He didn't know. He was desperately hoping his assessment of the jurors was correct.
If he was correct his act would work. He was waiting to see. "Defense doesn't have access to this high tech like the state", "poor Casey, look at her she is such a teeny hurt thing", "folksy down to earth", "I'm just like you guys I can't even spell."
I have a suspicion also that his sl*t comments were directed at one person. Believe me when I tell you that if you have a name and birthdate you can find out anything about someone. They researched this jury and everything they did was designed to influence. They knew the jury and the state didn't. The state trusted the jurors and their evidence too much.
To think we laughed when he crossed out iorn. He knew how to spell iron. He passed the bar.
He played them like a fiddle. And he won.
I agree. A fiddler he is. Jose Baez did not prove to me that he is a great lawyer, quite the contrary. He proved to me that he is/was good at playing to an audience and he played his audience well. I believe throughout the proceedings he was continuously coached; he was often seen sending and/or receiving text messages. He is/was the quintessential traveling elixir salesman hawking his wares to particular jurors using specific nuances, verbiage, carefully utilizing proverbial persuasion to elicit emotional responses from each of his targets. They were easy marks, captive, in fact, lulled by the meticulous court process forced to endure endless testimonies, sidebars, and exhaustive instructions. Within the confines of His Honor Judge Perrys courtroom, they were like wards of the state, powerless, having little say in their daily existence and forbidden to talk about the very reason for their present circumstances, craving the one unifying desire of all of humanity, to know and be known by another.
I believe simply stated short emotional assertions by Baez awakened their unconscious minds. A subtle momentary glance in their direction penetrated their indifference as though receiving an instant message from an unrequited lover. Unconscious emotional amalgamation plunged their minds into a hermeneutic spiral of illogical complacency rendering them incapable of asking rational questions, considering realistic scenarios, and/or constructing reasonable inferences. Their verdict spoke more about their state of minds, their character, and their deficits than it did about the quality or quantity of the evidence presented during the trial.
I believe Jose Baez won the case by dishonoring the basic principles of the criminal justice system. In my opinion, his presentation within the courtroom (as well as his interactions within the media) did not promote the discovery of truth, the administration of justice, or the protection of society. Societal norms are directly influenced by courtroom decrees. How is American society going to incorporate the edicts of the Casey Anthony trial?
