Legal Q&A for Rhornsby #2

[Wudge]

From what I've seen, KC is too self-absorbed to allow her attorneys to imply she isn't sophisticated. If she won't allow them to say it, they won't use that defense, right?

Many posters allege that Caylee died from suffocation by duct tape that was left on the body and then decorated with hearts. That certainly does not evidence a sophisticated premeditated murder. Moreover, evidence of sophistication won't be found in the allegations that Casey drove around for days with Caylee's dead body in the trunk of her car and then disposed of it in bags that were placed on top of the ground near the house.

This case shouts of anything but a sophisticated murder.

FWIW

 

[logicalgirl]

Well, I just know I would argue to a jury that she is not sophisticated enough to not only have thought to use gloves BUT actually have been able to accomplish not getting fingerprints anywhere.

That is what I would argue, it would be to the State to present evidence otherwise or argue convincingly the evidence suggests otherwise.

I see your point but still don't agree about the prints - I constantly use tape, both wide sticky and duct tape, and use the edge of my scissors on the duct tape to place, my palm on the outside to smooth, and the scissors on the other end to bend down the flap so it doesn't stick to the roll. I got used to doing that way so the tape actually stuck and I didn't have to do it a bunch of times to get it right.

 

[whats the punch line]

bbm

What does not having to touch icky decomp have to do with sophistication? I think if she wore gloves, it had nothing to do with fingerprints. (I bet dollars to doughnuts she used gloves when trying to clean the decomp out of her trunk, too..afterall, there was decomp found on the paper towels in trash bag from Tony's.) I think she didn't want to risk getting any of it on her hands in the event of a garbage bag tear. OR, I know that sometimes when I carry heavy bags with my hands, they hurt my hands because weight of the bags makes the handles dig into my palms. I'm sure the prosecution could reasonably explain away a pair of gloves. She doesn't have to be sophisticated to use them- just self absorbed.

Just my two cents.

Because we cannot be sure when the duct tape was applied, we can't assume there was decomp present at the time.

My theory again is that Caylee with duct tape was placed in the bags (I'm gonna assume if you can move a sleeping 2 year old with out waking them, you aren't going to have issues moving a corpse, if you are so stupid as to create one) pre rigor, and placed in the trunk. (think about it, baby dead in bags, in trunk, went to blockbuster with Tony, watched 2 movies, went to bed, get up in the morning to dispose of the body, uh-oh, full rigor) I do think KC was smart/sophisticated enough to wear gloves. (think of all the other smart/sophisticated things she did) I'm thinking when rigor set in was when things went awry. I think she had to wait until rigor was complete before she was able to dispose of the body.

At 5'7" and 115 lbs, I never had issues lifting and moving my kids sleeping or awake until they were about 5 yrs old. They were never dead though.

ps: she never googled rigor mortis

 

[impatientredhead]

Well, I just know I would argue to a jury that she is not sophisticated enough to not only have thought to use gloves BUT actually have been able to accomplish not getting fingerprints anywhere.

That is what I would argue, it would be to the State to present evidence otherwise or argue convincingly the evidence suggests otherwise.

imho that is a bad road to venture down completely. The fact that the forensic team could not find prints is not proof that they did not exist. Hammering home the point that the state may *believe* she placed the the tape there is different then being able to prove it, demonstrate it, etc...

Casey will be a demonstrated liar by closing arguements, is generally unlikeable, and does not display appropriate emotional responses. I personally would not leave it up the jury to speculate on whether she was cunning enough to leave no prints. I don't think they are going to have a warm and fuzzy feel about her.

From our vantage point the state does not have prints, does not have an eyewitness, etc... I would stay focused on what the state has not showed the jury if I was going for reasonable doubt. Casey's only hope in my opinion is not that the jury believes someone else did it but that the jury believes the state did not do their job to a level that exceeds reasonable doubt.

I think she will be sentenced to die and will end up serving life without parole personally.

 

[logicalgirl]

This is such an interesting thought provoking thread. Thanks for the thought you really believe she had help from a person with a law enforcement background. I can see your point - but I still question - George? So my question is, when you think about George - would he really be able to disassociate himself enough to bag up his precious grand daughter? Out of all of them, he seems the most emotionally out of control. Bursting into meetings, throwing up during his first interview, throwing his father through a plate glass window, etc. And the rest of the time - just a doofus. I have a hard time believing he was ever a competent homicide detective. Do you not think if he discovered Casey had just killed Caylee, he would be so angry he would have done something to Casey? Not helped her clean up.

 

[whats the punch line]

imho that is a bad road to venture down completely. The fact that the forensic team could not find prints is not proof that they did not exist. Hammering home the point that the state may *believe* she placed the the tape there is different then being able to prove it, demonstrate it, etc...

Casey will be a demonstrated liar by closing arguements, is generally unlikeable, and does not display appropriate emotional responses. I personally would not leave it up the jury to speculate on whether she was cunning enough to leave no prints. I don't think they are going to have a warm and fuzzy feel about her.

From our vantage point the state does not have prints, does not have an eyewitness, etc... I would stay focused on what the state has not showed the jury if I was going for reasonable doubt. Casey's only hope in my opinion is not that the jury believes someone else did it but that the jury believes the state did not do their job to a level that exceeds reasonable doubt.

I think she will be sentenced to die and will end up serving life without parole personally.

Personally, I think the other 6 charges will result in guilty as charged, and will lead to guilty on the murder one. Do I think unless she cops a plea we will know what happened? Nope

Do I think she will get the death penalty? no.

I do think if they can prove the other 6 charges, and tie them to the crime, they will get their convictions. RH hasn't answered my questions on this yet. So it's simply speculation on my part.

 

[babycat]

Because we cannot be sure when the duct tape was applied, we can't assume there was decomp present at the time.

(Snipped for space)

Good point, thank you!

 

[rhornsby]

I have a few questions. Defense filed motions suggesting Roy K. as the killer or as the person disposing of the body? Reason I ask, Has the Defense changed their story about Zenaida G. "The Imaginary Nanny" kidnapping Caylee? Or are they now claiming that Roy is the so called Nanny? And that would not work either because he is not a female, is not a 10, and is not named ZFG. Or, could they now throw him under the bus as knowing a so called ZG? Anyone know if Roy knows a ZG?

Also, why is the defense claiming the DP as inhumane, well what are they afraid of? If Casey is not guilty then she will not get the DP. But if she is, why not give her the DP? An eye for an eye, it's OK to kill a child but inhumane to punish the killer! Regardless of the circumstances, Caylee was Murdered and who ever took part should pay the ultimate penalty...

I am with Patty G. I to felt one or two others helped disposed of the body...just saying. I have not heard this to be the case, but have felt this to be the case. I feel Cindy, George knew much more and did not share with LE. But that is JMO. All the man power, money used by TES, and tax dollars should be repaid if LE can figure a way to prove that someone else knew where Caylee's remains were.

What I don't understand is why LE has been soft on George and Cindy? The defense as well, if anyone I would of thought they would of put the blame on George or Cindy. Not Kronk or ZFG.

And one more question, sorry....Do we know if the Anthony's knew Kronk? Was it not said that one of the Anthony's neighbors knew him? Was Kronk the regular meter reader in that area?

All JMO and Questions of course...TIA

Everyone needs to be 100% clear on something. Until the jury is sworn in, it does not matter what the defense claims to the media or in any pretrial hearing - they are not bound to those statements, nor can those statements be used against them in trial.

The only thing the defense attorneys can be held to, is the theory of defense they provide during opening statements.

 

[Kimster]

Many posters allege that Caylee died from suffocation by duct tape that was left on the body and then decorated with hearts. That certainly does not evidence a sophisticated premeditated murder. Moreover, evidence of sophistication won't be found in the allegations that Casey drove around for days with Caylee's dead body in the trunk of her car and then disposed of it in bags that were placed on top of the ground near the house.

This case shouts of anything but a sophisticated murder.

FWIW

I totally agree with you. I was talking about how KC looks at herself. I can't imagine her sitting there in public court and allowing her attorneys to say she is anything less than brilliant. That is the point I was trying to make.

 

[whats the punch line]

As an analogy, I had a really sweet barn kitty. I was charged with his care and well being. He escaped, and I could not find him. He was hit by a car, last sunday. My husband said out right he looked okay so it was apparently internal injuries.

I could not look at him, I could not touch him, All I thought of was I let him down.

If I think this about a kitty, think of how cold and calculated it was to put duct tape on that child, and find her dead.

At least with my kitty, we found him and buried him so the coyotes and other animals could not get him.

 

[RR0004]

bbm

What does not having to touch icky decomp have to do with sophistication? I think if she wore gloves, it had nothing to do with fingerprints. (I bet dollars to doughnuts she used gloves when trying to clean the decomp out of her trunk, too..afterall, there was decomp found on the paper towels in trash bag from Tony's.) I think she didn't want to risk getting any of it on her hands in the event of a garbage bag tear. OR, I know that sometimes when I carry heavy bags with my hands, they hurt my hands because weight of the bags makes the handles dig into my palms. I'm sure the prosecution could reasonably explain away a pair of gloves. She doesn't have to be sophisticated to use them- just self absorbed.

Just my two cents.

...and let us not forget, she was very into CSI.

ETA: just for a little brevity

 

[RR0004]

I was under the impression that it was Tony L. By the time he got there, she was already outside of her car, with groceries not purchased from a store, but taken from home. Is that not the day they drove back to KC's to break into the shed for the gas can?

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

It was TL...but not gas can day.

 

[whats the punch line]

RH-
Forenics tested the wheel wells and frame and found nothing, how will Baez make the statement "there was definately part of an aminal plastered to the frame", and "2 dead squirrels crawled up in to my engine" go away?

Ps, I will pay good money to see 2 dead squirrels crawl any place.

 

[Soju]

Great trial attornies typically have large, if not massive, egos. They're not only skilled inside the courtroom but are also skilled in dealing with the media, which is really a base requirement to handle a high-profile case today. Moreover, they've become a brand name; e.g., Tom Messerau.
.

ITA. A lot of high-profile attorneys also seem to have wild hair and some hilarious (if not endearing) affectations.

Remember Jackie Chiles from Seinfeld?

 

[RR0004]

I see your point but still don't agree about the prints - I constantly use tape, both wide sticky and duct tape, and use the edge of my scissors on the duct tape to place, my palm on the outside to smooth, and the scissors on the other end to bend down the flap so it doesn't stick to the roll. I got used to doing that way so the tape actually stuck and I didn't have to do it a bunch of times to get it right.

...also if Caylee's DNA wasn't on the tape (no report stating that), then why would we assume that fingerprints were? I know DNA degrades failrly quickly, but considering the elements, I can't imagine there would be much of anything left fingerprint-wise either.

 

[RR0004]

Everyone needs to be 100% clear on something. Until the jury is sworn in, it does not matter what the defense claims to the media or in any pretrial hearing - they are not bound to those statements, nor can those statements be used against them in trial.

The only thing the defense attorneys can be held to, is the theory of defense they provide during opening statements.

Well, then I sure do hope Baez keeps his trap closed. Seriously, I cannot see him trying this case.

 

[rhornsby]

RH-
Forenics tested the wheel wells and frame and found nothing, how will Baez make the statement "there was definately part of an aminal plastered to the frame", and "2 dead squirrels crawled up in to my engine" go away?

Ps, I will pay good money to see 2 dead squirrels crawl any place.

That is why I expect the defense to somehow admit that Casey's entire story was a lie from the very beginning - in opening statements perhaps.

Because to do so really takes the wind out of the State's case so to speak.

 

[whats the punch line]

Latent prints
Although the word latent means hidden or invisible, in modern usage for forensic science the term latent prints means any chance of accidental impression left by friction ridge skin on a surface, regardless of whether it is visible or invisible at the time of deposition. Electronic, chemical and physical processing techniques permit visualization of invisible latent print residue whether they are from natural secretions of the eccrine glands present on friction ridge skin (which produce palmar sweat, consisting primarily of water with various salts and organic compounds in solution), or whether the impression is in a contaminant such as motor oil, blood, paint, ink, etc.

Latent prints may exhibit only a small portion of the surface of the finger and may be smudged, distorted, overlapping, or any combination, depending on how they were deposited. For these reasons, latent prints are an “inevitable source of error in making comparisons,” as they generally “contain less clarity, less content, and less undistorted information than a fingerprint taken under controlled conditions, and much, much less detail compared to the actual patterns of ridges and grooves of a finger.”[6]

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fingerprint[/ame]


Based on this statement:
"...which produce palmar sweat, consisting primarily of water with various salts and organic compounds in solution"
Could we not expect that finger print evidence would degrade over the course of months?
Thanks

 

[I Din Doot]

RH - Do you think we will ever find out who the Father of Caylee actually is?

 

[RR0004]

That is why I expect the defense to somehow admit that Casey's entire story was a lie from the very beginning - in opening statements perhaps.

Because to do so really takes the wind out of the State's case so to speak.

The problem is how and when can you believe a liar is telling the truth? Can the defense state she lied without corroboration from Miss Casey? Can they state she lied without offering an alternative theory or explanation as to who then IS responsible for having the child for 31 days? When I think back to the beginning of the case and what the State charged her with (lying to LE) how easy it would have been then to tell the "truth". Didn't happen...don't think a jury will buy it now.