I know how stupid this sounds. Isn't incest a crime in FL? Wouldn't it be incumbent on the police to investigate it? I would hope so. I understand what the DT is doing. Why are the police backing away from it? If you play music to loud they check it out.. but not incest?
I don't think it should be made public but you have to play the hand you are dealt. I may be just getting old but I think that if they didn't check paternity they would be remiss.
What do you mean the police are backing away from it? No one ever made any such allegation against George until the defense's opening statement, and thus far not one single witness has been presented to support the allegation. What is there to investigate?? The police already know 100% from DNA tests that George certainly was not Caylee's father.
They were talking on TV this afternoon & I could've sworn they said there was a nurse on the jury who has had experience in the smell of human decomposition. Do you think this will help during the deliberation of the jury?
Yes, I do.
According to Dr Drew, Judge Perry was the PA when Vasco Thompson was convicted. Could this present a conflict of interest for Judge Perry? Is this enough for a mistrial?
Thank you kindly in advance for your answer.
No. Any "conflict" HHJP would have would be in favor of the defense--he might be more likely than others to believe that VT is a bad guy--so the defense certainly won't bring that up.
but I just read on the blog at WFTV.com this AM that the question arose that possibly some correction may have been given for the smothering that Ms Simms has done to Casey during the trial. Personally I feel she has gone overboard with the "tender touches". This is a grown woman on trial for possibly murdering her own baby. Fake tears and all. Could there be a caution given for such overt smothering for crying? I noticed today that there was a distance between them and no close leaning into each other. Has a caution been given? Or could it be done? Thank you for your answers here.
I believe HHJP said at a sidebar that he was not concerned with it at that point but not to go overboard--paraphrasing.
Hence my Question. WHY did he suspect Lee? I'm basing this on the reason alot of us questioned wither or not Lee or GA might be. Wasn't it all based from rumors from ICA herself? That ICA told one of her boyfriends the groping story. I ask, because leaving it open, insinuates that there were alot of rumors or storys of abuse that are not being told. Instead of just ONE telling, that keeps being repeated. And the person who told it, the Jury have seen mucho evidence that she is aghm... not extally the most truthful person.
Shouldn't the SA made more of an attempt to put this in it's proper context?
No, I don't think they should bring it up any more than they have to. The more you talk about it, the more likely it seems to the jurors that it is true.
I know this a lightweigt question, but I'm curious: When they break for lunch, does ICA go back to her cell and eat alone, or is she allowed to have a "working lunch" with one or more of her attorneys?
I don't think they would have time to return her to the cell and bring her back over lunch.
Does the fact that the bug expert was called on 12/11/08 by the defense before the body was identified mean anything?
No. Everyone knew it was Caylee.
I was reading about alternates in a capital trial in Florida last night, and it sounds like the alternates are dismissed, pending call-back, before the jury is given instructions. Do you know if this is correct? And will they be dismissed at random or will be they be the last four selected for this jury?
The alternates will be dismissed before deliberations, yes. The alternates have already been identified--there is a "sticky" thread somewhere listing them.
Can more than one prosecutor participate in closing arguments? e.g. One start, and another finish?
Thank you all for your assistance in answering our questions.
It is up to HHJP. Most likely, he would not allow them to divide the closing but would allow one to do the closing and one to do the rebuttal to the defense closing.
There was a case several decades ago where an attorney was charged with a crime and an ethical violation for failing to report the location of a dead body to law enforcement. The attorney learned of the location because of what the client told the attorney. The state had a law criminalizing conduct that left a dead body in a state that was not proper disposal like burying, cremation etc. It was a public health, safety and welfare law to dispose of dead bodies. The requirement of the statute was that anyone knowing the location of such a body had a duty to report it to local health authorities. Because there was a violate of a statute, the attorney also violated his ethical obligations.
That is interesting - and pretty much out-of-step with the ethical rules I am familiar.
Every place I am aware of, including Florida, makes clear that the exemption for either confidentiality or privilege does not apply to the disclosure of any evidence of past crimes (as opposed to imminent crime in the future).
Do you know the case and/or statute? Cause that would be interesting to look at.
I have a vague recollection of what Themis mentioned, and I think the compromise was that the attorney was supposed to report the location of the body anonymously or without saying how he knew.
