Casey Anthony Legal Defense Strategies #2

[impatientredhead]

Is there a valid argument JB can put forth regarding KC's statement made to LE without counsel? She was there willingly to help the investigators find her missing daughter and she knew she was free to leave at any time. I'm thinking that it would be something regarding the nature of the questioning, i.e. how it changed when they realized she wasn't giving truthful information. They were interrogating her as if she were a suspect. Were they required to take her into custody and read her rights to her prior to this type of questioning?

Because of the date of the Fusian pics and the fact that KC said she looked in bars and places Zanny might go, I think Baez will have zero luck in getting these thrown out. He will try but I can't imagine an argument he could give that will allow that. Her night at Fusian will be testified to by state's witnesses but I can see why he'd rather the jury not have a visual. He'll be more successful getting evidence of her conduct prior to Caylee being missing thrown out. I think anything she did while her daughter was missing and not reported to LE should be admitted.

Destroying the credibility of the forensic evidence is probably JB's best shot at defending KC. If the jury zones out during the experts' testimony I think they'll rely on closing arguments to decide on it's reliability. It'll come down to whose summation is more believable. Can more than one defense attorney give closing arguments? I can't imagine JB not giving a closing argument but LKB will have to be the one to address the forensics at the end. This can't be trusted to JB.

It will be the same arguement it always is:

My client was not given her miranda rights, she felt intimidated, she felt that she was being interrogated, she was denied her right to have counsel with her at an interrogation

The state will say it was a voluntary statement and this was an interview with the mother of a missing child, there was no reason to read her her rights

Defense will say the police very clearly suspected Casey in this situation as soon they arrived (not reported for a month), that they left, verified information (which was unverifiable), came back and took this young, terrified, no criminal record/experience "girl" from her house, took her to an isolated location with three detectives who are clearly interrogated her as a suspect and tried to get her to admit harming her child

It will come down to the judge, the police did everything they could from recording it, to verifying with her that she knows she can leave.... but the police will also take certain liberties if there is a CHANCE the child is savable (Lundsford case for example where the confession was thrown out but the case was proven without it)

The pictures and video they will say are inflammatory to the jury. Same argument they gave for the jailhouse flip out not being released. This is a much grayer area of judgement (and grounds for appeal). The judge has to decide how much value it has as evidence versus how much it will only serve to turn the jury emotionally against the defendant, and then the how much is too much will be decided by an appeals court who can see how the whole trial played out while the acting judge had to decide as they went. Much cloudier area.

 

[lin]

Is there a valid argument JB can put forth regarding KC's statement made to LE without counsel? She was there willingly to help the investigators find her missing daughter and she knew she was free to leave at any time. I'm thinking that it would be something regarding the nature of the questioning, i.e. how it changed when they realized she wasn't giving truthful information. They were interrogating her as if she were a suspect. Were they required to take her into custody and read her rights to her prior to this type of questioning?

Because of the date of the Fusian pics and the fact that KC said she looked in bars and places Zanny might go, I think Baez will have zero luck in getting these thrown out. He will try but I can't imagine an argument he could give that will allow that. Her night at Fusian will be testified to by state's witnesses but I can see why he'd rather the jury not have a visual. He'll be more successful getting evidence of her conduct prior to Caylee being missing thrown out. I think anything she did while her daughter was missing and not reported to LE should be admitted.

Destroying the credibility of the forensic evidence is probably JB's best shot at defending KC. If the jury zones out during the experts' testimony I think they'll rely on closing arguments to decide on it's reliability. It'll come down to whose summation is more believable. Can more than one defense attorney give closing arguments? I can't imagine JB not giving a closing argument but LKB will have to be the one to address the forensics at the end. This can't be trusted to JB.

Maybe that is a good place to start here -- what is the forensic science in this case; how important is it; can it be attacked?

For example, the air sample tests. Ultimately, I think they'll be found credible but all they do is add to the witness statements and other evidence that shows Caylee was in the trunk. So the answer would be: air sample test; not very important just pile on imo and yes, it can but won't make much difference if it's excluded, imo.

 

[lin]

The testimony from the entimology experts will be very important for the SA in proving that Caylee was there all along. This video shows how the area has grown back in just over 6 months! LKB will have her work cut out for herself! IMO

YouTube - Where Caylee Anthony Rested

Oooh good one. This will also counter any contrary opinions given by hired guns for the defense.

 

[Marina2]

Remember when BC made this statement on GMA, June 16th? I don't think this statement ever came up in this thread though it seems relevant. I'm curious about his purpose for saying this. I know he doesn't think it would be a good idea for KC to take the stand just that he thinks there's no way around it. Is BC referring to specific assertions that Baez has made which make him think KC has to take the stand? Is it possible he knows of assertions Baez has made that we haven't heard? Or, is it just BC's round about way of saying that Baez' assertions will have to change because she can't take the stand? Why would he make this statement when all others feel it's inconceivable that she will testify?

"There's probably one person that knows the whole truth. That's Casey Anthony."

It's a truth that should come out, Conway said, in the course of a trial during which Casey Anthony would likely take the stand in her own defense.

"In this matter, it's almost inconceivable that she wouldn't take the stand. I think based on Mr. Baez's assertions, she has to take the stand," Conway said.

 

[lin]

Remember when BC made this statement on GMA, June 16th? I don't think this statement ever came up in this thread though it seems relevant. I'm curious about his purpose for saying this. I know he doesn't think it would be a good idea for KC to take the stand just that he thinks there's no way around it. Is BC referring to specific assertions that Baez has made which make him think KC has to take the stand? Is it possible he knows of assertions Baez has made that we haven't heard? Or, is it just BC's round about way of saying that Baez' assertions will have to change because she can't take the stand? Why would he make this statement when all others feel it's inconceivable that she will testify?

"There's probably one person that knows the whole truth. That's Casey Anthony."

It's a truth that should come out, Conway said, in the course of a trial during which Casey Anthony would likely take the stand in her own defense.

"In this matter, it's almost inconceivable that she wouldn't take the stand. I think based on Mr. Baez's assertions, she has to take the stand," Conway said.

Well, I certainly agree with his first statement; it sort of has to be that way due to Caylee's age and the lack of any known caretaker after they left Hopesprings other than KC.

Do you remember the date of this GMA? I don't watch these folks' media tours until they hit youtube and get posted here, if then. If it's post AL taking the lead chair, this could be a great, great clue. Even if it's before it seems pretty clear KC and/or her team were intent on her testifying and may be a clue they may be thinking of putting on a defense; maybe even accident or negligence. But with these people, he may have just been trying to stir up discussion to get a feel for public sentiment about the possibility.

ETA: nm, I see you included date.

 

[Jolynna]

JB was on the Today show this morning. I don't think part of the defense strategy will include throwing George or Cindy under the bus.

JB sounded very sympathetic toward George and Cindy, not like somebody "planting seeds" that they were something other than grieving grandparents.

 

[lin]

JB was on the Today show this morning. I don't think part of the defense strategy will include throwing George or Cindy under the bus.

JB sounded very sympathetic toward George and Cindy, not like somebody "planting seeds" that they were something other than grieving grandparents.

That makes a lot more sense to me. He needs them, imo, to even humanize her. Who else has a single positive word for her?

 

[essies]

That makes a lot more sense to me. He needs them, imo, to even humanize her. Who else has a single positive word for her?

Well. there's ......no, no not her! Hmmm...OK, there's .....no, no, not him!

Well, there's Lee and Mallory!! They count don't they?

 

[lin]

Well. there's ......no, no not her! Hmmm...OK, there's .....no, no, not him!

Well, there's Lee and Mallory!! They count don't they?

lol, not for anything in my book... (I just checked.)

Not so sure about what Mallory would say without CA hovering over her shoulder anyway.

Can you imagine the damage CA and GA could do if JB turned on them? Is there the slightest possible doubt in your mind that CA would turn on KC and nail her coffin shut if KC so much as implied CA was less than perfect, much less responsible for Caylee's death?

 

[Curious Me]

There'll probably be great attempts and delays to stop evidence from being allowed in, but it will be. There will be enough in to provide the jurors with the fact that this mother must not have wanted her daughter found.

The Fusion pictures have to be shown to the jury. Casey said she was there to do her own search for her daughter. so they have to be allowed in I would think. She did not report her daughter missing for 31 days... that one sentence fact has to be allowed in.

She lied to police who wanted to find her daughter, but she confused the search with intentional lies.

Casey's defense team will have to blame that on "the script" I imagine. Get ready for some new spin by defense.

 

[lin]

There'll probably be great attempts and delays to stop evidence from being allowed in, but it will be. There will be enough in to provide the jurors with the fact that this mother must not have wanted her daughter found.

The Fusion pictures have to be shown to the jury. Casey said she was there to do her own search for her daughter. so they have to be allowed in I would think. She did not report her daughter missing for 31 days... that one sentence fact has to be allowed in.

She lied to police who wanted to find her daughter, but she confused the search with intentional lies.

Casey's defense team will have to blame that on "the script" I imagine. Get ready for some new spin by defense.

I agree there are many things that just cannot be excluded. Maybe a good idea to explore defense response to some of those things? Like you suggested the "script" but maybe her team is more clever than she and will come up with something at least a tiny bit possible or believable. (If one squints, plugs nose and ears, I mean, to distort as much as possible to try to find it a bit believable.)

 

[believe09]

Help a poster out-if this has not already been done, can we use this thread to sort out the defense strategies that have been advanced so far and how they may conflict?

• Junk Science
• Body placed after Casey was jailed
• SODDI-"Zanny". RM, GA, CA, TL
• Reasonable doubt

 

[Brini]

Help a poster out-if this has not already been done, can we use this thread to sort out the defense strategies that have been advanced so far and how they may conflict?

• Junk Science
• Body placed after Casey was jailed
• SODDI-"Zanny". RM, GA, CA, TL
• Reasonable doubt

I think we pretty much beat SODDI to death. Maybe reasonable doubrt, too.

 

[essies]

Interesting article by a Ph.D. http://www.officer.com/online/artic...ection=18&&cPage=2&OrderBy=InsertDate&Dir=ASC

The Body in the Trunk
it smells like there's been a dead body in the damn car...

Written by Dr. Doug Hanson
Doug Hanson, Ph.D. is a Ph.D. Biochemist who has operated toxicology and analytical chemistry laboratories for over 25 years. He is also a freelance writer who has written extensively for law enforcement, EMS and first responder magazines. His areas of expertise and written articles include: forensic investigation, DNA analysis, blood spatter, trace analysis, toxicology, drug and analytical chemistry, and forensic anthropology among others. He has written about car bombs, IEDs, soft targets, biological and chemical agents and attack scenarios. He has written on juvenile arson and illegal meth labs. Doug has written and published a book entitled The Eider Files, a novel about bioterrorism.

 

[believe09]

I just don't get how they can present such a variety and not lose credibility. To me it is clear their only real strategy is reasonable doubt. As it was previously stated, they will fight in the trenches witness by witness digging up who cheated on the Spanish exam in HS, who got a DUI etc...

Karma is a b with that strategy simply because if they (the defense) are going to put Henry Lee on the stand, impeaching his credentials will be shooting fish in a barrel for the SA. How about if they use Baden...oops, the same.

 

[doogiesgirl]

The Defense calling it junk science is kind of par for the course. They are trying to save KC and they have so little to work with, really next to nothing besides attacking the state IMO. Just remember that if this smell had been found in the trunk of any of the peripheral players-----it would be damning evidence according to the defense and CA would be out there spouting that from the roof tops! MOO


I remember reading a Mark Twain book, trying to think what the name of it was....(oh I know "Puddin'head Wilson")....anyway in it there was a man(lawyer) in this small town who noticed that oil on the skin left finger prints and so over years he collected the finger prints of the whole town. They all called him the town fool for his "fingerprint" hobby. In the end he saved an innocent with this fool's hobby and convicted the guilty! Keep that in mind......that there was a time when even the value/the uniqueness of one's fingerprints was unknown. MOO

 

[believe09]

I read a book called Arsenic Under the Elms that had the same situation-it had to do typing kinds of arsenic. Because the jury was largely illiterate (mid 1800's) the bulk of the scientific testimony was ignored and the perp was found innocent in spite of having been guilty. He was a gentleman and the victim was very very poor so he had the edge to begin with.

In this case, imo, there is nothing remarkable about this perp that would likely cause conflict with the jury. She is not sympathetic. If she ever took the stand, she would be proven to be cunning and cagey. There is nothing sypathetic about this perps family-if they take the stand they will be hostile and their testimony will be impeached. What is compelling about this case is the victim who has been sidelined by the shenanigans of those who want their 15 minutes of fame....be it attorneys, family members or "experts."

They had better stick with reasonable doubt. I expect it to come down to this anyway. Evidence if overwhelming when taken as a whole-their only prayer is to get one or two of the blocks knocked away and hope the jury considers THAT to be reasonable doubt.

 

[faefrost]

The problem with the defense using the "junk science" approach in this, is that there are an awful lot of seperate and corborating junk science to disprove. While they may get a jury to doubt the air testing. The air testing + the dogs + expert eyewitness accounts + third party eyewitness accounts + the defendants mothers excited utterances on the 911 tape = rock solid and very hard to disprove.

 

[ZsaZsa]

It's Interesting and ironic that Cindy, despite all her media appearances and protestations, will be the one whose utterances convict Casey.

 

[believe09]

O/T Zsa Zsa, but it has to amaze her that if she had allowed Casey to dissuade her from calling 911, she would not be the one who put the cage around her child.

If Cindy does read here, YOU actually didn't put the cage around her-she did it to herself. SHE made her own choices-she is the one who was ultimately responsible for the well being of her child. You are a player only.

jmo