Search results

Don't know about this from experience but with the way the defense keeps talking how she's already done the amount of time that first offenders are sentenced leads me to conclude two things: 1. Even first offenders are regularly sentenced in that area; 2. That first offenders are usually...

I demand a round of applause for finding these: PDF email files. ETA: Ok, I'm withdrawing my demand; my back is getting a bit sore from all the patting. Some of y'all are real thumpers!! <joking>

I knew when I posted that I'd get called on it but did it anyway... <slapping own hands> "...The girl's mother, Casey Anthony, 22, had until 9 a.m. Tuesday to accept an offer of limited immunity to help investigators in the case. Officials with the State Attorney's Office said she did not...

IMO, the only reason the state decided not to seek the dp was the lack of a body. Once she was found and the evidence tended to show deliberate murder rather than accident, they filed notice of intent to seek dp. Bet KC is wishing she had taken the deal JB sought out for her early on...

The pattern in this case, imo, is that when JB wants some discovery, he goes directly to the prosecution and demands they give it to him, whether it's something under their control or not. If memory serves, at every discovery hearing JB gets a bit more "educated" on the discovery procedures...

About ten million years ago when I was in college, I worked at a big name retailer. A woman wrote a check for about $500 and I was asked to authorize the check. I didn't; I called security. They told me to go ahead and authorize the check and that the police would be waiting for her...

When your friend or your friend's child stands before you, you recuse yourself from the case.

I certainly hope things have changed a lot since then. Maybe the identity theft charge is key. IIRC, that is a charge that IS taken seriously nowadays. Also, it appears that the state isn't as willing to plead this one out as they may have been in your case. ;)

The facts in this case are really, really bad for the defense. I agree with Bill Shaeffer who opined the best lawyers in the world would have a tough time with this case. I guess my point is that due to what I believe is a mountain-range of evidence against KC, we can't really make a good...

Judge S probably will allow a hearing on this issue in an abundance of caution but if I was the judge on the case, I'd deny the motion without hearing figuring the potential issue for appeal will be moot when she's convicted by a jury. Clearly, if she is convicted there was sufficient evidence...

I understood that is your position. Just refreshing our memories about one of what I perceive to be the "bigger" things that would be hard to get around and linking to the 'evidence against accidental death' thread for those who may have concerns that could be a possible defense. :)

Again, you're correct. You do that a lot. :) Ineffective assistance of counsel is a very common attempt at creating an appellate issue but it's not very often successful. JB is so bad though, the state insisted that KC be present for the hearings, I believe, partially so she can't say she...

That was on the fraud case that she hadn't filed a notice of appearance yet. You're correct that technically she shouldn't have been arguing the motion about postponing it but it was more expedient for everyone to let her. What was the alternative? Postponing until she files? The defense...

BBM - Excellent summary. As for blowing mommie's cover, that could have happened with more than just KC's enabler's but also around her 'cute boys' and I'm not sure which would have been a bigger fear/motivator for her.

Remember, KC had sole custody of Caylee. If there were a possible SONDI (some other nanny did it) theory it must necessarily include KC pointing the finger at the last person with whom she saw or to whom she gave her child. As for the (lack of) possibility of an accident, please read this...

But you understand why he can't do that, right?

Just guessing here, in case someone smarter than me hasn't already answered, but I don't really think they're going to have to show as much of their strategy as one may think. They're not going to use a lot of the evidence that we've seen through discovery but it's all available, kwim?

If that's their strategy it's pretty silly. That trick is sometimes used in civil cases to try to drive costs up for the other side but doesn't seem like a smart thing to do in this case before this judge, imo.

That may be exactly how Mme. Esquire (nick too cool not to reuse) finally got her erstwhile client to feign some emotion. Sat her down and told her what was really going on, maybe no way would there be an acquittal without a miracle or 50.