LOVE AND PROTECT ALL CHILDREN


A discussion of children, their welfare, well being and lives. We must protect them, they are our future.
 
HomeRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 CASEY ANTHONY ~ MARCH ~ 2011

Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9, 10, 11  Next
AuthorMessage
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Caylee Anthony case: Magpie reports on 03/07/11   Tue Mar 08, 2011 9:23 am

Caylee Anthony case: Magpie reports on 03/07/11 hearing

Posted on March 7, 2011 by Valhall

It was a full house again for the hearing. George and Cindy (especially George) looked like they’ve had enough for awhile. Cindy is usually somewhat physically affectionate, putting her arm on George’s back, etc. I never see any reciprocal behavior from George. I realize, too, that some are more public than others, but this is a couple who knows they are in the public eye and being scrutinized at every movement – just saying. This has got to be an emotional roller coaster that they wish they could just get off. Cindy still looks for any acknowledgment from Casey, which again didn’t happen, but George has stopped. I noticed each day that he has looked at this feet or the back of the room when court was clearing instead of trying to make eye contact.
By the way, the couple previously identified as George’s parents are not. They go to the Anthony’s church.
It was surprising to see all the detectives in court again today since their testimony wasn’t needed. I respect their ability to sit there seemingly unaffected while their reputations are besmirched. I guess they’ve had enough trial experience to know to expect it. But it still would require great self control. In Mason’s argument for Miranda he kept talking about intimidation. Have you every been innocent and felt intimidated or fearful of a cop?

Today seemed different all around in court. I don’t know what it was, but if it’s burnout, how will we last through an extended trial? The usual cast of media were there. Most of them are engrossed in their Blackberry or Iphone. I, too, was busy boppin’ and weaving trying to look for little expressions or tells of the people there. LOL.
Baez seemed very deflated today; in court and outside. Typically he is smiling and polite. He typical kind of watches who’s watching. Today he had a different demeanor. While waiting for the elevator after the hearing another reporter asked Mason a question and then a few more. After getting out Baez made a comment about “If you let them ask one it turns into 5″. Funny he seemed to love the media earlier. I also noticed that Casey seems to be turning to Mason a lot more for her questions and scribblings. Could the tide be turning?
The defense and prosecution seemed more adversarial again today. I guess you can’t call the other side names and still expect to share cookies and milk afterward.
So what was the stipulation all about that Baez met in August 2008 with law enforcement and Linda Drane-Burdick? Is that something we’ve heard before and I missed or forgot?
Is Mason purposefully misleading the court or does he need to brush up on the testimony? He’s combining the arrest (for minutes) with the trip that Acevedo took with Casey to Sawgrass. She was not ‘arrested’ when Acevedo patted Casey down. That is typical procedure when allowing anyone into you police car. Suspect or not, there are procedures for everyone’s safety. George was once again vehemently shaking his head in agreement with Mason when he said that you “Can’t unarrest someone”.
I was also a little stunned by Mason once again talking about poor little Casey being intimidated by all these big men. He also pointed out, several times, that she had no prior experience with law enforcement and therefore could be easily confused. Well, isn’t it a point, also, that George has been a law enforcement officer? If he and Cindy had any concerns about Casey’s safety or impending arrest wouldn’t he have stepped in?
Linda Burdick would be a great poker player. She does make comments to her fellow State attorneys, but never really shows emotion. Poor Mr. Ashton, I don’t know if he realizes how often he does it, but when someone makes a comment he disagrees with, he shakes his head “NO”.
I haven’t watched any video yet, but right after Judge Perry made his reference to Mason about a “Parks” case, Joy Wray walked in. I need to rewatch it because it seemed like the Judge was very interested in her arrival. Maybe it was just that she came in late to the proceeding, but something in the gallery seemed to catch Judge Perry’s attention for quite awhile.
Sorry, not much to give for today with such a short hearing and all.
Peace
…Magpie.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: No Contest   Tue Mar 08, 2011 6:19 pm

No contest


In the case against Casey Anthony, closing arguments were held today with regards to two important Defense motions which were presented last week. The two motions were, 1) Motion to suppress the Universal Studios interview, and 2) Motion to strike jail videos (the Defense alleges the Anthony family was tricked into acting as “Agents of the State” at the behest of Law Enforcement).
If courtroom motions were won or lost over the clarity of the arguments presented, the Prosecution would win, hands down. As a result of the intelligence and clarity of the States argument versus the free-flowing and dramatic defense argument, there was no contest. However, the competition is not about who is the better orator; it’s about which side can bring appropriate case law to support their individual argument(s).
Cheney Mason cited a lot of case law but hardly connected the relevance between the case law and the facts of the case. His delivery today was difficult to follow, and he consistently confused many of the known facts in the case.
Linda D. Burdick, Assistant State Attorney, was precise, methodical, and most importantly, her arguments were factual.
Mr. Mason charged the Orange County Sherriff’s Office with being completely deceitful and conspiratorial in their efforts to trick Casey at Universal Studios. Mr. Mason accused anyone in a uniform or a marked car with police intimidation of Casey, who was not at all familiar with the law and didn’t realize her rights.
With regards to the Anthony’s being Agents of the State, Mr. Mason argued that it didn’t matter if the Anthony’s were “unwittingly” working at the behest of the Police, the fact remains, he contends, they were like puppets doing the bidding of the Police.
Linda D. Burdick, on the other hand, argued after Mr. Mason and immediately clarified the factual misstatements Mr. Cheney made. (It was a thing of beauty!) She pointed out that up until the time of Casey’s arrest, the suspect in the case was Zenaida Fernandez Gonsalez – not Casey Anthony. All reports and statement were filled out with Zenaida as suspect, therefore, Casey was not the suspect, not in custody, and not treated as a suspect.
With regards to the Anthony’s as Agents of the State’s motion, Ms. Burdick pointed out that it was the Anthony’s who sought the help of the Detectives, not the other way around. As it turned out in this case, both the Anthony’s and Law Enforcement were working toward the same goal: finding Caylee.
There were quite a number if interesting moments in today’s proceedings. Also, it was nice to see Detectives John Allen, Yuri Melich, and Eric Edwards present at the hearing.
Judge Perry advised that he will rule on these motions by the end of next week. It appears to be no contest, in favor of the State, however, anything can happen – and it usually does!
George and Cindy Anthony were present and both were chewing gum! I believe that Judge Perry does not allow gum-chewing in his courtroom. The Anthony’s, as is their habit, place themselves above the rules and the law, as we know. In addition, Judge Perry recently admonished the gallery to refrain from facial expressions or gestures during hearings. Perhaps George Anthony missed that direction because when it was Ms. Burdick’s opportunity to argue, George Anthony persistently shook his head from side to side to communicate his disagreement.
I wonder how much longer Judge Perry will tolerate this behavior from the Anthony’s?
Casey appeared very uncomfortable today. It was interesting to see all the tricks Casey used to pretend not to hear what Ms. Burdick was discussing. Casey shifted in her seat, looked around, wrote furiously on her yellow pad, and whispered to Mr. Baez and Mr. Mason to try to avoid listening. When Mr. Mason argued his case, Casey sat very still and attentive. She worked quite hard to avoid hearing anything that resembled the truth.
Casey may not be able to hack what’s coming, and what she will hear.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony: George needs anger management big time!   Tue Mar 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Casey Anthony: George needs anger management big time!


Filed under Casey Anthony
George Anthony, claims to be emotional on the stand, but seems to be more angry at everyone. George took the stand numerous time since all of this went down in 2008. He took the stand on GMA, Larry King, the Today show, and while in court on the 2 and 3rd of March. He never seemed to have an issue when he had his big mug on the tube for all to see him, lie for his daughter, and justify her.
George seemed to be fine when Casey’s attorney was questioning him. Answered his questions, some too much, but he answered the questions. Then the state gets up there and starts asking questions, and George goes off in his hothead manner. Linda Drane-Burdick, for the prosecution, started asking George questions about Law Enforcement, and since he was one at one time in his life, they went over how they work, and how they call in and communicate with the communication center. Then they talk about the uniform and if George wore a uniform to calls and he did, and some he didn’t. If you watch the video: http://www.wftv.com/video/27054152/index.html at 22:20 starts the angry George coming out. LDB asked, if you could have you would have had 2,000 police officers there to help look for Caylee. Yes, George says, the more that could have been there, the faster we could have brought Caylee home. LDB, the more officers the better. George, right. An Amber Alert, you name it, it should have been done. LDK Right! George goes on, LDK says, Well! George, Thats right, well! That’s a sore subject between you and I, so we can badger all day long. LDB says ‘JUDGE’. The Judge says “listen sir.” George goes on and says, you opened the door. The Judge said Don’t talk over each other. LDB says ‘Yes sir”. The questioning goes on.
Now a little about the Amber alert in Florida. Here is the website for the FL Dept of LE Amber Alert.
Criteria For Activation
To activate the AMBER alert the following five (5) criteria must be met.
• The child must be under 18 years of age.
• There must be a clear indication of an abduction.
• The law enforcement agency’s investigation must conclude that the child’s life is in danger.
• There must be a detailed description of child and/or abductor/vehicle to broadcast to the public (photo when available).
• The activation must be recommended by the local law enforcement agency of jurisdiction.
The date the Anthony’s gave Law enforcement was 9 June 2008, then later changed the date to 16 June 2008, they were not clear when it happened. Remember it was Shirley Plesea who pointed out the last day they had seen Caylee, if that wasn’t weird. Then the Anthony’s changed the date, from the 9th of June to the 15th. The real question would be, why didn’t Casey report Caylee missing on the 16th June and had no intentions of reporting Caylee missing at all, until Cindy reported Caylee missing? Oh yea, I forgot Casey used her detective skills to see if she could find Caylee, and used other resources to boot. My guess would be George should be mad at Casey.
The next time George was on the stand, again his hothead took over. George was very angry during the questioning with the prosecution on the second day. You could tell by his face expression, which he has many. When asked that had LE said they are done with this domestic dispute in your family, and had LE left, he would have continued with his independent means to find Caylee. George said anything he could have done to bring his granddaughter home he would have. LDB said that you would have done that independent of LE. If they weren’t going to help, he would have found other means to get help, George said. And he did that he stated by the way of kid finders and other organization out there too. Other families that were out there to assist us, ma’am. Then his attorney experience kicked in and she says, I don’t know why you are going in this direction ma’am, because I wish we could change….then LDB says your Honor, Mr. Anthony I object him challenging me..of course George is butting in…change places with me. George says he will challenge LDB. The Judge says Mr. Anthony just listen to the questions, sir. George says well you know sir, if I may answer you, sir this is a very emotional time. The Judge says he understands that, but listen to the question and answer it. The Judge was very nice to Geo, and asked the ‘angry’ old man if he needed a recess. After the George head shaking, trying to compose himself, he says he doesn’t need one and just wants to get this over with. Video The George challenge at 18:55
On redirect by the defense George started to cry. Baez was asking a hypothetical question, if I told you if you showed up in court next Wednesday, and it would save your daughters life….REALLY Baez? George has missed many court hearings, which shows that he does not support his daughter. But when you put it that way, save your daughters life, you can bet he would. But it is hypothetical and a stupid question!
Isn’t it just so unreal how the Anthony family blames everyone else? Everyone is wrong, George and Cindy are right, and their daughter is now going to trial for the murder of her child, and it is the States fault! This bunch of nuts are just that, a bunch of nuts.

.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony Hearing: Day 4, Closing Arguments   Tue Mar 08, 2011 6:38 pm

Casey Anthony Hearing: Day 4, Closing Arguments



Judge Belvin Perry has given himself a generous amount of time to make decisions on the motions to exclude Casey's statements to law enforcement and to her family. While we may be impatient to hear the decisions, Judge Perry is now doing what he knows best: he is making rulings that will be appeal-proof. He wants this trial heard once. He also has a formidable record when it comes to having his cases overturned. In his years as a judge, he has only had one-half of a verdict overturned on appeal. I'm sure he doesn't want to add a full case to his "loss" column. So, we will have to wait until the end of next week and we can rest assured he will make the fairest decisions possible, whether we like them or not.

We all know the testimony and the accusatory questions asked of the police officers who testified. We can remember that none of the Anthony's came out and said that they were working as Agents of the State. George testified that he felt he had been "duped" by the police into doing their bidding. Even so, he testified that his goal was to locate his granddaughter. Cindy Anthony said the same, she was looking for Caylee regardless of what the police were doing. Lee Anthony denied he was an Agent of the State; he was conducting his own investigation and freely sharing his information with the investigators. He wanted to solve the "problem".

If you were to go back to 2008 and look at the documents and voice mail messages left by Cindy Anthony, I think you will find that the family considered LE as Agents of the Anthony Family. There were so many instances of ranting about how LE wasn't doing their job in looking for Caylee. Cindy Anthony complained that the detectives on the case weren't keeping the family "in the loop" enough. They weren't giving the Anthony family everything they wanted to conduct their own investigation. Detectives Allen and Melich both testified that the family was constantly asking them to talk to Casey to get information from her. They stated that they couldn't, but the family could. They suggested ideas as to how it could have been done. It was clear back in 2008 that the Anthony's wanted LE to do their bidding. When they didn't, it was more rant and threats.

Mason was the first to speak on behalf of the defense. I have notes, but I am pretty much ignoring them since they are the same hot mess that his presentation was. Rather, I'm going to paint you a picture of Casey Anthony as portrayed by Mr. Mason by putting the various puzzle pieces of the early pieces of Mr. Mason's narrative together.

Concerning July 15 to 16, 2008, Cheney said that Casey was a young woman (later referred to as a girl) who was never Mirandized until her indictment October 14, 2008. All the statements made on these two days would need to be excluded because she hadn't been read her Miranda rights.

Her mother, Cindy, wanted her arrested. From that moment on Casey was under intense psychological pressure.

This 22 year old woman had no police record and had no contact whatsoever with law enforcement whatsoever, except that she had dated a policeman. She had "no awareness, no hard in the street kid, not somebody who had any idea of what's going on."

That evening, "at least four deputies arrived, all in full regalia, uniforms, badges, guns, cartridge belts, etc."

Those bits and pieces of information are what Cheney Mason wanted the judge to see of poor Casey. Take the previous four paragraphs and tell me where there are mis-statements or half-truths! It's sort of a "what's wrong with this picture" game.

Mason continued with his long, rambling speech, which I will not attempt to duplicate or summarize here. However, as he spoke, there were more "half-truths" and "misstatements".

She was briefly interviewed and then handcuffed and led out to deputy Acevedo's patrol car and put in the "cage" leaving her a prisoner. Then, she was driven around to Sawgrass. "with another deputy in full regalia, who followed in another car." The other deputy, Fletcher came up to Acevedo's car and interviewed her, again without Miranda about the "nanny scenario."

Mason then explained that Sgt. Hosey took her for a walk when she got back. (Nasty comment about Hosey here about his not remembering much other that the contents of that conversation.) At that point Casey was un-arrested.

At this point, Judge Perry interrupted Mason to ask when the handcuffs were removed. According to Mason, the record was unclear about that. However, Mason went back to the fact that even before she was handcuffed, she was in a psychological situation where her mother was yelling at her and the deputy was "holding" her to write a statement. (I suppose that Mason wanted to get across that she was psychologically handcuffed from the get-go.)

I'm leaving out any more snarky comments here because I do want to give you a chance to pick them out and comment on them for yourselves.

In essence, this was the body of Mason's argument. He also discussed the family members as being Agents of the State. It was a summation of the defense testimony presented with plenty of digs at the misbehavior of the detectives who ensnared the family into acting as Agents of the State.

There was some discussion of case law Mason had provided to the judge and it was the State's turn.

Linda Burdick (for sake of brevity, I will use the name she refers to herself by) responded with a detailed time line of the events. She calmly presented it and went on to argue the State's position on both the issues. Again, no details here, because we all heard or read about the testimony. I would like to include her time line, however, to help you in the "what's wrong with the picture" game that was Cheney Mason's presentation. Burdick, indeed started out by stating that there were fundamental disagreements with the facts which have been taken completely out of context and mixed up.

1. 911 Call: 8:28 PM (stolen vehicle)
2. Arrival of Cpl. Fletcher: 9:43 PM
3. Final 911 Call: Contemporaneous with last 911 call
4. Arrival of Dep. Acevedo: 9:52 PM

LE's main occupation was gathering information from the members of the Anthony family.

When Dep. Acevedo put Casey in her patrol car, she informed Casey she did not have to go with her. Casey went voluntarily to help identify the last place Caylee was seen.

5. Dep. Acevedo and Casey went to Sawgrass Apartments.

When Casey was returned to the home, she was free to do as she pleased.

6. Ryan Eberlin takes Casey's statement at 1:05 AM

The handcuffing incident occurred after Casey's statement was taken and was of no more than 5 minutes duration. When released, Casey was allowed to return to her house and even spent an hour alone in her room. (George Anthony keeps wagging his head "no" to everything at this point.)

By correcting Mason about the time line of events, Burdick shows the judge that her initial statement to LE was made prior to the handcuffing and therefore should be admitted in trial.

The remainder of the State's argument dealt with whether Casey was in custody during her trip to Universal and that there are rulings considering this. Burdick read a bit from Casey's phone call home after she was arrested, indicating that she had been arrested on an "effen whim". Casey, she stated, could clearly stand up for herself!

As far as the Agent of the State was concerned, Burdick just had to recap the testimony of the three Anthony family members. We will have to wait for Robyn Adams and Sylvia Hernandez until the defense has the opportunity to depose them.

Burdick continued on with her time line oriented presentation and went through, in exquisite detail the events of the evening.

I must also say that she cited some wonderful case law. In the two cases she cited in depth, it was clear to see that the situations in both were very parallel to the case here. It is in part 4 of the video.

This case is complicated because the fact is, it is difficult to say when Casey went from being a witness to the alleged kidnapping of her daughter by the so-called nanny to murder suspect. Cheney Mason made no differentiation between Casey's arrest for child abuse and lying to police and her murder indictment. If Mason were to be believed, Casey was a murder suspect the instant Cindy Anthony made her final 911 call.

In 2008, Jose Baez certainly signaled that it would eventually become a murder case when he refused to let Casey talk to anyone about finding her daughter, Caylee. He also indicated that Casey had her reasons and we would all understand at trial. It was then that I realized Caylee was no longer alive.

I look forward to hearing your responses to the "what's wrong with the picture" game!

Hearing:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

References

WFTV
Orlando Sentinel
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Attorneys battle over air science in Casey Anthony case   Tue Mar 08, 2011 10:08 pm

Attorneys battle over air science in Casey Anthony case



By Jacqueline Fell, Reporter
Last Updated: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 5:57 PM


More Info





  • Latest Casey Anthony news
  • Key players
  • Case timeline




ORLANDO --
Prosecutors and the defense disagree over the scientific evidence that has linked Casey Anthony to her daughter’s murder.
The science used to put Anthony on trial is also being put on trial.
If prosecutors who say Anthony killed her 2-year-old daughter get their way, a new kind of science will be introduced during her trial -- air science.
Workers at the Oak Ridge National Library in Tennessee say an odor found in the trunk of Anthony’s car show decomposition.
The defense is calling this "junk science."
If allowed into the courtroom, it could be the first time it's ever been used.
The defense's experts said this science is too new and “hasn't matured for a scientific conclusion.”
Dr. Kenneth Furton said there's "no scientifically validated methods capable of identifying the presence of human remains based on the presence or absence of specific chemicals."

Prosecutors said police dogs alerted to signs of decomposition in the trunk of Anthony’s Pontiac.
However, defense's experts said dogs aren't a "consistent tool” and "aren't scientific instruments,” and therefore they "are not reliable."
Dr. Scott Fairgrieve said there's too much error involved in the scenting ability of a dog and they may be detecting the wrong things, such as blood rather than decomposition.

The prosecution, however, isn't sold on Fairgrieve's expertise. In his deposition in December, Fairgrieve was asked if he's done experiments to verify his opinion. His answer was no.
Web Extra

Forensic botanist Neal Haskell said he found tiny (microscopic) flies in Anthony's trunk. Investigators found a large number of gnats in a bag in the trunk. His report, which came out in 2009, said the flies feed off of decomposition.
In January 2011, the defense and prosecution talked with forensic entomologist Timothy Huntington. His deposition was just released last week. Huntington, who at one time studied with Haskell said "the insects are, are not consistent with the presence of a decomposing body."

Haskell's report read, "Paper toweling was used in an attempt to clean the decompositional fluids purged from the remains in the trunk of the car."
However, Huntington told attorneys you can’t say one way or the other if a body was ever in the trunk.
Huntington said the gnats were probably from the garbage found in the car.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Amazing case law from 3/7 closing arguments   Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:42 am

amazing case law from 3/7 closing arguments


After yesterday’s closing arguments on two important Defense motions in the case against Casey Anthony, I got to thinking that I’d sure like to read the cases that were cited by the Judge, the Prosecutor, and the Defense. But then I realized that I have a life and a job and need to give this case a rest!
And so….being that I am a tad fickle, I said to my self, “well, what the heck – I’ll see if I can find these cases!” Well, I found all the cases cited in yesterday’s hearing, and now I want to try to figure out how Judge Perry will rule based on the case law cited.
Now, you know that I am not a lawyer, right? I love the law, however, and love to write about it…..
So, here goes my analysis of how these cases inform on the two motions argued yesterday:
1) State of Florida v. Parks
Judge Perry mentioned the State of Florida v. Parks case to Mr. Cheney Mason during his closing argument and said he would like Mr. Mason to look at that case and advise how it might support the Defense argument.
In this Appellate court decision, the suppression of statements to police was raised in appeal, and is one of the case items at issue. The court found that although the admission of statements (by the defendant and a co-defendant/witness) were a mistake, this mistake by the trial court was found to be harmless to the case itself and therefore not an issue at appeal.
This tells me that Judge Perry may see Casey’s Universal Studios interview to be harmless since a great deal of the information in her interview can be argued and proved elsewhere in the case, but more importantly, perhaps Judge Perry is saying if he allows the interview, it will not be questioned at appeal. Remember, this was a case that Judge Perry told Mr. Mason to review.
2) Rollings v. State
Rollins v. State is the horrible case of Danny Rollings. Rollings was sentenced to the death penalty for each of the five murders he committed. Of course, one can only die once, the jury sentenced him to death for each of the five murders. There were a few appeal issues, one of which involved Rollings statements to police. What is interesting here is there is also a charge of a jail inmate, Bobby Lewis, acting as “Agents of the State” in the information gathered by that inmate:

On appeal, Rolling challenges the trial court’s findings that (1) his statements to Lewis and law enforcement officers did not violate his right to counsel because Lewis was not acting as a de facto state agent and, (2) that the assistant state attorney’s involvement in the interrogations was not unethical and did not warrant suppression of Rolling’s statements. Specifically, Rolling maintains that law enforcement officers and prison officials knowingly exploited the relationship between himself and fellow inmate Bobby Lewis such that Lewis was acting as a de facto government agent when he elicited inculpatory statements from Rolling.
Bobby Lewis befriended Rollings for the specific purpose of hopefully getting his sentence reduced as a result of offering testimony for the state. The State of Florida refused to enter into any such agreement with Bobby Lewis. Regardless, Lewis became Rollings “confessor” and mouthpiece, but not at the behest of any State Official, though the Defense would have liked the court to believe otherwise.

…find that the record and relevant caselaw clearly support the trial court’s conclusion that Rolling’s right to counsel was not violated because Bobby Lewis was not acting as a government agent when he elicited incriminatory statements from Rolling or served as Rolling’s “mouthpiece” during the January 31 and February 4 interviews…
The appeals court did not find flaw with the trial court on this issue.
3) Ross v. State
Ross v. State has to do with a person who was fifteen days shy of his 16th birthday. He was found guilty of the murder of a 64 year old woman who was stomped to death. Ross was sentenced to death by the trial court. The issue on appeal had to do with the question of whether his confession was freely given or coerced by the police. The defense claimed that the defendant, although given the Miranda Warning numerous times, didn’t understand his rights due to his low IQ. Ross stated each time that he understood his rights and didn’t want a lawyer.
The appellate court found that low IQ or “mental weakness” did not mean a confession was not voluntary, therefore the appellate court found no issue with the trial courts decision to admit the confession. What ultimately occurred in this case on appeal was the death penalty was questioned and the case was sent back to the trial court. The appellate court stated:

The appellant was sixteen years of age and mentally retarded at the time of the crime. His prior criminal activity consists of petty offenses. Under the standards of our capital felony sentencing law, the mitigating factors outweigh the aggravating factors. Death is not an appropriate penalty. The sentence of death should be vacated and a sentence of life imprisonment without eligibility for parole for twenty-five years should be imposed.
4) Ramirez v. State
Ramirez v. State, a death penalty case for a 17 year old who killed a woman, Midred Boroski. The issue on appeal had to do with the defendant’s confession and the defense claim that Ramirez was not properly Mirandized.

Ramirez argues that the requirements of Miranda were violated because the warnings were not administered before the interrogation began, rendering his confession to the crime inadmissible. “Interrogation takes place … when a person is subjected to express questions, or other words or actions, by a state agent, that a reasonable person would conclude are designed to lead to an incriminating response.”
Linda D. Burdick argued that the situation in the Casey Anthony interview was unlike what occurred in Ramirez. In Ramirez, the defendant was at the police station, where a reasonable person would conclude that they were in custody. However, the Casey Anthony case, she was at Universal Studios, and free to go. In Ramirez, they found that a reasonable person would think they were in custody.

There is no question in this case that Ramirez was subjected to interrogation and was not initially informed of his Miranda rights. However, the State argues that Miranda warnings were not required because Ramirez was not in custody at the time that he was interrogated at the police station. We disagree. Custody for purposes of Miranda encompasses not only formal arrest, but any restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with formal arrest.
Ultimately, the appellate court found that to strike the confession would not be in the best interest of justice. They wrote:

Ramirez, for whatever undisclosed reason he had in his own mind, told the detective the truth of what occurred in the criminal episode. Excluding the instant confession is not in the interests of society or justice. On the other hand, the majority places the interest of society in having this abhorrent crime punished in substantial and unnecessary peril.
In the interest of justice, the appeals court did not reverse this case.
5) Henry v. State
Henry v. State, another death penalty case in which the defendant killed by binding, gagging and cutting the throat of his victim. A motion to suppress the confession of the defendant was denied and questioned at appeal. The appeals court upheld the verdict and agreed with the trial court that allowing the confession into the trial was not at issue.
6) Malone v. State
Malone v. State, related to an “Agents of the State” accusation, This citation, I believe, was raised by Mr. Mason. The circumstances of this case were the defendant, with a partner, viciously killed two people during the commission of a robbery. This is an “Agents of the State” issue is encapsulated as follows:

Malone argues that his convictions should be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial because the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress certain incriminating statements made by him to one of his cellmates who, unknown to Malone, was an informer for the State. He concedes that these statements were not coerced and were voluntary, but argues that they may not be used against him because they were deliberately elicited by a State agent in the absence of his counsel and without his being informed of his Miranda rights by the informant.
The appeals court found that the trial court should have suppressed these statements since Malone’s 6th Amendment Rights (Right to Counsel present), were violated. Therefore, the case was sent back and retried.
In regards to the Casey Anthony case, it was NOT found that anyone was acting as an Agent of the State (although the defense would like to argue Robyn Adams was an Agent, she was not).
Conclusion
There is sufficient case law, in my humble opinion, that supports denying the Defense motions. Casey Anthony was not “in custody” while riding in the police cars! Casey Anthony was directing where the police cars would travel as they drove to check out places where “Zanny” may have lived.
The Anthony’s were not Agents, and the fact that the Detectives ordered the taping of the videos of the jail visits, is perfectly legal – there are signs placed around the jail that video taping is taking place!
I didn’t read the entire cases in the above links, I read the objections and the outcomes – the details were gruesome. I think I may have some bad dreams tonight!
Oh well, thank goodness, I’ll be Only Dreamin’!
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Docs, Testimony Reveal Casey Anthony Arguments   Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:10 pm

Docs, Testimony Reveal Casey Anthony Arguments


More Evidence Expected To Be Released Friday




POSTED: 5:21 pm EST March 9, 2011
UPDATED: 5:59 pm EST March 9, 2011


ORLANDO, Fla. -- Newly released depositions and a closer look at recent testimony reveal what strategies both sides in the Casey Anthony case may take when the trial begins.


Four days of hearings revealed Anthony's defense team now has at least one expert opinion that would support its claim that someone placed Caylee Anthony's remains in the woods after her mother's incarceration.
The hearings, which wrapped up Monday, centered mostly on several defense motions that seek to suppress several of Anthony's initial statements to authorities. Defense attorneys allege that Anthony should have been read her Miranda rights and that she was essentially being interrogated by investigators.
MORE: Extended Coverage
Defense attorney Cheney Mason cited a federal case, U.S. vs. Alfonso-Perez, to request a jury instruction about witness lying. Mason argues that detectives conspired to manipulate the Anthony family to get incriminating evidence on Casey.
Orlando criminal defense attorney Richard Hornsby, who is not affiliated with the case, said the defense is honing one prong of its attack -- conspiracy.
"(They claim) that certain witnesses the state presented lied. That's a very interesting issue that will come out more as the case progresses," Hornsby said.


Who Placed Caylee's Remains?




In newly filed expert depositions, the defense team's botanist testified that the plant and root growth found with Caylee's remains could have sprouted in as little as a week, supporting the defense theory that someone other than Anthony placed the remains there.
"It seems clear they have not abandoned the argument that the body was placed there after Casey went to jail," Hornsby said.
The reports also reveal that the defense team's bug expert doubts Caylee's body was in her mother's trunk.
Dr. Tim Huntington testified that he would have expected to see "a whole slew" of insects in the trunk that feed on decomposing bodies if that were true.
The state plans to counter with Huntington's longtime mentor, Neil Haskell, who claims Anthony's car still smelled like death months into the case. He said he found evidence of coffin flies in the vehicle.

Two Surprises


Testimony at the hearings in recent days by Orange County Sheriff's Office Sgt. Reginald Hosey caught some longtime case followers off guard.
The night Caylee was first reported missing, Hosey testified about taking Anthony for a private walk to figure out what was going on.


Hosey claimed that Anthony, who had not seen her daughter in a month, was not worried about Caylee's condition, but was concerned that her own parents were trying to take her daughter from her.
"Did she try to convince you this was no big deal? That this was her mother causing problems?" prosecutor Linda Drane Burdick asked Hosey.
"Yes," he replied.
The defense questioned as to why the revelation is just now coming out and why it was not put in a report.
Another surprise was that no one in law enforcement read Anthony her Miranda rights until the day she was indicted, three months after she was first arrested in connection with her daughter's disappearance.
Prosecutors claim Anthony willingly answered questions and was not subject to Miranda because the suspect at the time was "Zanny the nanny," not Anthony.
Perry has yet to rule on the motions but indicated he would late next week.
The state revealed on Wednesday it plans to release more evidence in the case on Friday. WESH.com will post the evidence that is released.
Anthony's murder trial is scheduled to begin in May.
Copyright 2011 by WESH.COM. All rights reserved.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony: Depositions May Hint at Strategy   Wed Mar 09, 2011 9:00 pm

Casey Anthony: Depositions May Hint at Strategy

Posted March 9, 2011 by Kreuzer33
Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: Anthony Body Found, Anthony Family, Anthony March 9, Anthony Text Message, Anthony Text Messages, Anthony Trial, Anthony Update, Belvin Perry, Brad Conway, Casey Anthony, Casey Anthony News, Caylee, Caylee Anthony, Caylee Anthony News, Caylee Body Found, Caylee March 9, Caylee Update, Cindy Anthony, Gary Utz, George Anthony, Jan Garavaglia, Jose Baez, Judge Belvin Perry, Judge Perry, Lee Anthony, Leonard Padilla, Missing Child, Missing Girl, Roy Kronk, Tim Miller, Todd Black, Tot Mom

CNN has obtained depositions of three key witnesses in Casey Anthony’s murder trial. These depositions could hint at the defense’s potential strategy.
Full details can be found at the link below.
From CNN:
Depositions of Roy Kronk, Jan Garavaglia and Gary Utz show the defense may try to suggest that key evidence was tampered with and may be inadmissible to the jury. Even if the judge allows this evidence to be submitted during the trial, it is the defense claim that someone moved Caylee’s remains and duct tape found with the remains, which is so important to the prosecution’s case, may not have originally been over Caylee’s mouth area at all.
Meter reader Roy Kronk initially reported a suspicious-looking plastic bag in a wooded area close to the Anthony home in August 2008, two months after Caylee went missing.
Jose Baez, Casey Anthony’s attorney, questions Kronk, alluding to the idea that Kronk’s initial visit in August was to search for Caylee’s body after seeing the media at the Anthony home and learning of a $250,000 reward in the 2-year-old’s disappearance.
“You cared enough to, at that point, to look around because you wanted to investigate it, is that correct?” Baez says.
“Yeah. Well, there was a $250,000 reward,” Kronk responds.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony: "Toss Those Statements"   Wed Mar 09, 2011 9:02 pm

Casey Anthony: “Toss Those Statements”

Posted March 9, 2011 by Kreuzer33
Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: Caylee Anthony, Casey Anthony, Tot Mom, Missing Girl, Jose Baez, Cindy Anthony, Missing Child, Leonard Padilla, George Anthony, Anthony Family, Todd Black, Lee Anthony, Caylee, Anthony Text Message, Anthony Trial, Tim Miller, Anthony Update, Caylee Update, Caylee Body Found, Anthony Body Found, Anthony Text Messages, Brad Conway, Roy Kronk, Casey Anthony News, Caylee Anthony News, Anthony March 9, Caylee March 9, Linda Drane Burdick, Belvin Perry, Judge Belvin Perry, Judge Perry, Linda Burdick

The defense team would like to have statements made by Casey Anthony to law enforcement and relatives thrown out ahead of her murder trial.
Their reason: She wasn’t read her Miranda rights until three months after Caylee was reported missing.
Full details can be found at the link below.
From CNN:
Her defense lawyers argued Monday that Anthony thought she was in custody in July 2008 when she first talked to police, before she’d had her constitutional rights as a criminal suspect read to her.
“She was handcuffed, patted down, placed in a car, which is a cage, (and she) could not get out,” attorney Cheney Mason said.
But Assistant State Attorney Linda Drane Burdick countered that the suspect words should not be off limits, claiming she freely and voluntarily spoke with police and had not been detained. Early in the investigation, police were looking at a woman named Zenaida Gonzalez — whom Anthony said was the girl’s babysitter, a claim the woman later denied — and not Anthony as the prime suspect in the girl’s disappearance, according to the prosecution.
“In no way did Ms. Anthony, or would a reasonable person, believe that they were in custody during any point in time when she was giving statements to the Orange County sheriff’s office,” Burdick said Monday. “Not being subject to custodial interrogation, Ms. Anthony was not entitled to her Miranda rights.”
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Random Rants   Thu Mar 10, 2011 1:56 am

March 9, 2011

random rants


We all have our own personal things to rant about with regards to the Casey Anthony case, right? I have quite a few raging rants, but tonight I just need to rant about some things that I forgot to mention in my last few posts – just random things that made my blood boil during the recent Defense motion hearings.
Cindy Anthony….
…said she recalls Yuri Melich’s initial interview with Casey lasting about an hour. (I am referring to the initial taped interview that Yuri did after reading Casey’s police statement.) In addition, Cindy testified that Yuri’s tone of voice was intimidating and demanding of Casey. Nothing could be further from the truth! When Linda D. Burdick asked Cindy if she knew the interview was taped, it was a classic “gotcha” moment! Cindy almost choked and her expression was priceless!
When Judge Perry hears this interview with Yuri and Casey, which is only 19 minutes and 7 seconds long, he will hear the soft and extremely calming tone that Yuri had!
During Cindy’s first day on the stand, there was a moment when Ms. Burdick, referring to the Anthony home address, misstates the address as “Hope Springs”. Cindy curtly corrected her by saying, “Hopespring.” Ms. Burdick then says, “Whatever.” And, oh, Cindy was furious! The look on her face was priceless and reminiscent of the Morgan deposition in the Zenaida civil case when Cindy said, “… you’re cute but you’re not a 10″, (referring to Zenaida).
At one point, Cindy is talking over Ms. Burdick, and says “Linda this is very unsettling to me.” The Judge stops Cindy, who then turns to the Judge and says “it was because of her tone of voice”, like she was a school girl complaining to the teacher.
George Anthony….
My biggest rant is a statement that George Anthony made about John Allen. He said, referencing how Sergeant Allen speaks, “He’s got a stutter.” Huh? That’s not true and it’s such an awful and mean thing to say! That made me so darn mad!
Anyway, those are a few of my most maddening rants from the recent motion hearings.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Caylee Anthony case: Battle Botanist   Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:14 am

Caylee Anthony case: Battle BotanistPosted on March 9, 2011 by JWG

Recently, a handful of defense expert witness depositions taken by the state were released to the public. Among those are depositions of the defense forensic botany expert, Dr. Jane H. Bock. As far as I can tell, the sole purpose of having Dr. Bock testify is to counter the prosecution’s expert witness, Dr. David Hall, and his conclusion that Caylee’s body had to have been dumped at Suburban Drive a minimum of four months prior to the discovery of her remains. Thus, it appears the defense may still try to claim Caylee was dumped there after October 14, 2008, the day Casey began her stint as the longest-serving inmate at Orange County. Since losing Laura Buchanan as a “witness” and deciding not to point the finger at Roy Kronk as an alternate suspect, about the only thing left for this Dream Team is, I suppose, Dr. Bock’s opinion.

Dr. Bock is a retired botany professor from the University of Colorado. She was brought onto the case by Linda Kenney Baden, the most recent member of the Dream Team to jump ship. The connection was actually made through a retired judge who, along with his wife, were vacationing together with Dr. Bock and her husband in Florida from December 2008 to February 2009.
In reading through the deposition, I thought of Dr. Bock as the classic grandmotherly type who would connect well with the jury. As Valhall has said to me, she has a comfortableness about her. She speaks in a manner that conveys her true and sincere passion for her work and the subject matter, using words such as “inspired” and “intrigued” to convey her thoughts.
I agree that Dr. Bock’s personality will help win over the jury in the sense that they will adjourn to their hotel rooms having enjoyed listening to her. She was clearly moved by seeing Caylee’s remains, both in person and in photographs. SA Jeff Ashton will need to be careful during his cross examination to hide his hot-headed tendencies and avoid appearing “mean” to Dr. Bock. However, I really don’t think this will be a problem. In reading the deposition of the good doctor, he comes across as respectful and patient.
According to Dr. Bock’s website, she has a “serious side interest in forensic botany.” The fact it is a side interest and not a full-time career came through loud an clear in the deposition. I hate to say anything negative about Dr. Bock, because she came across as very humble, likable, and earnest. Yet she also came across as a bit disorganized, unfocused, and unwilling to draw a professional conclusion. At the end of the day, I don’t think Dr. Bock will have anything of value to offer that will undermine the prosecution’s case.
Dr. Bock was deposed first on December 21, 2010. That deposition ran long so a second deposition was held on February 12, 2011. The first deposition was marked by rather lengthy exchanges – essentially back and forth sniping – between Mr. Ashton and defense counsel Dorothy Clay Sims which consumed nearly as many pages as Dr. Bock’s testimony. Both depositions were done via Skype and Webex, and the first deposition was also slowed due to a lack of familiarity with the applications.
Dr. Bock visited Suburban Dr. on February 1, 2009, accompanied by Patrick McKenna, a private investigator working for Baez. Prior to visiting the site, she was not given the opportunity to review any photos, reports, or any other form of discovery by the defense. Because of this poor up-front planning by the defense team, Mr. Ashton pressed Dr. Bock as to how she knew she viewed the exact location where the remains were discovered. No solid answer was ever given.
During her visit Dr. Bock took over 100 photographs, and these were the primary focus of the first deposition. Mr. Ashton asked numerous times if any of those photographs were of particular interest to her. Dr. Bock’s responses to those question gave me my first impression that she was not going to be particularly helpful to the defense. She would say a particular photo was interesting, then bounce to another without explaining why the previous photo caught her attention. Like a good sport fisherman, Mr. Ashton reeled her back to the photograph at hand and walk him through her thoughts. What surprised me was that she, for the most part, found the photos botanically interesting, but not necessarily forensically interesting.
The following exchange was typical:

Q. All right. This is photograph 46. Why might that be important?
A. It suggests that that’s a mature tree that’s been there for a while.
Q. Oh, okay. All right. Go ahead. If there’s any others.
Okaaaaay…If you’re wonder what, if anything, that had to do with the remains and the length of time they had been at the scene, you are as befuddled as I (and probably Mr. Ashton).
Dr. Bock examined Caylee’s skeletal remains in a mortuary, after they had been released to the Anthony family. It was clear this left a lasting impression on her, as she commented on how small the skeleton was. She handled a few bones but mostly examined them with a magnifying glass. She noted roots growing on the bones, however, she did not take any measurements of the roots.
Dr. Bock received Dr. Hall’s report on February 17, 2009. When asked if she formed any opinions about his report, her first response was that she was impressed with (and envious of) the accuracy of his plant identifications. She also mentioned that she recently reviewed a book of his and recommended it be published, that it would be useful. It’s statements like those that simply make her a likeable, honest person.
But, there are other statements about the report and throughout other parts of the deposition that left me with the impression that Dr. Bock is a bit disorganized and therefore not always tight with the facts. She had a great deal of trouble finding information such as specific photographs she found interesting (wouldn’t she have noted them or set them aside?) or when she received certain pieces of discovery, such as Hall’s report. She seemed to misunderstand Dr. Hall’s observation that the remains site was also a local trash dumping site. As stated above, she would offer up a photograph as being interesting botanically, but not forensically, even though she was being deposed as a forensic botanist. It’s those little but frequent pieces of her testimony that caused her to come across to me as a weak witness.
Another example to this point was when she was asked whether there was anything interesting in the investigative reports provided to her – she began commenting on the medical examiner report. Again, Mr. Ashton reeled her back to the investigative reports. She pointed to the passage whereby Dr. Lee examined the car at the OCSO evidence garage. It was interesting to her because there might be botanical evidence in the trunk, such as seeds and twigs.
Mr Ashton then asked:

Q. Is there any indication in any report or any photograph that there was any botanical evidence in the trunk?
A. I don’t know. I would hope.
Q. Well, I mean, have you examined the reports of the crime scene technicians and the trace evidence that the FBI analyzed, the trunk contents, to see if there was botanical evidence involved?
A. No.
Okaaaaay…I’m seeing a pattern here of her finding something interesting, then maybe not really finding anything of interest after all, and not pursuing it any further. By the way, early reports from CSI’s Bloise and Vincent do note leaf litter was removed from parts of the car. Just saying.
An interesting exchange occurred near the end of the first deposition when Mr. Ashton tried to ascertain Dr. Bock’s level of expertise with the flora and fauna of Florida. He asked how much experience she had working in the botanical field in the state of Florida. Her first response was to say that she knew the person who wrote the first flora of Florida rather well – a person who is deceased. ( Okaaaaay… ) Her second response was that her parents lived in Florida. Her third response indicated she did research on the feeding behavior of the Florida tortoise. Her fourth response was that she did thesis research on the water hyacinth, which first showed up in Florida around 1900 (she did not actually travel to Florida for this research). Her fifth response was that she had a colleague at Florida International University working on some very interesting botanical problems down in the Keys. Eventually, Mr. Ashton coaxed out of Dr. Bock that if one were to add up all the hours she traipsed through the woods of gardened in Florida, she would have 2 to 3 years of experience (not necessarily expertise).
( Okaaaaay… )
Towards the end of the deposition Dr. Bock had this to say as well:

I have to say that when I agreed to work with the defense on this case, obviously, I thought there could be something I could do for the defense in this case. You know, I’ve had a recent other source of information about this case, and I’m embarrassed to tell you what it is. My daughter, the mother of that cowboy, watches a lot of TV. I don’t, And she loves truTV. And she calls me up and says, oh, mister so-and-so is on TV, you should look. So then I’ve learned a lot. I watched the transition of judges on TV. And once I heard my name mentioned, but it was mispronounced, which relieved me. And what else have I learned on TV? I think that’s all. But it’s been a source of information.
( Okaaaaay… )
The second deposition focused on Dr. Bock’s review of crime scene and medical examiner photos. Some of the highlights:

  • She was asked (essentially) whether or not the plants at the crime scene would be consistent with those found in swampland. She agreed that they were consistent.
  • At one point she was asked if she could identify a vine in a particular photo, to which she replied “No, I’m not going to say. I trust his (Hall’s) identifications.” ( Okaaaaay… )
  • It was her opinion that the leaf litter found around the skull nearly to the level of the eye sockets could have occurred within a week’s time. Yet in her first deposition she noted that the leaf litter that had accumulated in the one and a half months since the crime scene was stripped of all vegetation was “two or three leaves deep.”
  • She noted some “very old stuff” located either at the bottom or underneath the skull, in particular a leaf skeleton. She said that it was indicative of it being surrounded by water at some point, but also that it would have taken 6 to 12 months for it to form. Dr. Bock said she assumed that the leaf skeleton had already formed when the body was placed there, but had no clear basis for that assumption.
  • It was also her opinion that the root growth on the skeleton, hair mass, and blanket could have occurred within a week’s time. Yet she also admitted she had never examined a skeleton with roots growing on it before, and had only examined a crime scene involving a body outdoors “three or four times” in her nearly 30 years of being interested in forensic botany on the side.
  • While she has never examined human bones with roots growing on them, she did mention she examined chicken bones with roots growing on them. This was on the family farm. When she was a child.

( Okaaaaay… )
But, at the end of it all and when asked by Mr. Ashton, Dr. Bock said she was not prepared to render an opinion as to when Caylee’s remains were placed at that location.
The defense should show some dignity and not call this lovely woman to the stand. They will not win this throwdown. She has nothing to offer.
JWG
References:
Dr. Bock Deposition #1
Dr. Bock Deposition #2
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony - Where Is This Case Headed?   Thu Mar 10, 2011 5:16 pm

Casey Anthony – Where Is This Case Headed?

Posted on March 8th, 2011
by Simon Barrett in Op-ed, crime
Read 1,285 times.

Last weeks three days of court haggling over inadmissibility of evidence, and yesterdays ‘closing arguments’ have me wondering a great deal as to what the final outcome of the trial of Casey Anthony will be.
One thing was clear from this last four days of court time, the Anthony defense team of Jose Baez and Chaney Mason have changed tactics. Rather than try to place blame on meter readers, missing children search organizations, or fictitious Nannies they have their sights set on a different target. Pulling a page out of the OJ Simpson criminal murder trial play book they have decided to apparently ignore the guilt or innocence of Casey Anthony and instead pick holes in the prosecutions methodology in investigating the crime. Are we watching a replay of the Mark Fuhrman debacle?
It was a tortuous three and a half days of arguments. And the king of the filibuster award has to go to Cheney Mason, I swear that if you asked him what the time his watch had, it would take at least an hour to get the 10 second answer out of him. It would be quicker to pound a stake into the ground and improvise a sundial!
While most of the arguments had the umami of a three day old donut it became very clear that the Baez/Mason team were cherry picking. The favorite target has moved from Zenaida to Miranda! The objective would seem to be twofold. Firstly it would prevent a great deal of damning although circumstantial early evidence, such as the 911 calls, the ‘oops I was only kidding about working at Universal Studios’, and that icky ’smell of death in the car trunk’ problem.
One has to opine that if Baez does win this skirmish, does he then move on to bigger prey? I think the answer has to be yes. But it will not be about proving the innocence of his client, it will be more about proving the ‘flawed’ techniques used by the prosecution and law enforcement.
Are we sitting on the cusp of another high profile trial that has nothing about guilt or innocence? Rather it is just about procedure and finger pointing?
One thing is for certain, little Caylee Anthony is dead. It does not matter what you may think of the guilt or innocence of mother Casey Anthony, the possible role of grand parents George and Cindy Anthony, or even brother Lee. Caylee Anthony did not put Duct Tape on herself and then climb into a Laundry bag, then a trash bag, and in a final demonstration of youthful defiance throw herself into a flooded swamp!
Simon Barrett
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Indigency Anniversary: Taxpayers' Bill   Thu Mar 10, 2011 10:46 pm

Casey Indigency Anniversary: Taxpayers' Bill


Records Show More Than $80K Spent On Anthony Defense




POSTED: 3:45 pm EST March 10, 2011
UPDATED: 4:31 pm EST March 10, 2011



ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony's defense team is again asking for thousands more taxpayer dollars, exactly one year after Anthony was declared indigent. Since then, her defense has cost Floridians more than $80,000.


On March 10, 2010, Orange County Clerk of Court Lydia Gardner declared Anthony indigent. A judge later approved the declaration, meaning Anthony's defense is now funded by taxpayers and doled out by a state agency.
In a new motion, Anthony defense attorney Jose Baez said he has no choice but to ask for more investigative hours.
Baez said his team needs another $12,000 to investigate 340 state witnesses and review more than 9,000 pages of new evidence filed by prosecutors.
The motion, similar to several others filed by Baez, asks for 300 additional investigative hours at a state rate of $40 per hour. Past requests by Baez have been granted, either in whole or in part, by Judge Belvin Perry.

Justice Administrative Commission figures reveal Anthony's defense has billed $30,883 in investigative fees to taxpayers.
So far, the JAC has reimbursed the Anthony defense team $49,300 and another $31,281 in bills is still pending.
ther state-paid fees include:





  • $7,206 for deposition transcripts
  • $8,879 for crime scene processing by an expert witness
  • $9,299 in subpoena services
  • $9,866 in out-of-state travel expenses for those working for the defense
  • $2,045 for in-state travel expenses for a due process provider

The state-paid costs are above and beyond the $275,000 defense fund Anthony spent on her own before being declared indigent and eligible for taxpayer reimbursement.
Jury selection for Anthony's murder trial is scheduled to begin May 9.
MORE: Extended Coverage
Copyright 2011 by WESH.COM.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Friend Predicted Dumped Body's Location   Thu Mar 10, 2011 10:51 pm

Casey Friend Predicted Dumped Body's Location


Childhood Friend Met With Investigator Days After First Report Of Missing Child




POSTED: 4:46 pm EST March 10, 2011
UPDATED: 6:25 pm EST March 10, 2011



ORLANDO, Fla. -- A newly filed deposition in the case against Casey Anthony reveals an eerie prediction made by one of Anthony's best childhood friends.


It happened during law enforcement's first trip into the woods along Suburban Drive, just 72 hours after Caylee Anthony was first reported missing.
Deputy Sheriff Appling Wells interviewed Kiomarie Cruz, a friend of Anthony's, on July 19, 2008. Caylee had been reported missing only days before, despite the fact that Anthony claimed she hadn't seen the child in more than a month.
Wells and Cruz walked the wooded area that was thick with vegetation near the front of Hidden Oaks Elementary.
Cruz called it a favorite hangout for her and Anthony, where young people would go to have sex, drink and smoke marijuana.
In Wells' deposition, he said Cruz told him that if Anthony had done something to her daughter, that was the place where she would put the child.
Five months later, on Dec. 11, Caylee's remains were discovered roughly 350 yards from Anthony's so-called hideout.



Become A Fan Of WESH 2 News On Facebook:

The connection could help prosecutors make a case that Anthony has a history of doing clandestine things in the wooded area, and those who knew her best in the past even predicted that was the place where she would dump her child's body.
Cruz may have damaged her credibility. According to published reports, she sold her story to a tabloid for as much as $20,000.
Cruz is listed as a potential witness for the state.
Jury selection for Anthony's murder trial is scheduled to begin May 9.
MORE: Extended Coverage
Copyright 2011 by WESH.COM
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey's Defense Wants More Taxpayers Money   Thu Mar 10, 2011 10:58 pm

Casey's Defense Wants More Taxpayer Money


Posted: 6:22 pm EST March 10, 2011




ORLANDO, Fla. -- The defense in the Case against Casey is asking for more money from taxpayers for its private investigator.
Casey's lawyers want investigator Jeremy Lyons to do another 300 hours of work at a rate of $40 per hour. That's an extra $12,000.
The defense said Lyons would be going through new evidence submitted by the state and looking into the prosecution's witness list.
Judge Belvin Perry has yet to rule on the request.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: NO MIRANDA AT ALL?   Thu Mar 10, 2011 11:09 pm

no miranda at all?


Sometimes things are so unexpected and implausible, it’s easy to fail to really hear what is said – at least for me, that’s the case.
Who could ever imagine that a super-smart detective could forget to read the Miranda Warning when Casey was finally arrested? When I read this today, my heart sank!
If this is true, and if the Orlando Sentinel is correct in their story of March 9, 2011, “Casey Anthony: What were the biggest surprises at hearings?” by Hal Boedeker, no Miranda was read at all!
Boedeker quotes Bob Kealing, as saying Casey was not read her Miranda Warning until the day she was indicted. Kealing said, “Prosecutors counter that Anthony willingly answered those questions early on and was not subject to Miranda warnings because the suspect, after all, at that time was Zanny the nanny.”
Well, I learned something brand new today! It is not always necessary for someone to be Mirandized before they are arrested!
Phew!
Yes! It was legal for Casey to be arrested without Miranda because, as we know, she was not the suspect in the criminal case, Zenaida was. Casey was arrested for lying to police and endangerment of a child. It was not until her indictment that she was arrested for criminal activity.
The information below explains this quite clearly:
Can you be arrested without being read your Miranda Rights? Yes!

The Miranda rights do not protect you from being arrested, only from incriminating yourself during questioning. All police need to legally arrest a person is “probable cause” — an adequate reason based on facts and events to believe the person has committed a crime. Police are required to “Read him his (Miranda) rights,” only before interrogating a suspect. While failure to do so may cause any subsequent statements to be thrown out of court, the arrest may still be legal and valid.
Also without reading the Miranda rights, police are allowed to ask routine questions like name, address, date of birth, and Social Security number necessary to establishing a person’s identity. Police can also administer alcohol and drug tests without warning, but persons being tested may refuse to answer questions during the tests.
The Defense team in this case is charging that Casey was in custody as a result of being handcuffed and placed in the “cage” of the police car by Deputy Eberlin. They also contend that when Casey went with Deputy Acevedo to the Sawgrass Apartments, she had to sit in the back of the car, but that was only as a result of the procedures of traveling in a marked car. She did not sit in the back of the car with the Detectives, as she was assisting them at the time.
The question goes to the when it can be determined that a reasonable person would think they are in custody, and being “deprived of their freedom of movement.”
When am I in custody?

The most obvious example of being in custody, of course, is when the police say, “You are under arrest.” But you might be in custody even if the police do not say, “You are under arrest.” Generally, the law considers you in custody when you have been arrested or otherwise deprived of your freedom of movement in a significant way. This may occur when an officer is holding you at gunpoint or when several officers are surrounding you. Other examples are when you are in handcuffs or when the police have locked you in the backseat of a police car. There are no absolute rules on when a person is in custody–the test is whether a reasonable person in the circumstances would have felt free to leave the scene, and a court will consider all the circumstances. (Emphasis added.)
I believe that Linda Drane Burdick made an excellent case in her cross and in her closing argument, and I really do think Judge Perry will rule in favor of the Prosecution.
More discovery coming tomorrow!
Wesh News advises that more discovery will be released tomorrow. I haven’t heard what the discovery will contain, but we’ll soon find out!
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: How Much Sincerity Did Jose Baez Muster?   Thu Mar 10, 2011 11:13 pm

How Much Sincerity Did Jose Baez Muster?



10 Mar

This article is the second to examine the apology offered by Jose Baez to Jeff Ashton in open court on Friday, March 4, 2011. Mr. Baez may be seen and heard at the following link.
http://www.wftv.com/video/27081023/index.html
Jose Baez: “I apologize directly to Mr. Ashton for any personal attacks I may have spoken to him both privately and publicly. And because none of which… I think this an easy thing to do because it is something I agree with and believe and not because of prompting needed from anyone. I have a great deal of amount of respect for these prosecutors who sit here. I… I also admire their passion for their cause. And I respect their intelligence and dedication to their work. And many times over the last several years we have all butt heads privately and we’ve all agreed on many things privately and I just wanted to make it clear that unfortunate sometimes and… unfortunately because of the magnification of a case like this, the attention that these things get speculated on and dragged on and it is an ugly reflection of what we do in our profession and I think it’s my obligation to clear that up. And I want the court to know with all the sincerity that I can muster, that this is truly what I believe and it is truly what I aspire to do each and every day that I carry out in this honorable profession of being a defense lawyer. Thank you.”
“I apologize directly to Mr. Ashton for any personal attacks I may have spoken to him both privately and publicly” – Mr. Baez offers a limited apology to Mr. Ashton. Mr. Baez does not apologize for any written “personal attacks”, only those “spoken”. His listeners, including Judge Perry, may be aware the written retort from Mr. Baez in response to the prosecution’s filed objection to the defense’s most recent disregard for court orders were peppered with many insults to Mr. Ashton. “Attacks” is limited to only those which were “personal”, professional attacks are not up for apology. Even those these “attacks” were “personal”, they were “spoken” “both privately and publicly”. What is the definition of “both privately and publicly”? Is Mr. Baez saying he and Mr. Ashton spend time together “privately” and not connected to this case? Or does “privately” refer to unrecorded phone calls? Does “publicly” mean in front of other people or in the courthouse or on television? The phrase “I may have spoken” is a sure sign of insincerity. Mr. Baez offers an apology, yet denies knowledge of his actions which necessitated the need for the apology. If Mr. Baez does not know for what he apologizes, how can anyone else? “Spoken to him” limits the apology to only those “attacks” Mr. Baez verbalized directly to Mr. Ashton, therefore no apology is offered for anything Mr. Baez said about Mr. Ashton to the press or anyone else, either privately or publicly. Much like a four-year-old who is sorry he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, but not sorry about the three cookies he wolfed down before being stopped, Mr. Baez seems far more contrite Mr. Ashton heard any “attacks” than he is about actually making the “attacks”. Mr. Baez does not understand why he should be apologizing or the purpose of an apology.
“And because none of which…” – Mr. Baez begins to minimize the effect of any “attacks” which he may or may not have said directly to Mr. Ashton, but stops himself, visibly tripping over his words as he switches topics.
“I think this an easy thing to do because it is something I agree with and believe and not because of prompting needed from anyone” – Mr. Baez believes it is “easy” to apologize to Mr. Ashton for three reasons, listed in the order of importance to Mr. Baez. First, Mr. Baez agrees with his own course of action. It is most important to Mr. Baez for the court to understand Mr. Baez agrees with himself. If there is anyone in the world who Mr. Baez is not in disagreement with over his treatment of Mr. Ashton, it is himself. Mr. Baez is his own cheerleader. Of next most importance is reason number two, Mr. Baez believes in apologizing to Mr. Ashton. Did Mr. Baez also “believe” the best course of action earlier was to insult Mr. Ashton “both privately and publicly”? Finally, Mr. Baez apologizes to Mr. Ashton “not because of prompting” from another party who shall remain naMASONless.
“I have a great deal of amount of respect for these prosecutors who sit here” – Mr. Baez has “a great deal of amount of” something which causes him so much verbal consternation he mangles a simple phrase like “a great deal of” by mixing in additional unneeded words. Somebody is sensitive to stating aloud his alleged “respect” for “these prosecutors”. Mr. Baez sees “these prosecutors” as people “who sit here”, not as “these prosecutors” who have done admirable work for the state in preparing this case in a professional manner.
“And many times over the last several years we have all butt heads privately and we’ve all agreed on many things privately” – Mr. Baez wants the court to know he and the prosecutors do a lot of things “privately”, a word which now appears three times in the course of a few sentences.
“it is an ugly reflection of what we do” – Mr. Baez states what “we do” is to speculate and drag things on. Although Mr. Baez contends the media mirrors this in their reporting and in so doing make it “ugly”, the news reports are a “reflection” of the business of a defense attorney, specifically Mr. Baez.
“And I want the court to know with all the sincerity that I can muster” – Mr. Baez states he is not sincere, so he must “muster” “sincerity”. One either is or is not sincere, one cannot “muster” “sincerity”.
“that this is truly what I believe and it is truly what I aspire to do each and every day that I carry out in this honorable profession of being a defense lawyer” – Mr. Baez ends with a sentence of such jumbled references, no one can be sure what he is saying. What is it Mr. Baez “truly” believes and is “truly” aspiring to do? From the grammatical construction of the paragraph, the most likely reference is Mr. Baez’s obligation to clear up the ugly media reflection of his own life.
We have learned Mr. Baez should leave mustering to military professionals and stick to mustarding his baloney sandwiches while he ruminates on methods of clearing up the ugly media coverage of his personal foreclosures and failures to pay invoices.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Who is the WORST liar inthis ALL-YOU-CAN-EAT BULL$HIT BUFFET?   Thu Mar 10, 2011 11:30 pm

Who is the WORST liar in this All- You-Can-Eat Bull$hit Buffet?



Posted March 9, 2011 by eggtreenews in Uncategorized. Tagged: Casey Anthony, Caylee Anthony, eggtreenews, hailey dunn, Haleigh Cummings, Parody News, Satire news, true crime.
Egg Tree News poses a query:
Who is the WORST liar in this All- You-Can-Eat Bull$hit Buffet? Your choices (from a variety of cases):
Cindy “I will beat my delusions into you with my magical pet hammer Fluffy” Anthony
Dead-behind-the-eyes pillbilly hick with a serious case of the stupids, Misty Croslin
Casey “my entire life is one half-cooked offensively unconvincing lie, but get off my back, I’ve got partying to do” Anthony
Billie Jean “the kiddyporn in my bedroom isn’t mine or my douchetard slasherfreak boyfriend’s, and I don’t know who put it there, or what happened to my missing daughter, so stop giving me a hard time and pay my rent” Dunn
Local fool and freeloading mooch George “I demand to file a police report about my empty gas cans, but I’ll let the wife track down my missing granddaughter” Anthony
White trash pillionaire Ronald “I don’t know, I was at work” Cummings
Lee Chuckles “I believe everything my sister says, and so should you, except for the bit about me molesting her” Anthony
Shawn “I would never do nothin to harm that little girl, even though I admitted to the cops I threatened to kill her once, and never mind these homemade slasher movies in my dresser drawer” Adkins
Jose “I have solid proof of my client’s innocence, but I’d rather let her rot in jail waiting for a sensational high profile trial cuz I can make more money that way” Baez
Elizabeth “I gave my baby away to strangers, no wait, I actually killed him because I hate his father- no wait that’s a lie too- what on earth did I do with him again” Johnson
Pill pusher and Alfred E. Newman impersonator Tommy Croslin
Jimmy “people drop like flies around me but I don’t know nuthin about nuthin, I’m a sensitive rebel with a heart of gold, I swear” Hataway
Cheney “I’m retiring anyway so who gives a $hit” F.U.N. Mason
Melissa “I didn’t mean to do it, I just premeditated it and went through with it” Huckaby
Dr. Henry “17 hairs in the trunk and I swear they didn’t come from this hairbrush Mama Gremlin smuggled to me” Lee
OJ “absolutely, positively, 100 percent not guilty” Simpson
John and Patsy “she’s in a better place, so let’s just drop it already” Ramsey
Charlie “I don’t have a drug problem, I’m just a tigerblooded warlock on a mercury surfboard turning tin cans into gold on a daily basis, and how is my impression of Christian Bale’s crackhead character from The Fighter” Sheen
Please discuss.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Heartless Twit Outsmarts Sociopathic Twat   Thu Mar 10, 2011 11:33 pm

Heartless Twit Outsmarts Sociopathic Twat



Posted March 5, 2011 by eggtreenews in Uncategorized. Tagged: Satire news, Parody News, egg tree news, Casey Anthony, Caylee Anthony, lee anthony, agent of the state.
-Orlando, FL
A bitter chill blew through the Orlando courthouse yesterday during the latest Casey Anthony hearing, when brother Lee “Chuckles” Anthony, the proud middle finger of the hand family, took to the stand and plunged a deadly spork into his sociopathic sister’s excuse for a heart. As it turns out, Chuckles, who was once considered Casey’s must trusted ally- Willis to her Arnold Drummond, if you will- was actually moonlighting as a secret agent of the state all along. The betrayal was outlined in a stunning chapter of courtroom drama yesterday, that left Our Shackled Damsel of Doritos seething with outrage in a powerful whirlwind of cheese dust. Indeed, her devil eyes bore holes right through him, as she glared a furious, jaw-clenched “What you talkin ’bout, Willis?” in his direction.
The drama began unfolding as the smarmy, unshaven, and underdressed giggler burst into the courtroom on a chariot carried by his own arrogance, then sat on his throne of entitlement- which the rest of us call the witness stand- and detailed his work as an ultracool double agent. According to Chuckles, law enforcement was so impressed by his innate investigative instincts, they solicited his superior services in their humble quest to find his missing niece, Caylee. He was instructed to pump his trusting sister (and not in the way she normally likes) for any information regarding Caylee’s whereabouts.
But Chuckles, in his infinite Anthony wisdom, sparked his OWN investigation to get to the bottom of the issue. After purchasing a standard detective trenchcoat, fedora, monocle, and smoking pipe, Chuckles cunningly grilled his sister in a series of gripping jailhouse interrogations only rivaled by the Pink Panther. He checked his loyalty at the door (along with all dignity and those pesky ethics), and tried with all his moronic might to squeeze a lil drop of ‘truth’ from the pathological liar’s ‘memory.’ Some analysts have even questioned if he resorted to speaking in Anthonybonics, a coded language devised by Mama Gremlin Cindy, and decipherable only to her, and subject entirely to her interpretation, which can change at any given time, depending on who she wishes to frame for her granddaughter’s murder. Or something like that…
But his Herculean detecting efforts did not end with the mere questioning of the homicidal harlot. Nay, the bold, unlicensed amateur even admitted to sneaking into Baez’s office/loveshack, and stealing evidence that would assist him in his personal investigation.
Well played, Tubesox. Well played. Einstein’s got NOTHIN’ on you.
Upon hearing of Lee’s betrayal, Casey’s eyes filled with hellfire. Soon heavy dark clouds gathered in the courtroom, and Our Damsel of Doritos arose, shooting flames from her fingertips while cursing a pox on Castle Hopespring.
Not really. But you get the drift…
Stay tuned to Egg Tree News for developments in this breaking story.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Retired professor to challenge court order   Fri Mar 11, 2011 8:32 am

Retired professor to challenge court order


Julian Heicklen want to get arrested

Retired New Jersey chemistry professor Julian Heicklen scheduled an activity-filled trip to Florida this week: First, he handed out jury information pamphlets in Fort Lauderdale and then gave a speech to South Florida Libertarians.

Today, Heicklen plans to distribute jury pamphlets outside the Orange County Courthouse -- with the expectation that he will be arrested.

The 79-year-old activist is a civil disobedience pro. Arrested 31 times and jailedon 10 occasions, Heicklen gained notoriety in the 1990s for smoking marijuana outside Pennsylvania State University, where he taught, to protest drug laws. Decades earlier, he took part in the civil rights movement.

These days, Heicklen espouses jury nullification — the idea that jurors may ignore laws with which they disagree. Today, he intends to defy Orange-Osceola Chief Judge Belvin Perry's order blocking individuals from approaching jurors at the courthouse with pamphlets aimed at "educating" them and influencing their decision-making.

"I absolutely plan to defy Judge Perry's order," said Heicklen. "The issue is a First Amendment issue. It has nothing to do with jury nullification. The immediate issue to be resolved is: Do I have the right to stand out there and pass out any literature?"

"I mean if he ordered me not to hand out lollipops, I'd be there," he added.

Heicklen explains he is in a unique position to fight what he considers a blatant infringement of free speech rights.

He claims no significant property holdings. He has more years behind him than ahead. His family has suggested that he go to a retirement facility, but Heicklen maintains the county lock-up is a much less expensive option with full-time security, medical care and free meals.

"He can't punish me," he said of defying Perry's order. "He can only start paying my expenses [by sending him to jail]. That's all he can do."

Heicklen's quirkiness, wit and logic make him a colorful character and a royal pain for judges who sometimes have a difficult time figuring out what to do with the elderly man bent on making a point.

Despite the amusing things he says, Heicklen's mission is serious: He doesn't want government – and in this case, the judiciary — messing with the Constitution.

Some, like local activist Mark Schmidter, who is affiliated with the Fully Informed Jury Association, the organization that prompted Judge Perry's order, consider Heicklen a patriot attempting to awaken a largely apathetic public.

"I admire the hell out of the guy," Schmidter said. "Julian really looks at himself as a lawyer for the Constitution."

Schmidter used to hand out jury pamphlets at the courthouse, advising jurors they should vote their conscience and have a right to "hang" a jury with a vote. He stopped doing this on the campus, however, after Perry issued his order in late January. He acknowledged he has no desire to get tossed in jail, despite his strong feelings on the matter.

Meanwhile, Heicklen's recalcitrance and commitment to this particular cause run deeper than most. He is prepared to sacrifice his freedom to make his case.

Not everyone views Heicklen with fondness and reverence. He recently appeared in federal court in Manhattan for handing out pamphlets advising jurors there to dismiss the law if they disagree with it and to vote their conscience, according to a New York Times article published late last month.

When a magistrate judge asked a non-responsive Heicklen whether he was awake, according to the Times, Heicklen said, "I'm exercising my Fifth Amendment right to remain silent."

Heicklen was indicted on a federal charge of jury tampering in that case for distributing the literature. He called that indictment "a tissue of lies," according to the Times report.

The concerns raised by federal authorities in New York mirror those expressed by Judge Perry. His administrative order restricts the distribution of leaflets with "information tending to influence summoned jurors as they enter the courthouse" in order to protect "the integrity of the jury system."

One judge in the 9th Circuit covering Orange and Osceola determined a jury had been "tampered with" after discovering members had leaflets "containing information attempting to influence the jury," Perry noted.

Perry has opted not to comment and to let his order speak for itself. Still, his document was thoroughly researched and supported in part by a federal court ruling out of California, which found a narrowly drawn restriction was permitted in another case involving FIJA jury pamphlets.

Nonetheless, Perry's order generated a sudden friction between the conflicting constitutional interests at issue here: free speech and jury integrity.

FIJA, the group responsible for handing out the pamphlets, spoke out against Perry's order from the start, writing to the governor and calling for Perry's impeachment. The group also retained the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida and the Walters Law Group to fight Perry's order in court.

The ACLU petitioned the appellate court earlier this month, saying Perry over-reached with his order. The group claimed an incremental victory this week when the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Daytona Beach asked that Perry provide more details on the order. The ACLU will then get to respond.

ACLU of Florida legal director Randall Marshall called the appellate court's early decision "good news" considering that it could have denied or dismissed the petition. "A lot of these kinds of petitions never make it beyond initial review," Marshall said.

But for Heicklen, the legal route – marked by lawyers, paperwork and appeals — is too long. By challenging Perry's order as an individual and forcing the court to decide how to handle someone willing to defy the decree, Heicklen believes a resolution could come sooner than through formal litigation.

But Heicklen is pretty much flying solo when it comes to today's test of the order. He is not formally working with FIJA, which discourages its folks from getting arrested. And that's fine by him.

Unabashed, unafraid and with nothing to lose, Heicklen wrote Perry last month, asking him to resign for issuing his order. "You have violated your oath of office by lying to jurors to deceive them," Heicklen wrote, "…and grievously overstepping your authority as a judge."

On Thursday, as he prepared for his big day outside the Orange County Courthouse, Heicklen amplified his disdain for the order and his anger at the man who wrote it.

"The people of the United States are sovereign. Judge Perry is my paid employee," he said. "He does what I tell him to do, and he's going to do what I tell him to do because I pay his salary. And if he doesn't I'm going to have him fired. He works for me. I don't work for him."

Perry's order says anyone continuing to engage in passing out the literature in question outside the courthouse "may face indirect civil contempt of court proceedings. If found in contempt, a person may face confinement, a fine or both, according to the order.

**OrlandoSentinel
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony: Friend wore FBI wire during meeting with Casey Anthony   Fri Mar 11, 2011 2:43 pm

Casey Anthony: Friend wore FBI wire during meeting with Casey Anthony

By Amy Pavuk, Bianca Prieto and Anthony Colarossi, Orlando Sentinel

11:54 a.m. EST, March 11, 2011



More than 200 pages of evidence were released in the Casey Anthony case today, including a report from the U.S. Naval Criminal Investigative Service detailing part of the FBI's probe into her daughter's disappearance.
The Naval inquiry involved Cpl. Mark Hawkins, a friend of Anthony's since high school, who was described as a source with "long term and intimate knowledge" of Caylee and her family.
Hawkins, who said he went on a few dates with Anthony but they never had a sexual relationship, said he had daily contact with Anthony over the summer of 2008. At one point, Anthony sent him a message that stated she had something to tell him, but she couldn't say it over the phone.
As part of the investigation, Hawkins came to Orlando and met with Anthony twice.
During one of those meetings, the FBI gave Hawkins a recording device.

The report said Hawkins asked Anthony what she meant about a message left over the summer, and Anthony said that her brother Lee Anthony "knew most of the story about what had happened to Caylee" and that she would tell the source about it "some day."
"No direct admissions of guilt were obtained and the recording was retained by FBI Orlando," the U.S. Naval Criminal Investigative Service report said.
Casey Anthony, 24, is accused of killing her 2-year-old daughter Caylee Marie Anthony in the summer of 2008. Her trial is slated to begin in May.
Search volunteers complain about suspicious calls
Also made public today — Orange County deputies received numerous complaints from former Texas EquuSearch volunteers who said they received calls from someone representing themselves as an investigator calling "from the Orange County Courthouse."
Deputies ultimately determined the calls were made by investigators working for Anthony's defense attorney, Jose Baez.
Deputies checked into the complaints to determine whether the defense was misrepresenting itself as law enforcement or with the state attorney's office.
Investigators ultimately determined no crime was committed.
Expert reports on insects
Other documents released today showed expert reports discerning the insects found in the trash bag taken from Anthony's trunk, which they said have no forensic value and were likely attracted there because of rotting garbage, not a rotting corpse.
Also, no DNA was found on the laundry bag or the shorts found near the remains.
Deposition released this week
Other documents released in the first-degree murder case this week include a deposition from an investigator who said one of Anthony's girlfriend's told him that Anthony "didn't really want the baby."
Kiomarie Torres Cruz reportedly told an investigator that Anthony told her she didn't want Caylee and that "she was probably going to give the baby up for adoption" but Anthony's mother, Cindy, wouldn't allow it, Deputy Appling Wells said in a deposition released this week.
Meanwhile, in a wide-ranging deposition given by Wells, details are revealed about investigator's involvement in the case from before the Anthony's arrest to the collection of critical clues in the case.
Wells describes his impressions of the moment Anthony was arrested after lying to him and other investigators about working at Universal Studios in July 2008.
"I think she was shocked that she was arrested because her, her daughter is missing, and I think she was probably a little bit pissed off...," he said.
Later on in the deposition, which occurred March 9, 2010, Wells explains meeting with Anthonys' neighbor Brian Burner. Burner told Wells how Casey Anthony had borrowed a shovel to dig up a bamboo root in the backyard. He also said that Casey's car had been backed up in the garage that day.
"She brought it (the shovel) back an hour later," Wells said. "Nothing stood out as far as being something wrong."
Wells arranged to have the "round-blade" shovel collected as evidence. He also went next door and spoke to George Anthony "police officer to police officer," and told him, "I was looking for evidence that someone, something had been buried."
Throughout the deposition Wells expressed annoyance with the media, which by then was obsessed with the case. He denied leaking information about the investigation. "They're just vultures," he said of the reporters covering the case early on.
Kiomarie Torres Cruz talks about 'little secret'
On July 19, 2008, Wells met with Kiomarie Torres Cruz, who explained she and Casey Anthony we're long-time friends from middle school and high school. She told him their favorite place to hang out was a wooded area at the back of the neighborhood, near the Hidden Oaks School.
"That's where they used to go to, what did she say? Do adult things," Wells recalled, explaining they went there and "fornicated" and smoked "the wacky weed."
"But that was their little secret," he said.
Then he said she told him, "If Casey was to do something bad, maybe this is where she would put the baby."
They walked around the area described by the friend.
Wells also said "Casey voiced to her that she didn't really want the baby, that she was probably going to give the baby up for adoption, but her mama, Casey's mama, would not allow that at all."
Kiomarie said she wanted to adopt Caylee but that didn't happen because Cindy Anthony was "dead set" against it, Wells said.
At one point Jose Baez asked Wells if he ever questioned Kiomarie's mental health, and Wells said, "I didn't think that was an issue talking to her."
Wells also described hearing from a psychic who would call from time to time and say "Caylee was in a culvert next to an alligator."
He received several other tips about possible sightings of the child prior to the discovery of Caylee's remains in the woods off Suburban Drive in December 2008.
Dr. G found no evidence of trauma
Also filed late Thursday are depositions of officials at the Orange-Osceola Medical Examiner's Office, including Dr. Jan Garavaglia.
In Garavaglia's Sept. 28, 2010 deposition, she said Caylee's remains were tested for chloroform, even though she and another doctor "doubted that that could be even detected after such a long post-mortem period."
She also confirmed that the skeletal remains showed no signs of trauma. "With my own eyes, I saw no evidence of trauma," she said. "There's some post-mortem trauma from animals, but not ante-mortem trauma."
"Nothing leading up to the cause or manner of death?" She was asked. "No," she responded.
Garavaglia agreed a skull with a hole in it or evidence of broken bones with a weapon "would make my job easier
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: New Casey Anthony documents bring page count close to 25,000   Fri Mar 11, 2011 2:58 pm

New Casey Anthony documents bring page count close to 25,000



By Nick VinZant, Reporter
Last Updated: Friday, March 11, 2011 12:05 PM


The Case Against Casey





  • Latest Casey Anthony news
  • Key players
  • Case timeline



ORLANDO --
The Florida state Attorney's office has released more documents in case against Casey Anthony.
Friday's document dump included copies of the following:

  • Forensics exam results from a lab in Pennsylvania
  • Details of a search through Casey's computer
  • Emails between the Orange County Sheriff's Office and attorneys
  • Documents related to Texas EquuSearch's efforts to find 2-year-old Caylee's body.

The documents also include what appears to be a witness statement from an ex-boyfriend in California.
Documents released March 11, 2011



The state has been numbering the pages of documents as they release them. According to Friday's release, there have been 24,600 pages of evidence made public in the Casey Anthony case.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Why Did Jose Baez Make George Anthony Cry?   Sat Mar 12, 2011 7:58 pm

Why Did Jose Baez Make George Anthony Cry?



12 Mar

In a hearing on March 3, 2011, defense attorney Jose Baez asked George Anthony a series of questions. The exchange between Mr. Baez and Mr. Anthony may be heard and seen at the following link.
http://www.wftv.com/video/27068800/index.html
Jose Baez: “Mr. Anthony, you loved your granddaughter more than anything in the world?”
George Anthony: “Yes.”
Jose Baez: “And you would have done anything to help find her?”
George Anthony: “Yes.”
Jose Baez: “And you love your daughter more than anything in the world?”
George Anthony: “Yes.”
Jose Baez: “And you would do anything to protect her?”
George Anthony: “Yes.”
Jose Baez: “She is your baby?”
George Anthony: “Yes.”
During this series of questions, Mr. Anthony visibly has an emotional breakdown and begins weeping as he answers. Mr. Baez pounces on this emotional reaction by adding the extra question about Casey Anthony being his “baby”, which elicits further tears.
Despite his many poor choices which may have contributed to the ease with which Caylee Anthony went missing for more than a month with no one noticing and which have him vacillating from story to story, viewpoint to viewpoint, as he is asked identical questions over and over in court and interviews, the pain George Anthony feels is real. Mr. Anthony’s tears are real. Mr. Anthony agonizes over the events of the last two years and the upcoming trial. Mr. Anthony feels helpless and adrift. Although his decisions and actions may be debatable, the depth of his feelings and intensity of his pain cannot be questioned. Anyone in Mr. Anthony’s position would be suffering through depression, anxiety, despair, and guilt beyond the scope of what many would even want to imagine. It is important our opinions about Mr. Anthony’s behavior never be allowed to affect our compassion for his feelings.
The questions asked by Mr. Baez are spoken with few verbal stutters as he appears to be reading them, with the exception of the “baby” reference”, from a list of prepared queries. Did Mr. Baez expect the emotional reaction he elicited from Mr. Anthony?
Once Mr. Anthony began to shed tears, Mr. Baez appears to approve of the reaction by continuing with the line of questioning. The purpose of the defense seems to be to demonstrate if given an opportunity to become an agent of the state and given doing so would save Caylee Anthony’s life, Mr. Anthony would take the opportunity.
It is not clear how this helps the defense more than the prosecution as it also proves the state’s position Mr. Anthony would have done anything to save the life of Caylee Anthony including speaking to his daughter without the knowledge of Jose Baez.
We have learned Mr. Anthony would have done anything, other than call his daughter and check-up with her about the well-being of his granddaughter or contact the police after driving home his missing daughter’s car with the smell of death emanating from the trunk, to save the life of Caylee Anthony, whether those actions be as an agent of the state or as a private citizen.
We have learned Mr. Baez believes Mr. Anthony’s tears helped the defense in the decision to be made by the judge regarding striking statements Ms. Anthony made to Mr. Anthony in the early days of her incarceration.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: The Theories, The Depos And A Document Dump on Friday 3/11/2011 In Caylee's Case........   Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:14 pm

The Theories, The Depos And A Document Dump On Friday 3/11/2011 In Caylee’s Case……….


I think by now it’s pretty obvious that the defense is going for a hardcore conspiracy theory. I find it amusing to some degree, because it just does not line up in this case. To me it’s plain as day that law enforcement was completely baffled by a mother of a missing child doing nothing but lying. Lying about everything, even down to her place of employment. The audacity she had to take them to an office that did not exist, and try to play that is a bit unbelievable. Many of us have agreed time and time again that if this case were not for real, and an author wrote this as fiction, a publisher would not publish it, as it would be too unbelievable. The truth is indeed a bit stranger than fiction in this one. I can totally see the frustration of law enforcement, as could everyone else. How do you deal with a person like that? Thus the Universal interview happened, and I think that was nothing in the world, but frustrated detectives that were giving a young mother, who couldn’t tell the truth a chance to tell it, so it didn’t spin out of control. At that point, they thought (and it was obvious) that either Casey was afraid to tell the truth for fear of what her mother would say, or Caylee had some kind of horrible accident while in her mother’s care, and Casey didn’t want her mother to find out about it. I think that was plain as day. I don’t think they expected what had really happened at that point. Sure there was the smell in the car, but they really did want to give Casey the benefit of the doubt, and I think that was obvious. They wanted to find Caylee and find out what really happened to her. Plain and simply. Jose Baez and Cheney Mason can play the conspiracy theory card all they want to, but I don’t believe a jury will buy it, and it’s for sure a jury will not buy that Casey was a child, as Mr. Mason says, nope Caylee was the helpless child, and Casey was the terrible monster that destroyed her. The most damning evidence for what happened to Caylee will speak louder than anything and Casey’s personality, coupled with that of her parents will also speak very loudly. Of course her attorneys don’t garner her much sympathy either, as their performances are not good. The Casey ship is sinking faster than the Titanic after hitting the iceberg. Justice For Caylee Is Coming. I believe that.
The depos, well, let me see, the botanist I can dispute what she’s saying just by being a Florida Gardener, for many more years than she’s had knowledge of the vegetation and growth habits of Florida. The one week theory she has for the root matting is garbage. All in all I’m not impressed with the “experts” for the defense. They plain and simply appear to be just making stuff up that appears to dispute what the prosecution has. I think we are seeing exactly why so many “experts” would not return Mr. Baez’ calls, and so many quit. Seems to be a losing proposition for them. Reputations at stake, you know. This speaks volumes as to the damning nature of the evidence against Miss Casey.
So now we have a document dump being released today. As always I will be updating the post throughout the day. I do not yet know what exactly is in those documents, but lets hope it’s a good one.
Sources Of Information:
http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/27138191/detail.html
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-casey-anthony-evidence-20110311,0,5748789.story
It is being said that there are over 200 pages, therefore I do not think this will be a large document dump.
OCSD’s Forensic Report On Casey’s Computer
Emails Between Yuri Melich & Anne Pham
FBI’s Discovery Of Evidence Log
OCSO’s Evidence Log
NCIS Document (New)
More Evidence Forms
TES Forms For Julie Davis
OCSO Interview With Julie Davis
OCSO’s Complaints About PI’s
OCSO: Richard Duncan Info On Casey
Defense Expert Barry Logan
Defense Expert Tim Hunington
Emails Anne Pham & Cpl. Edwards
Bug Data & Temps
DNA Analysis Of Laundry Bag
Forensic Entomology Investigation
Subpoena For Mark NeJame
OCSO’s Questions For Searchers
Source Of Information:
http://livewire.wesh.com/Event/Casey_Anthony_Evidence_Release_March_11_2011
Another Source Of Information:
http://www.wftv.com/news/27162542/detail.html
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 102962
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: The Highlights Of The Latest Information Released In Caylee's Case   Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:20 pm

The Highlights Of The Latest Information Released In Caylee’s Case


The information recently released, coupled with the hearings and motions and all of the latest rumblings in Caylee’s case gave me much food for thought. I wanted to point out the highlights of the latest information released in Caylee’s case, at least from my perspective, though I asked my readers for theirs and as always they came through, it made me realize that most of us picked up on the same points.
Point one:
Law enforcement and Texas Equusearch did everything they could to find Caylee. The TES searchers did their very best to search every area, but the area where Caylee’s remains were ultimately found was flooded. It was under water, and not searchable for many months. The defense has been very combative on this point, even to the point of having their PI’s harass the searchers and they tried, under false pretense to get them to change their stories. I know they’re not, but the defense should be ashamed of what they have done to discourage people from searching for missing children. It’s a shame that there was not enough information to prove that the PI’s were impersonating law enforcement officers, and/or officers of the court, like the State’s Attorneys Office. That is a crime, and I for one would have cheered if these bozos were charged with doing the crime. Sadly there was not enough on tape to prove it, though they did prove they were misrepresenting themselves. The only recordings they had to go by were of them saying they were from the Orange County Courthouse. Many of the searchers (who could not produce recordings, because they spoke to them or didn’t save the messages) claimed that they (the PI’s) claimed to be from the State’s Attorneys Office. The searchers were obviously harassed, and that to me is a monumental shame, to the degree that many folks will now think long and hard before helping to search for lost children, and some will now just not do it. My heart goes out to TES and all that searched for Caylee, as they were treated very badly for doing a very noble thing. That is just pure evil!
Point two:
Again on the subject of private investigators, or PI’s, the defense has had many from Jim Hoover and Dominic Casey to Mort Smith and Jeremy Lyons, and now we are finding out that all of the whining the defense was doing for more money for Jeremy Lyons was likely going to at least 3 other PI’s as well. That is not what was represented to the court. The other three: Katie Delany, Scott McKenna and Gil Colon. Apparently none of them realize that they do not have the right to overstep their bounds, and they are not superior to law enforcement or a person’s right to privacy. Jose Baez and Cheney Mason completely misrepresented to the court their intentions on the TES searchers issue. They were indeed on a fishing expedition, and were strong arming people who did nothing wrong, but out of the goodness of their hearts, helped to search for a child that was lost. A child that was murdered, brutally by their client, whom they represent as being an intimidated child, yet they accused law enforcement of letting her lie to set her up to charge her for lying to them. HOW STUPID IS THAT??? It was their client, who is a grown up, now 25, then 22, who decided to lie and put on a show, and was given every opportunity to come clean, and given the benefit of the doubt, in spite of her car smelling like a decomposing body.
Point three:
Speaking of the car smelling like a decomposing body, the forensic experts of the defense, and their findings are interesting. I’ve noticed that most of these “experts” will not conclusively dispute the findings of the experts for the State. While a few do, most leave the possibility open that they could be wrong. That will not hold up under cross-examination. The few that do, either do not appear to have the proper experience to dispute it, even when they come across as likeable and knowledgeable at times. That will not hold up under cross-examination. While I did read one that was adamant on his opinion, he was more about giving credentials than argument. More about being critical than proving his stance. I have yet to see the opinion of one that comes across as believable, when the opinion as a whole is looked at. In short, they generally come across as unsure, conceding they could be wrong, or not having the proper credentials, or out-and-out giving false information as to the facts, or arrogant and combative, with not a lot of anything to back it up but criticism. I’m not a scientist, but I am a researcher and if I can sit and search the information out and shoot holes in it, well, that’s pretty bad for the defense. While some of the subject matter, it seems that opinions do differ, most of it is either pretty concrete one way or another , or has some sort of strong validation for it, if it’s a grey area. The defense is just not showing me enough to sway a jury on this stuff. That of course is my opinion.
Point four:
The crazies in this case……..Lord knows there has been plenty of them trying to insert themselves into this case. It is not necessary to name them all, but there has been plenty in this case, and many times they had motive that ranged from getting attention, to trying to get a lesser sentence for their crimes. I see Richard Duncan as fitting all of that criteria. Just one more instance of someone seeking attention and to get off light for their crimes. He obviously did not follow this case as closely as he thought as it was not possible for him to have seen Casey and her car as he indicated on the dates he indicated, and of course no blood in the trailer as he indicated either. The story was a tall tale from a drug addict that saw visions, and the visions were way off. Yet another sad case.
In conclusion to my points of interest I’d like to say that to me what the State has that I’ve seen stands tall compared to the feeble attempts by the defense to make their client a victim. I don’t see the defense stopping a guilty verdict in this case, based on what I’ve seen. I do however think that there is enough grey area in this case to prevent Casey from getting the death penalty. I’m amazed that the defense thinks themselves to be above the law in many instances, just like their client and her family. I truly hope that some day, when all is said and done on this case, that some of the dirty that was committed after the fact to try to exonerate Casey, will be held accountable. One more point in conclusion and that is that scientists are human beings and their opinions are either sound or they are not. Some of them can be swayed for political purposes, just like any other human being. Remember Global Warming? I cannot speak to the motive of all of the “experts” in this case, but I can say that most, if not all of the ones giving their opinions for the State are giving them based on their scientific knowledge and the evidence at hand, which seems to be more lacking on the defense side. Remember that many experts wouldn’t even call Jose Baez back, and some were on the case and bailed. I think you see the pattern.
JUSTICE FOR CAYLEE!!!
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: CASEY ANTHONY ~ MARCH ~ 2011   

Back to top Go down
 
CASEY ANTHONY ~ MARCH ~ 2011
Back to top 
Page 4 of 11Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9, 10, 11  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
LOVE AND PROTECT ALL CHILDREN :: CASEY ANTHONY-
Jump to: