Scamperoo
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2010
- Messages
- 1,143
- Reaction score
- 6
Oh FGS. Back to the weight.
Someone should bring up the weight differential between Casey and Caylee.
Oh FGS. Back to the weight.
If Mason does the closing argument during trial the jury is gonna need a lot of Red Bull.
Cheney Mason does not both me as much as he bothers others. I understand that he has a job to do. He is stating what he was told by his clients parents. He has no choice but to say these things because his job is to get these statements suppressed.
I would rather listen to him than JB.
This is terrible. Worse than I thought! Not persuasive at all.
How much do we want to bet that Judge Perry has his ruling in front of him right now??
CM is summarizing: Evening of July 15, CA called 911 - and was described as aggitated and hysterical saying "I want her arrested!" This begins the psychological pressure of a young 22 year old with no prior involvement with law enforcement, no street kid and no idea what was going on. Then 4 deputies arrives all in 'full regalia". She was questioned and then the next undisputed fact is that she was handcuffed by the deputy. This fact somehow evaded the knowledge of supervisors and the prosecution. Because she was handcuffed it cannot be argued that she was not in custody right then - and it started right then - she was led out to the car, patted down and put in the back seat of the car in the caged compartment where she could not open the doors or roll down the windows. Then she was driven to Sawgrass by a deputy in 'full regalia' and another deputy questioned her about the apartment and the nanny scenario - still no Miranda.
She was brought back and taken for a walk by Hosey and now a suggestion has been made that she had been "unarrested". CM cites Williams v. State - "there is no such thing as unarrest".
Judge Perry interrupts: at what point were the handcuffs taken off? Were they taken off before she went to look at the apartment? CM answers no one remembers that so clearly.
CM then says in the totality of the circumstances that she is in a psychological circumstance of her mother yelling for her to be arrested and the handcuffs and the uniformed deputies make it feel to her like she is in custody.
She is then questioned by Melich who takes her into a room in the house where the two were in there alone; she is isolated from her family at that point; no Miranda.
There is evidence that there were harsh tones from time to time.
Looking through the eyes of the defendant, 22 yo with no experience with law enforcement and she is in an environment where she does not believe she can leave or not speak. She was never told that she could leave or didn't have to talk to anyone. This went on until about 3:30 in the morning. LE leaves.
Then the deputies come back in the morning. And they took her at that time in the car and both CA and GA said they were told she will not be back - this is relevant to the whole concept of their intent to have her in custody.
They took her to Universal - they did not invite her to meet them there; he didn't ask the family will you bring her to Universal in the morning? This shows intent by LE to have her in custody.
Now they get to universal and there are 4 big guys including head of security at Universal - they are in a secured area not open to the public and they take her down a hallway whereupon they put her in a small conference room about 10' by 10' (CM shows an area of the courtroom about the same size) with 3 ARMED detectives and KC and they closed the door and did not give her Miranda - and they kept the door closed.
LE says the door was closed for privacy - but regardless of the reason stated by LE, CM is arguing that a closed door means something different to the reasonable person - that she was not free to go.
So under the law we must evaluate whether her freedom was deprived in any significant way;
JUDGE PERRY NOW GIVING CM HIS OWN RESEARCH ON THIS:
Parks v. State 644 1994
CM has not read that case :0
CM cites Ross v. State, FL Supreme Court
Find the totality of the circumstances analogous to KC's case.
...
How much do we want to bet that Judge Perry has his ruling in front of him right now??
Cheney seems to avoid the fact that it was Casey who lead them to Universal, to show them her "office".