State files motion to proceed with check fraudUPDATE CASE TO BE SCHEDULED

[RubyB]

Indeed they can. They can have the check charges and findings of guilty read into evidence and use it to show by legally established fact that cannot be refuted in the subsequent trial that KC did do those economic crimes. It can be used and argued in many relevant ways to the later homicide case. The more established facts that can be woven into the prosecution's case, the more comfort level the jury is going to have going into deliberations on the homicide case.

Valhall, and others who have followed and contributed to that "other" thread (ZG22=KC); this is where my mind immediately went with this new development.
IF KC has an alter ego and fake id, and IF she cashed AH's checked and strolled over to pay toward the ZG22 ticket, and IF there was this fake ID confiscated from KC's wallet, wouldn't the foundation for all of this need to be established before entering it into evidence in her criminal trial?
I've got a weird feeling that LE is preparing to prove that KC is the invisinanny in the financial crimes venue, and in doing so "greasing the skids" for the main event. Please Lord, let me be right...

 

[countzero]

Since the check fraud happened during the same general time frame of the murder (soon after), I would think it would be very relevant to the murder case. If the defense plans on sticking with Casey's "I needed the money to search for my daughter" story, then it ties in very closely, IMO. Wouldn't it be better for Casey to plead guilty to the fraud charges ?

See, this is what I feel the SA is doing now. Getting KC to either plead guilty or put her on the stand to explain herself. KC already has plead not gulity to these charges of check fraud. JB certainly can't explain it away without KC giving direct testimony. The jury will see right through that; any defendant who can't give direct testimony about why they stole funds in such a large amount, buying carp at the grocery store and targee won't hold water with JB stating KC stole the money to search for Caylee. They will want to hear from KC directly not her attorney.

 

[momtective]

Another quick question...At the trial for the forgery can KC be asked any questions regarding Caylee's whereabouts at the time the checks were written/cashed? TIA

 

[Searchfortruth]

They can use a conviction in the check case a couple of ways:

If found guilty the previous criminal record can be presented at the penalty phase. They seem to be getting as many aggravating factors as possible together.

It will also force some of these witnesses into sworn testimony. It sets the stage for perjury if any of these witnesses try to change their testimony in the murder case.

It will also prevent Baez from saying the check related events in the timeline need to be withheld from the murder trial as his client is facing charges related to those events. This will be very relevant in Amy's testimony.

In most jurisdictions you cannot enter a previous conviction as evidence in a current case as it creates bias in the jury. The state needs to prove the current case and when they do then the jury can be informed of the priors for the penalty phase. There have been many rape cases where the jury said they would have convicted if they knew about the priors but acquitted in a he said she said case for reasonable doubt.

JB will fight this going to trial first saying his client is fighting for her life in the other case and that this redirection of resources is unfair to his client. The state is usually pretty careful to make sure a DP defendant has had every opportunity to defend their life, so it should be interesting.

Bolded by me...Since the fraud was committed during the time frame of the murder, does this affect the state's ability to hold the trial for fraud before the murder trial ?

 

[countzero]

Valhall, and others who have followed and contributed to that "other" thread (ZG22=KC); this is where my mind immediately went with this new development.
IF KC has an alter ego and fake id, and IF she cashed AH's checked and strolled over to pay toward the ZG22 ticket, and IF there was this fake ID confiscated from KC's wallet, wouldn't the foundation for all of this need to be established before entering it into evidence in her criminal trial?
I've got a weird feeling that LE is preparing to prove that KC is the invisinanny in the financial crimes venue, and in doing so "greasing the skids" for the main event. Please Lord, let me be right...

I agree with the alter ego theory. However, KC even signed her name on AH's checks then there is also those photos captured by the bank of KC cashing AH's check with her forged signature. Not sure how LE/SA could or would bring the ZG profile into this charge.

Also there are the claims that KC fraudulently used CA cc's and let's not forget SP's bank account removals. Same time period.

 

[Searchfortruth]

See, this is what I feel the SA is doing now. Getting KC to either plead guilty or put her on the stand to explain herself. KC already has plead not gulity to these charges of check fraud. JB certainly can't explain it away without KC giving direct testimony. The jury will see right through that; any defendant who can't give direct testimony about why they stole funds in such a large amount, buying carp at the grocery store and targee won't hold water with JB stating KC stole the money to search for Caylee. They will want to hear from KC directly not her attorney.

I am wondering if she can change her plea, I think she can, but I'm not sure. From a defense atty's POV (not that I have experience in this area) I would think a guilty plea would be the way to go, no testimony, plus probably a lighter sentence. She's not getting off on the charges even if they take it to trial, so why not just plead guilty and take that bullet ?

 

[okiedokietoo]

I agree with the alter ego theory. However, KC even signed her name on AH's checks then there is also those photos captured by the bank of KC cashing AH's check with her forged signature. Not sure how LE/SA could or would bring the ZG profile into this charge.

Also there are the claims that KC fraudulently used CA cc's and let's not forget SP's bank account removals. Same time period.

And Caylee wasn't with KC when she wrote those checks and was caught on camera

 

[Searchfortruth]

I agree with the alter ego theory. However, KC even signed her name on AH's checks then there is also those photos captured by the bank of KC cashing AH's check with her forged signature. Not sure how LE/SA could or would bring the ZG profile into this charge.

Also there are the claims that KC fraudulently used CA cc's and let's not forget SP's bank account removals. Same time period.

That's another interesting point Count...the money stolen from Cindy and Shirley. Although Casey isn't being charged with this, can they bring this up if she goes to trial on this fraud case ?

 

[momtective]

And Caylee wasn't with KC when she wrote those checks and was caught on camera

Exactly, that's why I'm wondering if any questions regarding Caylee will be allowed.

 

[countzero]

I am wondering if she can change her plea, I think she can, but I'm not sure. From a defense atty's POV (not that I have experience in this area) I would think a guilty plea would be the way to go, no testimony, plus probably a lighter sentence. She's not getting off on the charges even if they take it to trial, so why not just plead guilty and take that bullet ?

We are talking KC here, guilty is not part of her vocabulary. :crazy: Neither is it part of JB's. If anything, this gives JB more face time before the cameras and to self-stroke his ego. He has probably told KC don't worry about this either.

I think a normal person would have plead guilty right away knowing they signed their name to numerous checks that did not belong to them and photos proving it. With a first offense, it is a slap on the wrist and probation time in our state.

 

[countzero]

Exactly, that's why I'm wondering if any questions regarding Caylee will be allowed.

I don't think the SA will even bring up Caylee first. Let JB state why KC committed fraud.

JB or KC will state the fraud was committed to help search for Caylee. Opens the door for the SA to ask questions.

 

[Searchfortruth]

The video of Casey writing these checks shows clearly that Caylee was not there with her. Will they be able to use this video in both trials, the fraud and the murder trial ? I don't know the rules on this, and would think that it would be used in both, but am not sure how using in one trial affect's the ability to use in a seperate one. That's it, I have exceeded my question limit for the day...

 

[beach]

Exactly, that's why I'm wondering if any questions regarding Caylee will be allowed.

No, no questions about Caylee will be allowed in re. the check fraud charge. Unlike the depos in the civil matter where you can go wayyy beyond the scope on a fact finding mission, strictly testimony that pertains directly to the check fraud charge will be allowed.

 

[MAMABEAR]

The State must have a strategy hidden in this latest Motion, I just don't know what they hope to accomplish by having the Check Fraud Trial first. If she's convicted, I don't think they can use that info in the murder trial, can they?

LMAO---looks like the State is gittin the hang of the term--->In a backwards sort of way". I love it. Stuff is starting to move. YUP-YUP

 

[momtective]

I am wondering if she can change her plea, I think she can, but I'm not sure. From a defense atty's POV (not that I have experience in this area) I would think a guilty plea would be the way to go, no testimony, plus probably a lighter sentence. She's not getting off on the charges even if they take it to trial, so why not just plead guilty and take that bullet ?

Knowing now (thanks countzero) that Caylee can be brought up in this forgery trial...of course KC's gonna plead guilty! She'd be a fool not to.

 

[impatientredhead]

Bolded by me...Since the fraud was committed during the time frame of the murder, does this affect the state's ability to hold the trial for fraud before the murder trial ?

The state can go to trial on the fraud charges first if they decide to, but JB will fight it all the way. With the other case being a death penalty case it will be interesting to see if the judge rules with the defense in delaying the trial.

From some of the other posts Casey can change her plea to guilty, but she won't IMO. We will never in a million years see Casey on the stand in either trial. They won't have to ask about Caylee not being in the tapes at the fraud trial if there is one because they can ask that in the murder trial (where it is relevant).

 

[ThinkTank]

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/19823153/detail.html#

(clip)
Last fall, Anthony's defense asked that the check fraud trial be
delayed so they could focus on the murder charges against Anthony, but
in a motion filed on Friday, the prosecution asked that the trial be
set for a date within the next 60 days.

Anybody know ..... was the previous Defense Motion to delay the check fraud trial GRANTED by a Judge?
Was there a Hearing on that matter?
If it was granted ...... wonder what new info the prosecutors would submit at this time, to have a Judge REhear their Motion to move forward with the check fraud case now?
Sure would like to read the prosecutors Motion which was filed last Friday.

 

[JSR]

It's a brilliant move. When she's convicted and they move to the sentencing phase prior criminal history comes into evidence. Her attorneys can't try the mercy tactic and say she's a young woman with no prior criminal history. IMO I think the SA is setting up for the sentencing phase

 

[okiedokietoo]

No, no questions about Caylee will be allowed in re. the check fraud charge. Unlike the depos in the civil matter where you can go wayyy beyond the scope on a fact finding mission, strictly testimony that pertains directly to the check fraud charge will be allowed.

Then if JB is not going to bring up "KC was getting money to help Caylee" because it opens the door for State..there is no way for defense to argue this so what do you think of JB convincing KC to plead Nolo contendere

 

[ThinkTank]

If Zenaida's civil case against KC was allowed to move forward BEFORE the murder trial (the Judge agreed that Zenaida should not have to wait to be compensated for her damages) ..... then, wouldn't the check fraud case also be allowed to be presented before the murder trial, so the people damaged by KC's fraud and theft can be compensated?