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

[Searchfortruth]

The only plea I can see the state offering Casey is LWOP, nothing less. The only reason that I can imagine that they would do that is to save tax payer money.

Casey had her chance to come clean early on, tell where Caylee's body was in exchange for limited immunity. She knew the evidence with Caylee's remains would not help her case and so she remained quiet.

With all of the time, money the state has had to expend on this case, search for Caylee, etc...I don't think the state has any sympathy for the one who sat quietly, saying nothing, while the whole world wondered and worried where exactly Caylee's remains were. If Casey had come clean, expressed remorse, she might have been given some mercy by the court, not now though.

 

[JBean]

I realize this is a difficult concept even in a hypothetical, because the media has just about everyone, except the defense team, convinced that KC is guilty, but my question is
Hypothetically speaking,
If KC is innocent of the charges of premeditated murder, aggravated child abuse, and aggravated manslaughter of a child, as in somebody else was responsible for the death of Caylee, then would any plea resulting in jail time be acceptable?
In other words, even if she didn’t do it, is she in so much trouble that she would be better off accepting a plea deal and serving the time offered in the plea?

In this hypothetical, KC is innocent of the charges, and accepting a plea deal would not be justice for Caylee. It would however, allow the real murderer to roam free to murder other children. Accepting the plea deal in this hypothetical would appease the masses, and the much despised KC would be off the streets for a number of years.

I am asking this hypothetical question because there are some people who still believe KC is 100% innocent of the 3 main charges. Personally, I have some doubts as to whether she committed premeditated murder, but I think she is guilty of some wrongdoing, I’m just not sure to what extent that wrongdoing is.
As far as my answer to the hypothetical question, If I was accused of the premeditated murder of my child, and aggravated child abuse, and the aggravated manslaughter of my child, and I was 100% innocent, I would not find any plea deal acceptable. If I am innocent, I am innocent, and I would not care what the media, LE, or the prosecutor said. I would not plead guilty period.

Not a difficult concept at all,I just wasn't clear on the question.
No, if she is innocent of all charges, it would not be justice for anyone if she accepted a plea deal.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

TDA, the way you have worded this seems to imply that noone who is convinced that KC is guilty is capable of thinking, or willing to think, for themselves. I would contend that is statistically so highly improbable as to be virtually impossible.



I personally very strongly believe that noone should plead guilty to any charge of a crime they did not commit. Unless, as part of a plea deal, they are given the opportunity to plead guilty to a charge lesser than what they did commit, and thereby have a significantly better chance of receiving a less severe sentence than they were likely to receive should they plead guilty to a charge as serious as the crime they committed. They'd be a fool not to.

I believe, however, beyond the shadow of any reasonable doubt that Casey Anthony is guilty of the premeditated murder of her baby Caylee.

Just for the record, my personal opinion of the media is that the media is evil, a necessary evil, but I believe they spin the news in whatever way they can to sell. Good, bad or indifferent, they are in all things for the money.
As for implying that no one who is convinced that KC is guilty is capable of thinking for themselves, or willing to think for themselves, well, that would be saying I am not capable or willing to think for myself, since I think KC is guilty, I’m just not sure what she is guilty of. As I have mentioned in numerous posts in numerous threads, my opinion of WS and its members is just the opposite of that implication. I believe that sleuthers, for the most part take what the press says with a grain of salt, and thoroughly go through the docs, etc to formulate their opinions. When I say that the press has nearly everyone convinced that KC is guilty, I am talking about the overall general public, and according to that same press, you will find very few who think KC is innocent. So I think the press has convinced nearly everyone that KC is guilty. Nearly everyone does not spend the time and effort to go through the docs the way most do here at WS, so media hoopla does not carry the weight here it does in the general public.
My original hypothetical question is simply
If KC is innocent of the charges against her, would any plea involving jail time be acceptable?
I am curious what peoples response would be to this question.
I am still under the impression that the SA put the DP back on the table, to force the defense to accept a forthcoming plea deal, using the threat of death to their client. To date, the state does not know how, where, when or why Caylee is no longer with us. The state believes KC is who did it, but without answering the how, where, when, or why, in this circumstantial case, I can’t be certain KC is the who.
There is a ton of circumstantial evidence, I agree, but it is my opinion that there are certain things that are still questionable about a lot of that circumstantial evidence. That is why I think the state will still offer a plea deal at sometime in the future, before the trial starts. The stronger the case against her becomes, I think there will be less chance of a plea deal forthcoming. I just think there is enough questionable circumstantial evidence that a plea deal may still be in the works. As always, my entire post is moo.

 

[mysteriew]

Very well said, DA, and I agree with this. It was my impression that any deals that were offered were unacceptable because they hinged on Casey admitting guilt for something she didn't do. My concern also was if Casey ever had a chance at any degree of immunity early on, but didn't take it either because she was in la-la land, or she was still too scared to rat someone out, or because she falsely believed her lawyers would be able to get her acquitted without her having to rat out the other party, or whatever the case may be, that is such a shame. Or if she rejected any deal that she should have taken because her lawyers advised her against it. I hope this didn't happen, I was always concerned about this (especially not knowing if the defense was being paid or by whom.) I don't know if any appropriate deal was ever offered. The deal I did hear about at some point was one which the defense thought was unacceptable.
I also have my doubts that Casey committed pre-meditated murder, think she may be guilty of something but not sure of the extent. I think her silence (i.e. not reporting) most likely indicates guilt of something, I'm not sure of the extent, but her non-reporting could also have been due to other causes.
I am still concerned that JB's desire to keep her from talking (possibly because he thinks she may be guilty, even if she's not), and her propensity to live in a fantasy world, may have prevented her from taking some kind of deal when she should have or possibly even from fully explaining the situation to her defense team. I assume the defense team don't ask the defendant too many questions trying to ascertain the defendant's degree of involvement, just in case the defendant is guilty. Is that right? I also think it's possible that Casey's not sure what happened, and worry that not enough investigation was done to figure out what did happen. Excuse typos etc, tired fingers typing here

I struggled with the idea of premeditated murder also. Early on in the letter to the SA, JB hinted at an accident. But often a suspect will say the murder they committed was an accident, even though they actually meant to kill at the time. And if the SA's hypothetical is what happened, then it may all depend on what your version of premeditated is. How long does a person have to consider it in order for it to be premeditated? Once the tape was found on the remains, IMO it was premeditated.

Consider this. First the tape has to be located. Duct tape is very hard to tear. So three pieces of tape had to be torn. The first piece of tape was applied. Then the second. Then the third piece of tape. A person can do without oxygen for about 3 min. After 3 min. a person can often be revived. So the tape was torn, the tape was applied and the waiting was done. During any part of this, the tape could have been removed without harm. IMO even if there was no previous consideration to murder, the required preparation time and waiting time equals premeditation.

When Caylee was found, the tape was still around her head. I don't even see an attempt to revive as being in the picture. IMO even this scenario is premeditation. The premeditation period may have been short, but when she applied that second and third piece of tape, IMO she was premeditating death.

 

[sharpar]

State is not required to provide motive ( Why ). I firmly believe there is still evidence that has not been released and wont be until trial. I believe the evidence will prove beyond a shadow of doubt that KC murdered Caylee. She is guilty as charged and will be proven so by the state punished for her crimes by a jury of her peers. Once convicted she will be a blip on the news every now and then but her 15 minutes are nearly over.

 

[mysteriew]

State is not required to provide motive ( Why ). I firmly believe there is still evidence that has not been released and wont be until trial. I believe the evidence will prove beyond a shadow of doubt that KC murdered Caylee. She is guilty as charged and will be proven so by the state punished for her crimes by a jury of her peers. Once convicted she will be a blip on the news every now and then but her 15 minutes are nearly over.

The state may not have to prove motive, but I believe they have it. KC has exibited jealousy of Caylee since her arrest. She reportedly has indicated frustration that CA was acting like the mom and not her. She was reportedly angry at her mother. With the alleged dispute with CA she didn't have a sitter so that she could go out. And wasn't it reported that the boyfriend didn't really want kids around? Kids have been killed for less.

 

[BeanE]

Just for the record, my personal opinion of the media is that the media is evil, a necessary evil, but I believe they spin the news in whatever way they can to sell. Good, bad or indifferent, they are in all things for the money.
As for implying that no one who is convinced that KC is guilty is capable of thinking for themselves, or willing to think for themselves, well, that would be saying I am not capable or willing to think for myself, since I think KC is guilty, I’m just not sure what she is guilty of. As I have mentioned in numerous posts in numerous threads, my opinion of WS and its members is just the opposite of that implication. I believe that sleuthers, for the most part take what the press says with a grain of salt, and thoroughly go through the docs, etc to formulate their opinions. When I say that the press has nearly everyone convinced that KC is guilty, I am talking about the overall general public, and according to that same press, you will find very few who think KC is innocent. So I think the press has convinced nearly everyone that KC is guilty. Nearly everyone does not spend the time and effort to go through the docs the way most do here at WS, so media hoopla does not carry the weight here it does in the general public.

My original hypothetical question is simply
If KC is innocent of the charges against her, would any plea involving jail time be acceptable?

I am curious what peoples response would be to this question.
I am still under the impression that the SA put the DP back on the table, to force the defense to accept a forthcoming plea deal, using the threat of death to their client. To date, the state does not know how, where, when or why Caylee is no longer with us. The state believes KC is who did it, but without answering the how, where, when, or why, in this circumstantial case, I can’t be certain KC is the who.
There is a ton of circumstantial evidence, I agree, but it is my opinion that there are certain things that are still questionable about a lot of that circumstantial evidence. That is why I think the state will still offer a plea deal at sometime in the future, before the trial starts. The stronger the case against her becomes, I think there will be less chance of a plea deal forthcoming. I just think there is enough questionable circumstantial evidence that a plea deal may still be in the works. As always, my entire post is moo.

BBM. That's an easier question to answer.

If KC is innocent of the charges against her (versus legally not guilty because of evidence considerations) then no, no jail should be acceptable to anyone.

MOO

ETA: And I agree completely about the media spinning things any way they want/need in order to sell. It's become the name of the game, and responsible journalism is a thing of the past.

MOO

 

[PaulaF513]

I honestly do not see where there can another individual involved. The only person named by Casey is ZFG and that has been proven to be a farce. If anyone else could be dragged into her web of deceit, she'd have already done so.

That said, I can easily see how Caylee's death could have been brought about by a spontaneous action by Casey as opposed to pre-meditated murder. The DA's hypothesis the other day is most likely exactly how Caylee's death occurred. Casey wanted to be with TL, she probably taped Caylee's mouth not long before she was seen on the Blockbuster video. The question is, did she intend to seal the baby's nose as well? In my opinion, it doesn't matter...she is guilty of murder. She exhibited depraved indifference for Caylee's wellbeing that caused her death just as certainly as if she had shot her.

I don't believe she will cop a plea unless it excludes all responsibility for caylee's death being anything other than an accident. She will probably demand a sentence of time served.

Edited to add:

It is not going to be legally easy to prove pre-meditation. If 1st degree murder with a possible death penalty is the only charge, I think the DA's office is making an egotistical mistake.

 

[BeanE]

IIRC what the A's said regarding Casey having to have had help was early on while Caylee was still missing, it was in reference to their belief at that stage that Casey might be hiding Caylee somewhere with the help of a friend or associate, right?

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0904/23/ijvm.01.html

CINDY ANTHONY, MOTHER OF CASEY ANTHONY: Casey had to have had help, no matter what you think the scenario might be.


Looks to me like she meant no matter what John Allen thought the scenario might be. I believe OCSO thought as of Day 32 that the scenario might be that Caylee was dead and/or murdered.

MOO

Full audio of the message left for John Allen in July 2008 can be listened to here:
http://www.wftv.com/news/19255787/detail.html

 

[BeanE]

Very well said, DA, and I agree with this. It was my impression that any deals that were offered were unacceptable because they hinged on Casey admitting guilt for something she didn't do. My concern also was if Casey ever had a chance at any degree of immunity early on, but didn't take it either because she was in la-la land, or she was still too scared to rat someone out, or because she falsely believed her lawyers would be able to get her acquitted without her having to rat out the other party, or whatever the case may be, that is such a shame. Or if she rejected any deal that she should have taken because her lawyers advised her against it. I hope this didn't happen, I was always concerned about this (especially not knowing if the defense was being paid or by whom.) I don't know if any appropriate deal was ever offered. The deal I did hear about at some point was one which the defense thought was unacceptable.
I also have my doubts that Casey committed pre-meditated murder, think she may be guilty of something but not sure of the extent. I think her silence (i.e. not reporting) most likely indicates guilt of something, I'm not sure of the extent, but her non-reporting could also have been due to other causes.
I am still concerned that JB's desire to keep her from talking (possibly because he thinks she may be guilty, even if she's not), and her propensity to live in a fantasy world, may have prevented her from taking some kind of deal when she should have or possibly even from fully explaining the situation to her defense team. I assume the defense team don't ask the defendant too many questions trying to ascertain the defendant's degree of involvement, just in case the defendant is guilty. Is that right? I also think it's possible that Casey's not sure what happened, and worry that not enough investigation was done to figure out what did happen. Excuse typos etc, tired fingers typing here

I'm unsure about this too, Seagull. I've seen people say that about this and other cases, but I've also seen defense attorneys say they investigate their client's cases and question them about details. Baez is one of the attorneys I've seen say this. I recently posted the link to what he said in regards to something else. I'll see if I can find it.

I think it's an individual preference with defense attorneys, and may vary from case to case, as to whether or not they question their client, and how extensively they question them and investigate.

This would be a good question for defense attorney Richard Hornsby on his thread.

ETA: Found the link
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0807/23/ng.01.html

Two quotes from Baez, but the whole conversation with him is interesting for a number of reasons.

BAEZ: No, no. I`m under the belief and it`s my experience that, number one, you don`t always believe everything you read in a police report. You verify it and you do your job and you do your investigation. So that`s part of my investigation that I have not had the opportunity to do yet because my client is locked up. And the only one who can take me to where she took the police would be my client. And I`m hoping to have the opportunity to do that relatively shortly.

BAEZ: You know, again, that`s another -- that goes along the same lines. I don`t know if she actually told that to the police. I don`t know if that actually occurred the way they say it occurred. And I`d like to certainly look into that a little bit further. If there are audio recordings of their conversations, I`d like to be able to play them for my client and ask her about those things. But that is part of the process of defending a case. And that`s part of the things that I, unfortunately, because we`re not at the discovery phase, haven`t had the opportunity to do.

 

[BeanE]

I would love to see KC have to stand up in front of a judge and tell exactly what she did, in exchange for a life sentence. To see her accept responsibility for what she has done, in front of the court, her parents, friends and the public would make me feel that a life sentence was acceptable.

As to the question of whether she is a danger to society or not, I can't imagine allowing her to reproduce again. I'll take the opposite side here...assume she didn't do it...her actions that led up to the "kidnapping" and her actions while she was "kidnapped" would make me never want to see her procreate again, even if she didn't actually kill her daughter. Even if she didn't kill her daughter, her behavior was disgusting.

Remember that a guilty plea would require her to attest in open court to acknowledge what she did. I'd be OK with that.

BBM

with an IV drip of truth serum and hooked up to a polygraph

 

[CentralFLMama]

As a resident and taxpayer of Orlando FL, I want to see this go to trial. We spend insane amounts of money on BS in this county/state/country and this is WORTH IT. If she is offered a plea, it better not be less than LIFE with a full confession in open court.

 

[believe09]

I doubt she would go for LWOP-she might go for it if she was not required to plead guilty (meaning confess) and she received something like 40 or 50 years with parole as a possibility.

 

[believe09]

I think we have to put this in context-what does the average baby killer receive in FL for a sentence? And I mean this seriously....how about the dude who tossed the infant on the highway?

Personally, I might even offer her 25-life with a possibility of parole if she confessed everything.

She may rather die than say she did it however.

 

[Clock's Tickin]

KC Anthony will never confess to anything. She doesn't have it in her. This is why we will never know the truth of what really happened to Caylee. KC has been given every opportunity to confess to even an "accident" from day one while speaking to detectives and certainly her defense team has given her all of the options. She plays by her own set of rules and really believes that her lies will set her free.

 

[logicalgirl]

With the current charges does she even have the alternative of 25 - life? My understanding is the only options offered are LWOP or the DP? I could be confused of course:waitasec:

 

[tankgirl]

I think we have to put this in context-what does the average baby killer receive in FL for a sentence? And I mean this seriously....how about the dude who tossed the infant on the highway?

Personally, I might even offer her 25-life with a possibility of parole if she confessed everything.

She may rather die than say she did it however.

BBM, Hell on earth could very well be the best punishment. Impossible to live this stuff down.

 

[tankgirl]

..on second thought, perhaps I should take the previous statement back. A person who murders a child doesn't really deserve to be among people who don't know what he/she has done, doesn't even deserve a smile from a shop clerk or a passing stranger imo. Suffering with what one has done implies a conscience. It's a sad thing to think about and my own opinions conflict with one another on the subject, depending on the context. That said, I hope that a plea isn't accepted.

 

[amethyst221]

Just trying to wrap my head around this but why would it be in the State's best interest to offer another plea deal? They offered one already and KC refused to take it so it leaves me to wonder why the State might offer another?

Personally, I don't foresee the State offering another plea deal.

I don't think the state will do it, but I can at least see a reason or reasons why they might, in general. Getting to and through the trial will be a huge expense to the taxpayers. No matter how good your case, no jury trial is a sure thing. Finally, even if the case merits seeking the DP, the defendant is not the typical defendant who gets the DP. She is a young, allegedly attractive young Caucasian woman and could arguably get disparate treatment, despite heinousness, etc. So the outcome might well be LWOP, which probably would be what a plea bargain would seek. Still, not saying it will happen.

 

[amethyst221]

Not a difficult concept at all,I just wasn't clear on the question.
No, if she is innocent of all charges, it would not be justice for anyone if she accepted a plea deal.

I also don't think that a judge would accept a guilty plea from someone who attempted to say or even imply that she was only pleading guilty because everyone was biased against her though she was really innocent. A court would examine if it was knowing and voluntary and whether the defendant was admitting guilt.