2011.04.25 Motion in Limine to Exclude "31 Days"

[Turnadot]

She was cleared, however, because she really did not kill her husband..... big difference in Cynthia S. and ICA.

And another contrast with KC's case, is that Cynthia never claimed to be searching for her "kidnapped" husband. If she had, then her actions would have been relevant for the same reason KC's are relevant, imo.

 

[strach304]

Her conviction was also overturned. They claimed she poisened her husband and after another medical examiner did tests they found that was not the case. That he died of heart failure. I believe that her behavior after the crime is what got her convicted in the first place, but she really didnt do it. If I'm not misitaken, this is the first case that used the "ugly coping" defense.

I didn't follow that one, my daughter gave me the highlights. I know her conviction was overturned though. I thought of it as one example where I know the evidence was allowed was my only point about that one. I did not know "ugly coping" was used by that defense or any other for that matter. That term may be a more recent phrase for that kind of defense but not unique or new.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

What about the 9-11 calls that mention the 31 days?

Other than that, I have to say this is deeply offensive and I cannot believe we live in a society where lawyers are allowed to even ask something like this. How on earth can they try to exclude this, as if a jury should not know the whole truth? They're risking peoples' lives and safety by trying to put a child killer back on the street - I know she gets a defense, but this is NOT a defense, it's just trying to weasel out of accountability. Utterly disgusting.

 

[A_News_Junkie]

I think since the statement that she was 'doing her own investigation' is coming in, so are these! JMHO.

 

[strach304]

You have to admit... watching the defense scramble is quite entertaining? If this case wasn't so sad, it would be funny.

They might as well try to get any mention of Caylee's name thrown out while they're at it. Make everyone only uses phrases like "that child" or "that little girl." It would make Casey and her family feel right at home.

Depersonalize the victim who in this case is a very small little girl. I think it was Richard Hornsby early on in this case who opined that it's next to impossible to be a acquitted of a crime against a child. My opinion for why CM has started his newest mantra in the most recent hearings of portraying Casey to be just a girl herself rather than a narcissistic, psychopathic full grown adult.

 

[strach304]

motion states "subsequent to the alleged criminal act". That means the 31 days came AFTER Caylee was killed ,as in BEFORE ICA was ever in jail.
Of course in the next breath they will claim Caylee was killed and placed on Suburban AFTER ICA went to jail.

Think about the statements and runaround with LE. Then jailhouse videos and phone calls. All after the 31 days. They're coming in so...this is their way of trying to separate the two? The judge hasn't ruled on the party pics yet right? At least which ones?

 

[Horace Finklestein]

So why try to keep the 31 days out AFTER Jose went on tv several times and said in court there is a perfectly good explanation, the AHA MOMENT!! Come on now one or the other.

 

[RR0004]

Maybe they'll make a proffer (heck...I don't know REALLY what the word means...just like the way it sounds) to the Court that she did lie.
So everything else is moot?
Ya know, we did expect all these silly motions, but has the DT ever made a serious effort to find who really killed Caylee? It seems to me that would be time better spent.

 

[RR0004]

So why try to keep the 31 days out AFTER Jose went on tv several times and said in court there is a perfectly good explanation, the AHA MOMENT!! Come on now one or the other.

Ah, yes...the "compelling" reason.

 

[RR0004]

Depersonalize the victim who in this case is a very small little girl. I think it was Richard Hornsby early on in this case who opined that it's next to impossible to be a acquitted of a crime against a child. My opinion for why CM has started his newest mantra in the most recent hearings of portraying Casey to be just a girl herself rather than a narcissistic, psychopathic full grown adult.

Even in the Child Welfare report it stated that Casey referred to Caylee as "that child". Who does that??!!??

 

[strach304]

This [unusual moose] is waiting for the defense to file a motion to exclude Caylee's body from the evidence.

Oh, gosh! You just reminded me of where my mind went when Cindy started the whole I believe Caylee is still alive garbage and GA and LA said the same. I knew there were reasons for this when those two joined in, it wasn't CA just coming totally unglued. I am sure that this has been considered. I was one of many posters suspicious when the A's had Caylee cremated and ICA had to make a public announcement stating it was entirely against her wishes. It was obvious to me how deliberately planned it was but only theories as to why. At every turn JB has knocked the forensics and brought up the LE and government labs doing the testing being biased. Needed a private lab for the touch dna, etc.

JB was more than glad to jump on this Merry-Go-Round in the early days before there was a body, the forensic discovery, proof of no nanny and the lies and witness statements for the party pic dates, etc. The longer this case has gone on the worse it has gotten. He even managed to get a big chunk of money then. Now is now. Oh, my! Wonder what he must be thinking these days? What a stark contrast. They are stuck, LOL!

 

[strach304]

So why try to keep the 31 days out AFTER Jose went on tv several times and said in court there is a perfectly good explanation, the AHA MOMENT!! Come on now one or the other.

Ooh, ooh. I know! I know! :great:

That mean ole' SA and Judge won't let our mental health experts testify so now they aren't allowed to tell us. Like ICA, not their fault. I'm soo disappointed. Really though, never thought I'd hear it or be impressed with what I heard if so.

 

[bowie]

Everytime I read "DT" I read it as death team not defense team. It took me awhile to realize I was doing it!

 

[Softail]

Even in the Child Welfare report it stated that Casey referred to Caylee as "that child". Who does that??!!??

Someone who is so detached, uncaring, cold, calculated, because they fear being caught murdering their child?:waitasec: That comment seeths disdain for "that child". IMO of course!

 

[Just Jayla]

I wonder if the defense's next move will be to say that, since the state is not demonstrating conciousness of guilt, that KC had no consiousness of guilt because she is legally insane. But I suppose they cannot do that without psychs, and IIRC JB said in open court they did not intend to seek that defense. I just don't put anything past them.

 

[aspiring drifter]

I wonder if the defense's next move will be to say that, since the state is not demonstrating conciousness of guilt, that KC had no consiousness of guilt because she is legally insane. But I suppose they cannot do that without psychs, and IIRC JB said in open court they did not intend to seek that defense. I just don't put anything past them.

i say she has no consciousness at all! just wind and tumbleweeds.

 

[JDzWife]

The only thing I give them "credit" for is wasting my tax dollars! I am really getting tired of their "last ditch efforts" that they have to KNOW will be Denied! I truly don't believe this will get tossed out. The 31 days has been referenced by the Anthonys in the past and I, too, believe it shows her state of mind very well... she just didn't care for no one except herself.

 

[Just Jayla]

What about the 9-11 calls that mention the 31 days?

Other than that, I have to say this is deeply offensive and I cannot believe we live in a society where lawyers are allowed to even ask something like this. How on earth can they try to exclude this, as if a jury should not know the whole truth? They're risking peoples' lives and safety by trying to put a child killer back on the street - I know she gets a defense, but this is NOT a defense, it's just trying to weasel out of accountability. Utterly disgusting.

You prompted me to do a Google search on English common law and the role of defense attorneys. Basically, I found what you and I both hope would be the genesis-That is, a defense attorney, or barrister, was there to make sure the defendant's accusers and witnsses were properly cross examined, that their rights are protected from an overstepping government, and to "endeavour by all fair and honourable means to obtain for a client the benefit of any and every remedy and defence which is authorized by law". Defense, not tall-tale.

I am sure that this got out of control as soon as the ink dried on the Magna Carta, but it still stinks, and these days it's completely over the top. In many ways, I feel like you can't violate the notion of fair judgement and due consideration of others (like JG, RK, GA or CA) just to get your client in the clear, when you know your insinuations not to be true. And JB/CM know they are breaking past the truth at Mach 10.

I hope the good Florida Bar has a few like-minded conservative people on board to clean house. And by 'clean house' I don't mean opening some book and seeing if they could do anything with JB, I don't mean other lawyers coming to his defense because "that's what they all do" and that's what some professor taught them to do (yes, I have seen AL's sermons)...I mean using common sense to determine that this dude is, as you wrote, endangering the rest of us in the name of winning, money and power.

 

[Softail]

So why try to keep the 31 days out AFTER Jose went on tv several times and said in court there is a perfectly good explanation, the AHA MOMENT!! Come on now one or the other.

No kidding! :lol: :back: :hot: anic:

 

[LinasK]

I flew from Kentucky to California in 1999 for $204.

Maybe one-way on SouthWest airlines???
I just checked SouthWest's prices- you can fly 1 adult 1-way Orlando to San Diego (I assume the closest to MH) for $137.