There is/was a thread titled: Questions regarding how a trial goes... it has been closed.
Why would that happen. I searched FAQ did not get the answer and I am learning here.
Would the questions be better posted here?
Was hoping to get some answers on some questions from people that would know.
Thanks
Never saw that thread, but if it's a legal question I believe it belongs here.
Will the judge stop ICA from shaking her head and mouthing "no" while other people testify. It seems to me that it would fall under her giving testimony without being on the stand for cross examination. Especially since she's facing the jury and they can see her. Shouldn't the SA's say something about it?
This has been answered before. AZLawyer & I agree that it's forbidden and Judge should act (or SA should object), RHornsby thinks it's common and SA must object if they want it stopped--RH practices in this jurisdiction so I would give his opinion more weight.
Judge Strickland sealed the jailhouse video of ICA's reaction when Caylee's remains were found.
The wording in his response led us to believe it made ICA looked guilty and it would taint a potential jury pool.
I'm assuming the SA's will want to use this and the DT will object.Do you believe it is likely to come in?
ETA:Recalling that perhaps the State said they would not use it .In light of the DT's opening statement ,can the SA's change their mind and ask to include it?
I don't think it's likely to come in because IIRC it was taped while she was there for a medical issue and there were other admissibility problems.
It seems the SA is bringing witnesses forward according to the timeline. Why hasn't the tattoo been introduced into evidence? I thought the judge ruled in their favor in having it admitted as evidence before the trial began.
Can they introduce it to show her state of mind during the 31 days Caylee was missing?
Also, at some point can they have AH testify that kc stole cheques from her while she was away on vacation? I understand about prior bad acts but if these things happened during the time Caylee was missing doesn't it become important and relevant to show what she was doing during that time?
I'm sorry if this has been asked and answered. I scrolled through the thread from when the trial began and didn't see the question.
Thank you
CA does fit into the timeline. I also think it was a great move on the part of the SA to have CA testify before a 2 1/2 day break in the proceedings. It's strange how they are having the same witnesses testify over and over again--I have never seen this occur--perhaps CA will also be called to testify over and over during specific portions as the other witnesses have done.
Yes, tattoo is relevant to state of mind and to motive (altho prosecutors don't have to prove motive). I doubt AH will be able to testify to the stolen checks b/c of the rule of prior bad acts.
On what grounds would this be not allowed? Is it because Cindy mentions Casey stealing?
"my caylee is missing
Current mood:
http://x.myspace.com/images/blog/moods/iBrads
distraughtShe came into my life unexspectedly, just as she has left me. This precious little angel from above gave me strength and unconditional love. Now she is gone and I dont know why. All I am guilty of is loving her and providing her a safe home. Jealousy has taken her away. Jealousy from the one person that should be thankfull for all of the love and support given to her. A mothers love is deep, however there are limits when one is betrayed by the one she loved and trusted the most. A daughter comes to her mother for support when she is pregnant, the mother says without hesitation it will be ok. And it was. But then the lies and betrayal began. First it seemed harmless, ah, love is blind. A mother will look for the good in her child and give them a chance to change. This mother gave chance after chance for her daughter to change, but instead more lies more betrayal. What does the mother get for giving her daughter all of these chances? A broken heart.
The daughter who stole money, lots of money, leaves without warning and does not let her mother now speak to the baby that her mother raised, fed, clothed, sheltered, paid her medical bills, etc. Instead tells her friends that her mother is controlling her life and she needs her space. No money, no future. Where did she go? Who is now watching out for the little angel?"
Lots of objections here to various parts of it --prior bad acts, hearsay, lack of foundation.
Why can't mention of KC stealing money come into trial? Can they bring it up when AH testifies? I think the jury should know that KC has been convicted of crimes in the past!
Prior bad acts are not permitted at trial except in very limited circumstances, i.e. to show MO.
How did George and Cindy's lawyer gain access to Casey's psychological evaluations?
I want access!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't know, however, I believe the SA gave it to their lawyer as the SA is entitled to investigate the allegations contained in it.
AZ/SoCal/Richard, et. al.,
Today we learned the Mark Lippman the attorney for Cindy and George Anthony has made (not sure if it's been filed yet) a motion that will be heard before the trial resumes Tuesday morning.
Before all of us non-lawyers speculate on all kinds of goofy stuff, I hoped you all might educate us on what this motion might be. I think we all can guess the subject matter, but specifically what (I don't know the words here
instrument or procedure might he be exercising - or is this potentially just to get something on record?
Sigh. Did that make any sense? My heartfelt thanks to all of you as always.
BFMD
Per RH's blog, I believe he thinks it is to obtain an order that the DT can't insinuate that GA molested KC until someone testifies to it. It could be that--or perhaps it relates to GA's grand jury testimony--for instance, if the DT can use it against GA, Lippman may be informing the court that he will be appearing to advise GA during this testimony.
On the Lippman motion ThinkTank postulated the following in the sidebar thread and I was hoping you could answer if the judge could indeed force an independent psyche eval? tia
as quoted by ThinkTank
Whatever the Lippman's Motion was .... the Judge asked if there were any objections to it, "before he SCHEDULES it" !! So, it is something that Lippman (Cindy and George) is asking the Judge to "schedule" for them. The State has no objection to it, but the Defense sure does object. Wonder what the Judge will "schedule" for the Anthonys? The Judge cannot force the Inmate to visit with her parents in the jail video system.....
Wonder if the Anthonys are asking for the Judge to schedule an independent mental health exam of their daughter? Could the Judge do that?
JP was referring to scheduling the motion itself. No, the Anthony's could not request a mental health exam of their daughter.
I have a question for our attorneys.
In light of the newest developments in trial- Is it possible that JB, along with Casey's cooperation, will ask for a plea this weekend and the SA has agreed?
Something tells me that GA and CA would not be this cooperative with the state if they knew the DP was even a possibility. I just don't see that. LWOP? Yes- I can definitely see that they would support that sentence. Death? Nope. Maybe the SA has agreed to take that off and that has something to do with the motion Mr. Lippman has filed and CA and GA complete cooperation????
I just can't see GA/CA/LA going along with this sentence.
I don't think that KC is looking for a plea at all. I think CA simply refused to throw the rest of her family away for a daughter who she probably now believes will spend, at a minimum, a considerable amount of the rest of her life in jail.
Hi everyone. I have a question regarding the depositions of George before trial. Since JB never asked GA about sexual abuse in the depositions, is there some way that the SA can bring this out in front of the jury that this is a recent strategy and was never explored during pretrial depositions? tyia
The DT took the depo not KC. A client can't be held to what their attorney did or didn't ask in a deposition.
