2011.08.05 Hearing on Casey's probation

[Italy]

This is completely off-topic and only a response to part of what another poster stated about this case being the genesis of Caylee's law and changes to jury selection irrespective of whether there is probation or not.

One of the changes I heartily wish would be made is the abolishment of the "Death Penalty Qualified" juror. It has no place in deciding guilt or innocence of even the most egregious crimes.

Let the jury recommend - individually if necessary - but in the end it is the judge who decides the sentence.

 

[Searchfortruth]

I asked a question about administrative probation (will she have to serve half of her probation first), over at RH's blog and received some clarification. Will bring over here...


Thank you. As for your questions about Administrative Probation, you are correct. But if I was a betting man, I say he splits the baby and places her on Administrative Probation to save face.

But between you and me, the Judge knows that would technically be illegal as FS 948.012(3) requires her to do half of her “regular” probation before she can be placed on “Administrative Probation.”

FS 948.012(3) – “The court may also impose split probation whereby, upon satisfactory completion of half the term of probation, the Department of Corrections may place the offender on administrative probation for the remainder of the term of supervision.”

Also, here are the statistics for supervision types to show how infrequently Administrative Probation is given (1.1% of all probationers.)

http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/annual/0910/stats/csa_month.html

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2011/08/the-great-probation-debate/comment-page-3/#comments

 

[21merc7]

This is completely off-topic and only a response to part of what another poster stated about this case being the genesis of Caylee's law and changes to jury selection irrespective of whether there is probation or not.

One of the changes I heartily wish would be made is the abolishment of the "Death Penalty Qualified" juror. It has no place in deciding guilt or innocence of even the most egregious crimes.

Let the jury recommend - individually if necessary - but in the end it is the judge who decides the sentence.

Ah, but with jurors making the decision the Judge cannot. It would be termed a "Prejudicial Judge" if only the Judge decided death in a jury trial. The Judge can revoke death penalty if the jurors find it and the Judge feels that it is not found under case law, which may have happened here and found guilty, under HHSS at least. But no, the Judge cannot do that if there is a jury. The 12 makes it fair and balanced as far as the system is right now, so they should be death penalty qualified. This jury was not death penalty qualified, jmo. No making someone say it once they said no.

 

[Aedrys]

Please do not be upset at our justice system, anyone. It is not perfect, but move to another country and tell me about being stoned to death or slashed to death simply because you are a woman and they can. Tell me about a loved one brutally murdered but the country is out of control and no one has a court system.

If it were you, what would you like to happen. What if you were innocent? I am not saying KC is, 'cause I don't think so.

If you were charged with murder you have a choice. Take a plea or take a jury. A jury is 50/50 shot. What would your choice be? Well, in Florida I know what your immediate answer is, but these peeps were sequestered 8 weeks total. So that is an answer of it's own. But what if you had the normal week to two week trial? What if you really were innocent? Roll the dice or plea? Know that once you plea no one will believe you when you take it back and say you were just scared. Know that there is evidence, but what does it show? What would you do?

Good, thoughtful post. I am law abiding citizen, so hopefully this will never happen to me, and I will never have to make a decision like this. I haven't lost total faith in the system. I do think it's flawed and needs to be fixed, though. I don't think letting Casey go free is in the interest of justice for anyone. I cringe at the thought of her getting pregnant and having another child. Innocent children shouldn't be at risk to Casey Anthony just so one innocent person doesn't get convicted. She is a menace to society, and she should be in jail. There is not one iota of good in Casey. She will never be a productive member of society. She will seduce, manipulate, and steal from any sucker that she finds. She will never be honest or lead an honest life. That is what scares me. That kind of person I don't want out on the street to do as they please.

 

[Patty G]

I don't understand how the Probation Department could waive the court costs and costs for investigation without letting the court know.

 

[21merc7]

I don't understand how the Probation Department could waive the court costs and costs for investigation without letting the court know.

Add to that, how did they start Probation without a given date and not conferring with the Court?

 

[Italy]

Ah, but with jurors making the decision the Judge cannot. It would be termed a "Prejudicial Judge" if only the Judge decided death. The Judge can revoke death penalty if the jurors find it and the Judge feels that it is not found under case law, which may have happened here and found guilty, under HHSS at least. But no, the Judge cannot do that if there is a jury. The 12 makes it fair and balanced as far as the system is right now, so they should be death penalty qualified. This jury was not death penalty qualified, jmo. No making someone say it once they said no.

Though they don't do so often, in Florida trial judges can override a jury's recommendation on death penalty.

 

[lauriej]

That's why they put her up there to say it, and why she was so nervous. She knows it is against ethics.

..i didn't think she looked "nervous" , she does talk fast ( i wish judgeP had requested that SHE slow it down for the court reporter.)

..she certainly had no problem getting it out there as often as she possibly could that judgeS -----"b/c the (NG) verdict wasn't the outcome that he had hoped for"----- the "disqualified" judge said this, the "disqualified" judge did that..

..IMO---she's looking more comfortable every time she takes the podium, and it looks like she's fitting right in with the rest of the 'team'.

 

[rotterdam]

I highly suspect that when the time was being calculated there was absolutely nothing on record stating probation. DOC in the county jail knew nothing about it

Baez seems to be the only one who knows/knew about this and kept his pie hole shut till it came up AFTER she was gone.I still guess that the letter was computer generated...have they shown the complete letter yet? The clerk made an error. We can hear the judge's own words. Because the clerk made an error , it shouldn't negate the defendent doing probation.

It looks to me like the clerk left Strickland's courtroom on the day of sentencing for check fraud and immediately generated a probation starting that day w/o thought that she was still in jail. Florida is being exposed more and more for getting light on crime. They used to be one of the tougher states but their political persuasion is turning. When that happens, more and more laws come into play and lawyers have more loopholes to set the defendant free.

I suspect the clerk who processed the order signed by JS, uses a saved form form letter and only types in the unique items.
Further more the order did not specify probation after release but neither did it specify probation during incarceration. The DOC took upon themselves to interpret this the way they saw fit , and who knows, might have even asked the DT team for clarification. Things are apparent very loosey goosey in FLA.
Bet it will change now after all this ruckus

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

That's why they put her up there to say it, and why she was so nervous. She knows it is against ethics.

She's on the right team, then, if she's starting out her career by thumbing her nose at ethics. :cow:

 

[NSS]

Susan Finigan is a probation supervisor, and she spoke at today's hearing, according to the Orlando Sentinel.

Just jumping off your post Nat (I am eons behind).

The only unusual visit was a Natalia Lewis on 2/2/2010. The supervisor did say that the visit was in early Feb (heard whilst getting showered for work and missed the exact date).
Maybe that was the probation visit.

It would be easy if they just notated it like they do attorney visits...lol

 

[cyberborg]

That's why they put her up there to say it, and why she was so nervous. She knows it is against ethics.

It is funny that ... while LF is very bright, sharp and top of her Bar graduation class ... :waitasec: that veteran CM and rookie JB both seem to hide behind her suit tails when it comes to arguing complex and/or intricate issues.

It is good for LF to showcase her skills, baptism by fire :clap: but ... sad for CM and JB. :loser:

 

[cyberborg]

I don't understand how the Probation Department could waive the court costs and costs for investigation without letting the court know.

Agreed. The mistake made IMO is that EVERYONE thought that FCA was guilty and would spend the rest of her life in prison, and so they treated this as moot and went through the 'motions' because it was seen as overkill at that time.

Hindsight is 20/20. Shortcuts were taken in the expectation of getting away with it and ... it backfired! Who knew FCA would be found NG. No-one really expected it.

 

[krt]

It is funny that ... while LF is very bright, sharp and top of her Bar graduation class ... :waitasec: that veteran CM and rookie JB both seem to hide behind her suit tails when it comes to arguing complex and/or intricate issues.

It is good for LF to showcase her skills, baptism by fire :clap: but ... sad for CM and JB. :loser:

All JB and CM did was feed her to the wolf and she fell for it hook line and sinker thinking "wow I am really that good, look where i am on one of my first cases" .......What is really sad for us and bad for the Florida legal system is that although LF is at the top of her Bar graduation class that she had the audacity to state the OBVIOUS untruths re JS being "disqualified" and slanderous comments about him (---which I think Mason was the one COMPLETELY behind those comments.

And to openly admit that the DT KNEW the original order was wrong and to inquire why is it the DT's responsibility to notify the court? Seriously?.......sorry, I have absolutely NO respect for her!

 

[suzihawk]

You make a good point but I think he has many law clerks to do all his research. It was a stall tactic.

For what purpose would HHJP want to stall? That sounds more like a defense ploy. IMO

 

[rotterdam]

I think JP is concerned about overruling another judge's Order. If HHSS wants her to serve that year and he states that was his intention and that is what he wants HHJP will find a way to carry out that Order. I think the Order is the most important issue here. And probation is not a sentence. If DOC agrees they can get her in and out without detection from the public I think he will agree with probation. If it becomes a problem with protestors there could be changes but there is no proof there will ever be a problem, just speculation at this point.

Kind of hinky here, too, that HHSS had to recluse himself shortly after KC was visited by the probation officer. Another coincidence???? jmo

Whatever JP's ruling will be on this mess, he would not be overruling SS.
He just has to figure out what the law legally allows to do in this aftermath of errors. And hopefully., he will also revisit the sentencing time for lying to LE as calculated by DOC. After all, DOC are the so called experts on this type of stuff, not JP.

 

[Italy]

It seems Baez and friends were looking for protection for Casey Anthony. I guess they didn't think she would need to come back for probation either.


"Kris Herzog, famous Hollywood celebrity bodyguard and owner of The Bodyguard Group of Beverly Hills says that he was approached by supporters of Casey Anthony to protect her, so she could move to Beverly Hills, CA.
For the 1st time in over 43 years, The Navy SEAL Bodyguard Group and it’s parent company The Bodyguard Group of Beverly Hills refused to take a job, the Casey Anthony protection job.

Chris Jones, former U.S. Secret Service Presidential and White House security detail member is director of The Bodyguard Group Threat Assessment unit. Chris Jones and the Command staff of The Bodyguard Group, including Navy SEAL Team members from our Celebrity Bodyguard unit wrote a Threat Assessment on Casey Anthony.

 

[rotterdam]

He was relying on the DOC for his information re days/time served....

I so agree with you. DOC are the experts on such calculations. You can not expect JP to know all the latest and greatest nuances as it applies to those type of thingies. JP trusts them as to what they are doing. JP is not a one man band.

 

[LambChop]

It is funny that ... while LF is very bright, sharp and top of her Bar graduation class ... :waitasec: that veteran CM and rookie JB both seem to hide behind her suit tails when it comes to arguing complex and/or intricate issues.

It is good for LF to showcase her skills, baptism by fire :clap: but ... sad for CM and JB. :loser:

My guess is they are not hiding but giving her the opportunity to polish up her courtroom skills so she can argue cases in court. Again, JP's courtroom has become a classroom. Nothing wrong with it. I think she does a good job, although she appears nervous she is spunky, and she does take direction well from JB (who I think gets the information from CM). lol

 

[TxLady2]

Ah, but with jurors making the decision the Judge cannot. It would be termed a "Prejudicial Judge" if only the Judge decided death in a jury trial. The Judge can revoke death penalty if the jurors find it and the Judge feels that it is not found under case law, which may have happened here and found guilty, under HHSS at least. But no, the Judge cannot do that if there is a jury. The 12 makes it fair and balanced as far as the system is right now, so they should be death penalty qualified. This jury was not death penalty qualified, jmo. No making someone say it once they said no.

Interesting. Do you know what it takes to be "death penalty qualified?" It simply means that you agree that you could vote for the death penalty if the evidence supports it. Apparently, this jury didn't feel the evidence even supported a murder conviction, much less 1st degree.
If three highly educated attorneys all with many years of courtroom experience cannot convince a jury of 12 reasonably intelligent people of a person's guilt, then I don't think it can be blamed entirely on the jurors, do you? I don't think this had a thing to do with being DP qualified or not. JMO