2010.05.11 - Casey Anthony Death Penalty Motions Hearing

[Lanie]

Oh that is just too funny! Now, Lanie, you have to start your very own thread about what books do we think should be cited at the next motions hearing. Or mix and match, you list the books and we try to guess which motions they are being used for.

Thanks for a very good laugh, I needed one to help my blood pressure go down a wee bit:woohoo:

Glad I could help, lol.

Well, I actually think a more effective reference for today would have been 'The life of David Gale', which I believe is a movie and not a book, but, "To Kill a Mockingbird" was a book that was made into a movie, and my money is Baez was referring to the movie.
MOO

 

[Lanie]

I tend to agree, it really sounds like the start of a lot more defense motions whining about not having the specifics they want ... :boohoo:

And then TES comes to mind. I've lost count of the motions on that one.

 

[Lanie]

Do you or anyone have any idea as to how the court will respond to this motion? It doesn't seem right that the State should have to for warn the defense with their every upcoming move and strategy.

IMO, which I know don't count cause I ain't no attorney , if the defense does indeed file my predicted motion, I believe it will fall under 'work product' and be denied.

 

[strawberry]

Oh my. I'm reading the article by Paraport that I linked back there <<<<<.

Wonder if this shows us a facet of the defense's strategy. Hmm.

I haven't even gotten through the first page and I'm thinking isn't this reverse discrimination? Britain has partially decriminalized infanticide by mothers, acknowledging that it's biology gone awry? Now THAT sounds sexist! The changes go back to 1922...what does that tell us? Come on!

 

[snowshuze]

O/T Defense attorney for Cody Posey had me cryin' my eyes out. I agree there are excellent attorneys on BOTH sides of the isle.

 

[legalmania]

Do you or anyone have any idea as to how the court will respond to this motion? It doesn't seem right that the State should have to for warn the defense with their every upcoming move and strategy.

Can you direct me as to what motion you are talking about? I haven't had time to catch up today.

 

[mitzi]

To add further. Here is the mission statement for the Florida State Attorneys Office.

"To pursue vigorous and fair prosecution of criminal cases, with a commitment to serve as an advocate for the rights of all victims, and promote the safety and well-being of the public."

repeated:

The mission of our office is threefold:
1. To pursue vigorous and fair prosecution of criminal cases.
2. To advocate for the rights of all victims.
3. To promote the safety and well-being of the public.

The vision of the State Attorneys Office for Florida.

Vision

"To excel and be acknowledged as a leader in providing quality prosecution, exceptional service to victims, and for our work in partnership with the community in providing early intervention and preventive education programs for juveniles, consistent with the safety and well-being of the public."

http://sa18.state.fl.us/mission/mvv.htm

In short...yes the SA's office is an advocate for the victim.

Red mine.

And that's a good thing because Caylee's own immediate family sure isn't advocating for her. :furious:

 

[cecybeans]

My question is - and it may have been asked already, haven't read the whole thread - WHO PAID TO FLY HER HERE?

If it was the Taxpayers, we got ripped off. :furious:

I have a feeling that this may have been from Ms. Lyon's budget for her DP clinic; I seriously doubt the defense is making any expenditures until the actual budget has been finalized.

However, that being said, I find it a bit ridiculous that Ms. Lyon would bother to have an expert witness fly in for an argument she could have presented herself simply citing Ms. Rapaport's published papers. It gave the impression she is rather a spendthrift and that is not something anyone connected with the defense needs to be displaying at the moment.

Unfortunately, even if Ms. Rapaport's credentials are stellar, her argument was weak and her presence on the stand was rather timid and unimpressive. She is a law professor, not a social scientist, so her assumptions about cause and effect didn't even address other important social variables that a serious study would encompass. Her sample size was extremely small, by her own admission, which also allowed for major erroneous interpretations of data. (An abstract from a paper on the subject indicates that her tiny sample of females are also disproportionately likely to have killed family members, although she does not hazard a guess as to why. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1411240)\

Ms. Rapaport also admitted that her conclusions about the possibility that prosecutors chose the death penalty more often because of sexist reasons was not necessarily conclusive or especially scientific and that it did not necessarily reflect what this particular team may have done. The fact that AL did not follow up with any specific examples or evidence to support her claim that they did, further weakened an already flailing argument, imo.

I understand Ashton's ire that this witness was called at the last minute. I think he should have noted that AL's excuse - which was a lack of organization brought about by a change in judges - was entirely the defense's doing and should not have further inconvenienced the state, as they should have anticipated this result and planned ahead. But both this expert witness and AL's argument proved weak enough that JA didn't have too much trouble dispatching either one, and I'm glad JP allowed it because, imo, it only put more egg on the faces of this defense team and nicely eliminated it as an issue during trial.

 

[Aedrys]

I just had to wonder why on earth AL was so stuck on the sex toy thing today..so freaking strange.

I was wondering about that too. Are they going to claim she's innocent by reason of insanity by dildo or something? Good lord, if that's the case, there's a lot of woman who'll start claiming that for everything, lol.

 

[cecybeans]

My brain is fuzzy,but didn't AH tell LE about CA getting ticked when she saw the pics for the No Clothes party?KC was supposed to be working,IIRC,and Cindy caught her.
This wasn't about a young ,single mom who had her parents babysit so she could go have a social life.This was about about a liar and a schemer.She told her parents she was working,then went out partying and socializing,instead.Some of those times she told her parents she was taking Caylee to stay at the nanny's overnight ,while she worked.
What did she really do with Caylee? There was no nanny,so what KC did with Caylee is important.
The before pics are not about showing bad character,they are about "What were you doing with Caylee???"
ETA: I have always believed that Caylee was starting to talk more.KC couldn't get away with her little ploy for much longer,because Caylee could tell Cindy what they were REALLY doing.

Absolutely. And I'm sure if the state saw pictures of KC going to church socials and laughing with friends during that month looking as carefree as she did in the ones in question, they would be bringing them up as well.

That girl didn't look like she was concerned in the least about finding a "missing" toddler. It wouldn't matter if she was wearing a wimple and a habit.

 

[Aedrys]

I thought they were just late? The hearing I went to regarding the budget, they were present.

Whether they were late or not there, they obviously didn't care about the state paying for their daughter. Cindy (or was it Conway) said it was just "administrative" stuff. Yeah, because how much money your daughter is going to get to mooch, I mean spend from the state isn't important. It's not their money, so they don't need to know the details. Typical A's. I can see where Casey gets it from.

All I'm saying is, if that were my daughter, I'd want to damn well know the money details, how many experts, etc. I'd want to do know she's getting the best defense possible. I guess that's just not important to the A's. Makes me SO MAD.

The selfishness in this case is just astounding. I don't feel sorry for any of them. They got here because of who and what they are, every single one of them. I will shed no tear and feel no sympathy for any of the A's but Caylee. Sadly, I don't even like thinking of her as part of that family, especially since they sure don't act like she ever was.

 

[logicalgirl]

Aren't you from Canada, where the legal process may be slightly different than in the USA?

Slightly??? LOL - understatement of the month here!

 

[whiteangora]

Can you direct me as to what motion you are talking about? I haven't had time to catch up today.

It hasn't been filed yet....I was projecting.
Lanie posted that the defense probably won't be satisfied with just a list of aggravating factors from the State and that they most likely will want reasons, and explanations, thus the projected motion(s).
Sorry for the confusion

 

[TakeNote]

wow....i should have put dinner in the crock pot today....this thread was a good read..thank you all for your thoughts and insight into this case

 

[beach]

Can you direct me as to what motion you are talking about? I haven't had time to catch up today.

It wasn't a 'motion' per se, if I am thinking about the same thing -

Judge Perry granted the defense motion that the SA submit exactly which aggravating factors they planned on proving at trial to support seeking the DP. 4 were obvious, 2 others the SA had not decided on. They will have to submit those to the defense. No biggie really, however a little bittersweet since it will be tipping their hand, but better because there will certainly be no appellate issue.


ETA: I see Themis explained it much better while I was typing my response.

 

[TrY]

I watched the WFTV raw video of today's DP hearing earlier today (and no, I don't have the time today, unfortunately, to go through 55 pages of this thread) so I've just glanced as some of the pages here and there.

I think Casey was crying for herself, not her daughter. She didn't really have any tears that I could see (I watch the raw video on my computer, I am not able to watch the proceedings on TV unless it's on HLN or there's a recap on JVM like today) so Casey's crying reminded me of the last time she did this in court. It's when Casey comes off looking bad, then it's time for the waterworks or the dabbing and looking at your fingers bit.

I figure that it didn't take too long for the SA JA to get under Casey's skin either. She had the pursed lips and clenched jaw look that she had yesterday.

If anyone attended the hearing today in person, what was JB doing typing away at on a keyboard on the defense table? Anyone know?

 

[denjet]

Thanks for that info DP--don't want to be reading non-existent kitties into all this!



Agreed; he looks worn. I can't see him crossing the aisle until after the marriage is over. I thought they would stick it out until after the trial but the abuse allegations may hasten things, particularly if they will be brought up in open court.

Is it possible that this business of the defense trying to get a copy of George's GJ testimony is causing him some grief? combined with the new judge and the defense losing more motions ? .... Just seems strange that Conway wasn't there either ... some speculated that the SA may have called him as a witness at today's hearing ... but I really can't fathom why or for what they would need him ... any thoughts?

 

[lauriej]

..i don't understand the "expert" that AK brought today. yes, she has written an article (or aticles) on gender-bias/death penalty.

..( and went to harvard, blah, blah....ummm.ok...."expert" you are. )

..however-------she was here TO testify in THIS case-------and admitted she knows very little about it------has read "a couple" of media stories (!?)

..who CARES how her study relates to the darlie routier case???

..you would think, that she would have done some CASEY ANTHONY research prior to testifying IN the casey anthony case...so that she could apply her "white woman/mothers that kill their kids are gender-biased" TODAY in court, to THIS case.

..instead, she came across as muttering all over the place ( umm..sex toys? ).

..if this is a preview of the type of "experts" that the defense will be presenting,good grief.

..( and, of all the HUNDREDS of media stories that have been written------which "couple of them" did she read ? )

 

[Dear Prudence]

I thought they were just late? The hearing I went to regarding the budget, they were present.

I could be mistaken, sorry if so! I just thought I remember them not being there and Brad being asked on InSession about it and he replied something like well, it was just an administrative hearing.

I did notice they were 30 minutes late yesterday and Cindy was about 15 late today.

 

[Numbers]

I watched the WFTV raw video of today's DP hearing earlier today (and no, I don't have the time today, unfortunately, to go through 55 pages of this thread) so I've just glanced as some of the pages here and there.

I think Casey was crying for herself, not her daughter. She didn't really have any tears that I could see (I watch the raw video on my computer, I am not able to watch the proceedings on TV unless it's on HLN or there's a recap on JVM like today) so Casey's crying reminded me of the last time she did this in court. It's when Casey comes off looking bad, then it's time for the waterworks or the dabbing and looking at your fingers bit.

I figure that it didn't take too long for the SA JA to get under Casey's skin either. She had the pursed lips and clenched jaw look that she had yesterday.

If anyone attended the hearing today in person, what was JB doing typing away at on a keyboard on the defense table? Anyone know?

Canceling his May, 2011 reservations at the Miami Hilton?