Aedrys
If justice doesn't get you, karma will.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2010
- Messages
- 6,719
- Reaction score
- 17
Respectfully Quoted Intermezzo![]()
Someone explained this for me in a post a while ago, (sorry I don't remember who). They said, this case is about Casey murdering her daughter. Not about who put the body "there." That satisfied me at the time, but I still wonder why they are so worried about who put the body there...or really the (not)fact that Casey "couldn't" have put Caylee's body "there."
So, what are they up to? What good does it, or would it do to put so much effort into "proving" Casey didn't dump her daughter's body, after she killed her? TIA.
...js...
Seems to me they are playing for the penalty phase. It makes no sense to argue whether the body was there or not unless you are trying to get your client LWOP instead of the needle. If someone else put her there, then someone else applied the duct tape, and this could all be a tragic accident that snowballed rather than a heinous crime of revenge.
Otherwise, it makes no sense to argue that her body wasn't there or somebody moved it. That is not arguing for innocence, that is trying to get a reduced sentence. Seems to me they know she's guilty, and they know the trial is going to go badly for them, so they might as well better prepare for the penalty phase than the actual trial. (Methinks the defense is seriously regretting getting HHJS to recuse himself).
I can't imagine why a defense attorney would jump over the trial and just prepare for the penalty phase (seems like an appellate issue if you ask me), but that seems to be their thinking. I just can't wrap my head around any other reason they would go this route. It's a far cry from Casey is innocent and we'll see the evidence in court, isn't it?