Jeff Ashton -Retired? Not if he has anything to say about it! ;) ***Updated***

[Gypsy Road]

Since Ashton is also from Pinellas County, and was his sworn duty to take his job seriously, you could say thirteen lazy citizens from there failed little Caylee. Blatant chuckling is not an inappropriate smile or two.

Blatant chuckling was not done only by Ashton. Cheney, Baez, Casey and others ALL chuckled inappropriately during the trial. Just thought that needed pointing out! Ashton isn't the only one who acted unprofessionally at times.

 

[rossva]

IIRC, Before the trial started, Ashton stated he would delay his retirement till after the trial. Lawson Lamar knew that Ashton was gone when this trial was over. Therefore, he might have given Ashton a little more leaway to ignore his admonishments, and let the trial run it's course rather than dismiss him mid trial. After all, Ashton did have a good conviction rate while under his guidance.

If he were admonished 6 times he wouldn't have his job. If this were true LL just admitted he could not do his job. An employer usually does not warn an employee more than 3 times and action is taken.

The only person who lost in the trial was Caylee Anthony. Prosecutors do their job. The State did what they could to put their case on. The public outcry at the verdict tells the story. The only person legally responsible for Caylee was KC. It amazes me, too, when people become a victum how much their attitude changes towards the legal system. We all want the system to work but it is never a game, ever. jmo

 

[LambChop]

Blatant chuckling was not done only by Ashton. Cheney, Baez, Casey and others ALL chuckled inappropriately during the trial. Just thought that needed pointing out! Ashton isn't the only one who acted unprofessionally at times.

I don't think JA ever laughed at the defendant. That would have been inappropriate. I do think some of the expert witnesses were funny, even KC laughed. jmo

 

[LambChop]

IIRC, Before the trial started, Ashton stated he would delay his retirement till after the trial. Lawson Lamar knew that Ashton was gone when this trial was over. Therefore, he might have given Ashton a little more leaway to ignore his admonishments, and let the trial run it's course rather than dismiss him mid trial. After all, Ashton did have a good conviction rate while under his guidance.

If you can't control your employees it's a reflection on your ability to manage. Six times???? I think it's just politics as usual. jmo

 

[rossva]

True, but their chuckling did not help sway the jury to a not guilty verdict. And their acting unprofessionally could only hurt themselves; Ashtons allowed an alledged baby killer to go free.

Blatant chuckling was not done only by Ashton. Cheney, Baez, Casey and others ALL chuckled inappropriately during the trial. Just thought that needed pointing out! Ashton isn't the only one who acted unprofessionally at times.

 

[RANCH]

How? I am not trying to be combative, but what is he doing right now to get justice for Caylee? How is him probably becoming a millionaire a good thing? If she was convicted, I would send him a check, thanking him, but thats not what happened here. I guess I feel he needed to earn his new found money and thank his lucky stars he was in the right place at the right time to be given this case. The fact is, the jurors were offended by him, they may be idiots and misguided, but thats what these people saw and they FREED her! I hold him responsible that shes walking free right now, and there is no justice for Caylee no matter what because what happened to her was unfair, there is no fixing that ever. He had the power to put her away, and had he maintained a level of decorum, she would be on death row, I have no doubts. jmo

So your saying that the jury had a personal dislike of Jeff Ashton and that made them disregard the evidence and vote not guilty? If that's the case it makes the jury look more pathetic in my opinion. That would mean they acted like babies instead of doing their job. MOO.

 

[Chablis]

I don't think JA ever laughed at the defendant. That would have been inappropriate. I do think some of the expert witnesses were funny, even KC laughed. jmo

I thought it was inappropriate when he was talking to the jury about Maria Kish,or whatever her last name is. Was it appropriate when mentioning her to point out shes attractive? What did her having to be attractive have to do with anything? I thought it was sleazy. jmo

 

[Tugela]

No, they could not and would not do anything differently.

The state is there to present the facts to the jury and that is exactly what they did.

I think Ashton knew all along Baez would never be able to prove the ridiculous accusations Baez made. And Ashton was right.... JB never did.

What Jeff could not foresee is this jury would not make Baez prove anything he said in OS. The jury was so shallow that they just believed Baez cuz he said it.:innocent:

The state is there to try their case. They are not there to try the defense case. The state demolished the defense witnesses but still that was not enough for this jury who had already shutdown even listening to the evidence shortly after OS ended. They liked the 'story':innocent: Baez told and believed it without question even though it was full of more holes than swiss cheese and did not conform with the evidence presented.

IMO

Well he should have forseen it, if he was at all competent. The defendant does not have to prove anything, that is the responsibility of the state. Ashton would certainly know that. All the defence has to do is provide a reasonable alternative explanation.

The problem for the prosecution is that they could not prove three things:
1) How CA died or if she was killed at all?
2) Who did it?
3) Who had physical custody or was present when it happened?

They knew that full well, that any reasonable jury would ask those questions, and that the prosecution would not have adequate answers. But they went ahead with those charges anyway, basically tossing the dice that they could get enough of an emotional responce out of the jury to convict in the absence of evidence.

 

[3doglady]

Since Ashton is also from Pinellas County, and was his sworn duty to take his job seriously, you could say thirteen lazy citizens from there failed little Caylee. Blatant chuckling is not an inappropriate smile or two.

Both CM and JB were photographed blatantly laughing at their own witness, Dr. Spitz. Then there was the hearing when CM gave his famous finger sign to JA. JB had to apologize to JA in court for attacking him personally. When I compare the DT's behavior to JA, JA walks away smelling like a rose.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Well, I can begrudge Ashton, because I feel his demeanor in court was atrocious, and I hold him responsible for not getting a conviction, we heard what the jury thought about him, we saw his smiles and acting totally unprofessional. He has no right to make a buck off Caylee, yet I bet hes made more than the Anthonys put together, and Casey is free, and that makes me sick. What the heck was he laughing about, what was so funny? There is nothing funny about a psycho mother who left her child to rot. And the next day hes off to the Today show? What for? So he leaves to make some money and now that the case is old, hes going to go back to work? jmo

Anyone who supports Caylee instead of the Anthony family would be decrying Baez, the jury and Perry (for obvious reasons), not Ashton.

 

[Gypsy Road]

True, but their chuckling did not help sway the jury to a not guilty verdict. And their acting unprofessionally could only hurt themselves; Ashtons allowed an alledged baby killer to go free.

That's not exactly so. The jury members who have spoken out did not say that Ashton's chuckling swayed their vote. They said that could not convict on the evidence produced in court. I never heard any one of the jurors state that Ashton's chuckling swayed them into a not guilty verdict. If I'm wrong, please correct me and provide a link.

 

[LambChop]

That's not exactly so. The jury members who have spoken out did not say that Ashton's chuckling swayed their vote. They said that could not convict on the evidence produced in court. I never heard any one of the jurors state that Ashton's chuckling swayed them into a not guilty verdict. If I'm wrong, please correct me and provide a link.

I believe one of the judge's instructions were not to let the personalities of any of the attorneys to interfer with your judgment. I know it was one of the instructions I was given when I was on a jury. If the juror's were swayed by liking, or not liking, JA they disobeyed the judge's orders.

JA was not the only attorney trying this case. SA presents a case based on what they have and what the judge will allow them to present to the jury. If the jury does not buy the State's case it does not mean they did not do their job. For any jury it does not mean they didn't do their job (not talking about this jury). All it means is either defense produced evidence that was convincing (which this jury claims they were confused and defense provided no evidence JB claimed to have had in their opening statement) or there just was not enough evidence.

I also think what JA may have been trying to convey to the jury was do not judge KC on her appearance alone. Size and attractiveness have nothing to do with your ability to commit murder. jmo

 

[Dells]

Well, I can begrudge Ashton, because I feel his demeanor in court was atrocious, and I hold him responsible for not getting a conviction, we heard what the jury thought about him, we saw his smiles and acting totally unprofessional. He has no right to make a buck off Caylee, yet I bet hes made more than the Anthonys put together, and Casey is free, and that makes me sick. What the heck was he laughing about, what was so funny? There is nothing funny about a psycho mother who left her child to rot. And the next day hes off to the Today show? What for? So he leaves to make some money and now that the case is old, hes going to go back to work? jmo

Bolding by me....

What did the jury say about JA? I have watched the interviews that the jurors gave after the verdict, and I never saw them say anything negative about JA. They did say that they did not like casey anthony, and that they strongly suspected that casey did something bad to Caylee, but did not feel that the proof was there for them to convict her. I disagree w/them and think there was ample evidence to convict casey, but that it a discussion for another thread. In the interviews that I saw, the jurors said that they wished that they could have convicted her, that they wanted to convict her, that they thought she was a horrible person. Jennifer Ford even said that their not guilt verdict does not mean that casey anthony was innocent, and one of the possible scenarios was the casey did murder Caylee in cold blood. casey was far from exonerated of this crime, even from the jury.

 

[Dells]

If you can't control your employees it's a reflection on your ability to manage. Six times???? I think it's just politics as usual. jmo

I agree. Lawson Lamar is really in a pickle here. If he criticizes JA's handling of the casey anthony case, then he is only criticizing himself because he was the boss that ultimately was in charge.

 

[Spice]

True, but their chuckling did not help sway the jury to a not guilty verdict. And their acting unprofessionally could only hurt themselves; Ashtons allowed an alledged baby killer to go free.

Nah. I don't buy that for one single second. That joke of a jury allowed the baby killer to go free. Ashton did a stellar job. That jury did not ask for ONE piece of evidence for review yet they had the gumption and to ask for pretzels, games, and every other creature comfort they seemed to be focusing on for themselves. And judging from their interviews post verdict, they did NOT follow directions while "reviewing" the evidence handed to them. They were a joke of the highest order.

Ashton fought hard for Caylee and he is an amazing attorney. He chuckles once in the direction of the biggest bozo to ever see the inside of a courtroom and he is somehow to blame for this travesty of justice? He showed an incredible amount of restraint over the almost three years of tomfoolery and outright disgusting lies and games played by the defense.

They did not do their job and to blame Ashton for being somehow unlikeable and the cause for their absolutely lazy, disinterested, attitude is ignoring the fact that they did not take their duty as citizens seriously. They made a mockery out of the system with a lot of help from Jose. Ashton made the point that he was worried about the verdict when those 12 people had ZERO reaction to the pictures of Caylee's baby skull with duct tape wrapped around the mouth. How could they not have a reaction to that? What is wrong with them?

They did not care. They failed Caylee, not Ashton.

 

[Aedrys]

Nah. I don't buy that for one single second. That joke of a jury allowed the baby killer to go free. Ashton did a stellar job. That jury did not ask for ONE piece of evidence for review yet they had the gumption and to ask for pretzels, games, and every other creature comfort they seemed to be focusing on for themselves. And judging from their interviews post verdict, they did NOT follow directions while "reviewing" the evidence handed to them. They were a joke of the highest order.

Ashton fought hard for Caylee and he is an amazing attorney. He chuckles once in the direction of the biggest bozo to ever see the inside of a courtroom and he is somehow to blame for this travesty of justice? He showed an incredible amount of restraint over the almost three years of tomfoolery and outright disgusting lies and games played by the defense.

They did not do their job and to blame Ashton for being somehow unlikeable and the cause for their absolutely lazy, disinterested, attitude is ignoring the fact that they did not take their duty as citizens seriously. They made a mockery out of the system with a lot of help from Jose. Ashton made the point that he was worried about the verdict when those 12 people had ZERO reaction to the pictures of Caylee's baby skull with duct tape wrapped around the mouth. How could they not have a reaction to that? What is wrong with them?

They did not care. They failed Caylee, not Ashton.

Awesome post! This is exactly how I feel! Thank you! :great::rocker:

 

[NavySubMom]

Linda Drane-Burdick was the Prosecutor in charge of this whole case, as she works on child crimes, not JA. JA was brought in for the forensic evidence only, and he did a great job in presenting that evidence, and demolishing the DT's forensic witnesses. Too bad the jury did not understand that scientific forensic evidence at all, or understand cutting edge scientific research and its relevance in today's world. JA sat 2nd Chair, or whatever that is called. JA' understanding of the scientific evidence compared to JB's meager attempts to even ask coherent questions of these witnesses was so evident to me. JA's presentation of the forensic evidence was top notch. I think JA was very focused on the forensic evidence, and that is evident in some of the questions that have been asked him post-trial about the evidence of FCA's doings and goings on all around the case, Mr. George handled some of those items. You simply cannot put the blame for the loss all on JA for chuckling at JB during the closing arguments, that is absurd to me.

In any event, the jurors are instructed NOT to take into consideration AT ALL their personal feelings for ANY of the attorneys, let alone the foreman making a statement that he liked how JB said "good morning" to the jurors each day, where the State did not. Attorneys are not allowed to address the jurors in any fashion during a trial, anyway, except during opening and closing arguments.

IMO, MOO, etc.

IMO, MOO, etc.
ETA: this jury was focused on everything and anything except what they supposed to focus on in coming to their verdict, I can't say "deliberate" because I do not believe they even did that.

 

[jane the dood]

Linda Drane-Burdick was the Prosecutor in charge of this whole case, as she works on child crimes, not JA. JA was brought in for the forensic evidence only, and he did a great job in presenting that evidence, and demolishing the DT's forensic witnesses. Too bad the jury did not understand that scientific forensic evidence at all, or understand cutting edge scientific research and its relevance in today's world. JA sat 2nd Chair, or whatever that is called. JA' understanding of the scientific evidence compared to JB's meager attempts to even ask coherent questions of these witnesses was so evident to me. JA's presentation of the forensic evidence was top notch. I think JA was very focused on the forensic evidence, and that is evident in some of the questions that have been asked him post-trial about the evidence of FCA's doings and goings on all around the case, Mr. George handled some of those items. You simply cannot put the blame for the loss all on JA for chuckling at JB during the closing arguments, that is absurd to me.

In any event, the jurors are instructed NOT to take into consideration AT ALL their personal feelings for ANY of the attorneys, let alone the foreman making a statement that he liked how JB said "good morning" to the jurors each day, where the State did not. Attorneys are not allowed to address the jurors in any fashion during a trial, anyway, except during opening and closing arguments.

IMO, MOO, etc.

IMO, MOO, etc.
ETA: this jury was focused on everything and anything except what they supposed to focus on in coming to their verdict, I can't say "deliberate" because I do not believe they even did that.

The only thing this jury "deliberated" was whether or not to have pepperoni on their pizzas. What a lazy, inept, spineless group. Caylee deserved better.

 

[rosepetal1065]

The only thing this jury "deliberated" was whether or not to have pepperoni on their pizzas. What a lazy, inept, spineless group. Caylee deserved better.

and don't forget... what to order from the dessert lady..puke

 

[Thinker Belle]

ElectJeffAshton Jeff Ashton
Be sure to check out HLN at 11 pic.twitter.com/PWrP58W8