Casey may represent herself at trial.

[Anais]

Has anyone seen George's interview from last night/early morning ? Sounds like KC will keep JB and aid in her own defense http://www.wftv.com/video/17719972/index.html

IMO it's just another way for Casey to take more stabs at the spotlight, further manipulate the process and of course look for any way possible to make sure that if she is convicted that she'll have a road for an appeal-one way or another!

 

[Insomnia Momma]

I know that it seems that way ... but there is tons of precedence where convictions are overturned on appeal when the courts have refused to allow the defendant to represent themselves. It is a constitutional right and in fact one of the very oldest laws, predating much of the Bill of Rights. One such example is Faretta v. California. The Supreme Court said in the 1975 case that defendants have a constitutional right to waive counsel at trial if doing so voluntarily and intelligently. Furthermore, the high court ruled in the 1993 case of Godinez v. Moran, that the standard for determining competency to stand trial — whether the defendant can understand the proceedings and assist in his defense — is the same standard for waiving the right to counsel and pleading guilty.

This is a relatively recent decision California v. Dent

"When a motion to proceed pro se is timely interposed, a trial court must permit a defendant to represent himself upon ascertaining that he has voluntarily and intelligently elected to do so, irrespective of how unwise such a choice might appear to be. Furthermore, the defendant's 'technical legal knowledge' is irrelevant to the court's assessment of the defendant's knowing exercise of the right to defend himself."

Citing: (People v. Windham (1977) 19 Cal.3d 121, 128, 137 Cal. Rptr. 8, 560 P.2d 1187 [*8] (Windham), quoting Faretta, supra, 422 U.S. at p. 836.) Erroneous denial of a Faretta motion is reversible per se. ( McKaskle v. Wiggins (1984) 465 U.S. 168, 177, fn. 8, 79 L. Ed. 2d 122, 104 S. Ct. 944.)


As far as being able to use "ineffective counsel" or "ineffective assistance of counsel" as grounds for appeal it is important to remember as the Court stated in Faretta “(...) when the accused manages his own defense, he relinquishes, as a purely factual matter, many of the traditional benefits associated with the right to counsel. (...) the loss of legal and technical expertise a lawyer provides could prove detrimental to any case. (...) a defendant who elects to self-represent has no right to appeal based on ineffective assistance of counsel."

You know what's sad? You just cited more case law in this ONE post than JB has in this entire case to date.

IMO it shows his inexperience.

 

[websurfer]

She will puppet all she is guided to say...
people [ cold hearted ones]
do not have brains to fool some of the people some of the time or
some of the people all the time...
especially 12 very important ones...:blowkiss:

 

[StealthTheory]

talk about delusions of grandeur...

 

[GreenPoet]

talk about delusions of grandeur...

I have often thought that Casey may have planned the "perfect crime" in her own mind. Young people often rebel against parents by becoming the very thing the parent despises.

With GA being in law enforcement, I think Casey may very well have become the criminal that GA spent his career pursuing. I believe she may have learned criminal behavior by listening to the stories that GA may have shared over the years about the cases he was working on.

I have often thought that GA may know more than we can imagine, as this case might be very similar to something he had worked on in the past, including the location of the body.

It would not surprise me if she wants to defend herself. If killing Caylee was indeed premeditated, defending herself for the crime may very well have been part of the fantasy.

 

[Theonly1]

It is not going to happen (in my opinion)! Maybe she will "assist" in her defense and that will be the long and short of it. This is a pre-qualified death penalty charge/s on the table not a simple traffic violation. Yes, for a short time Ted Bundy did represent himself but he was a former law student, highly intelligent and met certain criteria. He also had back-up counsel. Casey did not graduate high school and I highly doubt she could even properly manage one motion before the court, much less a trial. She might have these delusions of grandeur but it is not going to happen. And if a judge does fall off the bench, bonk his or her head and approves it then she's going to need more than Baez backing her up (my opinion).

T

 

[tiredofthis]

Wftv reporting that Casey may represent herself ... and get taxpayer monies to do so ... what are your thoughts on this?

Wow. She has really lost it. Return from la la land, KC, it would not be a very good idea to represent yourself.

 

[L L & S]

Never, in a BA-zillion years with this girl represent herself, E-V-E-R.

Im that sure.

Although, if they get a change of venue to FUSION, perhaps.

Oh you're baaaaaaad.

 

[hroark2112]

I think it's a great idea. Let her represent herself. One less appeal she can file.


It seems like everyone who gets the death penalty files an appeal based on ineffective counsel. You can't go to court and say "Oops, my bad...I'm a dumbass!" after you represent yourself.

Remember....ah damnit...Colin something-or-other...the guy who shot up the Long Island Railroad car? He defended himself. That was a CIRCUS!!! Witnesses saying "No, I saw YOU shooting me!!" That trial was a bigger train wreck, and he screwed himself to pieces.

Let her do it. Then the judge can ask her if she wants her execution to be regular (injection) or extra crispy (Ol' Sparky)!!

 

[Theonly1]

It is not going to happen (in my opinion)! Maybe she will "assist" in her defense and that will be the long and short of it. This is a pre-qualified death penalty charge/s on the table not a simple traffic violation. Yes, for a short time Ted Bundy did represent himself but he was a former law student, highly intelligent and met certain criteria. He also had back-up counsel. Casey did not graduate high school and I highly doubt she could even properly manage one motion before the court, much less a trial. She might have these delusions of grandeur but it is not going to happen. And if a judge does fall off the bench, bonk his or her head and approves it then she's going to need more than Baez backing her up (my opinion).

T

I'm wrong! It looks like it doesn't matter WHAT the charge is if she can get around a Faretta motion because I guess the nature of the charge is irrelevant to the decision to grant or deny a Faretta motion. In Faretta, the charge on the table was only grand theft (I believe) but in the California v. Dent case it was Murder 1. In Dent, the defendant had two attorneys both of whom did not show up to court on time (one had told the judge the night before he would not be there). When the morning came for trial and the defendant had no counsel the judge took both the attorneys off the case and tried to continue the case for another time. The defendant wanted to talk to the judge about it and the judge was concerned that counsel was not around. Once one of his attorneys did show up the defendant wanted to proceed with the one attorney and himself pro se. The judge (knowing it was a capital case) did not want to do it and the case was appealed for this reason.

It looks like (in sum):

If a motion to proceed pro se is timely interposed, a trial court must permit a defendant to represent himself upon ascertaining:

1)that he has voluntarily elected to do so ("Voluntary"),
2) and intelligently elected to do so ("Knowing"),
3) competently elected to do so ("Competent"),
4) irrespective of how unwise such a choice might appear to be.
5) Furthermore, the defendant’s ‘technical legal knowledge’ is irrelevant to the court’s assessment of the defendant’s knowing exercise of the right to defend himself.”
6) Motion cannot be denied because of the seriousness of charge (can be death penalty qualified)

Erroneous denial of a Faretta motion is reversible per se.

 

[trac]

IIRC Ted had been a law student and that was why that was allowed

No one is going to allow her to grandstand in the courtroom she
doesnt even have a GED - there are standards because the charges
are so serious and no one wants reversal or appeal issues .

KC better get used to not getting what she wants - no one is going
to indulge her sense of entitlement ever again - that little dynmanic
is history

When I told my daughter that this might be happening - all she said was 'just like Manson' Manson did represent himself and they had the trial twice

I guess crazy is as crazy does

 

[JenninFla]

She is a joke. I think her lawyer dont want anyone else coming in to steal his "money" and fame espically if heck freezes over and he gets her off.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

If this has been posted elsewhere please forgive me (the threads have exploded since yesterday am!)Why isn't KC being provided with a public defender? She's young, unemployed, with no assets, so it seems she would qualify. Do they not exist in Florida?

 

[one_hooah_wife]

Consider this ... If Casey motions for a pro se defense and it is denied ... and if that denial is found unjustified, any subsequent conviction could be overturned by a higher court, as it was in California v. Dent and People v. Joseph both using Faretta as precedence. Now, it is also within Casey's rights to at any time, request additional counsel.

To be clear ... she could start out with a motion for pro per or pro se representation hoping that a judge will deny ... setting her up for at the very least an appeal being granted if she is convicted ... and if the judge calls her bluff and grants her motion for a pro se defense she can always ask for additional counsel later.

 

[debs]

Never, in a BA-zillion years with this girl represent herself, E-V-E-R.

Im that sure.

Although, if they get a change of venue to FUSION, perhaps.

At least she's had ample experience at this bar.

 

[Charge Them All]

I don't think she ever will, but I would love to see it opcorn:

 

[Kimi]

Don't have a link as this was posted on one of the Caylee supporter pages on Myspace...

George Anthony told Eyewitness News that Casey she would not represent herself. Her current attorney, Jose Baez, walked into court Wednesday along side another attorney. The two stood beside Casey when she made her first appearance.


The judge asked Baez if he will file a Notice of Appearance, in other words, if he would represent Casey, and he said he would. Casey's father George also spoke to Eyewitness News about his daughter's plans for representation in court.


"No, she's gonna assist her attorney and or attorneys, or people that are there to help her in any way she can and she's done that," he said.

 

[nancy botwin]

Thanks Nancy ... I appreciate you adding your thoughts and expertise to this topic. I worked for three years during law school for the Office of Friend of the Court ... filing a lot of amicus curiae motions and briefs for pro se cases then later I clerked for an appellate judge. It could actually be a pretty savvy move on Casey's part ... lots of times when a defendant chooses a pro se defense they are allowed quite a bit if leeway with the court ... even with Baez sitting in.

Ha!-- I thought I smelled a lawyer!-- and clerking for an appellate court judge!-- that's awesome experience. I don't think there's a high-five emoticon, and I always see the clapping one as somehow sarcastic, so I'll use this one :woohoo:

That said, I don't think that this will happen ... I look for some really high profile attorneys to swoop in any day and come to Miss Casey's rescue!

Gross! I hope not. I just logged in and saw there's a new thread on this topic, so I'll have to check it out.

Consider this ... If Casey motions for a pro se defense and it is denied ... and if that denial is found unjustified, any subsequent conviction could be overturned by a higher court, as it was in California v. Dent and People v. Joseph both using Faretta as precedence. Now, it is also within Casey's rights to at any time, request additional counsel.

To be clear ... she could start out with a motion for pro per or pro se representation hoping that a judge will deny ... setting her up for at the very least an appeal being granted if she is convicted ... and if the judge calls her bluff and grants her motion for a pro se defense she can always ask for additional counsel later.

I agree! re: at least filing a pro se motion. It seems like Casey's always running a game and it would make sense to imagine she got bored one day in Baez's office, started engaging some Law & Order fantasies and decided she could pull one over on the courts. (especially if it's true she could get the state to fund the defense's forensic testing). And truly, she wouldn't have anything to lose by just filing the motion to see what happens.
I keep recalling how Ted Bundy was so pleased with himself when he realized he could circumvent prison policy and marry his girlfriend in open court by just saying "I marry you. I marry you..." The legal system is a huge themepark to a lot of psychopaths.

I agree that she probably won't end up representing herself-- but it's a possibility and I would absolutely love to watch.

 

[Friptzap]

Are you sure it's represent herself? and not RESENT herself?

 

[WillenFan21]

I don't think it wil happen