2011.06.23 Sidebar Thread (Trial Day Twenty-six)

[~n/t~]

Pizza for lunch! Dig in!

 

[dog.gone.cute]

This is brutal!

What happens if the defense completely abandons their opening statement? What will the jury think?? I know that opening statements are not considered evidence, but what was the point of giving that opening statement if they were not even going to address the issues? They can't expect to have that information in the back of the jurors minds in the deliberation process if they don't expect them have it in their mind as to why the defense completely abandoned it?

I agree.

BBM:

The "Defense" also used photos of the Anthony's pool, yard and house in their Opening Statement.

Even though the "OS" is not considered "evidence" ... photos of the swimming pool were shown to the Jury on a large display board, and it must have left a lasting impression in the Jury's minds because this was the "first" statement they heard from the defense.

While I understand that Defense does not have to prove anything ... they brought it on themselves ... and their "defense" so far is helping the State.

:cow:

 

[countzero]

Thanks. I've got it on now. I missed the first few minutes and was afraid I missed him.

You're welcome. Normally Judge Eaton is on doing his commentary. To which I mute :floorlaugh: He is Cheney's sidekick and spouts for him. Ugh :banghead:

Hope Richard is wearing a terrific looking pocket square. He rocked in his the other day :rocker:

 

[robmom]

I just think all the planets were in alignment for Caylee when this Motley Crew came together. You would have to search far and wide in order to assemble a more ineffective bunch of Attorneys than Baez Mason and Simms.

I once worked for an attorney who put on a defense that the client was innocent because he didn't know there was a meth lab in his own basement. I thought that would probably be the worst defense I ever saw. And then came this team.

 

[LambChop]

Any lab ought have standards and protocols. I am sure JA will destroy this guys credibility but I scratch my head at the lack of written procedures and protocols by Dr. Vass's lab.

It's because they are an experimental lab and I believe this was established during Dr. Vass' testimony on direct. They are not held to the same standards because they are experimental and have to be free to experiment not just test. I think I have that right. jmo

 

[Murphismo]

I just think all the planets were in alignment for Caylee when this Motley Crew came together. You would have to search far and wide in order to assemble a more ineffective bunch of Attorneys than Baez Mason and Simms.

Could not agree more! This is American Justice!:justice:

 

[camcneishg]

I was like this smoking mainstream cigarettes. I live near a reservation and they had Skydancer cigarettes for 12 bucks a carton at the time. I tried them. I haven't smoked a mainstream cigarette since. I'm convinced the big tobacco companies put things in their cigarettes to make us want more.

I haven't quit, but my smoking habits have changed. I no longer smoke in my car - which is huge for me. I can actually go several hours when I'm out and about without a cigarette and barely think about it. I know longer wake up in the middle of the night just to burn one.

I too switched to Skydancers!!! And love them!!

 

[Linda7NJ]

I agree with this thought - and even though JA will most likely tear this guy up - if he doesn't prove that there were procedures and protocols - then it makes me wonder about Vass's lab and if it makes me wonder - does it make the jury wonder?

research labs are often the ones that make up the protocols used by forensic labs. Hope that helps.

Remember the sticky heart residue? The forensic lab followed protocals because that's what they do. That evidence was lost. IMO They are really not paid to think, but to run proceedures & follow rules and document the results.

A reasearch lab would have seen it, said Hey...this is interesting...let me take photos ...before I start a process that will destroy it. See what I mean?

 

[~n/t~]

This is brutal!

What happens if the defense completely abandons their opening statement? What will the jury think?? I know that opening statements are not considered evidence, but what was the point of giving that opening statement if they were not even going to address the issues? They can't expect to have that information in the back of the jurors minds in the deliberation process if they don't expect them have it in their mind as to why the defense completely abandoned it?

They lose all credibility in my opinion. The jurors like many of us are waiting for that AHA moment from the defense. If I was a juror, I'd want proof that Caylee drowned and Casey was sexually molested by her father and brother which would explain away her behaviour. If that is not proven by the defense, the 31 partying days whilst her baby girl was dead will not go over well with this jury.

 

[SallyLu]

I wonder when the real fireworks are going to start, I'm on the verge of turning on Hoarders...ullhair:artyguy: This is honestly getting rediculous - I have never in my life heard such drivel. The only good thing is that it's so flipping boreing that JB hasn't had time to really screw things up....:twocents:

I know what you mean. The DT couldn't arrange a p*** up in a Brewery...:crazy:

I went and roamed around the forum for a change. I thought there might be a topic on the Southwest pilot that ranted and raved about everyone but his mother and was on an open mic.

 

[LyndyLoo]

I agree with this thought - and even though JA will most likely tear this guy up - if he doesn't prove that there were procedures and protocals - then it makes me wonder about Vass's lab and if it makes me wonder - does it make the jury wonder?

I have to wonder why DT didnt go into all this policy and procedure stuff with Dr. Wise??? Since it is the DT trying to discredit the Oak Ridge Lab P&P when reaching conclusions??..Bringing in a forensic toxicologist to try and do that is just rediculous..

Just an aside, didnt DT learn from the frye hearings that Dr. Logan was not the (expert) person to discredit this stuff??..Yowza...

 

[concentric]

Do you think DS will be putting her arm around ICA any more?

 

[Florida Native]

You're welcome. Normally Judge Eaton is on doing his commentary. To which I mute :floorlaugh: He is Cheney's sidekick and spouts for him. Ugh :banghead:

Hope Richard is wearing a terrific looking pocket square. He rocked in his the other day :rocker:

I can't listen to Judge E. either.

 

[Cubby]

http://www.tastesofchicago.com/cate...oushome&utm_medium=rnav&utm_campaign=dropdown

More pizza for everyone, straight from Chicago the best Pizza pies in the world!

 

[Kentjbkent]

I am honestly confused about Dorothy Sims performance. I made a joke about it in the trial thread, but I am seriously and really perplexed at what just happened with the last witness. I thought she was an experienced lawyer and an expert in the field of questioning forensic and science witnesses? I was confused about this because her website says she specializes in social security, but I thought I remembered hearing she was a superstar in questioning and cross exam. But that is about as far from the truth as ICA’s lies. Ms. Sims is really embarrassing herself with the poor questioning of this last witness.

I just hope the jury isn't feeling frustrated with Ashton because he is calling all of the objections, but notes it for what it really is and that is lack of competence from the defense.

This was actually discussed in length in a thread dedicated to the subject of D. SIms when it was announced she was joining the defense team.

She IS apparently experienced in this area, but her expertise is in representing the PROSECUTION in almost all of her cases.

If I am not mistaken, she had never stood on the DEFENSE side in the past...so this WOULD be new to her!!!

 

[Chili Fries]

It's because they are an experimental lab and I believe this was established during Dr. Vass' testimony on direct. They are not held to the same standards because they are experimental and have to be free to experiment not just test. I think I have that right. jmo

No offense but they really don't. Creative research is fine when searching for new avenues of inquiry but doing test results which are going to be presented at trial requires great rigor. I used to do testing for PCB's that could wind up in court cases and I was very aware of dotting my i's and crossing my t's. You have to be able to back your findings up with verified methods and good quality control.

 

[Talina]

IS is commenting that Lippman should be brought before the Florida Bar for breaking client/attorney confidentiality. Man, the Florida Bar is going to be busy

That would be assuming that his clients did not give him permission to give these statements has been giving.What he was quoted as having said last night is not the first time he has said it. He said virtually the same thing last week on Vinnie Politan's show (I saw him say it). If the Anthony's were upset with it then, I seriously doubt they would have left that go unsaid to Lippman. IMO

 

[nursebeeme]

hey guys... wesh says the analysts are up next
http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/interactive.html

 

[~n/t~]

This was actually discussed in length in a thread dedicated to the subject of D. SIms when it was announced she was joining the defense team.

She IS apparently experienced in this area, but her expertise is in representing the PROSECUTION in almost all of her cases.

If I am not mistaken, she had never stood on the DEFENSE side in the past...so this WOULD be new to her!!!

Oh wow. I didn't know that. That explains it for me. She really does not look and act like a defense attorney. She's too soft spoken, sweet, imo.

Why in the world did she take on this case? :banghead:

 

[chasing.halos]

We need beer with our pizza... order up!