"Second Motion To Preclude Death Procedures for Impermissable Prosecutorial Motives"

[JLMcKenna83]

Which guy in CA? Hans Reiser? He gave up the body after conviction. Casey didn't do that, neither did Scott Peterson.

I think that poster means John Gardner. The man who killed Chelsea King and Amber Dubois

 

[nancy botwin]

Lets say Casey goes to trial, gets convicted, then the jury convicts her with the DP after the penalty trial. Can the judge say no to the death penalty and give Casey life with no parole?

I'm wondering how much power the judge has with what the punishment is in this kind of case?

Sorry for so many questions, for me legal stuff is hard to sift through and understand.

In Florida, the jury gives a recommendation in the penalty phase and the judge has the final say. To answer your question, a jury can recommend death and the judge can ultimately sentence her to life in prison.

 

[heatherhope]

Welcome!

Did you see our Legal Questions for our Verified Lawyers Thread?
Some of your more complicated legal questions can be answered over there. AZLawyer is real great to us so no worries that your question might not be important enough or sound "dumb". Most of us are at the same knowledge level as you are when it comes to legal stuff.

Oh no, no I didn't see that thread. Is that with these ones? I'm going to have to read that thread from the beginning!!! Thanks!

 

[heatherhope]

I think that poster means John Gardner. The man who killed Chelsea King and Amber Dubois

Yes, that is the guy and the crime. Sorry I couldn't remember names! It's a weakness of mine.

 

[logicalgirl]

Oh no, no I didn't see that thread. Is that with these ones? I'm going to have to read that thread from the beginning!!! Thanks!

Look above - Nancy popped in and answered your question for you. You can get lucky like this and one of the experts, like Nancy will answer you. But the primary legal thread is very helpful also if no one is around.

 

[heatherhope]

Look above - Nancy popped in and answered your question for you. You can get lucky and one of the experts will answer you also. But the primary legal thread is very helpful also if no one is around.

Thank you very much for your help. it's hard to navigate around here when your new.

 

[logicalgirl]

Thank you very much for your help. it's hard to navigate around here when your new.

You are welcome - just ask anyone and we've all done it with trial and error - no worries. I still don't know how to bring an outside quote from the news or a testimony in - but I'll get it one of these days.

Just keep at it and you'll be surprised how fast your posts add up. Just because you're a newbie doesn't mean no one is interested in what you have to say.
Just belly up and let 'er rip!

 

[Macushla]

I don't know if I missed something or not. In the today's news thread the only new items on the docket related to the motion to remove JS, notice of filing and notice of supplemental reports. Does this mean the 4 new motions reported on by channel 13 have not been filed or are they just not listed anywhere yet?

 

[logicalgirl]

I don't know if I missed something or not. In the today's news thread the only new items on the docket related to the motion to remove JS, notice of filing and notice of supplemental reports. Does this mean the 4 new motions reported on by channel 13 have not been filed or are they just not listed anywhere yet?

Sleutherontheside mentioned earlier that as of 10:30 this AM they had NOT been filed.

 

[nancy botwin]

Can the judge not accept the plea agreement? Or not accept the punishment from the state? So lets say Casey pleas out and the state and the defense agree to 40 years with parole, can the judge say no, and sentence her to 50 years with no parole?

I didn't answer your first question-- sorry.
A judge can decide not to accept a plea agreement. FL Rule 3.171 governs plea negotiations and agreements. Per 3.171, a judge can refuse to agree to the plea negotiated and agreed upon by the parties.

For the purposes of understanding the rule, pretend the prosecution and defense agreed that Casey would plead guilty to child neglect and the other charges would be dropped. The judge could determine this was not acceptable and inform the parties he would not accept this plea. At which point, the negotiated plea agreement would just be abandoned. The plea only becomes binding when it's accepted by the court (judge). It's generally unlikely in this kind of case, however, that both parties would assent to a plea agreement that is unacceptable to the court, IMO.

 

[Macushla]

So it seems like these motions have not been filed yet? Perhaps the defense team is so busy celebrating their latest 'win' that it slipped their minds that they had given Channel 13 copies of the motions but forgot to acutally bring the motions to the courthouse? Or is this their new way to file a motion - drop it off at channel 13 and expect the court clerk to see it and download a copy from the news stations web site? Interesting.

 

[Anais]

So it seems like these motions have not been filed yet? Perhaps the defense team is so busy celebrating their latest 'win' that it slipped their minds that they had given Channel 13 copies of the motions but forgot to acutally bring the motions to the courthouse? Or is this their new way to file a motion - drop it off at channel and expect the court clerk to see it and download a copy from the news stations web site? Interesting.

I am wondering if Judge Perry can do anything to the defense for such nonsense?!

 

[Macushla]

Oh my Goodness! Look at page 32 in this motion, item #3 I am quoting here:

"This Honorable Court has previously cautioned ALL parties from relying on news reports as a basis for its motions"

Indeed. the irony is rich.

 

[nums24]

i just gotta ask if we know if there is anymore discovery coming? cuz this just seems like they are trying to deflect again from something. they just never stop do they? what evidence is there that have had these lawyers talking about the penalty phase and mitigating factors. ive never seen a bunch of lawyers, whose actions, speak guilty, louder than this bunch.

Last week and today there was supplemental discovery provided as shown on the criminal case docket.

 

[LambChop]

Am I a day late and a dollar short? Has anyone else here noticed that in the first paragraph it states that Caylee Marie Anthony's remains were found on December 11, 2009?

 

[Wescott]

After reading the new "leaked" motions....I do have to say that from an objective point of view....they are excellent and do make compelling arguments. It is clear that JB never touched them...well except for when they were passed to CH13 but even then....he probably didn't touch them.

AL's sole purpose is to get the DP removed. I wonder if these motions were leaked in order to give the SA a "heads up" to stimulate either removal of the DP OR to stimulate new discussion about a plea. AL attempts to resolve the DP issue BEFORE having to go to trial.

I think I see exactly where they are going with this.

IMO they are a somewhat entertaining read but I don't think Judge Perry will grant any of them. I don't think that there are any legal precedents to support what they are saying. Lyon thinks the death penalty is unconstitutional, sexist etc., etc., Florida does not. She is ther_beatingA_Dead and making me :banghead:

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Am I a day late and a dollar short? Has anyone else here noticed that in the first paragraph it states that Caylee Marie Anthony's remains were found on December 11, 2009?

Nope! You are sharp. I saved those motions on my computer and am waiting to see what they look like when they are actually submitted to the Clerk of the Court!

 

[LambChop]

I had to stop reading this motion....Defense claims that SA brought back the DP after KC had to disclose where and how much money she received for Caylee's pictures....they claim the timing was suspicious because a DP case costs more. But the state did not get any of that money, JB did...all of it. Please did I miss something here? Help me out, anyone....

 

[LambChop]

Nope! You are sharp. I saved those motions on my computer and am waiting to see what they look like when they are actually submitted to the Clerk of the Court!

So defense is waiting for us to proof them? That's pretty sad, then again maybe not.

Hope the new judge got to read this one. He probably needs a good laugh by now.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

I read page one and page five so I hope I'm not repeating but (excuse my ignorance) but,

if a new Judge can be assigned to a case can a new Lawyer/s be assigned as well - especially if the person charged of the crime is now indigent?