Casey's Defense Team. What Now? #2

[Wudge]

Here's the indictment: http://www.wftv.com/download/2008/1014/17715453.pdf

Premediated murder one is felony murder.

Incorrect counselor.

A conviction of premeditated murder requires proof of intent. A conviction on felony murder does not require proof of intent. They are very different, indeed.

 

[Wudge]

"Capital" means that punishment by death is possible. Whether or not the State chooses to pursue death does not effect the classification of the offense.

Whether the facts lend themselves to a dual-theory prosecution is, of course, up for debate. The SA seems to think the facts are there. I tend to agree. But I do understand that others can and will see the evidence differently. FL law does, however, clearly afford for a dual-theory prosecution and jury instructions on both premeditation and felony murder and the indictment can and will allow the State to proceed as such at trial.

The point has been and remains that Casey has not been charged with felony murder. She has been charged with premeditated murder -- prosecutors dropped the death penalty in December.

The facts in this case do not support simultaneous charges -- both premeditated murder and felony murder.

To obtain murder one punishment in this case, prosecutors must select between a storyline of felony murder or a storyline that claims premeditation. The facts will not support both.

HTH

 

[Wudge]

Wudge, so you REALLY think KC is innocent? Do you like child killers running loose on our streets? If you really think she is innocent then thats your perogative but I can't believe you really do.

Casey is innocent. The law awards her that prejudice.

Moreover, based on the evidence we know of, I certainly do not see nor have I heard anyone put forth evidence that would support the charge of premeditation.

 

[Wudge]

But, you're not saying he wasn't guilty...just that based on what was presented you're surprised (?) that he was convicted?

By definition, insufficient evidence equals not guilty.

 

[gitana1]

Exactly! :clap:



Count 1: First Degree Murder (Capital)
Count 2: Aggravated Child Abuse

I've cited this case before because it clearly explains the application of Florida law re: dual-theory first degree murder prosecutions. In Leyva, the defendant's indictment also alleged first degree murder of premeditated design as Count 1, and aggravated child abuse in Count 2. The Appellate Court explains how the defendant can therefore be prosecuted and convicted of First Degree Murder via either/or a theory of First Degree Premeditated Murder or First Degree Felony Murder (via aggravated child abuse):

...Second, although the State was not required to disclose its theory of prosecution for first-degree murder in the indictment, it did so in this case. The State charged Leyva with first-degree murder by premeditation and/or felony murder and put Leyva on notice that its felony murder prosecution would be based upon the underlying felony of aggravated child abuse. Additionally, in Count II, the State told him that it intended to prove the aggravated child abuse by proving that he committed an aggravated battery upon and willfully tortured and maliciously punished this two-year-old child by beating and/or burning and/or biting him while committing an aggravated battery upon him. The State, therefore, provided Leyva with more information than it was required to provide, and clearly put him on notice as to the charges he was facing. Leyva v. FL 2008

Casey's going to face both theories of First Degree Murder at trial and she should prepare to defend against both. In addition, numerous legal pundits discussing the case have discussed how this case can and likely will be tried from the Felony Murder angle.

Makes sense. Excellent!

 

[gitana1]

Casey Anthony faces a total of seven counts:

First Degree Murder
Aggravated manslaughter of a child
Aggravated child abuse
Four counts of providing false information to a law enforcement officer

Although the State was not required to disclose its theory of prosecution for first-degree murder in the indictment, it did so in this case and have sucessfully prosecuted it in other cases.

The aggravated child abuse which results in death of a child IS 1st degree murder in Florida. I believe they filed both to make sure she didn't slip through the cracks, and she will have to defend BOTH charges if I am correct.

Aggravated child abuse resulting in a death, is premeditated murder under Florida statutes

I understand now thanks to Nancy Botwin, but the above appears to be incorrect. Aggravated child abuse leading to death is a type of first degree murder, coming under FL 782.04 (1)(a) (2) (h). Premediated murder is a completely different type of first degree murder coming under FL 782.04 (1) (a) (1).
What Nancy stated was that, if I understand her correctly, under a certain case, if a person is charged with both premeditated murder AND agrravted child abuse (not the kind leading to death), that person can be found guilty of first degree murder under 782.04 (1)(a) (2) (h) as well (aggravated child abuse leading to death), even if that was not originally charged. That makes sense. But, the two are completely diffferent first degree murder charges. Premeditated and aggravated child abuse leading to murder are separate charges. When a person is charged with aggravted child abuse leading to death, they are not then convicted of premeditated murder. However, if a person is charged with premeditated murder and ALSO aggravated child abuse, they can be convicted of murder one via aggravated child abuse leading, if there is not enough evidence for premeditated murder. That's great news and an awesome stratgey.

Also, any of the types of first degree murder under the statute are felonies, which is usual for murder.

 

[Wudge]

I understand now thanks to Nancy Botwin, but the above appears to be incorrect. Aggravated child abuse leading to death is a type of first degree murder, coming under FL 782.04 (1)(a) (2) (h). Premediated murder is a completely different type of first degree murder coming under FL 782.04 (1) (a) (1).
What Nancy stated was that, if I understand her correctly, under a certain case, if a person is charged with both premeditated murder AND agrravted child abuse (not the kind leading to death), that person can be found guilty of first degree murder under 782.04 (1)(a) (2) (h) as well (aggravated child abuse leading to death), even if that was not originally charged. That makes sense. But, the two are completely diffferent first degree murder charges. Premeditated and aggravated child abuse leading to murder are separate charges. When a person is charged with aggravted child abuse leading to death, they are not then convicted of premeditated murder. However, if a person is charged with premeditated murder and ALSO aggravated child abuse, they can be convicted of murder one via aggravated child abuse leading, if there is not enough evidence for premeditated murder. That's great news and an awesome stratgey.

Also, any of the types of first degree murder under the statute are felonies, which is usual for murder.

Correct.

A charge of felony murder differs greatly from a charge of a premeditation murder. People seem to have trouble with the concept. I suspect much of which likely stems from what many people consider to be flawed logic that leads to flawed law in states that have a felony murder statute.

Elsewhere, I offered a hypo to depict a situation that would be grounds for a felony murder charge. I will repost that hypo here.

REPOST

You have a lovely daughter who graduated from High School earlier that day. She was a straight A student throughout High School and received an academic scholarship to Princeton. For many years, she also gave freely of her time to many local charities and her church.

That night as she and her boyfriend drive by the local convenience store, her boyfriend notes that the owner of the convenience store, Mr. Parker, is not at his cash register. He tells your daughter to take the wheel, and he will run-in and try to grab a six-pack of beer before Mr. Parker returns to the front of the store.

He grabs a six-pack of beer and on his way out of the store, he also grabs a brand new laptop that Mr Parker just bought for $1,500. The boyfriend jumps into the car and your daughter speeds off.

However, Mr. Parker had come out of the backroom in time to see the boyfriend jump into the car with his laptop. He then rushed out of the store with the hope of seeing the license plate number, but he tripped over the door's threshold and stumbled and ultimately fell and impaled his heart on an exposed parking spike.

The store's video camera recorded what took place. LE arrests both your daughter and her boyfriend. The D.A. charges them with felony murder.

Did they plan and execute a premediated murder? No. Do they face penalty options attendant with murder one? Yes.

(No proof of intent is required, but the penalties are the same as for a premeditated murder.)

 

[gitana1]

Incorrect counselor.

A conviction of premeditated murder requires proof of intent. A conviction on felony murder does not require proof of intent. They are very different, indeed.

Wudge, seriously, I love ya' but you are stating something that does not make sense. As an attorney, I am aware that there are two major groupings of crimes. One is the category of misdemeanors, and the other is of felonies, which merely means a serious crime with a possible sentence over one year in duration. I cited and quoted the Florida statute that casey is charged under. She is charged with first degree murder under a theory of premeditation. Said statute has other types of first degree murder. They are all defined in that very statute as "murder in the first degree [which] constitutes a capital felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082." That's a direct quote my friend.
I know you like to run us attorney types around the table now and then and I don't mind that a bit. But, just because you say something is correct or incorrect does not make it so. The difference between felonies and misdemeanors is such a basic difference that there is really no argument here. In the U.S., either a crime is a misdemeanor or a felony. That's pretty much it. Misdemeanors are things like traffic tickets and smaller offenses. I don't mind a debate but for other people on here that may have no legal background at all, what you are saying may confuse them about what is reality and what is not. So, I will not debate this issue further with you. Still love ya' though!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Wudge]

Wudge, seriously, I love ya' but you are stating something that does not make sense. As an attorney, I am aware that there are two major groupings of crimes. One is the category of misdemeanors, and the other is of felonies, which merely means a serious crime with a possible sentence over one year in duration. I cited and quoted the Florida statute that casey is charged under. She is charged with first degree murder under a theory of premeditation. Said statute has other types of first degree murder. They are all defined in that very statute as "murder in the first degree [which] constitutes a capital felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082." That's a direct quote my friend.
I know you like to run us attorney types around the table now and then and I don't mind that a bit. But, just because you say something is correct or incorrect does not make it so. The difference between felonies and misdemeanors is such a basic difference that there is really no argument here. In the U.S., either a crime is a misdemeanor or a felony. That's pretty much it. Misdemeanors are things like traffic tickets and smaller offenses. I don't mind a debate but for other people on here that may have no legal background at all, what you are saying may confuse them about what is reality and what is not. So, I will not debate this issue further with you. Still love ya' though!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not defending felony murder statutes. They are anything but black letter law. However, in the states that have them, they do operate as I described; i.e., proof of intent is not required.

(see above hypo)

 

[Gypsy Road]

Thanks Wudge. I appreciate your insight here and great hypothetical to explain how a situation might be grounds for a charge of felony murder.

 

[gitana1]

I'm not defending felony murder statutes. They are anything but black letter law. However, in the states that have them, they do operate as I described; i.e. proof of intent is not required.

(see above hypo)

Wudge:
There are different classes of murder but murder is ALWAYS a felony. I think you may be confusing the term capital murder with what you are calling felony murder. Capital crimes are those that can result in the death penalty, but not always. Capital crimes are always felonies. Murder, no matter what kind or class, is always a felony. Felonies, are not always murder.
Any crime in the United States is either: 1) An infraction (usually traffic tickets and such), 2) A misdemeanor, also traffic crimes and other crimes that merit a sentence under one year, and; 3) Felonies. That's about all I have to say for now on this subject. Take care!

 

[karenz]

I'd start praying for a great flood at this point. Nothing will ever overcome her not reporting her daughter missing for 30 days. They will look at evidence and all that but no one can excuse that fact.

 

[Wudge]

Wudge:
There are different classes of murder but murder is ALWAYS a felony. I think you may be confusing the term capital murder with what you are calling capital murder. Capital crimes are those that can result in the death penalty, but not always. Capital crimes are always felonies. Murder, no matter what kind or class, is always a felony. Felonies, are not always murder.
Any crime in the United States is either: 1) An infraction (usually traffic tickets and such), 2) A misdemeanor, also traffic crimes and other crimes that merit a sentence under one year, and; 3) Felonies. That's about all I have to say for now on this subject. Take care!

No.

Counselor, I suspect you have not previously run into a case that had a felony murder charge. The legal concept behind the law is: in for a penny, in for billion.

Felony murder is real and can become very ugly. Though felonies are not always murder, a death that occurs as a result of the commission of a felony can result in the death penalty for all involved in states that have a felony murder statute -- again, proof of intent is not needed.

Note in my hypo that the girl thought he was simply going to grab a six-pack (misdemeanor), but her boyfriend also grabbed an expensive computer (felony).

http://felonymurderfl.org/resources/so-you-think-your-kids-are-safe/

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/us/04felony.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print

 

[Crafti]

If jose is smart he will ditch paying the high profiled medical examiners, anthropologists..etc., and hire some high profile Forensic Psychiatrists, psycholanalysts because the family dynamics suggest to me that casey is is the by-product of an extremely dysfunctional household.

Considering the fact that casey hid this pregnancy for 7 months suggests that she was sort of hoping it would go away. If Caylee was the result of a sexual encounter in which she was not a willing participant or something even worse than that I can see how that would mentally push her to the limit's of her already underdeveloped personality. If the rumors are true that cindy forced casey to keep Caylee than that would be a catalyst for disaster...as we see the end result.

She was unprepared emotionally and developmentally to take on such a task. Cindy and george should have seen that not only did casey not want to parent Caylee she was emotionally and financially incapable of doing it. I believe that casey did try to do the right thing by incorporating Jesse into this situation by saying he was the father. Unfortunately for her he also chose to have a paternity test and then her cover was blown and she no doubt could see that he had choices where Caylee was concerned and realized that he could leave at any moment and she would still be stuck with Caylee, so chose to cut her loses.

Cindy's desperate attempts to stand by casey now I think is her coming to the realization that her daughter was overwhelmed by the situation and that she missed all the opportunities to not only get casey help for her own emotional disturbance but to compassionately allow casey to say I can't do it mom, please just let me go.

I think that casey is sort of like a reflection of everything that is wrong in this family and with that in hand she may have some pretty strong mitigating circumstances.

Referenced your post for this line of thinking in general.

But CA didn't kill Caylee and won't be on trial. The family problems are not responsible for KC's actions, regardless of how bad they were or weren't. I have an overbearing mom, very controlling, always right, overprotective even now (I'm 44). "My mom is mean to me", or "I have a disfunctional family" is not a defense.

 

[maur33]

Referenced your post for this line of thinking in general.

But CA didn't kill Caylee and won't be on trial. The family problems are not responsible for KC's actions, regardless of how bad they were or weren't. I have an overbearing mom, very controlling, always right, overprotective even now (I'm 44). "My mom is mean to me", or "I have a disfunctional family" is not a defense.

I know that it's not a defense of what casey has done. I guess it's just that what we have here is literally an unprecedented view of the truly disturbing dysfunction of this family. And I feel that cindy and george created this monster.

These people are hiding something terrible and instead of trying to put the lid back on the family cookie jar they need to smash it and admit that their daughter is and has always been emotionally disturbed.

They failed Caylee in so many ways but having allowed her to be taken from the safety of her home with their disturbed daughter to me is beyond unbelieveable. They knew casey was a sick disturbed individual, how could leave this child in her care?

I don't know where I am going with this, I guess I just feel that casey is almost like frankenstein, she was created by the anthony's.

 

[Wudge]

Thanks Wudge. I appreciate your insight here and great hypothetical to explain how a situation might be grounds for a charge of felony murder.

(tip of my hat)

 

[TURBOTHINK]

I understand now thanks to Nancy Botwin, but the above appears to be incorrect. Aggravated child abuse leading to death is a type of first degree murder, coming under FL 782.04 (1)(a) (2) (h). Premediated murder is a completely different type of first degree murder coming under FL 782.04 (1) (a) (1).
What Nancy stated was that, if I understand her correctly, under a certain case, if a person is charged with both premeditated murder AND agrravted child abuse (not the kind leading to death), that person can be found guilty of first degree murder under 782.04 (1)(a) (2) (h) as well (aggravated child abuse leading to death), even if that was not originally charged. That makes sense. But, the two are completely diffferent first degree murder charges. Premeditated and aggravated child abuse leading to murder are separate charges. When a person is charged with aggravted child abuse leading to death, they are not then convicted of premeditated murder. However, if a person is charged with premeditated murder and ALSO aggravated child abuse, they can be convicted of murder one via aggravated child abuse leading, if there is not enough evidence for premeditated murder. That's great news and an awesome stratgey.

Also, any of the types of first degree murder under the statute are felonies, which is usual for murder.

Now, I am really confused...........I am not an attorney, but pretty good with statutes, but the difference in these confuse me. I am going to have to take your word on these.

I am going to ask my brother to explain it a little more in depth where I can understand it. Why would they charge her with both if they do not intend to prosecute both? If the premeditated does not work then will the aggravated child abuse kick in?

I am sure I am just over complicating this, but I am interested in how it works.

 

[Wudge]

Now, I am really confused...........I am not an attorney, but pretty good with statutes, but the difference in these confuse me. I am going to have to take your word on these.

I am going to ask my brother to explain it a little more in depth where I can understand it. Why would they charge her with both if they do not intend to prosecute both? If the premeditated does not work then will the aggravated child abuse kick in?

I am sure I am just over complicating this, but I am interested in how it works.

Now you are into which storyline (the evidence will show) will prosecutors tell to the jury. They can't do both.

 

[Jolynna]

I know that it's not a defense of what casey has done. I guess it's just that what we have here is literally an unprecedented view of the truly disturbing dysfunction of this family. And I feel that cindy and george created this monster.

These people are hiding something terrible and instead of trying to put the lid back on the family cookie jar they need to smash it and admit that their daughter is and has always been emotionally disturbed.

They failed Caylee in so many ways but having allowed her to be taken from the safety of her home with their disturbed daughter to me is beyond unbelieveable. They knew casey was a sick disturbed individual, how could leave this child in her care?

I don't know where I am going with this, I guess I just feel that casey is almost like frankenstein, she was created by the anthony's.

For every monster that chooses to kill her child that comes from a dysfunctional family there are hundreds from worse homes that strive to be different from their parents.

If we let everyone with a less than an ideal family background go free almost everyone would walk. That kind of thinking also doesn't give enough credit to those that suffer the most severe of severe abuse and THAT make better choices than Casey did.

Parents don't MAKE monsters. Monsters CHOOSE to be monsters. IMO

 

[countzero]

For every monster that chooses to kill her child that comes from a dysfunctional family there are hundreds from worse homes that strive to be different from their parents.

If we let everyone with a less than an ideal family background go free almost everyone would walk. That kind of thinking also doesn't give enough credit to those that suffer the most severe of severe abuse and THAT make better choices than Casey did.

Parents don't MAKE monsters. Monsters CHOOSE to be monsters. IMO

Bold by me. Also, some parents are monsters and the child becomes strong enough and determined enough not to follow that path. Yet, their child becomes a monster. Skipping a generation.