What Is the Defense Strategy #2

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

I really believe that the DT is behind the media motion. When Richard Gabriel was on IS yesterday he said the DT wanted to do a full review of the makeup of the jury venue.

If this case does not plead out...I believe that the DT wants to first...know the jury venue...then have time to do their research.

Note that the local Orlando media dropped out of the appeal......don't want to burn their bridge.
 
WolfmarsGirl said:
There are two ways they can go with that:
...
<snipped>

2) KC found Caylee after a drowning accident. She changed her clothes, tried to call parents and got no response, so she staged a kidnapping.
I am not too sure the chloroform could not be an artifact from evaporating chlorine in a person's hair mixed with decomp, so a jury might believe it. I wish we had an expert here who could tell us if chlorine plus decomp could produce chloroform, but, oh well.

The 31 days could be explained as I did above - scared of abusive George and Cindy, weak, frightened, L O V E L Y little KC, blah, blah, blah...

Either way, they will say it was just too darned late to call 911 because the child was long gone.

So, why get in trouble with mom and dad when you could party instead?
Click to expand...

Snipped and boldingby me (hope snipping is OK here)

I thought for the LONGEST time she tried to stage a carjack/kidnapping (because of the tape and her purse in the car at Amscot), but a big light bulb went off over my head the other day: She called ToneL to pick her up at Amscot stating she ran out of gas. Kind of kills a car/kidnapping story, to me.

But I do agree with you, I think the 'abuse' defense is going to be used to explain the 31 days. I don't think reasonable people will buy it at all, not for a second. It will reek of desperatation, I think, and could backfire: she sure didn't look scared or sound scared or act anytime during the 31 days. She was making plans for the future.

In other words, there is no evidence she was scared, quite the opposite.
 
With a lot of us thinking that the defense is going to use 'prior bad acts' so to speak, to blame George and/or Cindy for KC's behavior, I went back and found the video where she tells them "I haven't said anything, don't worry". Watch the first 90 seconds of this visit and see if you agree with my thoughts.

http://www.wftv.com/video/18205452/index.html

Watch Cindy's expression when KC says she has been talking to one of the doctors. Cindy then says "we forgive anything that you've said". KC replies with 'I haven't said anything, don't worry' in a very light and breezy manner. There are one or two awkward pauses during this exchange. Knowing that JB spent his own money to have the jail visits transcribed, I am willing to bet that this video and the transcript are going to be one of the first things the defense enters as evidence when/if they start their case in chief.
 
The more I read this thread the more I find this whole accident and/or abuse defense ridiculous. Who on earth is going to believe anything this lying defendant and lying family comes up with at the 13th hour?

There is SO much evidence of Casey lying only beginning with the zanny and employment story: but what, she is suddenly going to tell the truth when the 10 minute reality clock runs out? Who is going to believe her?

ANd if they think the family will help out it that: sam song, different verse. Obstructing the facts, changing of testimony, and SO much insistancethat SODDI. Now what, all of a sudden they were all just kidding and lying about their red flags and theories? Nope, that family and Casey put themselves squarely in the SODDI theory.

Sheesh. I think my dog and 11 of his peers would laugh at this. It's too late. The defense is going to be embarassed, imo.
 
With only a few days to go where are all the rest of the depos? Will we see them before the trial starts. RG and JG and RK?
 
Fluffy Puppy said:
The more I read this thread the more I find this whole accident and/or abuse defense ridiculous. Who on earth is going to believe anything this lying defendant and lying family comes up with at the 13th hour?

There is SO much evidence of Casey lying only beginning with the zanny and employment story: but what, she is suddenly going to tell the truth when the 10 minute reality clock runs out? Who is going to believe her?

ANd if they think the family will help out it that: sam song, different verse. Obstructing the facts, changing of testimony, and SO much insistancethat SODDI. Now what, all of a sudden they were all just kidding and lying about their red flags and theories? Nope, that family and Casey put themselves squarely in the SODDI theory.

Sheesh. I think my dog and 11 of his peers would laugh at this. It's too late. The defense is going to be embarassed, imo.
Click to expand...
Thing is, they only need 1 gullible juror to gum up the works, and that is what I think they will be shooting for if they don't plead out first, which is what I believe will happen.
 
USARDOG said:
Thing is, they only need 1 gullible juror to gum up the works, and that is what I think they will be shooting for if they don't plead out first, which is what I believe will happen.
Click to expand...

I am thinking the DT is trying to get a plea (and and that is part of the request for the Anthony's request for a visit) but the state isn't buying the accident/abuse thing. I just don't see the state agreeing to a lesser charge plea because there is no evidence that points to a lesser charge (accident, abuse, whatever). I could, however, see the state agreeing to LWOP for 1st degree.

I am so beyond 'a reasonable doubt' with what we know now, that I think even the chance of one gullible jurror is remote. Thinking about how this will all play out in a trial, I think the state's case is overwhelming.
 
I'm sure they will try to say "accident". But...What kind of human being NEVER sobs when their child dies? Who could sit there after an accident and not cry. I would think a parent being responsible for accidentally "killing" her child would feel even worse than if a stranger did it, because of a human emotion called GUILT.
When my son was born, the first week I clipped his little nails and accidentally clipped some skin and a drop of blood came out. I cried for a while since I felt so guilty. I was mortified that I had actually harmed him.
 
Macushla said:
With a lot of us thinking that the defense is going to use 'prior bad acts' so to speak, to blame George and/or Cindy for KC's behavior, I went back and found the video where she tells them "I haven't said anything, don't worry". Watch the first 90 seconds of this visit and see if you agree with my thoughts.

http://www.wftv.com/video/18205452/index.html

Watch Cindy's expression when KC says she has been talking to one of the doctors. Cindy then says "we forgive anything that you've said". KC replies with 'I haven't said anything, don't worry' in a very light and breezy manner. There are one or two awkward pauses during this exchange. Knowing that JB spent his own money to have the jail visits transcribed, I am willing to bet that this video and the transcript are going to be one of the first things the defense enters as evidence when/if they start their case in chief.
Click to expand...


She could have been reassuring Cindy that she did not tell them about her attempts to choke her in this exchange also. It is very important to Cindy that they appear to be a normal, happy family, as we all know.
Just my :twocents: :crazy:
 
SondraK said:
She could have been reassuring Cindy that she did not tell them about her attempts to choke her in this exchange also. It is very important to Cindy that they appear to be a normal, happy family, as we all know.
Just my :twocents: :crazy:
Click to expand...

Nah, since I watched this clip today, I now firmly believe KC was just assuring her parents that she did not talk about her innocence or guilt to LE without an attorney present. GA probably pressed that point before she went in, since he was former LE.

I don't think there is anything more to read into this because of the lighthearted manner in which KC said the sentence.
 
Recently posted in Today's News Thread

sjs323 said:
05/05/2011 Objection
Defense; to Motion for Relatives of Victim to be Excused from the Rule of Sequestration
Click to expand...

So - the Defense is objecting to the Relatives of Victim (GA and CA) to being excused from the Rule of Sequestration.

While I'd like to think it's because they have some wild card up their sleeve, I'm going to guess it's because ICA doesn't want them in the Courtroom to hear most of the really terrible details of what she did to Caylee.

I think she is concerned if they really know everything about what she has done - they will get up and testify truthfully at long last.


nums24 said:
Should they Stay or Should they Go? May 5th, 2011 by Richard Hornsby.

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2011/05/should-they-stay-or-should-they-go/
Click to expand...

And I see Richard Hornsby has come up with a new slant on the sequestration laws - and thinks they should and will be let in. I'm going to disagree with him.
 
By filing the motion objecting to G&A being in the courtroom at all, I think the defense has finally shown a bit of their hand. And the irony is indeed rich. The defense is going to sit back and watch as the State shreds the credibility of both George and Cindy. When the defense presents their case, they are going to call them to the stand and flat out accuse them of just about everything under the sun. It will not matter how much either of them deny or protest what the defense saying. The jury, at this point, isn't going to believe a word they say. And KC will sit there watching it all happen and not have to take the stand, because either JB or CM will have done it for her with their examination of her parents. Hate to say it, but this is a VERY clever move on the part of the defense. Since I doubt JB could ever think that clearly, I bet this was all CM's idea.
 
Macushla said:
By filing the motion objecting to G&A being in the courtroom at all, I think the defense has finally shown a bit of their hand. And the irony is indeed rich. The defense is going to sit back and watch as the State shreds the credibility of both George and Cindy. When the defense presents their case, they are going to call them to the stand and flat out accuse them of just about everything under the sun. It will not matter how much either of them deny or protest what the defense saying. The jury, at this point, isn't going to believe a word they say. And KC will sit there watching it all happen and not have to take the stand, because either JB or CM will have done it for her with their examination of her parents. Hate to say it, but this is a VERY clever move on the part of the defense. Since I doubt JB could ever think that clearly, I bet this was all CM's idea.
Click to expand...

Not sure with this recent development that the SA will shred them. I would have thought so under other circumstances but now I expect LDB to "play" GA and CA right into her hands and her prosecution plans. Carefully, with feelings and respectfully. And those parents will be ripe for it.
 
Macushla said:
By filing the motion objecting to G&A being in the courtroom at all, I think the defense has finally shown a bit of their hand. And the irony is indeed rich. The defense is going to sit back and watch as the State shreds the credibility of both George and Cindy. When the defense presents their case, they are going to call them to the stand and flat out accuse them of just about everything under the sun. It will not matter how much either of them deny or protest what the defense saying. The jury, at this point, isn't going to believe a word they say. And KC will sit there watching it all happen and not have to take the stand, because either JB or CM will have done it for her with their examination of her parents. Hate to say it, but this is a VERY clever move on the part of the defense. Since I doubt JB could ever think that clearly, I bet this was all CM's idea.
Click to expand...

I'm confused, I thought the motion was the the Anthony's wanted to stay in the courtroom for the entire trial? If they are on the witness list they have to be there or they will be in contempt of court and they can't go in until after they have testified.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...ness&URL=0900-0999/0914/Sections/0914.03.html
 
logicalgirl said:
Not sure with this recent development that the SA will shred them. I would have thought so under other circumstances but now I expect LDB to "play" GA and CA right into her hands and her prosecution plans. Carefully, with feelings and respectfully. And those parents will be ripe for it.
Click to expand...

I agree. The State is not going to do the defense's dirty work for them. If the defense wants to make Cindy and George out to be anything but grieving grandparents who just do not want to believe their daughter is capable of murdering her own child, the defense is going to have to do it themselves. The State wants to prove just how evil and vile Casey Anthony is. She is the one on trial. Not Cindy and George.

The defense is going to want to take the attention off of Casey being this vile creature... the State is going to want to keep the attention on Casey being exactly what they are accusing her of.
 
legalmania said:
I'm confused, I thought the motion was the the Anthony's wanted to stay in the courtroom for the entire trial? If they are on the witness list they have to be there or they will be in contempt of court and they can't go in until after they have testified.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...ness&URL=0900-0999/0914/Sections/0914.03.html
Click to expand...

They'd be sequestered, kept out of the courtroom during testimonies of other witnesses but not kept from the courthouse. Hope that is not more confusing? jmo
 
SondraK said:
She could have been reassuring Cindy that she did not tell them about her attempts to choke her in this exchange also. It is very important to Cindy that they appear to be a normal, happy family, as we all know.
Just my :twocents: :crazy:
Click to expand...

More importantly at that time would have been for CA not to give LE any more reason for motive. Probably why she denied the argument altogether imo. I do agree with the other poster though, the way Casey said it simply was reassuring them that she was keeping her yap shut since all she had said so far was lies and it landed her in jail. Many friends said Casey would go on and on about nothing so surely her parents knew this. She also has a history of re-telling more lies when she gets caught in the original.
 
logicalgirl said:
Not sure with this recent development that the SA will shred them. I would have thought so under other circumstances but now I expect LDB to "play" GA and CA right into her hands and her prosecution plans. Carefully, with feelings and respectfully. And those parents will be ripe for it.
Click to expand...

The only problem that might arise from this scenario is will CA and GA play along with the state ..... if they attempt to re-write history, then ICA/DT has to change their strategy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 77 more.
Total: 1,544 (members: 78, guests: 1,466)

Online statistics

Members online
78
Guests online
1,466
Total visitors
1,544
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,725
Messages
18,191,185
Members
233,505
Latest member
reneej08
Back
Top