Baez files yet another motion re: Video of Casey's reaction to remains found

[wonders]

I think that Strickland's comments regarding that video say so much that we don't need to worry about anyone seeing it. JMO MOO yada yada yada:

"Being duly advised in the premises, the defendant's Motion to Seal the Jail Videotape in question is granted. In taking this unusual step the Court has read and considered the pleadings of all parties, and personally viewed the videotape in question.

While the Court is loathe to shield any public record, an argument can certainly be made that the contents of the video are highly inflammatory."

<snip>

"Given the nature and scope of the pretrial publicity, it is not unreasonable to assume that many persons in the potential jury pool might view this video and develop a "hardened" attitude in reference to the defendant's guilt."

I haven't seen the video and don't need to see the video. She is guilty as sin. JMO

 

[EastCoast]

I wonder if the defense could have gotten around the anxiety attack by saying that at the time she had the attack, she didn't know if the body was in fact Caylee, and therefore was reacting more to the possibility that harm may have come to her child. Just trying to think like a defense attorney.

 

[Sundance]

Well, that must be some video!
Now my imagination is running wild!
So, does this mean that this video is sealed even after the trial is over?

Good question essies, but I don't have a clue, so I will have to defer to some of our legal eagles. The order does end with this though:

"Considering the matter and penalty at hand, it does not seem too great a restraint to limit access to the video in question. Therefore, the defendant's Motion to Seal the videotape is granted, and it must not be released for viewing by the general public or media, until further order of the Court."

 

[essies]

Good question essies, but I don't have a clue, so I will have to defer to some of our legal eagles. The order does end with this though:

"Considering the matter and penalty at hand, it does not seem too great a restraint to limit access to the video in question. Therefore, the defendant's Motion to Seal the videotape is granted, and it must not be released for viewing by the general public or media, until further order of the Court."

"Until further order of the court" - Hmmm! So, it may not be permanntly sealed? Ya think?:waitasec:

 

[MAMABEAR]

Maybe we will see it at the trial!?!

 

[essies]

Maybe we will see it at the trial!?!

Or maybe AL will use it to when she's arguing against the DP! " Your Honor-She's a sociopath! Just look!! ":boohoo:

 

[panthera]

I wonder if the defense could have gotten around the anxiety attack by saying that at the time she had the attack, she didn't know if the body was in fact Caylee, and therefore was reacting more to the possibility that harm may have come to her child. Just trying to think like a defense attorney.

I think they would still have the problem of her apparent lack of reaction when remains (bones) supposedly were found at Blanchard Park. If her daughter had really been abducted by the nanny, possible finding of a child's remains anywhere should've set in a "panic alarm", imo. The only thing that might make this possible for the defense though is the announcement of the skull being found, which would rule out animal bones, etc. and the location so close to her home. MOO

 

[panthera]

I am secretly hoping that they have begun to reign him in. It would be a miracle, but it could happen, couldn't it ? Oh I would love to be behind the scenes if that were the case... :woohoo:

Like for example, JB here's your new assignment: the jail video? Yes, that would be something wouldn't it?

 

[luvmygarden]

I don't know for sure when this happened---> she yelled, "I'm so p---ed" but member the lil black gurl who went to the enquirer with an interview? She said that is what KC said. So the way I see it is that it isn't true til we find out from other sources.

I believe I heard she said that when the death penalty was back on the table. Not when baby Caylee was found. I will have to look for it.
Maybe we could search death penalty and see if it is there.

 

[magic-cat]

I believe I heard she said that when the death penalty was back on the table. Not when baby Caylee was found. I will have to look for it.
Maybe we could search death penalty and see if it is there.

That is correct. What we heard that she said when Caylee was found is I can't believe this is happening NOW...The other remark was what she supposedly stated over and over again when the death penalty went back on.

 

[SoSueMe]

Is it possible that KC was upset with JB b/c he told her that he was the one who anonymously reported where the body was? He had an ethical decision to make and he did it and KC was pouting and upset b/c now her goose was really cooked?

I started reading this thread, thinking it was a new one until I looked at the dates. LOL Anyway, frenchvixen posted this back in March.

There really could be something to this observation. If JB was the only one that KC told where the body was, could it be that she was really pizzed at having the body found? It was said that JB was crying (or at least head in hands) and KC was ranting or definitely angry.

She would have to know the information came from JB, although his investigator didn't find the body, she probably blamed him for any interest in the area, just has she has always blamed others for her own actions.

 

[Sundance]

That is correct. What we heard that she said when Caylee was found is I can't believe this is happening NOW...The other remark was what she supposedly stated over and over again when the death penalty went back on.

This is from Uncer's LE interview, paragraphs formatted by me for easier reading:

11:35,11:36, in that time frame, we took her down to medical uhm, to view the TV and see what was happening uhm, prior to her attorney getting here. And plus, uhm, mental health staff was waiting for her so they could also observe her and be there if she needed mental health counseling or services.

Uhm, she walked into the medical clinic and immediately looked at the TV, which was on Channel Nine, broadcasting the uhm, breaking news. And she collapsed into the chair and started to what appeared to be hyperventilating. Uhm, she lost her breath. We told her a couple of times, "Take some deep breaths." She was, got real shallow breathing.


Uhm, her hands started to sweat. She started rubbing them profu...profusely. She was in uhm, waist chains and uhm, handcuffs. And she kept saying, "The waist chains are getting tighter and tighter on me. Please loosen them." And we told her we couldn't because we knew they weren't tight when she sat down in the chair.


Uhm, she didn't make direct eye contact with the TV but two or three times. She kept her head buried in her lap. She never appeared to be crying, but continued to uhm, breathe very rapidly, very fast.


Her hands started turning red. She started getting red blotchy palms. Uhm, at one point she did have me look at her hands. And I felt them and they were kind of warm, sweaty, uhm, clammy kind of feeling. The bumps obviously were raised bumps at all. It was ail underneath the skin.


And she had red, blotchy splotches all over her chest area and lower neck.


<snipped>


Uhm.... after the psychologist left she said, "Is my attorney coming?" And I said, "We assume he's on his way. Uhm, I don't know for sure. I will get one of the C.O.'s to find out."


Uhm, she goes, "Well will you sit in the room with me because I don't want to be alone."


Throughout that time she was still breathing rapidly, uhm, talking really fast, but not, nothing really about the case, just that you know, this isn't surreal. I can't cry. I can't break down and cry because this isn't real.


Uhm, and then she started talking about football.


Yeah (affirmative), huh, off the subject.

 

[NocturnalLady]

Not sure if this belongs here or in a new thread...

Anyhow - has anyone heard of the case of Kirk Billie? I was watching (I think) Dateline ID and they featured his case which I think has relevance here - especially in regards to the video.

Kirk Billie murdered/killed his two young sons by driving the SUV they were sleeping/riding in into a canal and allowing it to sink - thus drowning the boys. He presumably did this to punish their mother. Billie contends that he did not know the boys were in the SUV and he thought he was just ditching the car. The case took place in South Florida so comes under the same laws as Casey's case, involves the murder of a child (and ambiguity about if it was intentional or an accident), was presented to the jury as a death penalty case. Kirk Billie received LWOP (even after a second trial - same sentence).

The defense used a surveillance video taken of Billie while he was being held in a holding cell in the jail. The video has no sound. Supposedly Billie was unaware that he was surfeited (although I am sure that it was posted) and being filmed. The video purports to show Billie receiving the news from his father that the children were in fact in the car and were dead. Billie seemingly reacts with shock and sorrow over the news. He is seen pacing back and forth, leaning against a wall with head in hands (supposedly crying) etc.

The prosecution pointed out that Billie had already been told that his children were in the car and had in fact confessed that he knew they were and knew that they were dead. He knew that was why he was being arrested. So being told this by his father (if you even accept that's what the conversation was about - there is no sound on the video to confirm this) was not news to him. Billie contends that the video shows him finally "realizing" that the children were "really dead".

The jurors said that the video played little to no role in their determination of his guilt. They all thought he had done it intentionally. However they did (sort of ) indicate that the video did show remorse and that it had probably softened their opinion of him and led to LWOP rather than death.

So - if you draw comparisons to the Casey case - here is an example of the same type of video, obtained in the same way, supposedly showing the defendant having an extreme emotional reaction to the news of their child's death. In the Billie case the video arguably was the defense's star piece of evidence and it did save Billie from the death penalty. It was allowed into evidence by the judge in Florida. So why isn't Casey's video allowed in? IMHO it's because her reaction is so self-incriminating that it would basically convict her.

What do you all think?

 

[kageykaren]

Nocturnal Lady I think your right on the money. Initially I thought KC may have yelled out a name in frustrating anger that would be able to be detected by a lip reader. I think I'm half wrong at this time. The video must show something more than tears to cause such a stir. Gott be an angry outburst of feeling screwed.

 

[RR0004]

Not sure if this belongs here or in a new thread...

Anyhow - has anyone heard of the case of Kirk Billie? I was watching (I think) Dateline ID and they featured his case which I think has relevance here - especially in regards to the video.

Kirk Billie murdered/killed his two young sons by driving the SUV they were sleeping/riding in into a canal and allowing it to sink - thus drowning the boys. He presumably did this to punish their mother. Billie contends that he did not know the boys were in the SUV and he thought he was just ditching the car. The case took place in South Florida so comes under the same laws as Casey's case, involves the murder of a child (and ambiguity about if it was intentional or an accident), was presented to the jury as a death penalty case. Kirk Billie received LWOP (even after a second trial - same sentence).

The defense used a surveillance video taken of Billie while he was being held in a holding cell in the jail. The video has no sound. Supposedly Billie was unaware that he was surfeited (although I am sure that it was posted) and being filmed. The video purports to show Billie receiving the news from his father that the children were in fact in the car and were dead. Billie seemingly reacts with shock and sorrow over the news. He is seen pacing back and forth, leaning against a wall with head in hands (supposedly crying) etc.

The prosecution pointed out that Billie had already been told that his children were in the car and had in fact confessed that he knew they were and knew that they were dead. He knew that was why he was being arrested. So being told this by his father (if you even accept that's what the conversation was about - there is no sound on the video to confirm this) was not news to him. Billie contends that the video shows him finally "realizing" that the children were "really dead".

The jurors said that the video played little to no role in their determination of his guilt. They all thought he had done it intentionally. However they did (sort of ) indicate that the video did show remorse and that it had probably softened their opinion of him and led to LWOP rather than death.

So - if you draw comparisons to the Casey case - here is an example of the same type of video, obtained in the same way, supposedly showing the defendant having an extreme emotional reaction to the news of their child's death. In the Billie case the video arguably was the defense's star piece of evidence and it did save Billie from the death penalty. It was allowed into evidence by the judge in Florida. So why isn't Casey's video allowed in? IMHO it's because her reaction is so self-incriminating that it would basically convict her.

What do you all think?

I think you're absolutely right!!

 

[doogiesgirl]

Not sure if this belongs here or in a new thread...

Anyhow - has anyone heard of the case of Kirk Billie? I was watching (I think) Dateline ID and they featured his case which I think has relevance here - especially in regards to the video.

Kirk Billie murdered/killed his two young sons by driving the SUV they were sleeping/riding in into a canal and allowing it to sink - thus drowning the boys. He presumably did this to punish their mother. Billie contends that he did not know the boys were in the SUV and he thought he was just ditching the car. The case took place in South Florida so comes under the same laws as Casey's case, involves the murder of a child (and ambiguity about if it was intentional or an accident), was presented to the jury as a death penalty case. Kirk Billie received LWOP (even after a second trial - same sentence).

The defense used a surveillance video taken of Billie while he was being held in a holding cell in the jail. The video has no sound. Supposedly Billie was unaware that he was surfeited (although I am sure that it was posted) and being filmed. The video purports to show Billie receiving the news from his father that the children were in fact in the car and were dead. Billie seemingly reacts with shock and sorrow over the news. He is seen pacing back and forth, leaning against a wall with head in hands (supposedly crying) etc.

The prosecution pointed out that Billie had already been told that his children were in the car and had in fact confessed that he knew they were and knew that they were dead. He knew that was why he was being arrested. So being told this by his father (if you even accept that's what the conversation was about - there is no sound on the video to confirm this) was not news to him. Billie contends that the video shows him finally "realizing" that the children were "really dead".

The jurors said that the video played little to no role in their determination of his guilt. They all thought he had done it intentionally. However they did (sort of ) indicate that the video did show remorse and that it had probably softened their opinion of him and led to LWOP rather than death.

So - if you draw comparisons to the Casey case - here is an example of the same type of video, obtained in the same way, supposedly showing the defendant having an extreme emotional reaction to the news of their child's death. In the Billie case the video arguably was the defense's star piece of evidence and it did save Billie from the death penalty. It was allowed into evidence by the judge in Florida. So why isn't Casey's video allowed in? IMHO it's because her reaction is so self-incriminating that it would basically convict her.

What do you all think?

Since Judge S. said that he would seal the video as it is "highly inflammatory" and "might cause some who view it to develop a hardened attitude toward the defendant in regards to her guilt", I don't think we have to worry about it helping KC's cause.

IMO, and MO only, I think that tape has something going on between KC and JB in a "suggestive" nature. MOO

Does anyone know if we will ever be able to view it? Like after the trial?

 

[doogiesgirl]

This is from Uncer's LE interview, paragraphs formatted by me for easier reading:

11:35,11:36, in that time frame, we took her down to medical uhm, to view the TV and see what was happening uhm, prior to her attorney getting here. And plus, uhm, mental health staff was waiting for her so they could also observe her and be there if she needed mental health counseling or services.

Uhm, she walked into the medical clinic and immediately looked at the TV, which was on Channel Nine, broadcasting the uhm, breaking news. And she collapsed into the chair and started to what appeared to be hyperventilating. Uhm, she lost her breath. We told her a couple of times, "Take some deep breaths." She was, got real shallow breathing.



Uhm, her hands started to sweat. She started rubbing them profu...profusely. She was in uhm, waist chains and uhm, handcuffs. And she kept saying, "The waist chains are getting tighter and tighter on me. Please loosen them." And we told her we couldn't because we knew they weren't tight when she sat down in the chair.


Uhm, she didn't make direct eye contact with the TV but two or three times. She kept her head buried in her lap. She never appeared to be crying, but continued to uhm, breathe very rapidly, very fast.


Her hands started turning red. She started getting red blotchy palms. Uhm, at one point she did have me look at her hands. And I felt them and they were kind of warm, sweaty, uhm, clammy kind of feeling. The bumps obviously were raised bumps at all. It was ail underneath the skin.


And she had red, blotchy splotches all over her chest area and lower neck.


<snipped>


Uhm.... after the psychologist left she said, "Is my attorney coming?" And I said, "We assume he's on his way. Uhm, I don't know for sure. I will get one of the C.O.'s to find out."


Uhm, she goes, "Well will you sit in the room with me because I don't want to be alone."


Throughout that time she was still breathing rapidly, uhm, talking really fast, but not, nothing really about the case, just that you know, this isn't surreal. I can't cry. I can't break down and cry because this isn't real.


Uhm, and then she started talking about football.


Yeah (affirmative), huh, off the subject.

When I was like 20, I went through a very stressful period and I remember getting red splotches(hive like) all over my feet and hands. It was my body's reaction to so much stress.

I am sure KC did break out all over, she knew the jig was up. We've all seen the court videos of her rubbing her hands incessantly, that must be her nervous response to stress. I just want to see that video!!! Where are the bootleggers when you need them!?

:cow:

 

[NocturnalLady]

Since Judge S. said that he would seal the video as it is "highly inflammatory" and "might cause some who view it to develop a hardened attitude toward the defendant in regards to her guilt", I don't think we have to worry about it helping KC's cause.

IMO, and MO only, I think that tape has something going on between KC and JB in a "suggestive" nature. MOO

Does anyone know if we will ever be able to view it? Like after the trial?

I think if they don't use it in the trial we will never see it. Unless an employee steals it and sells it or something like that.

 

[Dear Prudence]

Not sure if this belongs here or in a new thread...

Anyhow - has anyone heard of the case of Kirk Billie? I was watching (I think) Dateline ID and they featured his case which I think has relevance here - especially in regards to the video.

Kirk Billie murdered/killed his two young sons by driving the SUV they were sleeping/riding in into a canal and allowing it to sink - thus drowning the boys. He presumably did this to punish their mother. Billie contends that he did not know the boys were in the SUV and he thought he was just ditching the car. The case took place in South Florida so comes under the same laws as Casey's case, involves the murder of a child (and ambiguity about if it was intentional or an accident), was presented to the jury as a death penalty case. Kirk Billie received LWOP (even after a second trial - same sentence).

The defense used a surveillance video taken of Billie while he was being held in a holding cell in the jail. The video has no sound. Supposedly Billie was unaware that he was surfeited (although I am sure that it was posted) and being filmed. The video purports to show Billie receiving the news from his father that the children were in fact in the car and were dead. Billie seemingly reacts with shock and sorrow over the news. He is seen pacing back and forth, leaning against a wall with head in hands (supposedly crying) etc.

The prosecution pointed out that Billie had already been told that his children were in the car and had in fact confessed that he knew they were and knew that they were dead. He knew that was why he was being arrested. So being told this by his father (if you even accept that's what the conversation was about - there is no sound on the video to confirm this) was not news to him. Billie contends that the video shows him finally "realizing" that the children were "really dead".

The jurors said that the video played little to no role in their determination of his guilt. They all thought he had done it intentionally. However they did (sort of ) indicate that the video did show remorse and that it had probably softened their opinion of him and led to LWOP rather than death.

So - if you draw comparisons to the Casey case - here is an example of the same type of video, obtained in the same way, supposedly showing the defendant having an extreme emotional reaction to the news of their child's death. In the Billie case the video arguably was the defense's star piece of evidence and it did save Billie from the death penalty. It was allowed into evidence by the judge in Florida. So why isn't Casey's video allowed in? IMHO it's because her reaction is so self-incriminating that it would basically convict her.

What do you all think?

I haven't heard of that case before, it is an interesting comparison.

Regarding the part I bolded: The judge has not ruled the video as inadmissable evidence at trial. He has ruled to not let it be released to the public before trial. He said it was so inflammatory that it could taint the jury pool. But, today Judge Strickland said he would hear arguments from the media as to why it should be released. I agree with you that this video must be incriminating to KC, unlike the Billie case apparently. Why else would Baez spend so much time arguing vehemently against its release to the public if it was no big deal?

 

[countzero]

Nocturnal Lady I think your right on the money. Initially I thought KC may have yelled out a name in frustrating anger that would be able to be detected by a lip reader. I think I'm half wrong at this time. The video must show something more than tears to cause such a stir. Gott be an angry outburst of feeling screwed.

Yea, like dropping the F bomb a few or more times and clinching her fists.