"G (Guilty)" vs "NG (Not Guilty)" Where do you stand?

[Wudge]

Not necessarily. The explanation might be such that it is best presented in court.

Correct.

 

[MAMABEAR]

The defense is asking for a later trial date so that Andrea Lyon has the opportunity to prepare for the case which is entirely reasonable, IMO. The later trial date has nothing to do with what the defense will be whatsoever. There may, in fact, be a reasonable explanation. We will have to wait and see at the trial.

The date was Oct. and that is 4 mo. I figured she was the smart one. Fore mo isn't long enough? I know she has been following this case and already has ideas or she wouldn't have hopped on board. Bet her students (at least some of them) have been assigned to this case many mos. ago. She could have done it in 4 mos. If she came on last mo then it would have been 5 mo. She is just letting the court know that she is the one in charge here. I will be glad when J.S. steps up and says he is the one in control.

I am so tired of all the pussy-footin around and walkin on egg shells with this farce. They just need to get on with it. I know---I know---lets dot all our I's and cross all our T's. Lets don't upset the defense. Pllllllllltttt!

 

[Balthazar]

Not buying it.If there was a reasonable explaination they would run with it.
The reason AL needs more time to prepare is because the defense wants to try and find ways to pick at the overwhelming evidence of KC's guilt.Yes,AL teaches ,and that is interferring in the time she has to devote to KC's case.So be it.The judge is bending over backwards to avoid an appeal.It's what they do.
But if there truly was a reasonable explanation the defense would be all to happy to get into court and clear this up.
ALSO the farther away we get from the incident ,the better it is for the defense and they know it.They hope for lost evidence and faulty memories after so much time.Makes their job easier.
So I believe the stallig has EVERYTHING to do with what their defense is ,or isn't.Or the fact they don't have one ,yet.

Using Andrea Lyon's need for time to prepare for Casey's trial as another reason to assume Casey is guilty is a ridiculous assumption. Using your logic, if that were true, you would have to assume that in every single case where the attorney needs time to prepare and asks for a postponement it is because the client is guilty.

 

[The Eunice Burns]

I never said nor implied that more merit has to be given to "any" defense explanation. What has been most discussed is the instruction that only relates to a particular condition; i.e., when the prosecution and the defense both provide reasonable explanations.

HTH

I know, Wudge. I was just having fun w/ ya; that's why I put that-- :crazy: -- at the end of my post.

However, I respect your knowledge. But OTOH, I cannot comprehend what reasonable explanation could be offered by KC's defense that would resonate with a jury, knowing what the SA has released thus far.

 

[Balthazar]

The date was Oct. and that is 4 mo. I figured she was the smart one. Fore mo isn't long enough? I know she has been following this case and already has ideas or she wouldn't have hopped on board. Bet her students (at least some of them) have been assigned to this case many mos. ago. She could have done it in 4 mos. If she came on last mo then it would have been 5 mo. She is just letting the court know that she is the one in charge here. I will be glad when J.S. steps up and says he is the one in control.

I am so tired of all the pussy-footin around and walkin on egg shells with this farce. They just need to get on with it. I know---I know---lets dot all our I's and cross all our T's. Lets don't upset the defense. Pllllllllltttt!

4 months is hardly any time at all to prepare for a case in which the defendant could potentially get the death penalty. There is not only a great deal of forensic evidence to be sifted through, there are thousands of pages of transcripts. Perhaps you have not read them all, but even for me, and I read unusually fast, it took a long, long time to get through them - sometimes whole weekends for one set of documents - and I wasn't taking notes or analyzing them in order to plan the defense and how to question witnesses which is what the attorneys are doing. This type of work is very tedious and requires a lot of hours. Andrea Lyon has a massive research project on her hands and it is fair and reasonable for her to be given adequate time to study the case, formulate her strategy and approach and structure the defense case. And beyond what we have seen, the defense may well have additional evidence, documents and transcripts which must fit into the structure of the defense story.

IMO, it's not a question of not "upsetting the defense" but of simply allowing adequate time for preparation to insure that this is a fair trial.

 

[MAMABEAR]

4 months is hardly any time at all to prepare for a case in which the defendant could potentially get the death penalty. There is not only a great deal of forensic evidence to be sifted through, there are thousands of pages of transcripts. Perhaps you have not read them all, but even for me, and I read unusually fast, it took a long, long time to get through them - sometimes whole weekends for one set of documents - and I wasn't taking notes or analyzing them in order to plan the defense and how to question witnesses which is what the attorneys are doing. This type of work is very tedious and requires a lot of hours. Andrea Lyon has a massive research project on her hands and it is fair and reasonable for her to be given adequate time to study the case, formulate her strategy and approach and structure the defense case. And beyond what we have seen, the defense may well have additional evidence, documents and transcripts which must fit into the structure of the defense story.

IMO, it's not a question of not "upsetting the defense" but of simply allowing adequate time for preparation to insure that this is a fair trial.

Well, by all means---let them git on with it. This is the last time they will git away with delays. It's all over but the cryin and I'm sure little miss prissy will be doin alot of that---cuz she is "GUILTY"

 

[Wudge]

I know, Wudge. I was just having fun w/ ya; that's why I put that-- :crazy: -- at the end of my post.

However, I respect your knowledge. But OTOH, I cannot comprehend what reasonable explanation could be offered by KC's defense that would resonate with a jury, knowing what the SA has released thus far.

(Just for fun)

Consider what might transpire if the defense's opening statement simply said: "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the evidence will show that Caylee died from an accident." And for their entire case-in-chief, the defense calls but one witness to the stand, Casey. Who admits she lied on a number of things, but only did so because she was shocked senseless when she found Caylee dead and felt so unbelievably horrible. Casey then goes on to tell an entirely plausible story of accidental death that the prosecutors find jurors are nodding their heads up and down on.

Prosecutors savagely cross-examine Casey, but cannot shake her tour-de-force testimony. And the defense immediately rests its case.

Prosecutors assess their premediation charge to be, at the very least, troubled. Though they do have a manslaughter charge for the jury to consider as well as the premediated murder charge, felony murder is not a charge.

 

[Brini]

(Just for fun)

Consider what might transpire if the defense's opening statement simply said: "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the evidence will show that Caylee died from an accident." And for their entire case-in-chief, the defense calls but one witness to the stand, Casey. Who admits she lied on a number of things, but only did so because she was shocked senseless when she found Caylee dead and felt so unbelievably horrible. Casey then goes on to tell an entirely plausible story of accidental death that the prosecutors find jurors are nodding their heads up and down on.

Prosecutors savagely cross-examine Casey, but cannot shake her tour-de-force testimony. And the defense immediately rests its case.

Prosecutors assess their premediation charge to be, at the very least, troubled. Though they do have a manslaughter charge for the jury to consider as well as the premediated murder charge, felony murder is not a charge.

If she's smart, that's exactly what she'll do. Barring the fact that there were no signs and symptoms of shock, I think it's likely that 12 people could be found, who would buy it.

"Unbelievably horrible" would be tough to explain, given that she was out renting vids with the b.f. du jour, that very night. But, some people might buy that, too.

The SODDI thing simply will not fly.

She'd REALLY have to be coached, though, to come across well on the stand.

 

[The Eunice Burns]

(Just for fun)

Consider what might transpire if the defense's opening statement simply said: "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the evidence will show that Caylee died from an accident." And for their entire case-in-chief, the defense calls but one witness to the stand, Casey. Who admits she lied on a number of things, but only did so because she was shocked senseless when she found Caylee dead and felt so unbelievably horrible. Casey then goes on to tell an entirely plausible story of accidental death that the prosecutors find jurors are nodding their heads up and down on.
Prosecutors savagely cross-examine Casey, but cannot shake her tour-de-force testimony. And the defense immediately rests its case.

Prosecutors assess their premediation charge to be, at the very least, troubled. Though they do have a manslaughter charge for the jury to consider as well as the premediated murder charge, felony murder is not a charge.

BBM This is the point that it will come off the rails, so to speak. KC testifying to a "plausible" explanation and in a truthful manner? Not her forte. I've said it before, but she shot the moon, she over reached w/ these wild lies and stories she made up. Way too much. She forgot the old credo, "Less Is More". If she had wanted to go the way of an accident, she should have never gone the "Zanny" route. I don't think the jury would believe her "plausible" explanation after all the evidence regarding her extravagant and outrageous lying is laid out for them.

 

[Balthazar]

BBM This is the point that it will come off the rails, so to speak. KC testifying to a "plausible" explanation and in a truthful manner? Not her forte. I've said it before, but she shot the moon, she over reached w/ these wild lies and stories she made up. Way too much. She forgot the old credo, "Less Is More". If she had wanted to go the way of an accident, she should have never gone the "Zanny" route. I don't think the jury would believe her "plausible" explanation after all the evidence regarding her extravagant and outrageous lying is laid out for them.

What if Casey says not only was it an accident, but she made up the wild tales because she is afraid of her mother who had tried to strangle her and her father who has been violent in the past? What if Casey says she is more afraid of her parents than the police? There is evidence to support such a claim. Casey was clearly hiding out from her parents.

 

[MaedchenX]

As much as I would like to see it happen, I doubt we will ever see Casey testify. I do not think she would hold up well under cross examination; the dismissive attitude, the tell tale "fruschtration" when challenged, the inability to conjure any concern for anyone but herself, and the anger at not having everyone fall at her feet (just going on my perception of the released interviews and family jail visit video of course) will all work against her believability. I think the defense is well aware of the challenges that having Casey testify would pose, but we shall see.

As for guilt, yes, I think Casey is guilty of purposefully killing her child.

 

[cecybeans]

(Just for fun)

Consider what might transpire if the defense's opening statement simply said: "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the evidence will show that Caylee died from an accident." And for their entire case-in-chief, the defense calls but one witness to the stand, Casey. Who admits she lied on a number of things, but only did so because she was shocked senseless when she found Caylee dead and felt so unbelievably horrible. Casey then goes on to tell an entirely plausible story of accidental death that the prosecutors find jurors are nodding their heads up and down on.

Prosecutors savagely cross-examine Casey, but cannot shake her tour-de-force testimony. And the defense immediately rests its case.

Prosecutors assess their premediation charge to be, at the very least, troubled. Though they do have a manslaughter charge for the jury to consider as well as the premediated murder charge, felony murder is not a charge.

Since you are the expert, please help me understand if I am wrong. I was under the impression that an accidental death can be considered felony manslaughter automatically if the child is under 12 and the circumstances if death are either from neglect or during the commission of a felony.

The fact that KC did not report any type of accident in any way shape or form (and since she is not a qualified medical professional to have pronounced her dead immediately, it is logical to assume that if KC had no doubt Caylee was dead, then some time had to have passed in order for her to have been sure - a delay which would certainly qualify for neglect in the case of a toddler being unsupervised by an adult for so long that the fact of death was unquestionable).

I have always maintained that the felony manslaughter charge might be the only charge that could hold up if we have no "smoking gun" evidence of premeditation. But I also imagine that, even if Murder One/LWOP is not the sentence (and I feel pretty confident AL may be able to pull the DP off the table) - I would think that at sentencing KC would get the maximum allowable simply because of her negligent behavior in not reporting an accident, her elaborate machinations to cover up her crime and deflect attention to Caylee's "missing" status with complex lies, her complete lack of affect or remorse while her child was presumed missing, and her subsequent crime spree within weeks of Caylee's "accidental death", not to mention the almost joyful way she not only ignored the fact Caylee was gone, but the callous way in which she erased her pictures from her computer and managed to steal several hundred dollars to pay for what can only be considered a celebratory tattoo. These are not the actions of a mother confused or traumatized by the accidental death of a child and I'm pretty confident that mental health experts would eliminate any condition that would mitigate this to the point that a jury would let her off with a minimum sentence if a personality disorder of some sort were the case.

In addition, her obvious contempt and anger at being arrested "on a whim", her continuous angry refusal to cooperate with LE, to lie and change stories and to create an obviously premeditated and elaborate escape plan during the cover up (complete with abandoned car, imaginary nanny and insistenc on a variety of implausible and wildly different alternate scapegoats), her little fraud/forgery crime spree with her friend's checkbook, will not make any jury or judge sympathetic to mercy at the sentencing phase (nor, unfortunately have the actions of her parents all along done much to help either). She does not behave like a traumatized mother and never has - she behaves like a self-absorbed petty thief with little regard for others whose criminal behavior may have escalated after her daughter died, but certainly existed and was documented long before.

 

[The Eunice Burns]

What if Casey says not only was it an accident, but she made up the wild tales because she is afraid of her mother who had tried to strangle her and her father who has been violent in the past? What if Casey says she is more afraid of her parents than the police? There is evidence to support such a claim. Casey was clearly hiding out from her parents.

There is nothing that demonstrates KC was hiding from them out of fear. Her actions after 6/15 (and before actually w/ the stealing from CA and her grandparents) belie that she was afraid of her parents. Their demeanor w/ her during the jail visits shows she was in the driver's seat, she wasn't afraid of them. She was raging at them while they were trying to soothe her down and keep from making her anymore angry. *You're the CEO, you're in charge*....If she was afraid of them and had reason to fear them, GA wouldn't have acted like he was subservient to her during those visits. A fearful person would have truly hid out, not gotten a tat, gone girl on girl dancing, shopping, and be bopping around Orlando. She wasn't "in hiding", she just didn't want to be found.

 

[The Eunice Burns]

Since you are the expert, please help me understand if I am wrong. I was under the impression that an accidental death can be considered felony manslaughter automatically if the child is under 12 and the circumstances if death are either from neglect or during the commission of a felony.

The fact that KC did not report any type of accident in any way shape or form (and since she is not a qualified medical professional to have pronounced her dead immediately, it is logical to assume that if KC had no doubt Caylee was dead, then some time had to have passed in order for her to have been sure - a delay which would certainly qualify for neglect in the case of a toddler being unsupervised by an adult for so long that the fact of death was unquestionable).

I have always maintained that the felony manslaughter charge might be the only charge that could hold up if we have no "smoking gun" evidence of premeditation. But I also imagine that, even if Murder One/LWOP is not the sentence (and I feel pretty confident AL may be able to pull the DP off the table) - I would think that at sentencing KC would get the maximum allowable simply because of her negligent behavior in not reporting an accident, her elaborate machinations to cover up her crime and deflect attention to Caylee's "missing" status with complex lies, her complete lack of affect or remorse while her child was presumed missing, and her subsequent crime spree within weeks of Caylee's "accidental death", not to mention the almost joyful way she not only ignored the fact Caylee was gone, but the callous way in which she erased her pictures from her computer and managed to steal several hundred dollars to pay for what can only be considered a celebratory tattoo. These are not the actions of a mother confused or traumatized by the accidental death of a child and I'm pretty confident that mental health experts would eliminate any condition that would mitigate this to the point that a jury would let her off with a minimum sentence if a personality disorder of some sort were the case.

In addition, her obvious contempt and anger at being arrested "on a whim", her continuous angry refusal to cooperate with LE, to lie and change stories and to create an obviously premeditated and elaborate escape plan during the cover up (complete with abandoned car, imaginary nanny and insistenc on a variety of implausible and wildly different alternate scapegoats), her little fraud/forgery crime spree with her friend's checkbook, will not make any jury or judge sympathetic to mercy at the sentencing phase (nor, unfortunately have the actions of her parents all along done much to help either). She does not behave like a traumatized mother and never has - she behaves like a self-absorbed petty thief with little regard for others whose criminal behavior may have escalated after her daughter died, but certainly existed and was documented long before.

:clap: Excellent.......BBM Hard to pick out my favorite sentence, but I think that bolded part ties it all up w/ a big red bow.

 

[MaedchenX]

What if Casey says not only was it an accident, but she made up the wild tales because she is afraid of her mother who had tried to strangle her and her father who has been violent in the past? What if Casey says she is more afraid of her parents than the police? There is evidence to support such a claim. Casey was clearly hiding out from her parents.

I don't disagree that the defense will in some way play up the contentious home situation, particularly the relationship with Cindy either during the trial or sentencing phase. However, in that case Casey really miscalculated her parent's support. They have been her greatest defenders since day o.. 31, even after the smell in the vehicle, the lies, the theft. She certainly felt safe enough to return home after being bailed out, so safe she even slept in bed with Cindy if I am not mistaken.

 

[Tuba]

To hear Lee tell it, KC is pugnacious and physical herself. I consider the habit of cussing the parents out, in their face and in a fury, provocative. She does that to both Cindy and George and we have those verbal assaults on tape. I don't think she is afraid of bodily harm from either of them but she seems to enjoy pushing them to their absolute limits. I do think she is morbidly fearful of Cindy and George seeing her as the killer of their granddaughter.

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

I was under the impression that an accidental death can be considered felony manslaughter automatically if the child is under 12 and the circumstances if death are either from neglect or during the commission of a felony.

SNIP

On the legal procedures thread, Themis's last post addresses the possibility of felony murder being a lesser included charge. I avoided going there, because Florida has a three-tier approach to felony murder that is more complex than most other states. Yet, I think most people who followed that discussion finally got their arms around the concept of felony murder, which often has people shaking their heads. On that call, I was satisfied with leaving well enough alone (end of that rat hole for me).

I would never say that felony murder is logically a lesser charge of premeditated murder. But laws are not always logical.

The following is but a tale. A male defendant is charged with premeditated murder (carries the death penalty) and manslaughter (felony gross negligence). In turn, he is tried. Unfortunately, his parents arrive too late to hear the jury's verdict. But as they run up the stairs of the court, they meet his attorney coming out of the courthouse.

The attorney tells them that he has good news and bad news. The good news is that the jury did not find their son guilty of premediated murder. The bad news is that they found him guilty on the lesser charge of manslaughter, but on that "lesser" charge, felony murder is automatically attached and the punishment is still death.

 

[MissJames]

Using Andrea Lyon's need for time to prepare for Casey's trial as another reason to assume Casey is guilty is a ridiculous assumption. Using your logic, if that were true, you would have to assume that in every single case where the attorney needs time to prepare and asks for a postponement it is because the client is guilty.

I really don't need a defense delay to convince me KC is quilty.There IS an advantage to the defense when trials are delayed over and over.That's why the delays are coming from the defense side.
The prosecution bears a much higher burden of proof,but it is the defense asking for more time.
Again,IMO if they had a reasonable explanation why not got to court and get it out there.
I believe there is so much evidence indicating Casey killed Caylee that the defense needs the time to go through every piece of it and figure out how to pick at it.Also,again,it's in their interest to delay,delay,delay.

 

[Jolynna]

If she's smart, that's exactly what she'll do. Barring the fact that there were no signs and symptoms of shock, I think it's likely that 12 people could be found, who would buy it.

"Unbelievably horrible" would be tough to explain, given that she was out renting vids with the b.f. du jour, that very night. But, some people might buy that, too.

The SODDI thing simply will not fly.

She'd REALLY have to be coached, though, to come across well on the stand.

I agree. My brother thinks it had to have been an accident. He hasn't read a single interview, but she's cute. No motive...could have left the baby with her mom...

I'm not sure how she's going to pull of the part where she says she was so shocked into "senselessness & felt so horrible" that she wrapped up half of Caylee's face in duct tape and then pitched Caylee in the car trunk and/or sandbox.

The duct tape is a big snag.

Even IF (and you know I don't believe it), but still IF she had had to seal up her dead baby's face to stop "leakage", you'd think the surprise accident and taping up your little girl's face would rattle a "mother".

Yet the defendant is videotaped that very day, arm in arm with her new boyfriend. But even by Blockbuster, she's already coherently managed to cover her fanny and called the grandma to make sure nobody would be setting Caylee's plates on the dinner table. "No worries mom. Caylee and I are off bonding."

And then she KC was so upset she fell to the ground sobbing...oops nix that...put "mama" doll in Caylee's arms so she wouldn't be lonely...oops that didn't cross KC's mind in 31 days...hmmm...oh yeah, she ugly coped note to self to look up definition)...she watched grisley murder movies. Then she made mad passionate love and wore Tony out so much he missed school the next day.

And how did KC showed her senselessness? She ran by her parents to get a shovel the next day. Ok...she downloaded the picture with Tony to her photobucket. Then she posted on all the social sites to all of her friends to remind them Friday night was White Night at Fusian.

If anything her functioning was higher. She was calling Cindy every day to make sure nobody panicked and did something rash, she worked (managing shot girls), cooked, cleaned house, did laundry, shopped for Tony and his roommates and had an active social life.

She also manages to cover her fanny every step of the way. Casey wasn't in shock. Her crime was disorganized because Casey is naturally one of those people who doesn't put out fires until they blaze.

JMO

 

[Balthazar]

I really don't need a defense delay to convince me KC is quilty.There IS an advantage to the defense when trials are delayed over and over.That's why the delays are coming from the defense side.
The prosecution bears a much higher burden of proof,but it is the defense asking for more time.
Again,IMO if they had a reasonable explanation why not got to court and get it out there.
I believe there is so much evidence indicating Casey killed Caylee that the defense needs the time to go through every piece of it and figure out how to pick at it.Also,again,it's in their interest to delay,delay,delay.

It is in EVERYONE's best interest for the trial to be delayed so that the defense may be sufficiently prepared, otherwise there could be a mistrial. If you look at other notorious cases, you will see that there is often a similar delay. Patience.