If this was not premeditated ( and I am SURE it was) then all I can say is Caylee's death by whatever means just happened to occur at a most serendipitous time for Casey- just when she wanted to be free of her the most.
782.04 (1)a1 is what Casey has been charged with, which uses the word premeditated design, but from what I'm understanding reading 782.04 (1)b.....it states that any of the above capital offenses can be sentenced to "DEATH". 782.04 (1) a2 (particularly h.), doesn't use the word premeditated, although it, in and of itself could also bring about a "DEATH SENTENCE".
I had previously been under the impression that only the 782.04 1a1 was the only charge that would bring about a death sentence, as that is what Casey is charged with, but the aggravated child abuse offense resulting in death can also bring about the death penalty. Is this particular offense which she hasn't been particularly charged with also included in the charge, or is it not?
In other words, premeditation is not an essential element to be sentenced to death, is it? Aggravated Child Abuse resulting in death of the victim is also a death penalty offense.
lin said:I'm trying to catch up with the thread and have noticed a couple of misunderstandings of Florida law posted. Just in case correction hasn't been made yet:
KC was indicted for 1st degree murder. Under Florida law, 2nd degree murder is a Lesser Included Offense. (LIO). Therefore, 2nd degree murder and all other LIO's have been on the table since the day KC was indicted. Please see other posts in this thread here and here for more specific information on LIO's.
Although KC was not specifically charged with Felony Murder, she may be convicted of felony murder, even though it is not a specific LIO. This is per Knight v. State, 338 So.2d 201 (Fla. 1976) and cited in the Florida Standard Jury Instructions. Our own AZLawyer, Themis and others have reviewed Knight and agreed that the jury may be instructed on felony murder although it is not listed in the indictment in the Legal Procedures thread, see Themis' posts here and continuing on page 27, here.
Neither felony murder nor 2nd degree murder require premeditation to be proven. However, wanted to clear up the misunderstandings of Florida law.
If this was not premeditated ( and I am SURE it was) then all I can say is Caylee's death by whatever means just happened to occur at a most serendipitous time for Casey- just when she wanted to be free of her the most.
(bolded by Harmony and added red to text to reply... especially in reference to this quote from the red bolded "permit reflection as to the nature of the act to be committed and the probable result of that act")
I have a question considering the following scenario since placement of duct tape to prevent leakage of pool water was mentioned in the other thread.
Casey is busy texting, on the phone or computer and Caylee ventures outside to the pool and drowns. Casey finds her and pulls her out of the pool. She makes the decision not to render aid for her daughter and covers her mouth and nose to stop leakage of pool water. Since Casey is not a trained medical person (to recognize a faint heart beat or shallow breathing, etc.) and since aid may have revived her daughter, wouldn't the decision to not call 911 (sufficient length of time to permit reflection as to the nature of the act to be committed) and allow Caylee to die (probable result of that act) be considered premeditation?
(note: I do not believe this is what happened, just postulating this scenario...)
Thanks in advance for any replies!!
782.04 (1)a1 is what Casey has been charged with, which uses the word premeditated design, but from what I'm understanding reading 782.04 (1)b.....it states that any of the above capital offenses can be sentenced to "DEATH". 782.04 (1) a2 (particularly h.), doesn't use the word premeditated, although it, in and of itself could also bring about a "DEATH SENTENCE".
I had previously been under the impression that only the 782.04 1a1 was the only charge that would bring about a death sentence, as that is what Casey is charged with, but the aggravated child abuse offense resulting in death can also bring about the death penalty. Is this particular offense which she hasn't been particularly charged with also included in the charge, or is it not?
In other words, premeditation is not an essential element to be sentenced to death, is it? Aggravated Child Abuse resulting in death of the victim is also a death penalty offense.
I'm relieved to know NOW that premeditation does not have to be proven to give someone the needle. I'm even more relieved to know that the SA has charged Casey in the proper manner, and she will at the very least be found guilty of 782.04 (1)(a)(2)(h) and be put to death due to the weight of the aggravating factors vs. the mitigating ones, per sentencing guidelines at 921.141 (5&6).
The 31 days says it all for me. When my baby died I was unable to leave the house for months. I carried his pictures from room to room. My body ached with physical pain from the loss. The fact that KC partied and got a tattoo claiming "beautiful life " tells me she wanted to be rid of Caylee. No accident. No scientific facts needed for me. It's going to hard for any juror not to react to the emotion of this case.
Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!!!!!!!Repeating see my post from the old thread, here.
In case you're not familiar with Knight, cited in Florida Standard Jury Instructions:
"Under Knight v. State, 338 So.2d 201 (Fla. 1976), felony murder is included within a single indictment count of premeditated murder. Therefore, first degree felony murder should be given if requested by the state and if supported by the evidence, although it is not a lesser included offense."
So to answer your question, yes, KC may be convicted of felony murder with the aggravated child abuse as the underlying felony, even though she hasn't been specifically charged with it and yes, death is a possible penalty for a felony murder conviction.
ITA...when you lose a child you want to die.The 31 days says it all for me. When my baby died I was unable to leave the house for months. I carried his pictures from room to room. My body ached with physical pain from the loss. The fact that KC partied and got a tattoo claiming "beautiful life " tells me she wanted to be rid of Caylee. No accident. No scientific facts needed for me. It's going to hard for any juror not to react to the emotion of this case.
I'm relieved to know NOW that premeditation does not have to be proven to give someone the needle. I'm even more relieved to know that the SA has charged Casey in the proper manner, and she will at the very least be found guilty of 782.04 (1)(a)(2)(h) and be put to death due to the weight of the aggravating factors vs. the mitigating ones, per sentencing guidelines at 921.141 (5&6).
Casey is not charged with murder under 782.04 (1)(a)(2)(h). Thus, the jury will not be instructed to deiberate her guilt for that crime. Casey is charged with premeditated murder under 782.04 (1)(a)(1). Accordingly, the jury will be instructed to deliberate her guilt for the crime of premeditated murder.
HTH
Actually other related charges can be considered by the jury.
This was already addressed and answered, on this thread, with supporting documentation.
It isn't all or nothing.
Thread #972 and a feeling of deja vu.
I am appreciative of the above statement in bold as it reminds us that while we're debating premeditation, that is not the sole crux of the issue.
JBean, might we extend this thread out to intelligently and respectfully discuss all aspects of premeditation, or are we restricted her to discuss premeditation as it might relate to charges?
While I do personally believe that Casey commited premeditated murder, I respect that many might not agree with that sentiment.
But, I have to wonder about the additional premediation on Casey's part - regardless of the charges/laws.
I'd like to explore other aspects of Casey's premeditation, for example: I would like to think that there isn't a sole participatant in this discussion who doesn't recognize that Casey is representative of an individual who deliberately and decidedly prolonged her families' agony in looking for an 'Alive Caylee.' Willful.
Here is where we get down to the short-hairs of the discussion... I understand that it is the nature of the beast to dissect semantics whilst interpreting the language of law. I get that and I appreciate that.
I'd like to see this thread become more interesting with the inclusion of some intelligent discussion in regards to the ethics and morals of premeditation in general. The inherant issue with this intelligent debate seems to be that it is lacking in a standard of moral measure. We're all commenting on the interpretation of legal linguistics without uttering much in regards to the moral dilemas that juors will struggle with.
I'd be hard pressed to isolate a singular argument posted on the previous 971 premeditation threads that speaks to the moral/ethical issues that evolved from Casey's premeditated efforts and actions to further confuse, hurt and prolong her families' stability, if Caylee did indeed die by accidental death.
JBEAN: Might we expand this thread to include ALL instances of premedition? To inlude those that occured after Oct. 15, 2008?
I can't help but believe that some nay-sayers who appear to prioritize. identify and define the 'victim' in this case differently than some of us will step up to intelligently discuss how it appears that a loving mother premeditated to further her own families pain - on the heels of an accidental death.
Let's step aside from the legal interpretations. Even if you're convined or not, of premeditation in regards to the charges, I would think that anyone who is not morally or emotionally stunted would agree that after July 15th, Casey has demonstrated a propensity to prolong her families' agony in a premeditated manner.
It would be refreshing if we had the leaway and the ability to challenge the definition of 'victim' and 'premeditation' w/o worries of being sanctioned.
Get it, got it - we've done 971 threads about premeditation as it is applicable to the law. YMMV (Your mileage may vary.)
This thread might evolve into something extraordinary if we open it up to include discussion of ALL of Casey's premeditated acts.
I have to hope that somewhere within the most die-hard 'nay-sayers' words, there exists some abstract conception of the true definition of 'victim' - even if it transcends the much-despised laws & legalese.
Can we post to the majority? Only a slim few, lacking in the ability to disassociate this case from their own experience would step up and argue based on any evidence or law that CAYLEE was the victim - not Casey.
Can we speak up respectfullyto discuss Casey's entirely contrived, planned and plotted premeditation in regards to how she's treated her family - and her poor baby's remains?
I think it is relevant and falls well within the thread title subject.
We've dabated the laws on 971 previous threads - can we fairly open this up and ask for a tad more MORAL depth to the discussion? (It's all well and good to rehash ESTABLISHED legal precedent out the whazoo...) could we move this along to an actual intellectual discussion that includes mores - and you can bet that the jury is thinking along these lines.)
Example: IF, IF, IF Caylee's death was accidental ---> EVERY move, utterance and action/inaction on Casey's part since has been premeditated.