2011.03.07 Motions Hearing

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
hey AZlawyer, you wouldn't happen to be familiar with the case the esteemed Judge cited would you? Parks v. State , 644 So. 2d 106 tia for any info you can pass along.
I'm not AZlawyer by any means, but poster named Evangeline from Hinky posted this:

Parks v. State, 644 So. 2d 106

From the decision:

"The evidence shows appellant freely and voluntarily gave his statement to police. Even if the police lacked probable cause for the arrest on the unrelated charge, the fact appellant was released from custody and voluntarily remained to answer questions breaks the causal link between the arrest and his making of the incriminating statements to police."
 
ty turnadot! wow, certainly gives me an idea of what the judge may be thinking. So funny, he cited the case, giving CM an opportunity to rebut it but CM was not even familiar with and therefore could not cite something to counter it.

I like where this seems to be heading can't wait til next week to hear the rulings.
 
Baez looked a angry to me went he was talking to Medina at the very end.

I noticed that, also. He was quite animated.....wonder if it had something to do with the sidebar? Medina sure scurried out of there, fast, after his rant.
 
Someone asked me a couple of pages back how I thought CM was doing. The answer is, "badly." :)

I am glad to hear you say that since your professional opinion is worthy.

I was actually surprised that Mason seemed better than I thought he was going to be today. I guess the bar was set pretty low for my expectations for them, but Mason did not mumble, did not act like he was hard of hearing, and he seemed pretty prepared and on point. Of course, not being an attorney, I have no way to assess his legal points or to know if his case law examples ere actually helpful to his case or not. But I have to admit he did worry be a bit today because suddenly they seemed more competent than I thought they were going to be.
 
Big mistake - HUGE - for CM to insult the intelligence of the Court (and potentially, a jury) by suggesting that Casey is a "child" or even was a "child" when Caylee went missing.
 
In summation, I think LDB's response to Defense arguments was brilliant and a bit audacious. (reading the transcript of KC's first call home after her arrest verbatim---using the f-word!)

Like a master Teppan chef, she sliced and diced their arguments and served them up as an appetizer with extra wasabi on the side.
 
ty turnadot! wow, certainly gives me an idea of what the judge may be thinking. So funny, he cited the case, giving CM an opportunity to rebut it but CM was not even familiar with and therefore could not cite something to counter it.

I like where this seems to be heading can't wait til next week to hear the rulings.
At the end of the hearing CM told the judge that he was "now familiar with the case". I suppose he read it on the spot after the judge cited it. I don't remember what his remarks were after saying that to the judge.
 
I only wrote "old man" because I was typing verbatium what CM said. Said with respect, I just thought maybe you didn't know he was the one who brought that up. I also did say he was mumbling. but he was. Not trying to argue, just making myself clear. I believe in Websleuths TOS and I support the mods 100%. Trying to be helpful. :)

I don't even think yours was one of them, Chiquita. :floorlaugh:

But thanks for the explanation. lol
 
Big mistake - HUGE - for CM to insult the intelligence of the Court (and potentially, a jury) by suggesting that Casey is a "child" or even was a "child" when Caylee went missing.

Yeah, I am still fuming over THAT one. He has some nerve. He better NOT refer to her as a child come trial time. I will explode if I hear that come out of his mouth again!
 
I am glad to hear you say that since your professional opinion is worthy.

I was actually surprised that Mason seemed better than I thought he was going to be today. I guess the bar was set pretty low for my expectations for them, but Mason did not mumble, did not act like he was hard of hearing, and he seemed pretty prepared and on point. Of course, not being an attorney, I have no way to assess his legal points or to know if his case law examples ere actually helpful to his case or not. But I have to admit he did worry be a bit today because suddenly they seemed more competent than I thought they were going to be.

Too bad he had no clue about the case the judge cited.....just saying....
 
In regards to George's parents... they live in Fort Myers, Florida (that is where I live) and there has been NOTHING in these few years in our local newspapers or actual news that has ever mentioned this.

I do feel bad for them because it seems that they had very little contact with Caylee in her short life. George, in the one of the jail visits, even tells Casey that grandma and grandpa Anthony are sorry that they were not more active in Caylee's life.

Are they even on a witness list? I am 99% sure that they are not on the State's witness list. Are they on the defenses witness list?

I understand that they want to stay out of this mess and understand why they have not spoken out on their feelings about this case, but I have always wondered what they think about all of this? Do they condone the behavior of their son and daughter-in-law?

Anyways, I do feel bad for them. I know that Cindy was supposed to make a trip down here to Fort Myers prior to Caylee's murder, but something came up? Just sad that they didn't get to see Caylee one last time before Casey murdered her.

I am happy that they are there for George... I just hope that they are there for Caylee too. I know last week they were sitting on the prosecution side... if that was them?
 
Question, CM said today the detectives knew ICA did not work at Universal before they took her there, true?
 
It just struck me as odd when CM went into his big bad beefy LEO with guns scared this child and psychologically intimidated her (KC) speech.

It's almost as if he forgot that he was looking at his "outline notes" and instead read them as a "speech".

I can see where he would want to imply those things (but to a jury)...but to state them outright? Absurd.
 
Monday 3/7 - The older couple shown in several photos on WS are not Anthony parents. They know the As from a Baptist church which the As attend on Sat or Sun nights. The couple took the As to Red Lobster last Friday after the hearing. The woman gave CA a small angel last week. CA collects little angels and keeps them in Caylee's room. CA's bff had a doctor appt last week and that is why she was absent one of the days.
The attorney for the As came in after the hearing began and asked both CA and GA when they would like to come to his office and sign an affidavit. GA said ASAP. They've been walking away from the parking garage when I've seen them leaving the courtroom lately. I think they found a free parking spot - perhaps at the attorney's office. InSession said to CA they would not show up unannounced and it would be around March 22. They'll call the attorney's office and set it up. I don't know what they were talking about.
During the hearing ICA was underlining and putting stars by the list LDB gave the court and the defense citing times when ICA spoke. She pointed to each one while she was talking to Michelle M. She was very animated. The courtroom sort of stopped in their tracks when LDB said the F word unexpectedly. Go TEAM!!!!
 
Question, CM said today the detectives knew ICA did not work at Universal before they took her there, true?

They were trying to verify it....with the security guy, I think....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
69
Guests online
3,135
Total visitors
3,204

Forum statistics

Threads
603,680
Messages
18,160,711
Members
231,820
Latest member
Hernak
Back
Top