Rhornsby Legal Q&A #3 Relevant to the Anthony Case

[JBean]

Just a reminder that the questions here are for rhornsby to answer.
thanks everyone.

 

[whats the punch line]

After Mr Ashton's argument regarding aggravating circumstances, using what I believe will be how the state will attempt to convince the jury of KC's guilt, Ms Lyon made a comment in her rebuttal which I hope you will address, and provide your opinion.

She stated that the autopsy did not include anything to indicate the duct tape was the cause of death.

Was a motion hearing on the constitutionality of the DP the appropriate venue to make that statement? Was this a faux pas? Mr Ashton was stating what a jury "might" conclude "if" they found her guilty. Should she have remained quiet, and focused on how the defense might "fix" the duct tape issues?

KC must have watched too many court movies thinking her attorneys could object, or "make" Mr. Ashton stop presenting his argument.

Lastly, I have a feeling the Anthony's will be running out of the courtroom LOTS during the trial. Will Judge Strickland eventually get tired of the disruptions?

 

[Macushla]

Mr. Hornsby Andrea Lyon does not use Caylee's name, when she speaks. She calls her 'the child', I don't think I heard her call Caylee by name once. It was in stark contrast to Mr. Ashton, of course. I would like to know what you think of this 'tactic' if it is one and why you think she is doing it. I think she came across as callous for using the term child instead of saying Caylee. Do you think a juror will find it as callous as I did or would they even notice in the midst of all that is being said?

 

[Eidetic]

Um, most of my thoughts involve something that rhymes with "Casey Anthony is tucked," so you can just imagine what my comments would involve...

:spit:

 

[AutomaticAuttie]

What is your take on how AL’s presentation of case law to back up her motion vs. Mr. Aston’s lack of citing even one case will affect the judges ruling? It seemed to me that AL cited case after case with supportive reasoning and Mr. Ashton sounded like he was making a closing argument to tug on the heart strings. This is just my opinion and I am not an attorney, so I like would yours with regards to how you think each side did Friday in court?

 

[Eidetic]

I don't think Lyon will step down at any time (but could she please get her hair did if we have to watch her for the remainder?).

OT :doh: You and hair... :trout:
I didn't know you had recently gotten married as well, I can't exactly say "recently" in our case, because it's already coming up on a year.
Congratulations. :cake: Make sure you both the time to slow down and take it all in once and a while, time marches on.

 

[DaughterAlice]

Mr. Hornsby Andrea Lyon does not use Caylee's name, when she speaks. She calls her 'the child', I don't think I heard her call Caylee by name once. It was in stark contrast to Mr. Ashton, of course. I would like to know what you think of this 'tactic' if it is one and why you think she is doing it. I think she came across as callous for using the term child instead of saying Caylee. Do you think a juror will find it as callous as I did or would they even notice in the midst of all that is being said?

Wow, awesome catch Macushla! Mr. Hornsby, I do hope you will voice your opinion on this one. It would seem like a jury might find the defense as cool & distant regarding Caylee and her untimely demise.

 

[BeanE]

Bringing over Richard's comment following Ashton's argument from the hearing thread which is now locked for those who may have missed it:

WOW! I think Jeff Ashton just threw down the gauntlet and I think it is crystal clear why the State is seeking the death penalty. I am not a death penalty proponent, but his argument is compelling - to say the least

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4550083&postcount=541"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 2009.12.11 Discuss Motions hearing. One year to the day Caylee Found #1[/ame]

 

[Luzer]

Well, he seems preoccupied with his Hispanic heritage. So I suspect that is the primary reason he believes Miami-Dade is the best place to go (Not that I blame him).

In a way, I hope they do pick the jury for the Check Fraud case there. Because his primary arguments in his motion for Miami-Dade is it has been exposed the least amount of media coverage in the case.


LOL - as the saying goes, be careful what you wish for.

From my experience in the Miami-Dade jury pools, the majority of the Hispanics use the excuse of not being able to understand English well enough to serve on a jury. Many other people I know say the same thing. I have seen over 100 people be excused because of this.

 

[MD MOMMY]

So we know by admission of Cindy and her mother SP that KC has stolen from them prior to stealing from AH. Can the prosecution bring this up at trial?

 

[wonders]

I don't think Lyon will step down at any time (but could she please get her hair did if we have to watch her for the remainder?).

Well, it is hard to maintain eye contact with someone if you don't agree with them. And since the defense was arguing against well established law, it probably was hard for Judge Strickland to look at them in agreement.

As for Casey, my opinion about the strength of the case vacillates from day to day. While I think the evidence of premeditation is weak; I saw how Casey reacted when Ashton spoke, and it looked to me like a girl who got caught in the act and was trying to deny it. So in a way, her reaction to a compelling and logical argument is what swayed me for yesterday.

My first bold:
First of all let me say I'm the ugliest women in the world. I haven't had my hair professionally cut in 3 years so I have no room to talk however I was thinking AL should have her hair cut in a short modern style when I was looking at her. I think it would make her look nice.
My second bold:
Execellent thought! Kudos.

 

[Bittiness39]

Do you think KC (Casey) acted alone?

 

[LambChop]

Not sure that this question has come up before but with DC not wanting to give a depo due to client privacy issues will the fact that he is collaborating on a book with the A's have any bearing on questions he will have to answer during the depo? Certainly if he plans on contributing information for a book deal he can provide the same information during his deposition. And can the SA force that issue on him, i.e. if this information comes out in a book and you have refused to answer the question during your deposition could it mean facing obstruction charges down the road? I don't understand how he can refuse to answer questions about why he was out searching for a deceased Caylee and who exactly told him to look in that area.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

Because he doesn't know for a fact that is what happened, thus the alternative hypothesis of physical restraint versus chemical restraint.

Mr. Hornsby,
I agree that JA’s argument was powerful and moving, but as another poster mentioned AL cited many case laws against the DP, where JA argued only that 70% of AL’s arguments just repeated itself. To me, that means that 30% of AL’s argument was relevant to what the judge needs to consider in making his decision whether or not to dismiss the motion, and JA gave nothing legally relevant for the judge to consider. Although JA’s argument was powerful and moving, it was speculative and was not fact based. The autopsy report could not determine cause of death, and no evidence of drugs were found. There is no physical evidence tying KC to the duct tape. The docs involving evidence from the trunk are relying heavily on two traces of human decomp, one in the carpet sample and the adipocerelike substance on the napkins found in the potentially contaminated white trash bag. So JA basically made up this powerful and emotional scenario, and topped it off by saying, If we get to this point, the jury will already know that the killers eyes that Caylee was looking into were the eyes of her mother. Moo
So, my legal question is this, what did JA say in his argument that the judge will consider when making his decision to allow or dismiss this motion?
One other question, is it common for prosecution to make up fairytales to argue motions?

 

[Jolynna]

Bump.

 

[Searchfortruth]

Isn't it a gamble for Jose to ask for a COV for the murder trial ?

I have read that they strive to pick a community that is demographically similar to the one where the crime was committed, when there is a COV. I know Jose hopes for Miami, but Jacksonville or Tampa would fit that requirement as well. I have also heard that, when a COV is granted, they often end up in a more rural community (less court schueduling problems).That would probably mean a more conservative jury, IMO, this could back fire on the defense.

 

[BeanE]

rhornsby,

Casey was heard saying "make him stop" to her attorney during Ashton's argument on Friday, and it sounds like the response she received was "I can't".

Is the reason her attorneys did/could not object because Ashton's postulation of what a juror might conclude was based on the evidence? Or is there some other reason?

Thank you in advance!

 

[Just Jayla]

rhornsby,

Casey was heard saying "make him stop" to her attorney during Ashton's argument on Friday, and it sounds like the response she received was "I can't".

Is the reason her attorneys did/could not object because Ashton's postulation of what a juror might conclude was based on the evidence? Or is there some other reason?

Thank you in advance!

Also, can they object if there is not a jury or if there is not a witness on the stand (like the objections in the ZFG case by Diane Tennis)?

 

[Just Jayla]

Isn't it a gamble for Jose to ask for a COV for the murder trial ?

I have read that they strive to pick a community that is demographically similar to the one where the crime was committed, when there is a COV. I know Jose hopes for Miami, but Jacksonville or Tampa would fit that requirement as well. I have also heard that, when a COV is granted, they often end up in a more rural community (less court schueduling problems).That would probably mean a more conservative jury, IMO, this could back fire on the defense.

Death qualified juries are more conservative anyway, so you are right, I think, it could make it worse.

 

[Muzikman]

Richard, thanks for being here and answering our many questions. Here is one:

There was a 5-minute break during the hearing, during which Judge Strickland and all of the attorneys went back for a pre-trial conference about the Fraud case. Why was this not done publicly? And what would have been discussed back there?

I do remember another conference which your fav reporter (heh) Kathi Belich attended and was able to record. Anything different about this one?

Thanks ~
MM