It's not about punitive damages. Casey's lawyers want to get through the entire trial without anyone saying that Casey was arrested for, charged with, or tried for the murder of Caylee. Even if the judge grants that request, as a practical matter I think the jury will figure it out (assuming they've been living under rocks and don't already know). I mean, Exhibit A will be the video of the jail visit, in which Casey is pretty obviously in jail, and the subject of the conversation with her parents is about who took Caylee so, um, why do you suppose Casey would have been in jail? :waitasec:
Then what if a witness says something inconsistent with what he/she said at the criminal trial? I guess ZG's lawyers are supposed to say, "OK, well, do you remember another time you were under oath testifying about this case?" Witness: "Oh, sure, when Casey was on tr--" JUDGE/ZG LAWYERS/CASEY LAWYERS: "NO! STOP! DON'T SAY IT!" Judge: "The jury will please disregard that partial answer. Witness, please answer yes or no only." Sounds like a circus to me.
But if the jury is going to be allowed to consider punitive damages, I think they have to be allowed to know the defendant's motive. In this case, Casey's motive at the time of the video jail visit statement was to deflect blame from herself and GET THE HECK OUT OF JAIL and NOT BE PROSECUTED FOR KILLING CAYLEE. How can that possibly be held back from the jury? How can the jury decide whether Casey acted with an evil motive if the motive is kept secret? :waitasec:
Hello? ZG attorneys? I know I said I thought the case should have been dismissed already, but feel free to use this argument.