Kronk Reveals 1990's Expunged Arrest

[Jolynna]

Does this create suspicion in any of your minds?
To me it is a big nothing. I am not excited about it nor does it move me in any way.
It almost adds to the comedic element of this case. Another poster posted on the other thread that "another clown just squeezed out of the car" and I think that is a perfect analogy.

It creates NO suspicion as long as nothing ties RK to association with any Anthony.

Ideally only those with "Mother Theresa" pasts would stumble across evidence. But, even if JK is a one-time "Jack the Ripper" as long as JK didn't assist the killer and wasn't aiding her, his past is "what it is".

Really, really bad guys (which I do NOT believe RK is) are called as witnesses all the time. RK just has to say why he was in the area and made the phone calls in August plus what he found the day he stumbled over Caylee's skull.

He can only be impeached on that limited scope and nothing else can even be brought up unless the defense can prove to a judge they have information that relates to *this* case. (Or the prosecutor accidently opens a door)

JMO

 

[radio]

It creates NO suspicion as long as nothing ties RK to association with any Anthony.

Ideally only those with "Mother Theresa" pasts would stumble across evidence. But, even if JK is a one-time "Jack the Ripper" as long as JK didn't assist the killer and wasn't aiding her, his past is "what it is".

Really, really bad guys (which I do NOT believe RK is) testify against each other all the time. RK just has to say why he was in the area and made the phone calls in August plus what he found the day he stumbled over Caylee's skull.

He can only be impeached on that limited scope and nothing else can even be brought up unless the defense can prove to a judge they have information that relates to *this* case. (Or the prosecutor accidently opens a door)

JMO

:floorlaugh::rolling::rolling::floorlaugh:

OT

 

[amysmom]

If the defense even attempts to go there I ASSUME it will be ruled inadmissable by the Judge beforehand and the jury will never even hear a word about it. My assumption.

I ASSUMED the same thing last night & asked for other POV's..I never saw any replies before I had to sign off so I'm glad you brought it up again

 

[maur33]

The defense will talk with his girlfriend, then decide.

And then decide what, exactly?

Tie him to THIS crime, that's what this trial will be about. He has offered this information on his own and the fact that he brought it up adds to his credibility as a witness.

What is jose going to do, get this man on the stand and then accuse him of murder, doubt it..the SA's wouldn't just sit there and allow that to happen.

And since jose knows casey murdered her daughter if he even so much as breathes the name of an innocent party as the the possible murderer, I do believe he could very well lose his law license.

 

[CarrieBean]

Seeing as the charges were dropped, I can't see how it would matter what the ex-gf says.

 

[Hot Dogs]

I don't think the defense will call on the MR in any way related to the expunged arrest. I think they are more likely to try to use him (and others) to raise doubt that the remains were there to be found in mid-August, and/or that they were moved around within the woods by somebody.

It's hard for me to imagine that the MR will not be a witness for the prosecution and the defense.

 

[bessie]

If the case goes to trial, an acquittal will rest on diversion, "muddy waters". Defense will examine any and all avenues that might cast focus away from their client. Regarding RK, if they can dig up enough fodder to feed the skeptics on the jury, they'll try to use him. Whether they do or not will depend on the court's ruling on admissibility, as others have pointed out. It will be an issue, though, albeit a weak one. So, to answer the question, yes. I do think RK's past will have a bearing on the case. The extent is still an unknown.

I'm so glad you opened this new thread, JBean because at this point, the topic is germane. I was fussing at you for closing the other one. Hope you didn't hear me.

 

[JBean]

And then decide what?

Tie him to THIS crime, that's what this trial will be about. He has offered this information on his own and the fact that he brought it up adds to his credibility as a witness.

What is jose going to do, get this man on the stand and then accuse him of murder, doubt it..the SA's wouldn't just sit there and allow that to happen.

And since jose knows casey murdered her daughter if he even so much as breathes the name of an innocent party as the the possible murderer, I do believe he could very well lose his law license.

I think a standard part of our adversarial justice system is based on the credibility of the witnesses. While most of us feel Kronk is 100% credible, it is the defense's job to create doubt. What doubt this does or doesn't create, or if the defense will even try to cerate it, is part of the discussion.
As I say, imo this adds to his credibility rather than detract. I don't see what everyone is getting so excited about.

 

[waiting4change]

I do hope the judge allows it...If he doesn't allow the defense to pursue this as a crime theory, is it possible some appeals court could later construe that as reversible error?

You know, right away when I saw the headline regarding RK, I thought right away...great! She is going to get away with it!!!!:behindbar I am hoping that I am wrong!!! Please talk me down (jk).

 

[amysmom]

Levi, the defense will not be ALLOWED to milk that teat. There will be a little hearing on it beforehand and in my opinion the Judge will say, "Counsel, that is not admissable" and "You will not be able to mention it...". I don't think the jury will ever know about it nor should they.

I always thought a witness's past criminal record is not allowed UNLESS it directly relates to the present case..I don't see that it does & ASSUME the judge will see it the same way..Besides, since the record/arrest was expunged there's nothing really there anyway.

 

[BaileyandBella]

Does this create suspicion in any of your minds?

It does for me.....something about him just doesn't sit right with me.

It also really bothered me on the 911 tape about finding a body and then laughing. I know people say it was a nervous laugh, but I don't agree.

 

[Irish_Eyes]

Can we please not forget this man WAS NOT EVEN CONVICTED OF A CRIME? Sorry, but that is an important fact to remember when suggesting this could be basis for an appeal!

Not convicted, he wasn't even indicted....but it wouldn't shock me if JB would try to find even the most tenuous link between RK and this crime...like someone above said, what else has he got???

I realize that for reversible error the judge would have to believe that had the evidence been presented at trial a jury might have voted to acquit, and this doesn't meet that in my eyes....but even judges to dumb things once in a while, as do juries...(OJ Part I, anyone?), so who's to say?


Did you notice that JB's motion included requests for DNA of the other A family members?? Why do you think that is? Do you think he's going to try to drag any of them into the line of fire??? I'm sure he couldn't if his defendant refused to let him put up that type of defense, but that doesn't seem to be the case...KC and JB are gonna play scorched earth...and I do think it will backfire, at least I hope it will, but again, what else have they got???

 

[ecs5298]

I think a standard part of our adversarial justice system is based on the credibility of the witnesses. While most of us feel Kronk is 100% credible, it is the defense's job to create doubt. What doubt this does or doesn't create, or if the defense will even try to cerate it, is part of the discussion.
As I say, imo this adds to his credibility rather than detract. I don't see what everyone is getting so excited about.

IMO This is going to be their defense strategy for the entire trial. They will go to extraordinary lengths to tarnish a witness's credibility. The judge will most likely take this one item away about Kronk out of play for the defense but there are a multitude of other things the defense can go after. The jokester side of me almost can't wait to hear the whoppers JB comes up with.

JB's cross exam of Kronk:

JB: "Mr. Kronk, have you ever stepped on and killed an ant?"

Kronk: "Ummm....well...I guess I might have stepped on an ant or two sometime in my life"

JB: "There you have it, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Mr. Kronk has just admitted that he's a killer and that he has probably killed multiple times. No further questions, your Honor"

:croc:

 

[maur33]

I think a standard part of our adversarial justice system is based on the credibility of the witnesses. While most of us feel Kronk is 100% credible, it is the defense's job to create doubt. What doubt this does or doesn't create, or if the defense will even try to cerate it, is part of the discussion.
As I say, imo this adds to his credibility rather than detract. I don't see what everyone is getting so excited about.

I don't know what people are getting excited about either.

I personally am a little disappointed in this forum for even questioning this man's credibility. Weren't we all not to long ago begging and pleading for someone to find this child? I suppose only the non-flawed human beings should ever be out looking and searching for dead bodies. Oh but wait isn't TM a recovering alcoholic, yet he is praised as if he is the Lord himself, another perfectly flawed good hearted soul who does this very thing every day of his life.

I am greatful to Mr. Kronk for not only finding her, but having not given up after his august phone calls, and choosing to rely on his own instincts and walking into the woods and finding her.

Maybe Mr. Kronk should have just kept on going about his business and we could all be sitting here hoping and praying that the Lord sends the Pope to orlando and into the woods to find this child. Because surely no one would question his past...although we all know about the Pope's past, right.

So maybe there is no one perfect enough here on planet earth worthy to have found this poor murdered little girl.

 

[impatientredhead]

I always thought a witness's past criminal record is not allowed UNLESS it directly relates to the present case..I don't see that it does & ASSUME the judge will see it the same way..Besides, since the record/arrest was expunged there's nothing really there anyway.

Even then it is not usually allowed, it is prejudicial information. If allowed it usually entered at the penalty phase.

I have asked before and not seen any input from anyone, but I don't think RK will even be called as a witness. There is nothing to be gained by introducing a witness whose testimony does not lead one way or the other to defendants guilt or innocence.

The state does not need him to establish location of the body. That is well documented and accessible through the LE/FBI agents. I don't personally see with the information we have what JB would gain by putting him on the stand. That the body wasn't there in August? Forensics show otherwise and he can show that this area was searched previously through other routes if really wants to go that route. If the claims that RK is "daisy chained" to Casey turn out to be true how does that help the defense?

 

[waiting4change]

Of course I don't believe that RK had anything to do with this case. I believe he is just like the rest of us that wanted to go and help with the searching.

 

[natsound]

Does this create suspicion in any of your minds?
To me it is a big nothing. I am not excited about it nor does it move me in any way.
It almost adds to the comedic element of this case. Another poster posted on the other thread that "another clown just squeezed out of the car" and I think that is a perfect analogy.

It creates no suspicion in my mind. He's a regular guy, your next door neighbor... not perfect, but knows how to do the right thing.

 

[Truth Seeker]

I don't know what people are getting excited about either.

I personally am a little disappointed in this forum for even questioning this man's credibility. Weren't we all not to long ago begging and pleading for someone to find this child? I suppose only the non-flawed human beings should ever be out looking and searching for dead bodies. Oh but wait isn't TM a recovering alcoholic, yet he is praised as if he is the Lord himself, another perfectly flawed good hearted soul who does this very thing every day of his life.

I am greatful to Mr. Kronk for not only finding her, but having not given up after his august phone calls, and choosing to rely on his own instincts and walking into the woods and finding her.

Maybe Mr. Kronk should have just kept on going about his business and we could all be sitting here hoping and praying that the Lord sends the Pope to orlando and into the woods to find this child. Because surely no one would question his past...although we all know about the Pope's past, right.

So maybe there is no one perfect enough here on planet earth worthy to have found this poor murdered little girl.

I agree with ya ~ the last thread on Mr. Kronk was locked and should have been but some still see him as suspicious!!

Untill or if there are ever any CHARGES brought against him he is a hero.

 

[Laece]

I don't know what people are getting excited about either.

I personally am a little disappointed in this forum for even questioning this man's credibility.

if anything, i think this case has taught us to question everything. we just come up with different answers, thoughts, ideas, and opinions after we are faced with the questions. there are lot of us here, obviously we are not all going to come up with the same conclusion. the way you feel so strongly about what you said is no different than the strong feelings of those who disagree with what you think.

in any case, we will get answers. well, i hope we will. and until then, no one is wrong, no one is right.

guess we'll find out.

(sorry, i know this is a 'duh' kind of post, but it looks like it needed to be said. )

 

[maur33]

I agree with ya ~ the last thread on Mr. Kronk was locked and should have been but some still see him as suspicious!!

Untill or if there are ever any CHARGES brought against him he is a hero.

Thanks.

I think he is a hero. BTW hero's come in all shapes and sizes and real hero's are the everyday people who do extraordinary things in the face of uncertainty..