The Justice System and KC

[logicalgirl]

Not at all. Everyone is so caught up with the quantity of motions filed by Ms. Lyon, but each motion is aimed at making sure every aspect of the death penalty aspects of the case are fairly applied.

Legal history of replete with "the same issue" being denied over and over again, until one day there is a coalesce of facts that suddenly make it obvious that a certain issue was unfair - the same issue that was dismissed time and time again.

Just recently the U.S. Supreme Court said you cannot execute the retarded - for two hundred years prior to this the retarded were executed over their attorney's objection.

Currently the U.S. Supreme Court is faced with the question of whether it is cruel and unusual punishment to sentence a juvenile offender to life in prison, even though no person was killed (i.e. a rape was underlying crime). Motions objecting to such a sentence were routinely denied for decades and suddenly the SCOTUS decides it is worthy of a look. Well I ask, what if that attorney said you know what, it has been denied 1,000 times before, why bother now.

Why bother, because you just might be the case that results in a cultural shift in what the law is.

Thank you very much for your answer, although you are preaching to the converted since I am Canadian. However, our system is not without huge flaws also. Our Life doesn't mean life, it means possible parole, even those convicted who have committed horrific crimes such as Clifford Olson, with his 13 children, although the RCMP believe the number was actually closer to 100. He regularly applies for parole. And innocent people are convicted, and guilty people are set free.
I don't believe Ms Lyons cares two hoots for Casey, her innocence or guilt - but for her own personal agenda and her upcoming book tour. And winning of course, which is about her and not her clients.

 

[Just Jayla]

AL is definitely using Casey as a platform. Why else would she even be on this case? She's from Illinois iirc.

Her being from the 60's Chicago crowd and her educational background are what made me suspect of this to begin with...But I can't see the angle, though-How can she use KC as a social instrument, as KC does not fall into one of the usual "labels" that AL would like to see?
What motion/decision can she illicit from this case that will have usurped legislation in the hopes of social change? I know that she wants notariety as it will give her a louder voice in the death penalty arena, but how can she tie KC, the DP and social justice?
I think KC will remain a one track case for AL, I think she will have to focus her skills at fighting the DP on its legal merits in general, rather than how it applies to a middle class, fairly educated, pretty Orlando girl.

 

[logicalgirl]

Angle? Two words - High profile. This lawyer wants to be famous, or at least written up in the legal books and leave a legacy.

 

[rhornsby]

Thank you very much for your answer, although you are preaching to the converted since I am Canadian. However, our system is not without huge flaws also. Our Life doesn't mean life, it means possible parole, even those convicted who have committed horrific crimes such as Clifford Olson, with his 13 children, although the RCMP believe the number was actually closer to 100. He regularly applies for parole. And innocent people are convicted, and guilty people are set free.
I don't believe Ms Lyons cares two hoots for Casey, her innocence or guilt - but for her own personal agenda and her upcoming book tour. And winning of course, which is about her and not her clients.

I would have to disagree, Ms. Lyon is doing an appropriate and professional job representing Ms. Anthony - now if you had said Jose Baez, I might see your point

 

[Tulessa]

Angle? Two words - High profile. This lawyer wants to be famous, or at least written up in the legal books and leave a legacy.

I don't think it's that at all. I just think she is very much against the DP.

 

[logicalgirl]

I would have to disagree, Ms. Lyon is doing an appropriate and professional job representing Ms. Anthony - now if you had said Jose Baez, I might see your point

I think you misunderstand my statement. I have no issue with the professional job she is doing for Casey - it appears to be as you say appropriate. I was speaking of her "purpose" for taking this case, this defendant. This case if furthering her own personal platform or so she hopes. It is unfortunate that as she forwards her life mission, she doesn't see to be aware of how poorly she is perceived by the public. Note to ALyons - brush up on your personal presentation skills. As for JB, can't say professional and JB in the same sentence because I don't want to get laughed off the board.

 

[Tulessa]

. As for JB, can't say professional and JB in the same sentence because I don't want to get laughed off the board.

:bow:

 

[logicalgirl]

I don't think it's that at all. I just think she is very much against the DP.

Oh I agree - but why this case? This defendant?

 

[Rlaub44]

I don't know, whose fault would it be if an innocent person was convicted and executed?

Was it the defense attorney's for not winning - maybe because he felt he would be offending the public if he filed to many motions or raised to much of a stink?

Was it the prosecutor's for using jailhouse snitches and questionable forensic evidence.

Was it the judge for allowing in questionable forensic evidence or for ruling incorrectly?

Was it law enforcement's for not investigating other suspects, for not looking into questionable leads, for illegally obtaining evidence?

Was it the jury's?

Something tells me that before we start asking whose fault it is if a defendant gets off on a technicality (therefore assuming they were in fact guilty) that we should first ask whose fault it is if an innocent person is not only convicted (happens daily) but sentenced to death (happens yearly), but also executed (exact number never to be known).

I certainly agree that we need to be vigilant against that tragic outcome, but I know that we all want our justice system to be as close to perfect as it can be. This requires eliminating the errors from both directions.

Your other posts in this section are great reminders of why the accused has the due process rights that they have. We are fortunate to live in a country that protects us from overzealous or malicious government, a fact that we too often take for granted.

There is a quote, often attributed to Ben Franklin (although the source has been questioned) that states, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety". Our Founding Fathers knew what it meant to be ruled unfairly, and they made certain to ensure us the basic rights we still enjoy today.

Unfortunately, it makes big news when a defendant is freed due to one of those rights, or "technicalities" if one prefers. That is why we watch both ends of the spectrum regarding problems in our system of justice. We need to strike the best balance to protect the rights of all citizens, whether they are the accused or the victim. There will always be pendulum swings in both directions, but on a whole, I think we find the correct "center" most of the time.

(Stepping off the soapbox now...)

 

[tracy87]

I would have to disagree, Ms. Lyon is doing an appropriate and professional job representing Ms. Anthony - now if you had said Jose Baez, I might see your point

are you saying that if the DP was dropped Ms Lyon would go away?

 

[Leila]

totally agree with the bolded section. This is indeed the element that turns this case upside down. I would like to see what other grandparental reactions are documented in cases such as this.
Does anyone have any cases to suggest for reference?

We've had other mothers kill their children - Andrea Yates and Susan Smith are two that come to mind on an immediate basis, but I don't remember ever seeing any coverage of the maternal grandparents in these two cases. I'm sure there were reactions, but they weren't shared publicly.

I did a brief search, and came up with one article that lists mothers who've killed their children, and although some of the names are familiar with cases that have been covered here at WS, I don't recall reactions by maternal grandparents. Link to article below:

http://crime.about.com/od/female_offenders/a/mother_killers.htm

 

[Leila]

new question:

if it were up to you, would you agree to a MUCH lighter sentence for kc if she were to confess and give full disclosure (and express true remorse) of what exactly happened?
or would you rather her get the death penalty, but NEVER get the answers to what truly happened?

what is more important to you? punishing kc to the fullest no matter what OR

finding the exact truth, answering all questions and giving CA, GA and LA and all of Caylee's family peace, but kc gets a second chance at a life outside of prison?

I would certainly opt for the truth, and would agree to a lighter sentence, although not a much lighter sentence. I'd take the death penalty off the table, and agree to something in the neighborhood of 25 years, if I was certain that she'd do the full 25 years.

 

[Leila]

PLease read this article

This article reminds of a case that I'm very familiar with as I know one family member.

My friend's sister, Alice, was carjacked from a South Carolina Walmart in November 2002. The perps took her across the state line into North Carolina where they killed her and dumped her body. They took her car and continued northwest, killing a young college girl in West Virgina. The two perps split up in Kentucky, where one of the perps was arrested, and the second one was later arrested in Indiana with Alice's car.

Both perps confessed and were tried in federal court as their crimes covered several states. Both were convicted and got the death penalty.

Although numerous searches were conducted by various search groups, Alice's body was not found. Then one of the perps offered some information late last year, and in January 2009, Alice's remains were recovered. It took until July of this year for the authorities to make a DNA confirmation, and Alice's family just had her funeral on November 14th - the anniversary of the carjacking 7 years ago.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

There are only 3 or 4 verified attorneys on the caylee forum (rhhornsby ,azlawyer and impatientredhead off the top of my head) and plenty of us non lawyer types and we think you are doing just fine! So do not ever be afarid to post what you are thinking. We are learning together, even the attorneys are picking up a thing or two.

Regarding getting someone off on a technicality..whose fault would you consider that to be?

IMO our justice system is as good if not better than any other system of justice that can be found. The vision and foresight of our forefathers has given us a foundation that has proven to be very solid.. In over 200 years, there have been very few amendments to the original foundation. To me, this means our system not only works, but has worked for a long time.
Is it a myth created by the media that this mafia boss or that hitman walked on a technicality after committing some horrendous crime? Possibly, but I do believe if this has ever happened that lawmakers would quickly act to insure against it ever happening again, in the same way, exploiting the same technicality.
If the defense found and exploited a technicality in this case, and KC walked, then lawmakers made a new law that rendered this technicality unusable by defendants in future cases, is that not our justice system working as best it can? It would of course be very sad that justice for Caylee was not accomplished because of this technicality, however, when lawmakers correct this technicality no future victims will see their hopes for justice unfulfilled by this very same technicality. IMO our justice system is a never ending work in progress. Just, for example, modern technology advances so quickly that our laws are having a hard time keeping up with it. Identity theft, modern forensics, etc. has moved so quickly with the speed of modern technology that our lawmakers have not been able to make all the laws needed to deal with this, YET.
To me, it is simply amazing that our forefathers built such a solid foundation for us, even though there was no internet, no planes, trains, and automobiles, no cell phones, no telephones, no electricity, no email, no computers, no televisions, that the same basic fundamentals they gave us are still not only alive and well, but throughout all this progress have had only a few amendments.
As to justice and how it pertains to KC in this case, I believe LE and the prosecution have done all they can to prevent KC from walking on a technicality. I don’t see that happening here. If KC did what they have indicted her for, I think justice will prevail.
So, if the question is whose fault would it be if KC gets off on a technicality? I would answer imo that no one is at fault, that the system needs to address and correct the technicality so it cannot be exploited further.
And of course, this entire post is MOO.

 

[JBean]

IMO our justice system is as good if not better than any other system of justice that can be found. The vision and foresight of our forefathers has given us a foundation that has proven to be very solid.. In over 200 years, there have been very few amendments to the original foundation. To me, this means our system not only works, but has worked for a long time.
Is it a myth created by the media that this mafia boss or that hitman walked on a technicality after committing some horrendous crime? Possibly, but I do believe if this has ever happened that lawmakers would quickly act to insure against it ever happening again, in the same way, exploiting the same technicality.
If the defense found and exploited a technicality in this case, and KC walked, then lawmakers made a new law that rendered this technicality unusable by defendants in future cases, is that not our justice system working as best it can? It would of course be very sad that justice for Caylee was not accomplished because of this technicality, however, when lawmakers correct this technicality no future victims will see their hopes for justice unfulfilled by this very same technicality. IMO our justice system is a never ending work in progress. Just, for example, modern technology advances so quickly that our laws are having a hard time keeping up with it. Identity theft, modern forensics, etc. has moved so quickly with the speed of modern technology that our lawmakers have not been able to make all the laws needed to deal with this, YET.
To me, it is simply amazing that our forefathers built such a solid foundation for us, even though there was no internet, no planes, trains, and automobiles, no cell phones, no telephones, no electricity, no email, no computers, no televisions, that the same basic fundamentals they gave us are still not only alive and well, but throughout all this progress have had only a few amendments.
As to justice and how it pertains to KC in this case, I believe LE and the prosecution have done all they can to prevent KC from walking on a technicality. I don’t see that happening here. If KC did what they have indicted her for, I think justice will prevail.
So, if the question is whose fault would it be if KC gets off on a technicality? I would answer imo that no one is at fault, that the system needs to address and correct the technicality so it cannot be exploited further.
And of course, this entire post is MOO.

IMO, this is the best system around and I would not want to be tried anywhere else. It has its flaws but I support it generally and agree that changes are effected regualrly to close exploited legal loopholes as they should be.

But the technicalities I was referring to are more evidence collecting protocol. For example, if evidence is gathered without a search warrant for items that required a search warrant rendering evidence inadmissible then it is the fault of the collectors of the evidence if criminal is acquitted because this.

 

[RR0004]

I don't know, whose fault would it be if an innocent person was convicted and executed?

Was it the defense attorney's for not winning - maybe because he felt he would be offending the public if he filed to many motions or raised to much of a stink?

Was it the prosecutor's for using jailhouse snitches and questionable forensic evidence.

Was it the judge for allowing in questionable forensic evidence or for ruling incorrectly?

Was it law enforcement's for not investigating other suspects, for not looking into questionable leads, for illegally obtaining evidence?

Was it the jury's?

Something tells me that before we start asking whose fault it is if a defendant gets off on a technicality (therefore assuming they were in fact guilty) that we should first ask whose fault it is if an innocent person is not only convicted (happens daily) but sentenced to death (happens yearly), but also executed (exact number never to be known).

JBean's was a good question...IMO worthy of an answer.

 

[RR0004]

I don't think it's that at all. I just think she is very much against the DP.

I'm sure there are hundreds of cases...with less notoriety...that she could sink her teeth into IMO.

 

[JBean]

I don't know, whose fault would it be if an innocent person was convicted and executed?

Was it the defense attorney's for not winning - maybe because he felt he would be offending the public if he filed to many motions or raised to much of a stink?

Was it the prosecutor's for using jailhouse snitches and questionable forensic evidence.

Was it the judge for allowing in questionable forensic evidence or for ruling incorrectly?

Was it law enforcement's for not investigating other suspects, for not looking into questionable leads, for illegally obtaining evidence?

Was it the jury's?

Something tells me that before we start asking whose fault it is if a defendant gets off on a technicality (therefore assuming they were in fact guilty) that we should first ask whose fault it is if an innocent person is not only convicted (happens daily) but sentenced to death (happens yearly), but also executed (exact number never to be known).

My post was poorly worded. What i was referring to specifically (in my mind LOL) was why would the defense attorney be to blame when the acquittal is based on a technicality due to evidience not being collected properly.
IOW, if a defense attorney reveals that a confession was obtained illegally or if no search warrant was issued for evidence and it was all tossed out at trial, why would an acquittal based on that be the fault of the defense attorney? IMO it would be the fault of those that are responsible for collecting that data.

What I was thinking in my mind didn't exactly make it to the keyboard.

 

[rhornsby]

I think you misunderstand my statement. I have no issue with the professional job she is doing for Casey - it appears to be as you say appropriate. I was speaking of her "purpose" for taking this case, this defendant. This case if furthering her own personal platform or so she hopes. It is unfortunate that as she forwards her life mission, she doesn't see to be aware of how poorly she is perceived by the public. Note to ALyons - brush up on your personal presentation skills. As for JB, can't say professional and JB in the same sentence because I don't want to get laughed off the board.

All that I know is that I don't know why she took on the case. It could be that she saw an inexperienced attorney over his head and wanted to help.

As for her public perception, outside of those who support Casey Anthony, I doubt she is poorly regarded.

Either way, we each have our own opinion that is built on nothing more than assumptions and inferences.

 

[RR0004]

This article reminds of a case that I'm very familiar with as I know one family member.

My friend's sister, Alice, was carjacked from a South Carolina Walmart in November 2002. The perps took her across the state line into North Carolina where they killed her and dumped her body. They took her car and continued northwest, killing a young college girl in West Virgina. The two perps split up in Kentucky, where one of the perps was arrested, and the second one was later arrested in Indiana with Alice's car.

Both perps confessed and were tried in federal court as their crimes covered several states. Both were convicted and got the death penalty.

Although numerous searches were conducted by various search groups, Alice's body was not found. Then one of the perps offered some information late last year, and in January 2009, Alice's remains were recovered. It took until July of this year for the authorities to make a DNA confirmation, and Alice's family just had her funeral on November 14th - the anniversary of the carjacking 7 years ago.

Thanks, Leila.

I read about the update here.

So heartwrenching. I appreciate you sharing her story with us.