he set May 2 as the day on which he is going to reveal the county in which he hopes to impanel a jury to hear this case.”

Anthony is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her daughter, Caylee. Anthony was not in court today.

To Baez’s to objections about whether an impartial jury can be found, Perry shot back, “The jurors are not supposed to be deaf, dumb and totally uninformed.”

Perry is so quotable that you might think he has wandered in from a prime-time drama.

Baez explained his difficulties in questioning several expert witnesses — one he couldn’t reach by phone.


Perry even lectured Biaz on phone use: “I can’t understand why you won’t pick up a phone and talk to him.”

WESH’s Fox reported, “Perry chastised Baez and, during the hearing, ordered him to provide him with a number for one expert so Perry could arrange for deposition.”

WFTV-Channel 9’s Kathi Belich reported, “Baez says his own experts aren’t returning his calls. And another defense expert who has not yet written her report has been tweeting about caring for her sick cat, working on her new book and vacationing in Tahiti. The judge is obviously losing patience with Baez.”

Central Florida News 13 also saw it as a bad day for the defense. “Difficult questions to Casey Anthony’s defense as to why they’re not making deadlines,” Central Florida News 13 anchor Ybeth Bruzual said in beginning the report. “Judge Perry was not too happy with the defense as he questioned why some of the defense team members have not provided the state with reports from all of their expert witnesses. The state says they need them before they can do depositions.”

Bruzual set up a clip of a Perry ultimatum to the defense: “I’m not interested in surprises. It’s simple. … If it’s not in a report or deposition, it’s not going to be allowed.”

Outside the courtroom, Belich tried to ask Baez about a complaint against him with Florida Bar. “Are you worried that you’ll lose your license?” Belich asked. He turned away from her.

In newscasts tonight, WFTV did not show a scene involving defense attorney Cheney Mason and hard-charging Belich. According to the Sentinel, Mason told her, “Mr. Baez did not lie to anybody and you are a pain in the ass.”

I’ve never seen that on “Perry Mason” or “L.A. Law,” either.

WESH, however, did show footage of Mason snapping at a reporter, “Get out of here.” Baez smiled.

Fox said he did ask Cindy Anthony, Casey’s mother, if she was losing confidence in the defense team. “She had no comment,” Fox said.
source:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:34 pm

Several items of interest have surfaced in the past few week, in the Casey Anthony case. Two relating to trial strategy (my favorite topic), I believe, are significant enough to warrant a brief discussion.

Judge Perry entered his order denying the Defense’s request to question Roy Kronk at trial regarding allegations of past indiscretions. The Defense’s primary motive in seeking permission for this avenue of questioning was a clear attempt to suggest to the jury that Kronk, not Casey, is the real killer of baby Caylee. At the time the Defense filed this motion, there were individuals in the legal community that lauded this sordid attempt as a sound and legitimate defense strategy. I, however, did not believe that and said so. First, it is neither a logical, practical, nor legitimate strategy, to engage in wholesale character assassination of anyone. Certainly not on a national stage, much less, in this case, Roy Kronk, whose persistence led to the discovery of Baby Caylee‘s remains. This secondary motive was clearly an attempt to gain some advantage in the court of public opinion, prior to Casey‘s trial. However, there is not one scintilla of evidence to support the outlandish and salacious, and by now, well publicized allegations, the Defense has brought against Mr. Kronk. Further, Kronk’s past is totally irrelevant to the issue of Casey’s guilt or innocence. Even if the intent was solely to raise doubt in the minds of the jury by casting suspicion upon someone, anyone else, you don’t tip your hand before trial. It serves no useful or legitimate purpose other than perhaps, to gain for the lawyer filing the motion, more face-time on television. And, didn’t this clumsy move give the Prosecution plenty of time and a clear shot to neutralize this “strategy?”

The mistake made herein by the Defense was actually though, a basic one, as implied in Judge Perry’s order. In his ruling, the judge has left the door open for the Defense to implicate Mr. Kronk through the presentation of circumstantial evidence at trial, of either the facts surrounding his finding of Caylee’s body, and/or any possible involvement by Mr. Kronk in Caylee’s death. More simply put, the Defense gave away its strategy by utilizing the Rule Criminal of Procedure that requires not only disclosure of its intent to attack Kronk but, which also mandates disclosure of the specific facts to be relied upon . It would have been far more stealthy and effective to attack Kronk at trial, by way of circumstantial evidence and to then bring it home during final arguments, that either he was involved directly in Caylee’s death or had engaged in some impropriety during the discovery of her body, thereby tainting the crime scene, and rendering the evidence found there suspect and unreliable.

Don’t misunderstand me, it is certainly a legitimate and oft-used defense trial tactic to attempt to raise a reasonable doubt in jurors’ minds that it was not the defendant, who was the actual killer, but some other person. The prevailing wisdom however, is it is better to spread that suspicion among several people, both named and unnamed, as opposed to targeting a lone individual. The more suspects the Defense can argue to the jury that may be responsible for Caylee’s disappearance and/or death the greater the possibility the jury can find a reasonable doubt, and possibly acquit, or at least, find that they are unable to come to a unanimous verdict. That strategy tends to put the prosecutors on the defensive and serves as a distraction from the planned presentation of their case at trial. It results in the expenditure of the prosecutors’ time, energy, resources and focus. I suspect that had Cheney Mason been involved from the beginning of the case, the issue of Mr. Kronk may have been handled much differently. Depending upon the level of his involvement during trial, we may yet see a different approach to the “some other dude did it” defense. We’ll wait and see.

So many of you have asked me about “that Laura Buchanan woman .” Laura Buchanan, a defense witness, had signed a sworn statement that in early September of 2008, she had personally searched the area where Caylee’s remains were ultimately found in December of 2008. Buchanan stated, “It is my opinion that the remains of Caylee Anthony were not there during the time of our search.” Buchanan further asserted that “I personally searched near the privacy fence and worked my way towards and then beyond the spot where the body was found. I did not notice anything unusual.” Buchanan, it appeared, was to be a major witness for the Defense. If she was to be believed, it opened the door for the Defense to argue that Caylee’s remains were placed at the location where they were ultimately discovered in December, after Casey was arrested and incarcerated the Orange County Correctional Facility. Therefore, someone other than Casey had to have killed Caylee and discarded her body. We know however, that Buchanan’s statement was refuted by a host of Texas EquuSearch volunteers who had searched the area around that location wherein Caylee’s remains were finally discovered, and had said that exact location was not, and could not, have been searched, because it was under water.

Despite these contradictory witnesses however, the Defense could still use Buchanan to advance their theory that someone other than Casey had killed and discarded the child’s body at the discovery location. But alas, it is not meant to be. The State Attorneys Office and law enforcement investigators were relentless in their investigation of Ms. Buchanan’s assertions. Ultimately, she folded and reversed course. Now, when asked during her deposition by Prosecutor Linda Drane Burdick whether she searched near the area where Caylee’s remains were found, Buchanan said, “I can’t say that to be true because I still to this day don’t [know] where she was found, what area or what she was near.” Later in her deposition, Buchanan stated, “I didn’t know where the remains of the child were, period. I didn’t know. I was…I was shown something, pointed to it.”

Setting aside all of Ms. Buchanan’s considerable, other baggage (claiming to have seen Baby Caylee on a Disney monorail; retaining Texas EquuSearch documents and later “adding notes“ thereto before handing them over to the Defense; sending Jose Baez e-mails with photos of herself attached, among other things), her deposition statements, under oath, render her utterly worthless to the Defense now.

In reading her depositions you might wonder why Baez had asked Buchanan if she was aware that she “was the target of a criminal investigation.” Because, surprisingly, he may, even in the face of her latest admissions, still try to use her at trial, arguing that her earlier statements were true and that she only changed her statements at deposition, out of fear of displeasing the State, together with being afraid that she, herself, could be charged with a crime. Again, I would suspect that a seasoned lawyer like Mr. Mason would disagree with such a foolish and risky maneuver. But again, we will see.

From my vantage point, like so many of you, I still view the State’s case as strong. The Defense has still much work to do with little time left to accomplish it. And, in the meantime, the noose is growing ever tighter around the neck of Miss Anthony.

For all of you who participate in the on-going lively, Casey case discussions on my blog site, even when I am absent, thank you. I read what you write and enjoy your perspectives, wit and repartee. I anticipate being free to write more often now, especially as Casey Anthony’s trial date rapidly approaches.

WJS

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by pookiebear on Sat Feb 05, 2011 4:39 am

hi everyone...it's been a while since i have posted. i have been glued to all the posts, but will have to go to sleep now & continue reading later today.

please post where i can view the most recent release of evidence..especially CA's jailhouse letters, the diary, etc. i really want to read these. thanks much & a better late than never Happy New Year to all!

pookiebear

Join date : 2009-08-01

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by Wrapitup on Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:01 am

Hi pookie..long time no see. Where have you been? I hope you took a trip around the world. :cheering:

Here is a link to anything that has to do w/the Anthony case..complete w/all the doc dumps and more.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

For the latest (sans the latest doc dump which is upthread) here you go:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Welcome back!!! Group Hug

_________________
Prayers for our little HaLeigh Cummings, wherever she may be!!

Nine-tenths of wisdom is appreciation. Go find somebody’s hand and squeeze it, while there’s time.
-- Dale Dauten--

Thank you RAINE for all you ARE!! I will ALWAYS hold you in my Heart!!
Wrapitup
Wrapitup
Founder
Founder

Join date : 2009-05-28

https://victimsheartland.forumotion.com/forum.htm

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Sat Feb 05, 2011 11:54 am

JP:
“I can’t understand why you won’t pick up a phone and talk to him.”
"Do you know how to use a phone? If not, I can show you." [My words]
crazy3 faint

Bozo also needs "schooling" on how to send things by FedEx, how to calendar motions to be heard, and how to write a motion to exclude evidence (diary)...But wait, JP reminded him that the deadline for motions to exclude evidence had passed, so what's a Bozo to do? 🇳🇴
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:10 pm

Order memorializing Feb. 4 Status Hearing (Summarizes decisions made).

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by Guest on Tue Feb 08, 2011 6:32 am

I really like this Judge. Lisette thanks for posting the link.
I don't understand doing depositions for the Penalty Phase before she is convicted. Seems like a waste of money to interview each person listed as a witness. It is the Penalty phase which may not happen. If it does then why does each side have to know what the wittiness will say? It should be raw testimony straight from the heart.

The 30 day notice for the change of venue was DENIED.
The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~ - Page 2 Anthon10
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:11 pm

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Judge Belvin Perry finalized an important issue this week in the case against Casey Anthony.

In court documents, Perry denied a defense request for 30 days' notice on the location of where jurors in Anthony's upcoming murder trial will be chosen.

Perry said at a Friday hearing he was leaning toward giving both sides one week notice of where jury selection will take place.

At that hearing, Perry admitted concern that the way he's conducting the change of venue could result in an appeal if Anthony is convicted.

"I'm still doing some research, still trying to see if a judge got reversed in choosing the location. I haven't found one yet," Perry said.

Anthony's defense requested 30 days notice of where the jury will be chosen from. This week, Perry officially denied that motion.

Perry said that he would entertain any objections to the location on May 4, five days before jury selection is scheduled to start.

Defense attorney Jose Baez argued that's not enough time to do the research he said is necessary to make an informed objection.

"There are many judges who've taken the approach this case is no different from any other case. This one is different," he said Friday.

The location of jury selection will be such a closely guarded secret that prosecutors acknowledged they would be making hotel reservations under assumed names once they find out the location.

There's still no word on how much notice the media or public will get.

The case heads back to court in the first week of March for more status hearings. WESH.com will stream those hearings live.
source:
wesh.com
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:13 pm

I have serious doubts about Kathy Reichs getting her report in by next Wednesday - JMO.
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by Wrapitup on Wed Feb 09, 2011 2:34 am

I watched that the other night and found myself laughing out loud at the mediocrity of Jose Baez. And Cheney isn't too far behind him. The Scream Team is doing everything they can to delay, delay and delay. I just laugh and shake my head. crazy3

_________________
Prayers for our little HaLeigh Cummings, wherever she may be!!

Nine-tenths of wisdom is appreciation. Go find somebody’s hand and squeeze it, while there’s time.
-- Dale Dauten--

Thank you RAINE for all you ARE!! I will ALWAYS hold you in my Heart!!
Wrapitup
Wrapitup
Founder
Founder

Join date : 2009-05-28

https://victimsheartland.forumotion.com/forum.htm

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:40 pm

Casey Judge Decides What Evidence Is In, Out

Judge Responds To Several Defense Motions Regarding Evidence

Gabe Travers, WESH.com
POSTED: 5:09 pm EST February 10, 2011
UPDATED: 5:44 pm EST February 10, 2011
-Perry denied a defense motion that hoped to keep any testimony out of the trial that Anthony had a history of lying or stealing.
-Perry said Rosciano's statements regarding their intimate encounters could not be used in the trial
-Perry granted only a portion of the defense motion regarding Lazzaro and denied the rest. He agreed that the existence of an intimate relationship was not relevant and could not be used, but said that all other aspects of their relationship are allowed.
-Perry denied the defense motion, saying the posting can be introduced at the trial.
-Anthony's defense hoped to exclude any evidence of Anthony borrowing a shovel from neighbor Brian Burner, but Perry struck down that motion.
-Another defense motions asked that Anthony's "la bella vita" tattoo be excluded...
Perry denied the motion.
-Perry also said that a Jib Jab video that features Casey Anthony's head in a Monster Mash video could not be used. Prosecutors said they had no intent to use the video.

Read more at:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The scale leans on the side of Justice for Caylee again! :cheering: cool


Last edited by lisette on Thu Feb 17, 2011 10:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:49 pm

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Chief Judge Belvin Perry ruled on several key motions in the case against Casey Anthony on Thursday regarding which evidence the jury will be allowed to hear...

Prosecutors can tell the jury about Casey's history of lying and stealing, and her dark MySpace "diary" from days after Caylee's disappearance talking about death and deception.
The jury will also hear how Casey borrowed a shovel from her neighbor, Brian Burner, the week after Caylee disappeared, and about a tell-tale tattoo, which says "Beautiful Life" in Italian, she got during that same time period when she claims she was searching for Caylee.
The jury will also hear limited details about Casey's sex life with ex-boyfriend Tony Lazzaro, who told prosecutors Casey was having nightmares and never told him Caylee was missing.
The defense had tried to keep all of that evidence out, but the judge ruled that it is relevant to the case and the jury should hear it.

Read more at:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Last edited by lisette on Thu Feb 17, 2011 2:25 pm; edited 1 time in total
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by Guest on Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:33 pm

:cheering: Some victories for Caylee today.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by Guest on Fri Feb 11, 2011 12:45 am

It's about time!! :cheers:
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:05 am

What Judge Perry ruled on today is going to be extremely hard for the defense to rebutt. The case can now be presented so perfectly to show beginning with Cindy's post on Myspace (beware of what you put on the internet!) then continuing on with Caseys activities with Tony from the very night that Caylee was never seen again, to her partying, nightmares,
never mentioning Caylee was gone, to her getting the tattoo. All this will be evidence of a woman whose daughter was supposedly kidnapped by her nanny.
Add in the detectives testying to Caseys lying to the police, her own written statements in her diary and the proof that with the area where her body was found was underwater and that it was placed there in June,
I think they have an airtight case. Plus the fact that the defense has no credible explanation for any of these things!
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:44 pm

I agree, artgal, that there is more than enough evidence to fry this momster, unless there is an outrageously unreasonable jury (i.e. O.J. Simpson jury). Can't wait til May to see this case resolved for precious Caylee...and maybe then to see charges brought against CA, GA, and/or Lee...Or do you think that will happen?
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:49 pm

I dont think they will charge any of the family though Cindy definitely committed perjury and obstruction and that is without a doubt in my mind as well as George. If Casey is convicted thats enough punishment for both Cindy and George I would settle for that.
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:55 pm

Motion Filed About Stain In Anthony's Trunk

Defense Wants Evidence Excluded From Trial

Attorneys with Anthony's defense said they wanted any mention of the smell in her car disallowed. They said investigators mishandled trash that had been in the trunk...
The smell in the car and the stain in the trunk are key pieces of the state's argument that Anthony knowingly drove around with the body of her daughter, Caylee Anthony, in the trunk and has knowledge of what happened to her...
For their part, Anthony's defense filed a motion accusing the state of deliberately mishandling several empty containers, including a pizza box found inside a trash bag taken from the trunk.
The defense accused investigators of letting the trash air out, so it would not smell the same to jurors in Casey Anthony's upcoming murder trial.
One source close to the investigation said on Friday that position is "laughable."

Read more at:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Can read motion at:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Last edited by lisette on Thu Feb 17, 2011 2:15 pm; edited 1 time in total
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:03 pm

Sorry, Bozo, the cat is already out of the bag: George, Cindy, and numerous members of LE stated early on that there was a definite smell of human decomposition coming from the car (though maybe not in those same words). Even if the garbage is "spoiled" as exculpatory evidence, there is plenty of testimony via hearings, statements, depositions, etc. to bring in the "smell in the car" evidence. Get ready for another DENIAL!! crazy3
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:12 pm

Wasn't there a deadline for filing motions about excluding evidence? Maybe there was a different deadline for forensic evidence? Oh wait...I forgot...Bozo doesn't think that he has to meet deadlines! huge waste
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by Guest on Fri Feb 11, 2011 4:44 pm

LOL lisette no Baez does not think deadlines apply to him. I agree with you artgal. KC being convicted is punishment for CA and GA. The rest of their lives have been ruined by their own daughter.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by charminglane on Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:04 pm

I never really thought of this before, but with all the time that Casey spent on the computer, wouldn't her search history after Caylee goes missing show that she did not use internet search methods or social media sites to aid in finding her daughter?
charminglane
charminglane

Join date : 2009-05-28

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Sat Feb 12, 2011 6:12 pm

Thats a very good point charming. I believe that this latest motion about the smell will also be denied. I just wonder at this point if they would ask the State for a plea deal. What in the world does the defense really have? They tried to prove that the body was moved after Casey was in jail now that is completely out, Kronk is out, there is no evidence in anyway
of a nanny, and for the life of me I cannot understand how they can explain that on the day Casey left with Caylee that night she appeared on a video renting movies with Tony and Caylee was never seen again. They must have something planned as an explanation but what???
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:57 pm

From what I've seen of Bozo's skills, I don't know that they really do have a plan...I think they're just bumbling along. If she is so stupid not to take a plea deal, she deserves what she gets. Of course, I don't know that the state would give her a plea deal now anyway.
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by charminglane on Sat Feb 12, 2011 8:21 pm

lisette wrote:From what I've seen of Bozo's skills, I don't know that they really do have a plan...I think they're just bumbling along. If she is so stupid not to take a plea deal, she deserves what she gets. Of course, I don't know that the state would give her a plea deal now anyway.

Lisette, I completely agree with you. The case is just rolling along the highway with Bozo at the wheel. If Casey and Co. think he is doing his job in their best interests, then she deserves what she gets--or what she pays for, which is nada! crazy3
charminglane
charminglane

Join date : 2009-05-28

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Sun Feb 13, 2011 10:21 am

I just cant wait for the opening statements. Baez will have to stand up and summarize for the jury that his client has been wrongly accused and sits innocent before them because.... and after that I cant think of a single reason for her being innocent!
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by charminglane on Sun Feb 13, 2011 1:23 pm

I think he will say that someone else did it. That would be the only thing that would even be semi plausible.
charminglane
charminglane

Join date : 2009-05-28

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by Wrapitup on Sun Feb 13, 2011 2:17 pm

UGLY COPING!!!! crazy3 la la la head bang over reaction Sarcasm Electric Chair :beer jumper: :crystal ball: gum faint Lies :good/evil: smoking pole dancer UGLY COPING!!! Hiney BS :trampoline: soap box :LE: angry

_________________
Prayers for our little HaLeigh Cummings, wherever she may be!!

Nine-tenths of wisdom is appreciation. Go find somebody’s hand and squeeze it, while there’s time.
-- Dale Dauten--

Thank you RAINE for all you ARE!! I will ALWAYS hold you in my Heart!!
Wrapitup
Wrapitup
Founder
Founder

Join date : 2009-05-28

https://victimsheartland.forumotion.com/forum.htm

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Sun Feb 13, 2011 2:30 pm

The problem for Baez is that he can say anything he wants - but it doesnt really matter what lawyers say
it only matters what they can prove. No matter that the burden of proof is on the prosecution, jurors are still going to have to be convinced by proof of the involvement of someone else. There just isnt any. Not one item in deposition or evidence that has shown up via the sunshine law presents another possible suspect. Casey will never testify but the defense has to have a credible story that shows how Caylee left Caseys' care. I believe that the State would take a plea if Casey would give a complete and truthful account of what happened and agree to at least 25 years in jail with no parole. Of course, thats never going to happen.
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Sun Feb 13, 2011 4:52 pm


Casey Anthony's defense team filed a request late Thursday asking Judge Belvin Perry to exclude any references to a decomposition odor emanating from Anthony's Pontiac Sunfire during her upcoming murder trial.

The amended motion notes that a bag of garbage was left in the trunk of the vehicle for 18 days in the summer of 2008.

The garbage was allowed to be aired out and odor from it dissipated, the defense says.

"The state of Florida has gone to extreme measures to try to prove that a decomposing body was the source of the smell in the trunk of the Pontiac Sunfire," the motion filed by Jose Baez and Cheney Mason says. "However, the bag of garbage found in the trunk of the vehicle poses a major obstacle in the state's attempts to take such a leap of faith."

The motion alleges that "law enforcement decided to preserve certain evidence and destroy others."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get the day's top stories in your inbox. Click here to sign up for the Midday Update newsletter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The motion also cites statements from an Oakridge National Laboratory official who described chloroform levels recovered from a piece of trunk liner removed from the car.

The motion says the official's testimony "simply means that a carpet sample in a tin can cannot reliably show the jury what the smell was like in the car at the time it was recovered."

"While law enforcement took great measures to attempt to preserve the carpet liner, they intentionally destroyed any evidence that could rebut their assertions."

Those actions, the motion claims, preclude the defense "from demonstrating to the jury that the smell in the trunk of the vehicle came from garbage and not a decomposing body."

"Law enforcement has destroyed exculpatory evidence, the only remedy is to exclude all references to the smell of the vehicle as it pertains to decomposition and exclude any attempts to introduce the tin can containing the carpet sample collected by law enforcement," the defense argues in the motion.

Meanwhile, the prosecution responded today with a challenge to the Anthony defense team's claims on another matter. The defense wants to exclude evidence of a stain found in Anthony's vehicle. That stain did not test positive for blood and testing could not pull a DNA profile from the stain.

But Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton says the difference between a blood, saliva or semen stain and a "biological stain is a subtle one, that seems to have eluded opposing counsel." The stain, tested by the Oakridge National Laboratory shows the presence of "volatile fatty acids consistent with the byproducts of decomposition."

Ashton also takes issue with facts stated in the defense motion regarding the stain and argues the state "does not concede the accuracy of the statement of facts" listed in that motion.

"If the history of this case has proven anything, it is that attorneys can make extravagant claims in pleadings that are not borne out upon closer examination," Ashton wrote in the response.

Ashton argues whether the trunk of Anthony's car contained the decomposing body of her daughter "is clearly material to the issue that will be before the trial jury in this case."

"The evidence that the trunk of the car contains a stain composed partially of volatile fatty acids consistent with decomposition and of the approximate size of a small child clearly tends to prove that material fact," Ashton wrote.

Anthony, 24, is charged with killing her daughter, Caylee Marie, in 2008. The child's remains were found in December that year in woods off Suburban Drive. Anthony's trial is scheduled for May.

Ashton also challenges the defense team's contention that the stain evidence would impede Anthony's ability to get a fair trial.

"The defendant has failed to set forth what unfair prejudice they fear," Ashton writes. "If the jury concludes, based upon all of the evidence presented in the case, that the stain in the trunk of the car was caused by the decomposition of a body kept there, then it is powerful and appropriate evidence of her guilt."

However, he added, "If they conclude that the stain is from some other innocent source, then they would conclude that it is neither relevant nor prejudicial. Is the defendant seriously concerned about a bias against sloppy car owners?"

source
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Sun Feb 13, 2011 6:01 pm

I love Jeff Ashton! Both he and LDB are so on top of this case that it's not funny, and their lack of respect for the "lawyering" of Bozo is hilarious!
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by CritterFan1 on Sun Feb 13, 2011 6:12 pm

artgal16 wrote:I just cant wait for the opening statements. Baez will have to stand up and summarize for the jury that his client has been wrongly accused and sits innocent before them because.... and after that I cant think of a single reason for her being innocent!
Artgal, I almost spit out my diet coke when I read that about innocence. I don't think KC has been innocent since Junior High. She is something else. She may be innocent of filing a W2, IMO, that would be it. She is a conniving piece of work. I am so thankful that she is not my daughter. You know the Ants have a hard time holding their heads up...oh, they are ignorant of blindness when thinking she was at work, and stupidity ever since Caylee went missing.
Cannot wait for the trial!!!!!!!
CritterFan1
CritterFan1

Join date : 2009-06-01

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by charminglane on Sun Feb 13, 2011 6:50 pm

You said it, Critter! I almost spit out My Diet Coke when you mentioned the W2!

Eeyore will just keep bumbling along...


charminglane
charminglane

Join date : 2009-05-28

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:25 am

Last Thursday the defense team filed an amended motion to have all references to the smell of Casey’s trunk excluded from testimony during her murder trial due to their claim there was spoliation of evidence. Now, this motion is asking to amend a previous motion to exclude evidence due to defense claims of spoliation, but since the specific motion they are amending is not named, it is assumed they are referring to the motion filed in 2009 to have the entire remains scene excluded because they weren’t allowed into an active investigation, at an active crime scene involving a child’s body that had not yet been identified immediately after the remains were found. In this prior motion they claimed evidence at the remains scene was destroyed while they were being denied access.


In this new motion the defense requests that all references to the smell of decomposition coming from Casey’s trunk be excluded, along with any testimony referencing a reserved piece of trunk liner that was sealed in a Tedlar bag. Basically the motion reduces to – we don’t want anyone who isn’t a scientist to state they detected human decomposition in the trunk. Now, since the defense already has filed the following motions:

■motion to exclude the LIBS work by Dr. Vass at Oakridge on testing the trunk liner for decomposition gases in his database,
■motion to exclude any testimony concerning cadaver hits on the trunk,
■motion to exclude any testimony about Dr. Vass’s testing for chloroform in the trunk liner, and
■motion to exclude any mention of the stain in the trunk;
this means they are trying to eliminate all scientific or expert testimony of the trunk, and now they are trying to also eliminate any layperson testimony of the trunk. In other words, we get a very clear message that the defense does not want to talk about the trunk. You can’t blame them.

Now, in this motion to exclude layperson testimony in reference to the decomposition smell Baez and Mason present the following testimony that Dr. Wise gave concerning chloroform levels detected in the trunk liner samples tested at Oakridge.

It means that a trunk is kind of an open area with some air flow and concentration dynamically changing and it is true with just about every real world sample. When you take a sample like the carpet and put it in the Tedlar bag in some small volume and it was in an incubator 35 degree Centrigrade for several days so it had time to equilibrate and build up a head space of the constituents in there. And so those concentrations I don’t think could reliably be transferred back to what the concentration of the trunk of the car was.

The defense then argues…

This put simply means that a carpet sample in a tin can cannot reliably show the jury what the smell was like in the car at the time it was recovered.

Let’s stop there. While the defense team wants to claim that what they have done is taken Dr. Wise’s words and “put them simply”….what they’ve actually have done is taken Dr. Wise’s words and “put them wrongly”. So let’s approach this claim of the defense in a two-pronged approach: 1) Let’s make sure we understand what Dr. Wise was saying, and then 2) make sure we understand why the defense’s statement is approaching the limit of 100% wrong.

Dr. Wise’s statement can be restated more clearly as follows – a trunk car is not airtight, so there will be new air introduced and old air pushing out through cracks and other passages in the car. In addition, there is a good size of volume of air in the trunk and the source of the chloroform is coming from the trunk liner. Now, chloroform readily volatilizes. That means it escapes from a surface or from within a porous material as gas into the air. So any chloroform in the trunk liner (whether it be from decomposition of a human body, or some other external source) will continuously outgas into the overall volume of air contained in the trunk. And that air will slowly be pushed out and new air introduced through air passages in the trunk.

Keeping in mind that chloroform is about 4 times heavier than air and therefore will linger near the trunk liner, it still will be “mixed” a little with the overall air volume and you will lose chloroform from the air immediately over the spot in the liner that is outgassing it. So if you were to be able to insert a vacuum into the closed trunk of the car, and suck out an air sample from the entire volume of air trapped in the trunk, it would not match the concentration of the test of the trunk liner because of this airflow, mixing, larger head space and introduction of new air/evacuation of old air.

Now, if you take a sample of the trunk liner, contain it in a Tedlar bag that has a very small head space and is airtight, and then “cook it” to force the chloroform contained within the liner to outgas into the headspace of the test container….you get an accurate chloroform concentration reading of the sample of the trunk liner. And that’s all Oakridge was testing for, was the chloroform level in the trunk liner. They were not testing for the overall chloroform level in the trunk. So the first problem with the defense’ argument is….they completely misinterpreted (either intentionally or through ignorance – take your pick), Dr. Wise’s statement.

It is curious that a specific reference to when and where Dr. Wise testified and made this statement is not made in the motion to exclude. One can only assume that Dr. Wise made this statement during the defense’s deposition of him. And, even more interesting is that the question asked of Dr. Wise that elicited the above statement is not included in the motion. For instance, if the question was…

Q So, are you telling us that the air testing of the trunk liner shows that the overall chloroform level in the trunk was at or above a level that could be produced from human decomposition?

Dr. Wise would have been ethically and scientifically bound to correct them that the test was not an indicator of the chloroform level for the trunk’s entire air volume, but was the tested concentration of a specific piece of the trunk liner. And it should be pointed out that Dr. Wise makes no statement that the test results for the chloroform level in the tested trunk liner samples being dubious or inaccurate. That’s because they aren’t! They just can’t be misapplied to the overall trunk air space.

The second issue that needs to be addressed in the defense’s argument here is this part:

…a carpet sample in a tin can cannot reliably show the jury what the smell was like in the car at the time it was recovered.

The defense has now taken Dr. Wise’s statement, misinterpreted it in the motion, and then misapplied it to an entirely different “test”. The first test, the air sampling test, was a quantitative empirical test to accurately determine the concentration of certain gases in the liner. That’s not done with anybody’s nose, and it’s not done with anybody’s comparison to “what they have smelled before or not”. It is done in a controlled lab environment with a spectrometer designed to measure the level of certain substances. In other words, it’s a hard number of how much of a gas – in this case chloroform – is present in the head space just above that liner sample.

If the tin can is popped open at trial for the jury (which I doubt seriously it will be) that would be a qualitative measure by the jurors of what they smelled. It has nothing to do with trying to detect how much of a particular gas is in the can, what the concentration levels are, or anything else. It either smells like a dead body or it doesn’t. What the defense is saying here is because the can would not be opened back up into the trunk, with its overall air volume and its airflow exchange, it will be unreliable because it is concentrated. But the moment the tin can is opened in a court room it will have more head space and more airflow than ever could have been present inside a locked trunk.

Overall…it’s just a really stupid argument. If they wanted to prevent any sample being opened before the jurors, they could simply fall back on…a juror doesn’t have the experience or knowledge to know what they are smelling. Like I said, I doubt seriously we are going to see the state “pop a top” in the court room.

Now, we move to the second half of the argument made in the motion to exclude testimony of the “stink” in Casey’s trunk. It goes toward the “junk” in her trunk. HA! In this part of the motion the defense outright accuses OCSO of intentionally destroying evidence associated with the trash in the trash bag. They make a comparison of how the trunk liner sample has been preserved and how the trash was handled and stored. They state that while the liner sample is preserved in an airtight container, the trash was laid out in a drying room, aired out, and then placed in an unsealed cardboard box in evidence storage where it remains today.

What they don’t mention is that the entire trunk liner, except for the small samples taken to perform spectrometry testing, has also been stored in the same manner as the trash. The liner, sans the little patches cut for testing, has not been hermetically sealed. It’s sitting in evidence storage, just like the trash from the trash bag. In addition to that, they appear to be clueless on why the liner sample has been preserved in the Tedlar bag! They think it is to make some grand theatrical impact on the jury by popping the top open and just making them all throw up, or something. Any samples of the liner preserved in a Tedlar bag have been retained for future testing. And that would include…any testing the defense team might need done.

Of course…that would require Baez to stop spending his time trolling blogs, writing motions on whether his client’s commissary purchases are inflammatory, and manually color-coding his little excel spreadsheets. But what the hell.

So the defense team wraps up with: Since the state preserved what they claim will be inculpatory evidence (but the state hasn’t claimed that and the defense is now claiming it!), and intentionally destroyed exculpatory evidence (which there is no foundation to outright claim anything about the garbage is exculpatory), they want every single reference to the stink-mobile excluded.

Stay tuned for the next installment of the fictional story called “Casey’s Defense Strategy”.

source:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:30 am

My questions is regarding Val's article - does Baez have any conception or understanding of the scientific evidence in this case? I honestly believe regarding Baez's defense that Casey might have an argument for appeal based upon his represenation of her. If she doesnt think of it after shes convicted, Im sure that Cindy will! Baez better watch out!
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:43 am

Stay tuned for the next installment of the fictional story called “Casey’s Defense Strategy”.

ROFLMAO ROFLMAO ROFLMAO
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:48 am

artgal, I too think that if anybody ever had the
"incompetent counsel" excuse for an appeal, it would be KC. However, I remember reading somewhere that it really took extreme actions for that to fly...That even someone who's lawyer fell asleep during trial was not granted an appeal on that basis. I think it was because he/she had another lawyer as well...Sorry I can't provide a link for that info...I just remember reading it. Don't remember where. And she does have CM as co-counsel. But, anyway, Bozo is really DUMB about this scientific stuff, and everything else, I might add...
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Mon Feb 14, 2011 10:01 am

I too doubt they could win on appeal on that basis, but I have a feeling that if Casey is convicted that Cindy is going to do everything in her power to discredit Baez and Cheney too. I shudder to think what Cindy will resort to, but if she was willing to cast doubt on any or all of Caseys friends that could have resulted, if successful, of their being tried for murder,
I wouldnt put anything past her. Cindy is not going to go quietly into the night when this is over.
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:54 pm

The Casey Anthony defense team is being accused of misstating facts to the court — and the complaint comes from a Knoxville-based court reporting service hired to handle deposition transcripts.

Gerald Stogsdill wrote a letter to Chief Judge Belvin Perry Feb. 8, explaining a dispute over payment for deposition transcripts between his firm, Stogsdill Court Reporting Services, and Anthony attorneys Cheney Mason and Jose Baez.

"It obviously has been represented to Your Honor that my office had initially agreed to provide court reporting services at rates significantly lower than normal rates and then refused to honor the discounted rate, and I believe the reason given the Court was my alleged claim that the job was difficult and took more time than expected," Stogsdill wrote.

"These statements are not true," he continued. "I cannot ignore the attack on my integrity and reputation without responding."

The dispute appears to be over the service's standard rates and what the state of Florida pays for transcription services for indigent clients like Casey Anthony through the Justice Administrative Commission.

"Although it has been represented to the Court that I tricked Mr. Baez and Mr. Cheney (Mason), I believe that our court reporting services were obtained under false pretenses," Stogsdill wrote. "I would not have agreed to provide court reporting services under the substantially lower rates and terms established by the JAC guidelines."

Baez and Mason could not be immediately reached for comment Monday.

Stogsdill said his business has been operating for more than 20 years with a reputation "for being fair and ethical, a reputation that would have been impossible to establish and maintain with shenanigans like those I have been wrongly accused of by the attorney(s) for Ms. Anthony."

Stogsdill provided a series of emails between his office and the offices of the two attorneys to support his complaint. At one point in his letter, Stogsdill writes, "we assume (sometimes incorrectly, unfortunately) that attorneys will pay their bills."

Casey Anthony, 24, is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee Marie in 2008. The child's remains were found in a heavily wooded area off Suburban Drive in late 2008 months after the child was reported missing. Anthony faces the death penalty if convicted.

source
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by artgal16 on Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:56 pm

This is the second time Baez has been accused of lying - how long before he is removed?
artgal16
artgal16

Join date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Tue Feb 15, 2011 1:10 am

Poor Bozo! He and KC still think they can lie and everybody will believe it because they said it! They are a perfect pair! And more news today...

Casey Trial Evidence Breaks Legal Ground

Use Of MySpace Postings First In Local Capital Case, Expert Says

POSTED: 5:46 pm EST February 14, 2011
UPDATED: 6:41 pm EST February 14, 2011

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Legal experts say the Casey Anthony trial could be the first time in Orlando that MySpace postings may be used to try and convict someone of capital murder.
Judge Belvin Perry ruled that the postings in question could be introduced during the trial, but prosecutors still have some hurdles to clear...

"There are some issues of proof with this," said Jeff Deen, who supervises a statewide staff of defense attorneys. Five handle only first-degree murder cases. Deen is not connected to the Anthony case...

"They have to show she's the one who's making the postings. It's not open and shut they can be introduced," he said.

Read more at:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

With JP's fondness for adherence to the law and the precedent set by prior cases, I'm a little surprised that he even allowed these...And, with KC here, there, and everywhere, it might be difficult to prove that she is the one that posted...EXCEPT I just remembered that Bozo actually conceded that she posted the lyrics and kinda brushed them off as just some words she liked from a song or something like that...Not sure, I'll have to look that up. Sounds like she would have done better in this instance to stick to her lying and claimed that she is not the one that posted the "Diary of Days"..It was Zenaida...or Jesse...or Amy...or Tony...or....but NOT ME!! Lies huge waste


Last edited by lisette on Thu Feb 17, 2011 2:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by lisette on Tue Feb 15, 2011 1:14 am

Defense Questions Casey's Ex-Best Friend

Posted: 3:34 pm EST February 14, 2011
Updated: 3:46 pm EST February 14, 2011

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony's defense team questioned her former best friend under oath Monday.
Amy Huizenga accused Casey of stealing her checks, and using them at stores such as Target, while Caylee Anthony was missing. Casey was caught on surveillance video using the checks.
Casey was charged with check fraud, but that took a back seat to the murder charges against her for allegedly killing her daughter Caylee.

WHAT'S NEXT IN THE CASE?
Attorneys in the case against Casey aren't scheduled to be back in court until next month. The next hearing is set for March 2-3.
The judge will consider a defense motion to suppress statements made by Casey's parents, brother, her father's self-proclaimed mistress, her jail pen-pal, and her statements to law enforcement.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
lisette
lisette

Join date : 2009-05-29

Back to top Go down

Normal Re: The Case Against Casey Anthony ~February 2011~

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum