Is there any possibility of a Plea Deal on the Murder Charges?

[ThinkTank]

As far as I understand it - there are two types of "plea" that could possibly take place.

(1) The State offers the Defendant a plea deal, wherein she admits her guilt in detail, and agrees to a lesser sentence (less than death penalty).

(2) The Defendant changes her own plea from "Not Guilty" to "Guilty" of some crime (probably manslaughter or anything lesser than first degree murder, and puts herself at the mercy of the Judge for sentencing, and no trial is necessary.

The State has said as recently as the May 11, 2010 Hearing on the DP Motions, that there is NO "phantom plea deal" offered by the State, which the Defendant alluded to in her sworn affidavit, dated March 10, 2009, where she said Ashton was just angry because she would not take a plea deal for a crime she did not commit. I personally do not believe the State will offer the Defendant any type of plea deal.

So, it remains to be seen if the Defendant will change her own plea to GUILTY, as she did, at the last minute, in her check fraud trial......which I personally think she should do... and also believe she should not get any brownie points on sentencing for changing her plea at such a late date, after sooooooooooooo much time, effort, and EXPENSE to Florida tax payers.

 

[Themis]

As far as I understand it - there are two types of "plea" that could possibly take place.

(1) The State offers the Defendant a plea deal, wherein she admits her guilt in detail, and agrees to a lesser sentence (less than death penalty).

(2) The Defendant changes her own plea from "Not Guilty" to "Guilty" of some crime (probably manslaughter or anything lesser than first degree murder, and puts herself at the mercy of the Judge for sentencing, and no trial is necessary.

<Respectfully snipped.>

You are correct on the first one -- that the State or the Defendant makes an offer to the other side (either can initiate an offer) and the other side accepts. The result of the "deal" is that the charges may be modified and the plea from defendant is changed from not guilty to guilty. The deal may also include sentence caps. However, the deal between the State and Defendant must be approved and pronounced by the Court. The court doesn't always accept all plea deals or all parts of a plea deal. That is not a given fact.

The second one is incorrect. The defendant's only unilateral choice -- without the agreement and recommendation to support it from the State, is to "plead to the sheet." In other words, she would have to plead guilty to the charges as presently written and to the death sentence! Any other hoped for modification in the charges to a lesser included offense or other offense, changes to a possible maximum sentence or anything else would require the agreement and support of the State. The State also has a right to due process and to prove the charges the State's Attorney has decided to bring. Part of the powers of the Office of the State's Attorney is to decide what charges to prosecute and what sentence they will seek. The courts may not and do not usurp that power. Defendants cannot end run that power by unilaterally pleading to something else. So, there is no incentive for KC to "plead to the sheet" and incur the death sentence.

KC's choice without any State Attorney agreement is to "plead to the sheet" which she will not do, or to go to trial. No other options.

 

[ZsaZsa]

As far as I understand it - there are two types of "plea" that could possibly take place.

(1) The State offers the Defendant a plea deal, wherein she admits her guilt in detail, and agrees to a lesser sentence (less than death penalty).

(2) The Defendant changes her own plea from "Not Guilty" to "Guilty" of some crime (probably manslaughter or anything lesser than first degree murder, and puts herself at the mercy of the Judge for sentencing, and no trial is necessary.

The State has said as recently as the May 11, 2010 Hearing on the DP Motions, that there is NO "phantom plea deal" offered by the State, which the Defendant alluded to in her sworn affidavit, dated March 10, 2009, where she said Ashton was just angry because she would not take a plea deal for a crime she did not commit. I personally do not believe the State will offer the Defendant any type of plea deal.

So, it remains to be seen if the Defendant will change her own plea to GUILTY, as she did, at the last minute, in her check fraud trial......which I personally think she should do... and also believe she should not get any brownie points on sentencing for changing her plea at such a late date, after sooooooooooooo much time, effort, and EXPENSE to Florida tax payers.

I really hope none of that happens- I don't think I could bear to listen to CA when she explains that KC pleaded ONLY because she knew she could not get a fair trial.....:innocent:

 

[USARDOG]

At this stage in the game, and I do believe to ICA that this is all just some morbid game of "Who will break first?", it is too late to change her plea to guilty. I don't think she will ever admit to murdering poor little Caylee. I think she would rather sit on death row and have CA thinking that she was wrongly convicted than admit what she did and have CA know that she is a monster. ICA doesn't care what the world thinks, but she does care, a tiny smidgeon, about what CA is thinking. Like she told YM, she knew what her mom's reaction would be and that she would never forgive her. She will get either the DP or LWOP and she will sit behind bars and watch CA continue to travel that path she has chosen, trying to convince everyone and anyone that there REALLY is a nanny name Zenaida who stole Caylee and that ICA is a pawn in the evil LE's plan to ruin her life. JMO

I agree that this is a "game" for KC, but I believe CA knows the truth, but would prefer to pretend that there is a Zanny.

IMO CA can pretend either way, she can pretend KC was "railroaded," if she is found guilty, and she can pretend if KC pleads Guilty, that KC is pleading to something she didn't do because she is such a humanitarian that she wants to spare everyone the grief of the trial... "Mother of the Year" don't ya know! :banghead:

 

[justthinkin]

No way, Jose.

 

[TinPan]

Do you think that KCs' sober and stressed look could be from AL breaking the news to her before her departure, that, she most likely will be found guilty? She may have advised her to plead guilty, sending JB into a tailspin when he returned from his vacation.

 

[The_Flashlight]

I think if even both sides pushed a dream plea at her she wouldn't take it.

 

[countzero]

Do you think that KCs' sober and stressed look could be from AL breaking the news to her before her departure, that, she most likely will be found guilty? She may have advised her to plead guilty, sending JB into a tailspin when he returned from his vacation.

If I had to gander a guess, it would be your theory. I'd be interested in seeing the visitors log as to how close to the date of the hearing that the defense team saw her and who was it.

I don't believe AL sugar coated anything to ICA and that could be what precipitated her exit; that JB wants to draw this out as far as he can. It's also combination of many things as well. It seems out of character for AL to depart her "cause", but even the best can see the writing on the papers that this isn't going to end well for the JB crew.

Now with Themis's explanation that for ICA to plead guilty, ICA would also have to accept the penalty as well. ICA doesn't think more than 10 minutes at a time as we know so I agree with Themis's post.

My question would be if ICA did decide to make a plea of guilty, can the SAO change the sentence under certain conditions being met for the plea of guilty?

 

[tiff07]

At this stage in the game, and I do believe to ICA that this is all just some morbid game of "Who will break first?", it is too late to change her plea to guilty. I don't think she will ever admit to murdering poor little Caylee. I think she would rather sit on death row and have CA thinking that she was wrongly convicted than admit what she did and have CA know that she is a monster. ICA doesn't care what the world thinks, but she does care, a tiny smidgeon, about what CA is thinking. Like she told YM, she knew what her mom's reaction would be and that she would never forgive her. She will get either the DP or LWOP and she will sit behind bars and watch CA continue to travel that path she has chosen, trying to convince everyone and anyone that there REALLY is a nanny name Zenaida who stole Caylee and that ICA is a pawn in the evil LE's plan to ruin her life. JMO

After watching Caseys police interviews from way back I agree.

 

[Gnatcatcher]

I agree that this is a "game" for KC, but I believe CA knows the truth, but would prefer to pretend that there is a Zanny.

IMO CA can pretend either way, she can pretend KC was "railroaded," if she is found guilty, and she can pretend if KC pleads Guilty, that KC is pleading to something she didn't do because she is such a humanitarian that she wants to spare everyone the grief of the trial... "Mother of the Year" don't ya know! :banghead:

BBM - are they SERIOUSLY still going to go with the nanny bit, or do you think they're going to sidestep it at every turn?

In the check trial, I think she pleaded guilty at the last minute because there just was no way to prove she did NOT do it, with the handwriting on the checks, the video, et al. But with this, there is no video of the murder. So just before the verdict is announced, even if she did say "I did it", what's the point in that? She'll never be believed about the how/when/why, never, she'll downplay that, make it an accident she was afraid to tell, and still create new lies to cover all that. So why would the Judge then pass any lighter sentence on her?

You know, I was listening again yesterday to all 10 of the audio interviews, the one from her home on July 16 followed by the interviews at Universal. Even after she'd been called out and admitted she lied about working there, about Jeff and Juliet working there, the detectives did something really funny -- minutes later after they all agreed to get past that she lied about her job there, they were talking about how she communicated with Zanny when Casey would check up during the day on Caylee. The detective asked if she would talk to Zanny online and would she do that "from here, from work?" and she said "I just usually used my phone". He'd already established she didn't work there, but threw that right in there I guess to trick her into still telling the lie, and she did. So who CARES what she'd say if she plead guilty. Who cares.

 

[LambChop]

BBM - are they SERIOUSLY still going to go with the nanny bit, or do you think they're going to sidestep it at every turn?

In the check trial, I think she pleaded guilty at the last minute because there just was no way to prove she did NOT do it, with the handwriting on the checks, the video, et al. But with this, there is no video of the murder. So just before the verdict is announced, even if she did say "I did it", what's the point in that? She'll never be believed about the how/when/why, never, she'll downplay that, make it an accident she was afraid to tell, and still create new lies to cover all that. So why would the Judge then pass any lighter sentence on her?

You know, I was listening again yesterday to all 10 of the audio interviews, the one from her home on July 16 followed by the interviews at Universal. Even after she'd been called out and admitted she lied about working there, about Jeff and Juliet working there, the detectives did something really funny -- minutes later after they all agreed to get past that she lied about her job there, they were talking about how she communicated with Zanny when Casey would check up during the day on Caylee. The detective asked if she would talk to Zanny online and would she do that "from here, from work?" and she said "I just usually used my phone". He'd already established she didn't work there, but threw that right in there I guess to trick her into still telling the lie, and she did. So who CARES what she'd say if she plead guilty. Who cares.

No video of the murder site but there is a video. The video that is presently sealed from the day the remains were found. It is sealed because JS viewed it and he felt her actions spoke louder than her words.....

Time to release the tape.... jmo

 

[USARDOG]

BBM - are they SERIOUSLY still going to go with the nanny bit, or do you think they're going to sidestep it at every turn?

Your post edited for brevity.

I was thinking how CA will handle any results in her head. She knows the truth, but in her unique style, can look blue straight in the face, and call it green with no problem at all.

In a way I do feel for KC, in that living with CA must have been something straight out of "Texas Chain Saw Massacre." What comes out of her mouth in no way resembles the truth more times than not, and the terrible faces she makes!!! :sick: It does not surprise me that KC grew up to be such a prolific liar, she had a master for a teacher.

I still believe a plea is possible, they both can pretend they are doing it to save stress on the family, and CA can still cast her vote for KC, "Mother of the Year!"

 

[chefmom]

No video of the murder site but there is a video. The video that is presently sealed from the day the remains were found. It is sealed because JS viewed it and he felt her actions spoke louder than her words.....

Time to release the tape.... jmo

Oh, I soooo hope they release that tape! That's the day that I will be "sitting on a rainbow!" :dance:

 

[nums24]

Snipped from: http://www.wftv.com/news/24580616/detail.html

In court documents, the defense is attacking EquuSearch attorney and former attorney for George and Cindy Anthony, Mark NeJame.

They are contending he's in the case to promote his own interests, even approaching a national crime reporter named David Lohr about "ghost writing" a book for him about the case.

But perhaps even more startling, Lohr claims NeJame told him Casey Anthony was offered a plea deal; 10-years behind bars to show investigators where to find Caylee's remains. That's information that has never been made public before.

&#8220;You say there was never any plea offer?&#8221; WFTV reporter Jeff Deal asked NeJame.

&#8220;No, no, I'm not aware of one," he replied.

NeJame admits he spoke with Lohr and a reporter for the Orlando Sentinel about a book, but there's no truth to the plea deal.

WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer also believes a 10-year deal is unlikely. He says prosecutors would take a lot of heat for offering such a light sentence.

"I find it highly improbable a deal was even attempted prior to the discovery of the body," Sheaffer said.

The defense would have strongly urged Casey to take the deal knowing, she could get out in just eight and a half years.

In a letter to Mark NeJame, Cindy and George Anthony wrote that he has, &#8220;taken deliberate steps to prevent us from finding the truth.&#8221; (read letter)

NeJame told WFTV he isn't planning a book, but isn't ruling it out, and if he did, the money would go to charity.

 

[nums24]

Here is an interesting read:

Plea Bargaining in Capital Cases

http://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/0472099116-ch6.pdf

 

[logicalgirl]

Thanks Nums24, that was VERY interesting. I was particularly interested in the penalty part of the cases that described the offender's life and circumstances leading up to the trial. One in particular had a horrendous background, yet the jury was unmoved and sentenced the individual to death.

I don't know if ICA will plea - but I think she'd better. Her life prior to this murder was a cakewalk, and I expect the jury to laugh to themselves and shake their heads silently as the experts are testifying.

I just don't know if ICA is aware of how close to a death sentence she is skating.

 

[suepitzl]

IMO, Baez will milk this to the very end and then plea bargain it out, as the trial gets closer there will be much more media attention and possibly more $$$$$$$$ and certainly more face time.

 

[drip~drop]

IMO, Baez will milk this to the very end and then plea bargain it out, as the trial gets closer there will be much more media attention and possibly more $$$$$$$$ and certainly more face time.

I'm not so sure Baez would give up serveral weeks or months of pure face time.
Indeed the trial, the interviews, becoming a special comentater on shows like NG JVM GS oh and his books and movies and all the good stuff. You now, like his very own boat so he won't always have to hitch a ride with Geraldo.
I don't think he'd give that up without a fight..
jmo
let May arrive Quickly!:innocent:

 

[GolferChick]

IMO, Baez will milk this to the very end and then plea bargain it out, as the trial gets closer there will be much more media attention and possibly more $$$$$$$$ and certainly more face time.

Totally agree suepitzl...Baez cannot resist the media exposure - he's addicted and the defendant...she's in her own Casey Fantasyland and thinks after trial, she'll walk out and MTV will offer her a reality show. I don't care for criminal defense attorneys myself but I realize they do have a duty to their clients -- the sad part about this case is that Baez is so media hungry, I think he's incapable of making his client understand the realities of what she is facing -- it works wonderfully to let Casey continue to indulge in her fantasies as long as long as it gets him in front of the camera -- and the motherlode of media is coming to Orlando in May 2011...

 

[tlcya]

Gonna bottom line it here

ICA will never accept a plea deal even if it were offered. It is just NOT in her personality makeup. She will go to the chair convinced that manipulating her way out of this situation is just another couple of moves away.