Motion In Limine To Exclude Mental Health Experts

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
BBM
No I don't believe we know for sure.

I don't know why, but I do believe Cindy did not know until June/July 2005 that Casey was pregnant..
I also believe Casey did not go see an OBGYN and get pre-natal care until Cindy found out then she went to a doctor and confirmed the pregnancy.

Casey's was covering up her pregnancy with Lies of female issues or something.
She did not get an abortion and I don't know where she thought she'd give birth, but I have a feeling she would have given birth and then abandon the infant at a Hospital or EMS Station under Florida's Safe Haven Law.
:twocents:

Whoops Intermezzo - I asked the same question and didn't realize you had answered me - :loser: .
I think we jumped off into thinking that because CA was spouting my daughter has a tumor or some silly thing at Rick's wedding. CA may have issues :maddening: but the A's seem like a family who is very conscious of how they "looked" so I find it very hard to believe CA didn't know and just didn't feel like "sharing" with her brother at the wedding. I doubt CA was very proud of this pregnancy, particularly with no baby-daddy waiting in the wings.
 
Yes, and Baez's smart guy response was "just because someone is smiling doesn't mean they are happy"!

The Defense will have full opportunity at trial to introduce this photo to illustrate ICA's state of mind just before she was arrested. This individual in the picture could in no way be seen as a mother who is distraught that her child has been missing for 31 days.

Remember when Baez said in court that the court didn't knwo if she was told a joke right before the photo was taken as a way to trick her into smiling - that was RICH and even the judge laughed.
 
http://on.wesh.com/gQX5qi

Motion to dismiss motion in limine...blah blah blah...just making it official that these guys are not going to testify in the guilt phase and only one may testify in the penalty phase.

But the Defense has filed another motion on top of this one haven't they about testimony of mental health experts. Can you file against a motion that has been declared moot and dismissed?:waitasec: I guess Mason thinks he can.
 
I keep asking this question over and over again - but no one ever answers me - so we know for sure that ICA did not receive any pre-natal care until the last month or so - do we know that for sure? I don't think the SA would be mentioning that even if she did because of medical privacy laws?

Just wanting to clarify what is urban legend and what is not this close to the trial. Thanks.

No one knows for sure because we have to rely on CA and GA, and ya know how that goes. But I believe in one of GA's depos he said KC told him in May. I think CA knew before that because KC told her friend that her Mom did not want her to have an abortion. Sounds like the only reason CA admitted KC's pregnancy was because her back was against the wall with her family. KC could not have found a more "baby bump" revealing dress than what she was wearing to the wedding. I think CA and KC got a great deal of enjoyment out of denying KC was pregnant. And unless CA was with KC 24/7 I don't know how she would ever think that KC was not sexually active. Now that was intentional to cause a sensation. I think these two thrive on being sensational. Their own private joke. Not funny now. jmo
 
Remember when Baez said in court that the court didn't knwo if she was told a joke right before the photo was taken as a way to trick her into smiling - that was RICH and even the judge laughed.

Maybe somebody told her they liked her hoodie...
 
Remember when Baez said in court that the court didn't knwo if she was told a joke right before the photo was taken as a way to trick her into smiling - that was RICH and even the judge laughed.
That makes NO sense!:waitasec: LE wouldn't care if she were smiling. In several of her booking photos she's not smiling...
 
I keep asking this question over and over again - but no one ever answers me - so we know for sure that ICA did not receive any pre-natal care until the last month or so - do we know that for sure? I don't think the SA would be mentioning that even if she did because of medical privacy laws?

Just wanting to clarify what is urban legend and what is not this close to the trial. Thanks.

Hi LG! :seeya:

I don't know the answer of whether or not she had pre-natal care, but I am curious as to why you want to know? Are you thinking that if she in fact did not, it further shows that Cindy did not know she was preggers? And that It shows Casey really didn't care that she was preggo?

I'm trying to figure out where you are going with that. If it is along the lines that I'm thinking.

I have said it before and I'll say it again (as much as I hate it), but if Casey had an abortion it would have been a much more humane way to kill Caylee, than the way she did. IMO of course. :cry:
 
Hi LG! :seeya:

I don't know the answer of whether or not she had pre-natal care, but I am curious as to why you want to know? Are you thinking that if she in fact did not, it further shows that Cindy did not know she was preggers? And that It shows Casey really didn't care that she was preggo?

I'm trying to figure out where you are going with that. If it is along the lines that I'm thinking.

I have said it before and I'll say it again (as much as I hate it), but if Casey had an abortion it would have been a much more humane way to kill Caylee, than the way she did. IMO of course. :cry:

Sorry mods, after posting - I realized this is O/T for this thread but to want to answer Softail

Okay, let me see if I can explain my line of thinking without getting mega jumped on as in the past, for being a Cindy supporter - which I am not - in any fashion whatsoever.:maddening:

First I want to know if we have anything real to support the "no pre-natal" care whatsoever stories and Cindy being an RN should have known better" comments that go on and on.

Second because we spend an inordinate amount of time talking about what Cindy has done - at any given time we have three or four threads completely dedicated to her. While I am disgusted at her behavior, I can sort of figure out what has been going on. While it's obvious Cindy has tried to do much to disrupt the prosecution of ICA for killing Caylee, she clearly has had only a very minimal effect on the actual process. The majority of her actions have frustrated us to the point of "craziness" but I don't see where it has delayed the LE from building their case. :ignore:

So I kind of keep her "in a box" because once I figured out what she was about - I expect certain behavior from her, if that makes any sense. And sure enough CA is true to form.:sigh:

The thing that doesn't make sense to me is this pregnancy, or how we believe this pregnancy progressed. We assume ICA didn't want to be pregnant, even though we know she thinks only 10 minutes ahead - never actually took her thought process ahead to realize this new "thing" in her life that was getting her attention and pampering was going to result in a live child. It took the pressure off of ICA to have to make a decision about the next step in her life. And if we claim CA was overbearing and controlling everybody's business in this family, then it is completely illogical that CA did not know about ICA's pregnancy early on and insist on prenatal care for her.

Long story short, it is the one part of this family's behavior/history, and particularly CA, that is inconsistent to the rest of the family's behavior/history. So it leaves me :waitasec: All IMO of course.
 
I keep asking this question over and over again - but no one ever answers me - so we know for sure that ICA did not receive any pre-natal care until the last month or so - do we know that for sure? I don't think the SA would be mentioning that even if she did because of medical privacy laws?

Just wanting to clarify what is urban legend and what is not this close to the trial. Thanks.

I have been wondering about this, too. Who paid for ICA delivery of this child? And there has been nothing about Caylee's medical care. Babies and toddlers need well-child check ups and immunizations. Who paid for this and who took Caylee for this?
 
From the news thread

Sounds like he is saying that the law states the information gained from talking to ICA HAS to be allowed into evidence for the purpose of DT theory. I can't tell if he is talking about what ICA said to LE and others, or Just the stuff she said to the Drs.

If it's the stuff she said to the Drs, the same ones who didn't file a report stating such things, so the LE could verify, research, etc.. such claims... I don't see how it would be allowed. The DT seems to want to prevent that as much as possible,which is so against Florida law.
 
I have been wondering about this, too. Who paid for ICA delivery of this child? And there has been nothing about Caylee's medical care. Babies and toddlers need well-child check ups and immunizations. Who paid for this and who took Caylee for this?

Yes. exactly but being Canadian, I don't know the answer to my next question - which is are health records protected by any laws in the States because they are here in Canada? There is no way I could find out as a Canadian who attended a doctor and got what care - ever- unless those records were subpoenaed for a trial. We have privacy laws preventing that.

So I've been wondering if we are making assumptions because we don't have access to any medical information. In the end, whether or not ICA did or did not isn't really important, unless it ties into some kind of mental health issue (sigh) but just is something that makes me go..hmmm.
 
I have a question about Casey's "seizure" and I am asking about it in this thread because I think it goes to her state of mind, even back then. I personally do not believe Casey had a seizure. I do believe that she most likely had a panic attack... I had my first and only panic attack over a year ago and I thought I was having a seizure also... my hands clamped up where I couldn't move them and I felt like electric shocks were racing through my body. My heart was racing. It was the scariest moment in my entire life... again... I thought I was having a seizure too.

I just relistened to Jesse's LE interview and he says that when all of them were at the hospital (Cindy, George and Jesse) that George confronted Jesse... saying that he knows he is a good guy, but Casey is not a very good person right now and that they needed to get her some kind of help... that he didn't need to be around her right now. This "seizure" happened on 11-18-07! I would really like to know what was going on during that time that made Casey have what I believe is a panic attack, or for George to say that Casey is not a very good person and that she needed help?

I really hope that we get to hear about that time frame during trial. I am sure the defense is going to milk this event as much as possible.
 
And if we claim CA was overbearing and controlling everybody's business in this family, then it is completely illogical that CA did not know about ICA's pregnancy early on and insist on prenatal care for her.

Long story short, it is the one part of this family's behavior/history, and particularly CA, that is inconsistent to the rest of the family's behavior/history. So it leaves me :waitasec: All IMO of course.
LG, I agree with your reasoning. If my memory serves me, Cindy was aware of the pregnancy fairly early on, and told Casey that she WOULD HAVE THIS BABY. There also is the sonogram picture on the wall at home. She was an RN, and Casey was a small person. However, to deny to folks at the wedding (when she was 2 months from delivering) the whole thing is just a blatant example of how they tried to hoodwink people all the time. This is the "parenting model" Casey had to follow! How can one NOT have mental issues having to grow up in that house, with all the head games being played?
 
Thanks LG for answering my question.

Yes, here in the US we have what is referred to as HIPPA laws that protect a patient's privacy. Similar to what you described in Canada.
 
LG, I agree with your reasoning. If my memory serves me, Cindy was aware of the pregnancy fairly early on, and told Casey that she WOULD HAVE THIS BABY. There also is the sonogram picture on the wall at home. She was an RN, and Casey was a small person. However, to deny to folks at the wedding (when she was 2 months from delivering) the whole thing is just a blatant example of how they tried to hoodwink people all the time. This is the "parenting model" Casey had to follow! How can one NOT have mental issues having to grow up in that house, with all the head games being played?

Here's where we disagree - because we have seen and heard how ICA speaks to her mother and her father. ICA felt comfortable stealing thousands from her mother, I'm sure she also felt free to disregard what ever CA may have said about her pregnancy. ICA was not a shrinking violet or a timid girl, she was more worldly than many that age, and she was an adult. If ICA wanted to get an abortion she could simply have chosen to get one - she didn't need either CA's permission or approval. I can only deduce ICA chose to continue the pregnancy because she chose to - it was convenient for her at that time.

What young adult female who is sexually active does not think about the pregnancy issue if they are even a day late in their cycle?
 
Thanks LG for answering my question.

Yes, here in the US we have what is referred to as HIPPA laws that protect a patient's privacy. Similar to what you described in Canada.

You are welcome Softail and thanks back for the info - I thought you must have some privacy laws also.
I find that I am "biding my time" waiting for the trial to happen, so when a subject such as the whole pregnancy/pre-natal care etc pops up on a thread - I think "oh yeah - I still don't know the answer to that one" and ask again.

It wasn't really a going anywhere with it question. We just have a lot of loose ends here and there that there seems to be time to fill to dig around in as we WAIT for the trial to begin.:waiting:

That was my only reason for asking.:great:
 
Here's where we disagree - because we have seen and heard how ICA speaks to her mother and her father. ICA felt comfortable stealing thousands from her mother, I'm sure she also felt free to disregard what ever CA may have said about her pregnancy. ICA was not a shrinking violet or a timid girl, she was more worldly than many that age, and she was an adult. If ICA wanted to get an abortion she could simply have chosen to get one - she didn't need either CA's permission or approval. I can only deduce ICA chose to continue the pregnancy because she chose to - it was convenient for her at that time.

What young adult female who is sexually active does not think about the pregnancy issue if they are even a day late in their cycle?

The kind that has said she hates birth control. I wish I had a link, but I remember reading that she could not stand birth control. It wasn't because it was convenient, she let that pregnancy go on out of laziness. It would have taken energy to go find someone to do the abortion, find the funds to pay for it, and so on. We've seen how lazy Casey can be. It's the whole reason she got caught. She should have run long before those 31 days were up, but she stuck around because she was lazy and thought her parents would clean up everything for her like they always did. Casey's problem was always depending on someone else to save her, or do things for her. She wasn't an independant woman at all, and that was her downfall.

The parents are the second reason she kept the baby. She definitely thought she could get more out of her parents with keeping the baby, and she did, for awhile. I do think the Cindy made a deal with her that they would take care of the baby and Casey would get to live the life she wanted - wouldn't that not be perfect for Casey? I think she thought that this pregnancy was going to make things better for her down the road, another way to make her parents do what she wanted them to do. And it worked until Cindy finally put her foot down, and that's when Caylee was murdered. Casey realized that her baby was no longer something she could hold over her parents head to get what she wanted, and Caylee was taking away attention that should have been on Casey, so she got rid of Caylee. And lo and behold, all the attention is back on Casey where it belongs, according to Casey.

So, in sum, Casey was a dependant, lazy, attention starved, spoiled girl who always got what she wanted no matter what. Had she been smart and independant, we wouldn't have the circus of case we have today. Caylee was just another tool Casey used to get more from her parents who, shockingly, were loving and giving attention to Caylee, a foreign concept to Casey. She kept her pregnancy because it was the easier thing to do, and she thought she'd get more attention and other rewards from her parents. Too bad Cindy had to try to make Casey be a mom at some point. That just ruined everything for Casey.

And to get back on topic, I'm sure she blabbed to those mental experts about what bad parents she had. Too bad we'll never really know what she said. But I do know she probably blamed her parents most of all for what happened.
 
Although I've been following this saga here on WS since it first broke in the news, this is my first post since I never really thought I had anything to add to the fabulous comments already posted. (And I hope this hasn't already been offered up as a comment)

But one thing has always stood out everytime I read about ICA and CA's denial of the pregnancy. If it is true that someone or more than one person (don't remember who) said that ICA wanted to have an abortion but CA wouldn't allow it, then how can it be that CA didn't know about the pregnancy til it was 6 months along?

Wouldn't a suggestion of an abortion at 6 months be a moot point? CA would have had to know about the pregnancy long before that time to have prevented ICA from aborting it. No abortions allowed at the 6 month time frame that I know of.

...i don't remember anyone saying that cindy was anti-abortion?

..kio marie said that cindy was anti-adoption though.

http://www.thehinkymeter.com/Library/CMA/interviews/kcruz071908.pdf
---kio marie torres cruz-----OCSO interview --august 2008--

Q About um, you weren’t able to have any children is that correct?
A Yes. Um...
Q And...

A ..I’d been told about the doctor, the doctor told us years ago I gone to go get an exam and the doctor said unfortunately because of my condition. That I was suppose to not have children. So, when Casey found out she was pregnant I asked her what are you gonna do about it? And she’s like, well I really want to give it up for adoption.

And so I figure you know it’s a good idea ‘cause I can’t have kids and I know Casey’s a cute girl and you know it’s a baby you know and it’s perfect and I had money at the time and I was doing pretty good. So, I said if you are going to give it up for adoption then you know I’m strongly considering adopting the baby from you.

She said that’s a good idea. But then she called me back saying that her mom pretty much has told her that no, she needs to keep the baby and that she’s not giving it up for adoption. Even though she really did not want to have the baby.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
239
Guests online
1,561
Total visitors
1,800

Forum statistics

Threads
599,541
Messages
18,096,348
Members
230,872
Latest member
jaspurrjax
Back
Top