Legal Questions for our Verified Lawyers #4

[twomanywords]

If the jury votes for LWOP is there still a penalty phase?

Thx

 

[jordibcbc]

It has been difficult to figure out what part of the behaviour of GA and especially CA was denial and which part was cover up, and whatever it was, it appeared that the behaviour made the investigation difficult.

Several things that happened – cleaning the trunk that smelled like death, attempting to give the wrong hair brush to LE, or other actions that interfered with evidence. There may have been other things that happened unknown to the public. Then, during the trial, there was the doubtful testimony about the computer searches and the ladder.

Could any of these actions be considered aiding and abetting after the fact or misleading (lying) to LE?

Do you think it is possible that CA could face charges more serious than the perjury people mention, no matter what happens to ICA?

 

[Amalie]

First, thanks to the lawyers who help us understand the details. I'm a longtime reader, first time poster. Linda Baden just said on HLN that she thinks that there is reversible error from LDB's closing since she implied that the drowning story was a lie, and that this would imply that the defense team knowingly presented what they knew to be untrue.
I know what reversible error is, but I don't know why that statement would imply that the defence team are lying.
I'm very concerned in general that if a guilty verdict that one of the very many mistrial motions from the defense. I fear that one of them might stick.
So, was there reversible error in LDB's closing argument?

I just want to comment on this as I heard her on HDL as well, I am not by any means a verified legal. I've also heard her just about every day on HDL or Fox and she throws this stuff out daily. Not only do I think it's totally inappropriate for her to even comment about the case since she was a former member, but it appears she was sent out there for defense damage control and to throw out pro defense commentary. I am personally much more worried about the 84 chloroform/my space searches because I think it sounded like it could have been an error with the expert's report.

 

[Chili Fries]

Are scientific competency classes part of the law school curriculum?

If there's one thing I think could help any attorney dealing with testing lab results it's a strong knowledge of ISO 17025 standards. ISO 17025 is the international accreditation standard for testing labs.

 

[greenpalm]

I saw on another thread a suggestion that the Juror who is employed as an IT professional may be helpful in interpreting, or explaining the 11th hour objection regarding whether or not the computer data indicating the number of chloroform searches (84) was accurate. However, my husband served as an alternate juror in the murder trial of Kosoul Chanthakoummane here in Texas, and he recalls being given explicit instructions that jurors were not to use their own areas of expertise to attempt to interpret, persuade, clarify or explain things to other jurors. The reason they were given was that such an opinion would be the equivalent of testimony without the opportunity for any rebuttal or cross examination.

My question then is, can the IT juror offer any professional insight into the computer searches to the other jurors or is he obligated to keep that to himself.

 

[SaltyTexan]

When the jury reaches a verdict, then they may or may not speak to the press in the room set up for that purpose, and yet they are still sequestered till the penalty phase is complete.

This is confusing to me, that they are sequestered from everyone but the press. Can someone please explain.

Also, thanks so much for all the legal questions answered, free legal talk, whoo hoo!

 

[MEM2010]

Something I saw a commenter post on here the other day really sparked my interest although it's OT.

They said that killing someone while DUI is not felony murder but they felt it should be.


So it sparked my question


If you intentionally kill someone by vehicular homicide, BUT get drunk beforehand, would they not be able to find you guilty of murder 1?


TIA! I;m just curious..this is nothing I plan on doing. lol

 

[BAHD]

What happens if she is found guilty and then someone else confesses to what really happened?

 

[beachbumming]

When the jury reaches a verdict, then they may or may not speak to the press in the room set up for that purpose, and yet they are still sequestered till the penalty phase is complete.

This is confusing to me, that they are sequestered from everyone but the press. Can someone please explain.

Also, thanks so much for all the legal questions answered, free legal talk, whoo hoo!

If the jury comes back with 1st degree murder they will continue to be sequestered and not allowed to speak to the media until they have reached a verdict in the penalty phase.

 

[greenpalm]

I mentioned previously that my DH served as an alternate on a murder trial jury here in Texas. He recalls they were told that they could not take notes during the trial. Clearly, these jurors have been permitted to do so. Is note taking determined state by state or does it have something to do with the amount of evidence and testimony? This case has had "tons" as JB would say (let's weigh it!) The trial for which DH served lasted 8 days for the whole enchilada: trial, deliberation & penalty phase. (They did hand down death)

 

[wallflower67]

If the deliberations result in a hung jury, are the SA and the DT teams allowed to poll the jurors as to who wanted to convict and to what offense?

For example, if 11 jurors want to convict her of 1st degree murder, but there is that one juror (#4!) who is a hold out, can the DT know just how close they came to losing so that maybe they can convince ICA to take a plea?

On the other hand, if most of the jurors want to aquit, and 1 or 2 want to convict and the jury is, therefore, hung, do you think the SA would retry?

 

[Donjeta]

Bill Schaeffer said yesterday on WFTV that the jurors don't have the court transcripts available when they deliberate. Why on earth is that?

It seems to me that it's awfully iffy for them to have to rely on memory or the notes they variably did or didn't do in a six week trial. The attorneys weren't even sure the jurors are going to remember which witness was which and brought photos and other reminders in the closing speech (you know, the younger bug guy and the older bug guy, the heavy set witness, the one with an accent etc.) So how many of them are really going to remember what Maria Kish said about the car smelling or who saw Casey on which date and what she said about where Caylee was and what the chemists and nonchemists said about how they did the test they did and which results they got, etc. .

It seems to me that an awful lot is left to depend on the closing arguments and the interpretations of the sides, and it's not really about the credibility of the witnesses but the credibility of the attorneys if they can't go back and read what the witnesses really said but have to rely on the impression of the attorneys reminding them about what the attorneys think the witnesses said.

So why can't they get the transcripts?

 

[natsound]

I'm sure this has already been asked and answered but I don't have time to rifle through this thread.

Attorneys, what can we assume KC has told Baez about what happened to Caylee? What is the typical relationship between defense atty. and client regarding confessions?

 

[MissJames]

I know our lawyers have already said it's not likely Cindy will be prosecuted for perjury BUT HHJP seemed very annoyed with the issue when Baez was trying to keep the computer experts out on rebuttal.
Is there anything a Judge can do if he believes perjury has been committed?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Bill Schaeffer said yesterday on WFTV that the jurors don't have the court transcripts available when they deliberate. Why on earth is that?

It seems to me that it's awfully iffy for them to have to rely on memory or the notes they variably did or didn't do in a six week trial. The attorneys weren't even sure the jurors are going to remember which witness was which and brought photos and other reminders in the closing speech (you know, the younger bug guy and the older bug guy, the heavy set witness, the one with an accent etc.) So how many of them are really going to remember what Maria Kish said about the car smelling or who saw Casey on which date and what she said about where Caylee was and what the chemists and nonchemists said about how they did the test they did and which results they got, etc. .

It seems to me that an awful lot is left to depend on the closing arguments and the interpretations of the sides, and it's not really about the credibility of the witnesses but the credibility of the attorneys if they can't go back and read what the witnesses really said but have to rely on the impression of the attorneys reminding them about what the attorneys think the witnesses said.

So why can't they get the transcripts?

If they get hung up on someone's testimony ...they can send a letter to the judge and request a read back of the particular part of a transcipt.

 

[Linda7NJ]

What happens if she is found guilty and then someone else confesses to what really happened?

Nothing. Casey goes to prison. Tried and convicted beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[whiteangora]

Are the jurors really able to handle/touch all of the evidence? InSession has mentioned several times that the jury has over 300 pieces of evidence in the deliberations room with them and that they can handle it.
Wouldn't it become contaminated? What if an appeal grants a new trial and different lawyers would want additional testing done on the evidence?
Thank you!

 

[Tennessean]

My question concerns the 48+ hour pause in the court proceedings before a penalty phase after a 1st degree murder verdict.

I, personally, served on a sequestered triple murder jury in Tennessee that resulted in 3 death penalties and 2 life sentences. The murderer was executed by lethal injection a couple of years ago after 28 years on death row. We reached our guilty verdict at about 2:00 one afternoon, court recessed until the next morning when the penalty phase began.

I would be _really_ PO'd at having to twiddle my thumbs for several days at the hotel while the lawyers get their cases together. Unreal.

I have also watched many 1st degree murder trials gavel-gavel on the old court tv from Fla and elsewhere (Aileen Wournos, etc), and none of those had this sort of pause, IIRC. Attorneys _always_prepared for the penalty phase while the jury was out in the guilt phase.

What's up with this? I think it's a disgrace to treat jurors in this manner.

Thanks for helping us out here!!
.

 

[Katprint]

Something I saw a commenter post on here the other day really sparked my interest although it's OT.

They said that killing someone while DUI is not felony murder but they felt it should be.

So it sparked my question

If you intentionally kill someone by vehicular homicide, BUT get drunk beforehand, would they not be able to find you guilty of murder 1?

TIA! I;m just curious..this is nothing I plan on doing. lol

This is really two questions.

Why killing someone while DUI is not felony murder: Normally, DUI by itself is a misdemeanor, not a felony. Unintentionally killing someone while committing a misdemeanor is involuntary manslaughter. Vehicular homicide, whether due to DUI or reckless driving or whatever other misdemeanor, is one way to commit involuntary manslaughter. Another way is the woman who gave John Belushi his (unintentionally) fatal drug overdose.

Why intentionally killing someone is murder even if you get drunk first and/or use a car as the murder weapon: Voluntary intoxication is almost never a defense to murder, except when the defendant was too intoxicated to form an "intent to kill." However, if the "intent to kill" can be proven by prior/subsequent statements, computer searches, personal animosity towards the victim, etc. then it is murder.

Note: When another crime (DUI, rape, robbery, kidnapping, etc.) is committed at the same time a murder is committed then the defendant can be convicted of BOTH crimes.

Katprint
Always only my own opinions

 

[miimaa]

What happens if she is found guilty and then someone else confesses to what really happened?

Wouldn't that be something!! Wonder what her story would be then with all the lies she has told. IMO don't see it happening because I am convinced that KC alone is responsible for Caylee's death.