The Case Against Casey Anthony - March 2011

Definition of "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt"
The standard that must be met by the prosecution's evidence in a criminal prosecution: that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

If the jurors or judge have no doubt as to the defendant's guilt, or if their only doubts are unreasonable doubts, then the prosecutor has proven the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the defendant should be pronounced guilty.

The term connotes that evidence establishes a particular point to a moral certainty and that it is beyond dispute that any reasonable alternative is possible. It does not mean that no doubt exists as to the accused's guilt, but only that no Reasonable Doubt is possible from the evidence presented.

Beyond a reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof that must be met in any trial. In civil litigation, the standard of proof is either proof by a preponderance of the evidence or proof by clear and convincing evidence. These are lower burdens of proof. A preponderance of the evidence simply means that one side has more evidence in its favor than the other, even by the smallest degree. Clear and Convincing Proof is evidence that establishes a high probability that the fact sought to be proved is true. The main reason that the high proof standard of reasonable doubt is used in criminal trials is that such proceedings can result in the deprivation of a defendant's liberty or even in his or her death. These outcomes are far more severe than in civil trials, in which money damages are the common remedy.

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

"The term connotes that evidence establishes a particular point to a moral certainty and that it is beyond dispute that any reasonable alternative is possible. It does not mean that no doubt exists as to the accused's guilt, but only that no Reasonable Doubt is possible from the evidence presented."

The paragraph above taken from the definition I posted
basically states that yes you can have some doubt but if its not a "reasonable doubt" you must vote to convict
I think that is a very important point.

ctee1 wrote:Casey never wanted Caylee. She had to steal money, from Cindy Shirley even her friends. She had no babysitter and ended up having to stay home or take Caylee out with her. Tony didnt want a child.

SHe had evey reason to have paternal involvement, unless she didnt know who the father was which was more embarrassing for her, so it was easy enough to tell people that he was dead.

I have every reason to believe she probably didn't even KNOW who the father was. When you sleep around and layer your lovers, sleep w/ someone while drunk, etc it would probably be hard to know who the father of your baby is.

I often wonder if there aren't more than a few guys out there who ask themselves- "Was this my baby?". But after all the shi* Casey and her parents have caused, I wouldn't blame a guy for staying away for fear of being dragged into an Anthony-induced hell on earth. Maybe the real dad had no clue Caylee even existed.

She lies about EVERYTHING else, why believe anything she has to say about who the father might have been? How convenient to say he's deceased. Typical, lying Casey. We will never probably know the real truth.

HippieChick

I remember Cindy stating that she knew who the father was, but his rights were ceased as she didn't want anyone to know. I can't provide a link...I remember that way in the recesses of my memory bank!

I found this and think it a good Who's who for the coming months. Maybe we can tuck it somewhere for reference.

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

cherylz wrote:I remember Cindy stating that she knew who the father was, but his rights were ceased as she didn't want anyone to know. I can't provide a link...I remember that way in the recesses of my memory bank!

Cherylz that must be the same Cindy that told her brother at the wedding that Casey was not preggers when she was sticking out to there at about 7 months. She lives in a world of denial where Casey is concerned.

jeanne1807 wrote:I found this and think it a good Who's who for the coming months. Maybe we can tuck it somewhere for reference.

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

How funny the advertisement is on that page!!! :muahaha:

I tend to agree with Sassy. I think she knows who the father is. I didn't before, but your powers of reasoning made sense to me.

State Files Response Over Hair Evidence In Casey Case
Posted: 5:41 pm EDT March 16, 2011
Updated: 5:45 pm EDT March 16, 2011

ORLANDO, Fla. -- The state filed its response Wednesday to a defense motion trying to keep key evidence about a hair found in Casey Anthony's car trunk out of court.
READ: State's Response On Hair Evidence: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A hair in the trunk did show signs of decomposition, but the defense says there's not enough "science" to back up that claim.
Prosecutors submitted more than 300 pages of case law to back their claims.

The judge still has to rule on the issue.

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

Defense wants hair with "death band" excluded. JA gives lots of good arguments (378 pages worth!) why it should be included.

Im hoping JP will hand out the rulings tomorrow
Thursday is a good day to do it!

Isn't today Casey's birthday? Or is it the 18th? I know it is right around St. Patty's day.

Would love it if JP hands out all his rulings in favor of the State on her 25th birthday!! :bday:

3/19/1986 is her Birthday.

Oh Lord. She is a Pisces. Have Mercy.

You know that is strange. Of my three daughters the Pisces one is the closest to me and the kindest and giving. The very best, loving mother.

The Ants really messed up that Casey. They sure did.

My DIL is a Pisces. Until her, I had never had much experience with them.

lindamarie wrote:3/19/1986 is her Birthday.

If we can get her time of birth, I can do her chart. Should be interesting.

Rereading again about reasonable doubt - I tried to finish this sentence:
Casey Anthony is innocent and someone else killed
Caylee Anthony and I believe that because....

and guess what, I couldnt come up with one single scenario that could possibly make any sense and I dont believe the defense can finish that sentence either.

Rereading again about reasonable doubt - I tried to finish this sentence:
Casey Anthony is innocent and someone else killed
Caylee Anthony and I believe that because I just can't bring myself to believe a mother could kill her child.

Artgirl Hows that? Boy I hope juror number 7 doesn't think like that.

Here's another one. Casey Anthony is innocent and someone else killed Caylee Anthony and I believe that because I believe Caylee drowned and Casey was so scared it was all a big coverup that went bad.

By the way I am playing Devils Advocate.

This is a great question Artgirl. I am anxious to see what others might come up with. Gives us an idea of where jurors might be thinking.

Ah, but Jeanne, is your doubt unreasonable? Because
we know mothers kill their children dont we? We have proof they kill them because we read about it every day and they get convicted and end up in jail. It is reasonable to believe mothers dont kill their children?

If it was an accidental drowning, then why not call an ambulance - would you know if your child could be revived? Would you duct tape her mouth and put her in a trunk where we could see the outline of her body,
and then triple bag her and throw her in the woods
if it was an accident? Would you not be grief stricken
and not want to go out and party for 31 days and have you nails done and get a tattoo? Is it reasonable
to believe an accident?

From JA's response to defense motion to keep hair with death band out:

In this case it is interesting to note that the hair in question was examined by an expert in this area hired by the Defense who, after his examination, she declined to list as a witness. To date no defense witness is disputing the FBI analysis opinion in this matter.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Evidently their expert agreed that the hair did show decomposition or they would have them as a witness disputing the State's claim.

Attorney Bill Sheaffer's opinion on how JP will rule on the motions heard at the hearings on Mar. 2-7:

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

Check out how strange this is:

RIP!!!!

Orange Co. Sheriff's Dept. Mourns Death Of 2 Deputies

Orange Co. Sheriff's Dept. Shaken After Deputy Deaths
Posted: 6:00 am EDT March 17, 2011
Updated: 8:53 am EDT March 17, 2011

ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- The Orange County Sheriff's Department is mourning the deaths of two deputies that died within just days of each other.
Homicide detective 48-year-old Michael Erikson collapsed and died Wednesday night. The department was already reeling from the death of 40-year-old Deputy Sebastian Diana over the weekend.
Orange County Sheriff Jerry Demings said his deputies are shaken to the core about the deaths. Both men were on the force for more than a decade and were very well-liked and highly respected.
“He was a very neighborly guy, very outgoing, very well respected here within our organization,” said Demings.
On Wednesday, Erickson collapsed while playing racquetball with a neighbor at the YMCA aquatic center off International Drive.
Erickson worked for the sheriff's department for 13 years and was set to testify in the Casey Anthony murder trial. Erickson was the first detective to interview Lee Anthony in 2008 and also interviewed Casey's neighbor, who loaned her a shovel during the time Caylee was missing.
WFTV’s legal analyst Bill Shaeffer says any statements detective Erickson made before his death can be used at trial.
“The state can use his deposition as substantive evidence as though he was there in person,” said Sheaffer.
Just days before Erickson’s death, the sheriff's office lost Diana, who contracted a bacterial infection after giving a 3-month-old mouth-to-mouth resuscitation back in 2006.
The child didn't make it and Diana was sick off and on for the past few years. Family members said his heart finally gave out.
“In many ways the life he was trying to save may have caused his own life,” said Demings. “That's what law enforcement officers do. They put themselves in harm's way every day and that's what it's all about.”
Because he died in the line of duty, Diana’s family will receive a portion of his pay and benefits for life.
Both men leave behind a wife and children.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Video I cannot embed.

Posted: 5:38 am EDT March 17, 2011
Updated: 9:46 am EDT March 17, 2011

ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- New numbers show the case against Casey Anthony will cost the courts more than $360,000, according to a report in the Orlando Sentinel.
Most of that money will cover sequestering the jury.The hotel bill for 12 jurors and eight alternates is expected to cost more than $125,000 and close to $50,000 will go toward meals.

Transportation, security, juror wages, and miscellaneous expenses are expected to cost more than $170,000.

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

I found this case while surfing for information on categories of penalties for death of a child either by accident or aggrivated child abuse:
PANAMA CITY — A local case could change the way felony murder cases are handled in Florida.

In 2008, Amanda Lewis, 28, of Esto, was convicted of first-degree felony murder and aggravated child abuse in the death of her daughter, Adrianna Hutto, 7.

Prosecutors said the testimony of Lewis’ son, A.J. Hutto, proved Lewis was dunking her daughter under water to punish her for misbehavior. However, A.J. also said Adrianna fell face-first into the pool while trying to scoop out bugs.

Lewis was convicted of first-degree murder under Florida’s felony murder statute. The statute says anyone in the act of committing certain felonies, including trafficking, arson, sexual battery, robbery, burglary, kidnapping, and aircraft piracy, that end with the death of another can be convicted of first-degree murder.

Aggravated child abuse was added to the list of felonies in 1984 by the Florida Legislature.

In the Lewis case, prosecutors argued she was committing aggravated child abuse when she killed the child.

The problem with that, local defense attorneys say, is three-fold.

First, it uses the same set of facts to convict someone of two separate crimes, aggravated child abuse, and first-degree murder.

Second, it expands, rather than narrows, the pool of people facing capital punishment.

Third, the only legal difference between aggravated battery on an adult and aggravated battery on a child is the age of the victim. The courts have already ruled that aggravated battery on an adult that ends with death cannot be used as one of the factors that bump a case up to felony first-degree murder.

“The definition of child abuse is so expansive that it is impossible to kill a child without abusing a child. Even if you neglect them and they die it’s going to be first-degree murder,” Deputy Public Defender Walter Smith said.

He added the entire concept of felony murder is an old holdover from English law that should be abandoned.

“You turn any crime into a homicide case if someone happens to die,” Smith said. “The whole idea of criminal law is that you punish Mens rea — the culpable mind.”

Lewis’ appeal was argued before the First District Court of Appeal on Jan. 13. The judges have not yet issued a ruling.

In her filing for the State vs. Lewis case, Natalie D. Kirk, an attorney at the Attorney General’s Office, wrote that prosecutors were interpreting the law and the wishes of the Legislature correctly to “punish child killers more severely.”

“While aggravated child abuse can indeed be a type of battery, it is a unique type of battery limited to children,” she wrote. “The Legislature was well aware that often there is one fatal blow (or one fatal dunking) to the child during the abuse and that killing a child would become first-degree murder if it amended the felony murder statute to include aggravated child abuse.”

Assistant Public Defender Kim Dowgul is defending Dennis Creamer next week in a similar situation. Creamer is accused of killing a 2-year-old girl in December 2008 and could face the death penalty if convicted. Dowgul has already argued and lost a motion calling for the first-degree charge to be thrown out in his case. The proper charge for defendants who kill a child in an aggravated child abuse case is aggravated manslaughter of a child, a first-degree felony punishable by a maximum of 30 years in prison, Dowgul said.

Smith said he has two other cases besides Lewis’ on appeal for the same issue. Lewis was convicting of drowning her child, Robert Sturdivant was convicted of beating a child to death and Mathew Caylor was convicted of raping and murdering a 13-year-old girl. Under the law, they all faced the death penalty, but prosecutors only sought death for Caylor. Sturdivant and Lewis were sentenced to life in prison.

“The death penalty is supposed to be reserved for the worst of the worst,” Dowgul said. “You are not reducing the people that qualify.”

In Sturdivant, prosecutors argued that he was committing ongoing child abuse and that he should be punished for two separate crimes.

“It’s a distinction without a difference,” Smith said. “I think the judges are recognizing that.”

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

i CAN see someone saying

"Casey Anthony is innocent and someone else killed
Caylee Anthony and I believe that because anyone who had contact with Casey and Caylee before Caylee went missing claims Casey was a loving and doting mother"

We all know better however. Why else would Cindy be threatening to take caylee away? You dont take a child away from a mother who is 'loving and doting'.

Yes that worried me too Sassy, as Jessie Grund is also on the defense list and that is what he will testify to,
that Casey was a good mother. However, I dont think
that lawyer can say what he "believes"
happened they can only offer proof - and a juror must
be presented with proof. In this case, it seems to me
that a mother that was a good mother couldnt go out and party for 31 days and NEVER report her daughter missing. Remember Cindy made the report not Casey.
The policeman who came to the house said Casey still maintained that Caylee was fine, and that she didnt want to produce her because Cindy would take her away from her.

After thought. If Casey knew who daddy was dead or alive, wouldnt Jose Baez make him and his family suspects? Casey said Zenida told her she needs to learn a lesson?Will there be requests for pat test requests when this is all over? More to come forward for profits on Caylees murder

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Judge Belvin Perry says he still plans to start Casey Anthony's murder trial on May 9, despite funding concerns from court officials.

Opening statements in Anthony's murder trial are scheduled to begin May 16 at the Orange County Courthouse.

Court officials estimate that the trial will cost Orange County more than $350 million. More than $200 million of that is for jury expenses that must be paid by the clerk of court's office.

Judge Belvin Perry has indicated he will bring in a jury from somewhere else in Florida for the case. That means expenses incurred for housing, feeding and guarding the jurors for the entire trial, which is expected to last six to eight weeks.

According to Orange County Clerk of Court Lydia Gardner, budget cuts could put the Anthony trial at risk.

"Our funding for the Casey Anthony trial is in serious jeopardy at this time," she said.

Gardner said that the Florida Senate has proposed a 5 percent budget cut in the final fiscal quarter of this year, just as the Anthony trial is scheduled to begin.

"I have informed both the Chief Justice of the state Supreme Court as well as Chief Judge Belvin Perry of these dire circumstances. If the Senate proposal goes through, the trial is in jeopardy of being canceled or suspended."

Court spokeswoman Karen Levey said that Perry is aware of Gardner's concerns, but said that any legislative measures are still premature.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

. If the Senate proposal goes through, the trial is in jeopardy of being canceled or suspended."

No Way!! OMG, if they cancel this trial...their will be riots all over the world. And, Casey will never live one day as a free woman. Someone will get her. MOO!

What in the hell are they talking about? They are going to let murderers back on the street because they cant afford to try them? Does that make any sense? She cannot go free she is an accused murderer and there is a dead child here. If that were true that means they might as well not arrest anyone for ANYTHING because they cant try them? No what it means is that they cannot sequester the jury- they will have to come straight from their local jury pool.

I hope that's what it means, Art. I could have had a stroke when I read that.

I cannot stand the new governor of Florida - he is a real jerk who is a multimillionaire and got the job to give himself and his rich friends tax breaks - while
refusing money from Washington for a high speed rail.

While Orange County Clerk of Courts Lydia Gardner said the Casey Anthony murder trial could be in jeopardy if proposed legislative funding cuts go through, the state senator overseeing funding to the court clerks said today that the cuts Gardner is worried about will not be nearly as deep as she fears.

"The clerk, I believe, may have some misinformation," said state Sen. Mike Fasano, a Republican from New Port Richey. "The five percent reduction they speak of is wrong. It's inaccurate."

At worst, Fasano said funding to the clerk of courts around the state will be a little less than one percent. At best, he said, their funding levels won't change at all.

"I'm doing my best to keep them held harmless," said Fasano, adding that the clerks will see a "very slim reduction of their dollars. They are a vital component to our court system."

In any case, Fasano said, it would not be a high-priority murder trial like Casey Anthony's that would be placed on hold due to financial considerations.

Civil cases would be in jeopardy before any criminal cases," Fasano said. "She, as clerk of court, knows that better than anyone."

After being asked about the costs associated with the upcoming trial, Gardner released a statement Wednesday saying the proceeding might have to be delayed due to budget cuts.

"Our funding for the Casey Anthony trial is in serious jeopardy at this time," Gardner said in an e-mail response to a newly released estimate of the costs associated with the murder trial set to start in May.

"The Florida Senate has proposed a 5 percent cut to our budget in the 4th quarter, just as the Anthony trial is scheduled to begin," she said. "I have informed both the Chief Justice of the state Supreme Court as well as Chief Judge Belvin Perry of these dire circumstances.

"If the Senate proposal goes through the trial is in jeopardy of being canceled or suspended," Gardner concluded.

But Fasano said there "were numbers thrown out there" that were not accurate. He said Gardner should have consulted with a lobbyist hired to represent the clerks before making her statement.

"Don't jump to conclusions before the proposal actually comes out," said Fasano, who chairs the Senate Budget Subcommittee on Criminal and Civil Justice Appropriations.

The Ninth Judicial Circuit court administration expense estimate for the trial comes to more than $361,000. The bulk of the costs involve housing, feeding and transporting 20 jurors for the duration of the eight weeks the trial is expected to run. Gardner's office would have to absorb much of the trial costs.

The Orlando Sentinel asked Gardner's office about its ability to cover the anticipated trial costs. Gardner responded late Wednesday, saying the trial comes at an unfortunate time as government budgets are getting slashed in Tallahassee.

Meanwhile, court administration officials insist the case is moving ahead toward its May trial date.

"Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. is aware that the Orange County Clerk of Courts, Lydia Gardner, has concerns regarding her office's ability to cover the costs that her office is responsible for in the State vs. Casey Anthony trial, such as jury sequestration," court administration spokeswoman Karen Levey said this morning in a statement.

Levey noted that the state legislative session just started and "talks of continuing the case are extremely premature."

She added that the Casey Anthony "trial is moving forward. It has not been continued."

Chief Justice Charles Canady decided in would be inappropriate to discuss any issues regarding the trial because of the possibility they might be appealed to the Florida Supreme Court at some point in the future, said high court spokesman Craig Waters.

"The Chief Justice and staff currently are working with the legislature on the statewide impact of the current budget shortfall affecting both the courts and the clerks," Waters said in a statement. "He has emphasized the importance of ensuring that significant disruptions in the operations of the clerks' offices do not occur."

Waters added that "discussions are ongoing, and Chief Justice Canady is hopeful that a solution soon will be found."

Waters provided a letter Gardner sent to the chief justice Wednesday, expressing "deep concern" about the Senate proposal "to cut 5% from Clerk appropriations in the fourth quarter…"

Toward the end of the two-page letter, Gardner mentioned the Casey Anthony case, calling it "one of this state's most notorious murder cases."

"What is in question is whether or not this trial will be suspended or canceled if the clerk is not able to meet her statutory responsibility to pay the jurors for their service (upwards of $32,000) or the vendor for their food and lodging during the sequester period (projected at $186,000)," wrote Gardner, noting that her office employs 498 deputy clerks.

"My office wants to ensure that access to justice is maintained and that we are able to continue providing the service to the public that they have come to expect," she said in the letter.

Orange-Osceola State Attorney Lawson Lamar's office is also aware of the budgetary problems this year and their impact on the court system overall, but did not respond directly to Gardner's statement today.

"It's unfortunate that looming cuts will probably impact the prosecution of all cases in some way," said Danielle Tavernier, spokeswoman for the prosecutor's office.

Casey Anthony, 24, is charged with first-degree murder in the 2008 death of her daughter Caylee Marie. Jury selection is scheduled to start outside the Orlando area on May 9. The portion of the trial jurors hear is slated to begin the following Monday, May 16. Anthony faces a possible death sentence if convicted.

Because the case is so high-profile, jurors must be selected from outside Central Florida, brought to Orlando and sequestered during the trial. That sequestration period, estimated at eight weeks in the cost breakdown, is significantly driving up the expenses associated with the trial.

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

Judge: Witnesses can't suggest Casey is a liar
Updated: Monday, 14 Mar 2011, 10:58 PM EDT
Published : Monday, 14 Mar 2011, 10:58 PM EDT

ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. (WOFL FOX 35) - A judge in the Casey Anthony murder trial on Monday issued rulings on some motions which were argued in court earlier this month.

Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. ruled that witnesses will not be allowed to give their opinion on Anthony's guilt or innocence, and they can not say or suggest that Casey is a liar. In addition, the judge will not allow testimony regarding accusations that staff at the Orange County Sheriff's Office purposely moved Anthony to a room where cameras recorded her reaction to news that her daughter's body was found. That tape will not be played in court.



Anthony, 24, is charged with first-degree murder in the 2008 death of her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee Marie. She has pleaded not guilty, claiming a babysitter kidnapped her toddler. Caylee was last seen in June of 2008, but she was not reported missing until a month later. Her remains were found in woods near the family's home in December 2008. Anthony's death penalty trial starts in May.
source: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

wesh.com prints clairfication of their article:

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Funding for Casey Anthony's murder trial should not be a major concern, a state senator told WESH 2 News on Thursday afternoon.

Earlier in the day, Orange County Clerk of Courts Lydia Gardner issued a statement claiming that her office's funding was in risk of getting cut by 5 percent.

Gardner said that the Florida Senate proposed the cut to the budget in the fourth fiscal quarter of the year, right when Anthony's murder trial was set to begin.

“Our funding for the Casey Anthony trial is in serious jeopardy at this time," said Gardner.

State Sen. Mike Fasano said Gardner's statements were not accurate. Fasano is the chairman of the Senate's budget subcommittee on criminal and civil justice appropriations. The committee oversees funding for offices such as the Orange County Clerk of Court.

Fasano told WESH 2 News that if there were any cuts at all in the final quarter of the fiscal year, they would be less than 1 percent.

He said the adjustment would be due to less revenue that came into the trust fund that funds judicial operations around the state. Taxpayer money will fill the deficit, so that the cuts, if any, are minimal, Fasano said.

Gardner said that funding meant the Anthony trial could be in jeopardy.

"If the Senate proposal goes through, the trial is in jeopardy of being canceled or suspended," she said.

Fasano also said that if the state needed to suspend or cancel any trials, civil cases would be suspended first, not criminal trials like Anthony's.

A call and email to Gardner's office Thursday afternoon seeking clarification were not immediately returned.

The trial is estimated to cost Orange County courts more than $350,000. More than $200,000 of that must be paid for by the clerk's office for jury expenses.

Judge Belvin Perry is bringing in a jury from outside of Orange County for the case. The cost incurred includes housing, feeding and guarding the jurors.

A court spokeswoman said Thursday that Perry still plans to begin jury selection on May 9.

Sassybtsweet wrote:i CAN see someone saying

"Casey Anthony is innocent and someone else killed
Caylee Anthony and I believe that because anyone who had contact with Casey and Caylee before Caylee went missing claims Casey was a loving and doting mother"

We all know better however. Why else would Cindy be threatening to take caylee away? You dont take a child away from a mother who is 'loving and doting'.

What a great point you made that CA would not threaten to take Caylee away if KC was a loving doting Mother.

Casey To Lee: I Was Read My Rights

Lead Investigator Claims She Was Never Read Miranda Rights

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony said in her own words she was read her Miranda rights, despite recent testimony from the lead investigator in the case, who said he'd never read Anthony her rights.
The statement could be key. Judge Belvin Perry is expected to rule by the end of the week on whether or not some of Anthony's initial statements to law enforcement will be allowed at the trial.

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

I think it sucks that noone w/be able to say the Truth..that Casey is a liar. I do understand everything else that JP has thus far, ruled on but I hope someone says it anyway. There w/be an objection and it will be sustained but the jury will have heard it.

I know that people know a lot more about this than I do, but I really don't think JP ruled that they could not suggest that Casey is a liar. The motion that he ruled on was a State's Motion and it was in regard to defense calling state witnesses liars (or hinting at it). This was filed by LDB because of the way some of the witnesses were treated by defense in depositions, and she was trying to stop that kind of thing before they were on the stand at trial...As a matter of fact, I think that there was an earlier ruling that it could be revealed that Casey is a thief and a liar if it directly had to do with events surrounding Caylee's disappearance and death. I just found it..."However, the state may be able to introduce evidence of collateral acts-such as lying or stealing- which are inextricably intertwined with the crime charged..." This was in Order Denying Motion in Limine Regarding Any Testimony That the Defendant Has a History of Lying or Stealing

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

The recent Order was to Grant State's Motions:
Item No. 1: Any testimony or expression of personal opinion by counsel, or any witness, that the defendant is guilty or not guilty...Granted.
Item No. 2: Any testimony about irrelevant character traits of Defendant (for guilt phase only)...Granted.
Item No. 3: Any testimony or argument of counsel expressing a personal opinion that the witnesses are "liars" or words to that effect...Granted (except where evidence exists in support of such information.)
This was to counter any "smear" campaign by the defense against witnesses.

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

Again, I'm sure reporters know more about this than I do, but I really think they got it wrong when they wrote that Casey's penchant for lying and stealing was off limits. It is very clear from JP's Order on Feb. 10 that information about these subjects can be introduced at trial if they are relevant to the case...JMO.

Thanks lisette, that was helpful.

HippieChick

Caylee Anthony case: a defense pathologist Spitz out a report
Posted on March 18, 2011 by JWG
Dr. Werner Spitz recently produced a “report” of his findings for the defense. I find his report even weaker than that of Dr. Bock. It seems Dr. Spitz read the Orange County medical examiner reports…acknowledged he read the reports…and chose to completely ignore the reports…except when criticizing the reports.

I thought it would be interesting and fun to walk through his “professional analysis” and ask some basic questions he left unanswered.
Dear Mr. Baez:

As you are aware, I performed a second autopsy on the remains of Caylee Anthony. Said autopsy was performed at the Robert Bryant Funeral and Cremation Chapel, in Orlando, on December 23/24, 2008.

And the report was written 806 days after the autopsy you performed. Did you write this report from memory, or from bench notes?

The salient points in this postmortem examination were:
The body was that of a previously autopsied, skeletonized remains, compatible with the age of 3 years. The remains were complete or almost complete, dry, brownish discolored. The skull was eggshell thickness without evidence of injury, pathological changes or deformity.

What did the brownish coloration tell you about the time the skeleton had been located in that area? Could the discoloration be due to tannins in the soil staining the bones? How long do you think it would take for soil to stain the bones in that fashion? One week, as Dr. Bock hypothesized?

Was the skull really eggshell thin? Is it normal for a 3-year old’s skull to be eggshell thin at death, or does it take a while for the skeleton to degrade to that level?

The skull had not been opened, at the first autopsy, in accordance with normal protocols as when dealing with skeletal remains. Since the skull had not been previously opened, this indicates that the interior of the skull had not been previously examined. A cake of dark brown residue was adherent to the left side of the skull, behind the petrous portion of the left temporal bone, spread over an approximately two inch diameter area. The location of the residue indicates that the left side of the skull was down during most by far of the decomposition process, causing the sediment to precipitate to that area.

I read with interest, in the report of the first autopsy, that saline introduced into the interior of the skull (blind washing) was considered an appropriate and comprehensive method of examination.

It may or may not be normal protocol to open the skull of completely skeletonized remains, but don’t assume ( we all know what happens if you “assume” ) that the interior of the skull had not been previously examined. As you note in your report, the inside of the skull had been rinsed with a saline solution. Of course, you fail to acknowledge that a tooth had been found inside the skull in this manner.

Now, given the skull was rinsed as you acknowledge, of what significance is that small patch of residue you found on the left side of the skull? Given the skull was rinsed and the tooth removed, do you really believe that small patch proves the skull was resting on the left side?

Review of the report of autopsy performed by the Chief Medical Examiner of District Nine, Orlando, Florida and photos all indicate that duct tape was adherent to the hair and not the mandible, therefore if the skull was once lying on its left side, as clearly evidenced by the location of the sediment, it is highly unlikely that both the skull and the mandible, which would have been disarticulated during decomposition, would roll back to an almost perfect anatomical position.

Well, at this point, Dr. Spitz, you have chosen to ignore your previous interest in the saline wash of the skull, and just assume you examined the skull in “pristine” condition. You cannot claim with a straight face at this point that the skull was lying on the left side.

Because of the above mentioned findings, this calls into question the statement made by Dr. Garavaglia that “Although there is no trauma evident on the skeleton, there is duct tape over the lower facial region still attached to head hair. This duct tape was clearly placed prior to decomposition, keeping the mandible in place.” This statement is flawed for the following reasons:

a. The evidence found at 2nd autopsy as described above.

Which we’ve already pointed out that “evidence” found at the 2nd autopsy is fatally flawed.

b. The DNA results of the duct tape yielded no DNA from the deceased.

Would you expect DNA to survive 5 1/2 months in a swamp when the adhesive upon which the DNA would have adhered had long dissolved away?

c. The lack of entomological evidence found on the duct tape is also inconsistent with the duct tape being placed over any orifice that would have attached to the duct tape during decomposition (skin would be expected to adhere to duct tape).

C’mon doctor, are you a real scientist or a hack? Bugs, skin, DNA would have come in contact with the adhesive. The duct tape adhesive had deteriorated away. It was gone, dispersed in the swamp floods. Are you trying to get us to believe the bugs and DNA would have burrowed through the adhesive and somehow gotten stuck in the plastic tape substrate?

The evidence discussed in a, b, and c seriously call into question the statement “clearly placed prior to decomposition, keeping the mandible in place.” The remainder of the skeleton showed no injuries, pathological changes or deformities, with the exception of evidence of postmortem mutilation, i.e., predation by animals.

I think we’ve already determined it is the “evidence” you’ve uncovered that is not serious.

The bones revealed no odor of postmortem decomposition and were completely devoid of soft tissues, adipocere or any remnants of any type of tape or glue residue.

Well, no kidding. You’re the pathologist. What happens to a body when it rots in a Florida swamp for 5 1/2 months? Were you expecting glue residue? Oh wait – thanks for acknowledging there was none. Kind of kills your arguments, does it not?

There is no evidence of ante-mortem trauma to the remains and toxicological examinations were negative for drugs. Therefore the cause of death is undetermined.

The body was too decomposed for that, correct?

The manner of death is also undetermined because there is no scientific information available that the death was at the hands of another.

No scientific. Just circumstantial – beginning with the three strips of duct tape.

My opinions are based on my education, training and experience and are rendered to a reasonable degree of medical certainty.
I reserve the right to amend my report should additional pertinent information become available.

I trust this answers your inquiry.

And of course, your opinion was also based on a payment schedule. Why else wait 806 days to render an opinion?
source:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Defense Depositions In Casey Case Filed

Deputy Erickson's Deposition Among Evidence

POSTED: 9:25 am EDT March 18, 2011
UPDATED: 10:00 am EDT March 18, 2011
ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony's defense attorneys filed thousands of pages of interviews with the Orange County Clerk of Courts on Thursday.
More than 40 transcripts of witness depositions conducted by the defense are among the filing.

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

Links to transcripts not available yet...Included are defense depos of Roy Kronk, Robyn Adams, Jesse Grund...Should be interesting!

I am anxiously awaiting JP's rulings on the motions from the Mar. 2-7 hearings...Supposed to rule sometime today. This will be on whether KC's statements to LE and the Ants will be suppressed. Also on whether the chloroform testing and root growth info are subjects for a Frye Hearing (Are they generally accepted in court as being scientifically legitimate?)

Oh gosh, I dont think the defense will get anything
but you never know I hope it comes before I have to leave early today at 2:00 pacific!

Casey Anthony: Roy Kronk details attack, kidnapping charge in new deposition
Dozens of statements filed Thursday.

Casey Anthony's defense team questioned Roy Kronk, the man who found Caylee Marie Anthony's remains in late 2008, about his personal problems, including how he was attacked by an ex-girlfriend's boyfriend years ago and later charged with kidnapping.

Kronk details the circumstances behind the charge in the more than 3,000 pages of witness depositions her team filed with the Orange County Clerk of Courts late Thursday that became public this morning.

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

From Orlando Sentinel article referenced above:

Allen and Baez disagreed on if they had arranged a specific meeting with Casey Anthony.

Allen said he didn't remember there being anything concrete set.

"It seemed like a lot of times when I had conversations with you, you just simply would put me off or tell me something that turned out to be nonsense," Allen told Baez.

Trouble for the prosecution?

posted by halboedeker on March, 16 2011 10:33 PM

In the Casey Anthony case, a witness hired by the prosecution could become a star witness for the defense, Central Florida News 13 reported tonight.
At issue: tests done on the spot where Caylee Anthony’s remains were found and how long that land was wet. Anthony is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her daughter. The trial starts in May.

“Scientific tests that happened on that property may have backfired on the state and played right into the hands of the defense,” Adam Longo reported.

Dr. James Jawitz, a University of Florida professor of soil and water, found that “for most of the entire time period from 16 June 2008 to 11 December 2008, Area A was not inundated.”

And that finding contradicts the state’s contention that the spot was inundated with water after the toddler’s remains were put there.

Longo said that Jawitz “may have dropped a few jaws with his report.” Jawitz concluded that the area was underwater for just 10 days in August 2008. Caylee’s remains were found in December, five months after she was reported missing.

Longo said that search volunteers didn’t start combing the area until Aug. 30. The state paid $5,750.50 to Jawitz for his research, Central Florida News 13 reported.

“And it could end up helping to prove Casey’s defense that Caylee wasn’t here until after Casey was locked up permanently in October of 2008,” Longo concluded.

Longo promised more on the issue after he interviews Jawitz on Thursday.

It was another eye-opening report from Longo, a fine reporter who used to work at WKMG-Channel 6. In an earlier report this week, he revealed arguments between the prosecution and defense as a September deposition of Jawitz ended.

At the end, something happened that infuriated Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton, Longo said. “Whatever did happen, we don’t know what what it was. The court reporter doesn’t make reference to it,” Longo said.

Then the argument followed, with Ashton snapping at defense attorney Cheney Mason to “keep your comments, thoughts, feelings to yourself.”

Defense attorney Jose Baez asked why Ashton was raising his voice. They traded words, and Baez complained, “You just screamed. You just screamed like a little girl.”

Longo replayed footage earlier this month of Baez apologizing to Ashton in court. Baez also apologized at the end of the September deposition.

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

This is pure bunk - they have photos - I saw pictures when the interviewed TES and Mark Nejame in Nejames office showing that the area was underwater.
Where do they come up with this stuff. They have aerial photographs of the area underwater.

I found this article in the hinky meters archives dated
August 24, 2010 regarding Dr Jawitz report at that time:

Caylee Anthony case: An analysis of Dr. Jawitz’s report
Posted on August 24, 2010 by Valhall
As previously discussed here at The Hinky Meter, I passed Dr. Jawitz’s report to a wetland expert and asked that he provide an analysis of the soundness of the water level analysis and its conclusions. Brian McGowan, CWD, CCP agreed to review Dr. Jawitz’s report and has offered his learned opinion. The following are his conclusions after spending several months looking over the available data obtained from the Stormwater Management office of Orange County. (The same data Dr. Jawitz is assumed to have utilized in his analysis.)

******************************

After reviewing the hydrological report assembled by Dr. James W. Jawitz and dated November 3, 2009, I have come to the following conclusions:

I believe that the methods that Dr. Jawitz employed to measure the groundwater fluctuation at the investigation site are sound and scientifically accurate. I also believe that the data reflected in his report is a true measure of groundwater depth at the investigation site. This data can be accurately extrapolated to measure the groundwater fluctuations at Area A (the site in which the remains were found). Also, the topographic map that he uses on page 3 of his report was adapted from a recent survey dated January 30, 2009 which was conducted by Allen & company Professional Surveyors and Pampers. This topographic data was measured in 1 foot contours which allow a high level of interpretation as to the topography of area A.

On page 3 of his report, Dr. Jawitz stated that he surveyed the elevation of his investigation site and found it to be 1.54 ft. below the elevation of Area A. What is not stated in his report is the instrumentation that was used to survey the investigation site nor what intervals of contours he recorded (i.e. 1-ft, 2 ft., or 5-ft). He most likely measured them in a 1-ft. interval but that is not stated in the report. He also stated in his report that he surveyed the area on November 2, 2009 which is only one day prior to the date on this report (page 3, Paragraph 2). Although Dr. Jawitz methods for measuring the fluctuation of groundwater at the investigation site and correlating that data to the fluctuation of groundwater in Area A is accurate and scientifically sound, he does not take into consideration other factors that could lead to the inundation of Area A that are independent from the Investigation site. Furthermore, the topographic map listed on page 3 of Dr. Jawitz’s report shows a high level of detail for the topography of Area A but does not show any detail for the investigation site which is located approximately 68 ft. from Area A. Without knowing what level of detail Dr. Jawitz used in his own topographic survey of the investigation site it is impossible to determine whether or not the site drains to a lower area. By looking at the topographic map on page 3 of his report, Area A appears to be a poorly drained depressional area.

The remains of Caylee Anthony were found in a wetland or a swampy area as referred to by Dr. Jawitz on page 1, paragraph1 under Site Location of his report. Wetlands can possess a very complicated hydrological regime. For a wetland to exist, three criteria have to be met. The first criteria is that hydric soils must be present. Hydric soils are those soils that are capable of ponding water for at least seven days out of the growing period. Soils are complex in themselves and an there can be many different soil types located in a small area. The second criteria is that a wetland must possess hydrophytic vegetation. This is vegetation that is dependant or can survive in wet or saturated soils. The last criteria is hydrology. This means that there must be a hydrologic regime that can support hydrophytic vegetation.

As a wetland scientist, I have been involved in many wetland investigations in which an area can change from a wetland supporting all three of these conditions to an area that only supports 1 or none of these criteria. To get an accurate picture of whether there are other factors involved in the hydrology of Area A that are independent of the investigation site, a wetland delineation and determination has to be conducted at Area A and the investigation site. At a minimum, the soils at Area A and Dr. Jawitz’s site should be identified and analyzed to determine how the sites drain. It is my professional opinion that Dr. Jawitz’s report dated November 3rd, 2009 lacks data that could be crucial in determining the accurate hydrological characteristics of Area A. Measuring the ground water fluctuations alone cannot give an accurate depiction of an areas hydrologic regime. Although Dr. Jawitz’s investigation site is located approximately 68ft. away from Area A and is also located in a wetland area, this does not mean that the hydrologic characteristics of the two sites are the same even if the groundwater fluctuations are.

Brian McGowan, CWD, CCP

****************

I would like to say how very grateful I am to Mr. McGowan for agreeing to do this as a personal favor and professional courtesy. In addition to his heavy workload and responsibilities in his own career, he voluntarily spent his personal time to review Dr. Jawitz’s report, analyze the data and provide his experienced opinion on this matter.

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

Its almost three oclock in Florida - I wonder if JP
waiting until almost closing time to put out the decisions -

Judge Rules On Casey's Initial Statements

Perry Says All Of Casey's Statements OK For Trial

POSTED: 3:31 pm EDT March 18, 2011
UPDATED: 3:47 pm EDT March 18, 2011

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Judge Belvin Perry ruled Friday on two key motions in the case against Casey Anthony.
Anthony's defense filed motions to have her statements to law enforcement thrown out from the first days after Caylee was reported missing.
Perry denied the defense motions and ruled Friday afternoon that all of the statements will be allowed at the trial.

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

JP ruled in the state's favor in all motions except the one about the chloroform. Rulings are below:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (Statements to Anthonys)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (Root Growth-Not subject to Frye Hearing)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (Chloroform--Not excluding, just saying that it is subject to Frye Hearing next week)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (Statements to LE)

Whoa! thanks for posting that - I will start reading!