2011.08.05 Hearing on Casey's probation

[grandmaj]

Here is how I see this. Judge Perry knows and has it on the record that the probation was not a valid probation. He has also noted for the record that the defense knew about this and didn't notify the court. He has also made it clear what the original record stated. And I think he believes that the record can be corrected as a result of that case that Frank George quoted.

What I also think this did was point out that the Probation Department excercised more discretion with a court order than they had a legal right to do. And will note that in his decision to avoid case precident from being set.

But in the end, the Judge unless he can find more case law which would indicate that this would not be considered double jeopardy, will rule against this probation. Because the screw up was Administrative, and no person should pay for that.

What I believe is, that Judge Perry will find out exactly what it is that was done. What probation other than intake was done. He said he wanted to talk to the supervisor of Probation. I think Judge Perry needs to be clear in his mind, did Casey really do probation, or did the probation department give her a pass.

Only if he believes they totally gave her a pass without a second glance do I believe he would consider probation for Casey.

However, I believe the record will be clear on his reasons, and I also believe that the probation dept., will be reviewed for policy. That supervisor should be shaking in her boots right now. She is not a judge and IMO she made decisions without going back to the court for clarification.

 

[LambChop]

I'm splitting hairs here, but this matter, even if he did have some bias in it, probably would not put his career in jeopardy.

Maybe HHSS had to research his ruling in between doing his day job. It obviously was going to be a hot button once pushed. My guess is he did so at the convenience of JP because it is JP who will now have to decide. And eight working days is not a lot of time when you consider what the issue was at hand. jmo

 

[LaLaw2000]

Was it "elegant" or "eloquent"? Makes a difference.

That HHJP does love to mix up his words, doesn't he.

BBM: HHJP said eloquent. I heard him, LOL!

 

[natsound]

Ya know what? That might be the best thing that could happen. She has ruined enough lives, IMO she took the life of a helpless child, and what good will she ever do for society. Go I say. Be gone. But I doubt she will. She doesn't have what it takes to be on her own for long. When the body guards are no longer supplied she will find other people to hurt, suck into her web and destroy.

No way... we would have nothing to talk about!! :crazy:

 

[Solace]

Why Geragos wants to help him is mind boggling.

Because he wants to be next to the biggest newsmaker at the time. What else.

 

[Whisperer]

Maybe HHSS had to research his ruling in between doing his day job. It obviously was going to be a hot button once pushed. My guess is he did so at the convenience of JP because it is JP who will now have to decide. And eight working days is not a lot of time when you consider what the issue was at hand. jmo

I think HHJP goes too far in trying to get things right. He has absolutely no problem putting the average Joe in lockup.

 

[21merc7]

You know that the Anthony case is the bane of the OC 9th District for the last few years, and with the appeal of the lying charges, the next few. They want this case gone, wiped away, never happened, 1950 all over again. But as most cases that get televised they never stop.


What is a Judge to do? Could change rules if he chooses one way, could become a low level case law citation if he chooses the other...

 

[LambChop]

I think HHJP goes too far in trying to get things right. He has absolutely no problem putting the average Joe in lockup.

I'm guessing the average Joe is much easier to deal with than KC, CM and JB. lol

 

[Italy]

I think Judge Perry will determine that the probation should follow Judge Strickland's original verbal order.

I think he will give her administrative probation and allow her to reside outside of the county (and the state). Probably something less than 1 year.


I'd be interested in hearing what others think will happen. Not necessarily what you want to have happen, but what you think will happen. Thanks.

 

[LambChop]

You know that the Anthony case is the bane of the OC 9th District for the last few years, and with the appeal of the lying charges, the next few. They want this case gone, wiped away, never happened, 1950 all over again. But as most cases that get televised they never stop.


What is a Judge to do? Could change rules if he chooses one way, could become a low level case law citation if he chooses the other...

I think what we often forget is, he's the Judge and it's his job to get it right. Justice for the defendant depends on it. SA can be overly aggressive, DT can shade the true and fabricate but the Judge has to get it right. jmo

 

[askfornina]

whew, trying to get caught up here. just watched the hearing. any idea what the "completely unrelated issue" is that LF brought up at the end? would like to see that sidebar transcript.

i don't see the problem with HHJP citing case law, if i was on trial i would certainly want the judge to know what he was doing.

i wonder how long this is going to take. seems like HHJP wants to get it right, so i'm expecting at least three or four days to get it all straight. any word on how long it'll be?

 

[ZsaZsa]

Maybe HHSS had to research his ruling in between doing his day job. It obviously was going to be a hot button once pushed. My guess is he did so at the convenience of JP because it is JP who will now have to decide. And eight working days is not a lot of time when you consider what the issue was at hand. jmo

He told the court that he had been in a trial all week, for another Judge, and had started his research on this issue at 10.30pm last night. He did some research and then had to stop because he was just too tired to continue..

 

[MEM2010]

I think Judge Perry will determine that the probation should follow Judge Strickland's original verbal order.

I think he will give her administrative probation and allow her to reside outside of the county (and the state). Probably something less than 1 year.


I'd be interested in hearing what others think will happen. Not necessarily what you want to have happen, but what you think will happen. Thanks.

What I think will happen:

She'll be made to serve some sort of probation with her address not made public, and phone check ins, be able to move out of state..etc.


What I want to happen:

HHBP will realize a severe miscalculation in her sentences and she'll be sent to jail for 4 more years...in gen pop...

 

[ZsaZsa]

I think Judge Perry will determine that the probation should follow Judge Strickland's original verbal order.

I think he will give her administrative probation and allow her to reside outside of the county (and the state). Probably something less than 1 year.


I'd be interested in hearing what others think will happen. Not necessarily what you want to have happen, but what you think will happen. Thanks.

I think you are exactly right.
I do think the concerns for her safety are over-rated as stated by the DT. When she was released from jail the OSCO investigated and found no credible threats to her.
I think she should have to run the gauntlet when she shows up for probation, to get a feel for the public outrage at what she did. That is how her life is going to be from now on, so she may as well get used to some name-calling. She earned it.

 

[Murphismo]

Here is how I see this. Judge Perry knows and has it on the record that the probation was not a valid probation. He has also noted for the record that the defense knew about this and didn't notify the court. He has also made it clear what the original record stated. And I think he believes that the record can be corrected as a result of that case that Frank George quoted.

What I also think this did was point out that the Probation Department excercised more discretion with a court order than they had a legal right to do. And will note that in his decision to avoid case precident from being set.

But in the end, the Judge unless he can find more case law which would indicate that this would not be considered double jeopardy, will rule against this probation. Because the screw up was Administrative, and no person should pay for that.

What I believe is, that Judge Perry will find out exactly what it is that was done. What probation other than intake was done. He said he wanted to talk to the supervisor of Probation. I think Judge Perry needs to be clear in his mind, did Casey really do probation, or did the probation department give her a pass.

Only if he believes they totally gave her a pass without a second glance do I believe he would consider probation for Casey.

However, I believe the record will be clear on his reasons, and I also believe that the probation dept., will be reviewed for policy. That supervisor should be shaking in her boots right now. She is not a judge and IMO she made decisions without going back to the court for clarification.

Okay, I can see him ruling out probation, I'm 50 50 on it right now. But then we are back to the fundamental question: If she was serving probation for a year, then she owes another year in jail, HHJBP said so today: you can't have it both ways. So do you think there's a chance she would have to go back to jail. Further, if she was on probation, couldn't the state charge her with violations for fraterazation with felons and contraband of letters?

 

[LambChop]

I think Judge Perry will determine that the probation should follow Judge Strickland's original verbal order.

I think he will give her administrative probation and allow her to reside outside of the county (and the state). Probably something less than 1 year.


I'd be interested in hearing what others think will happen. Not necessarily what you want to have happen, but what you think will happen. Thanks.

I think JP is concerned about overruling another judge's Order. If HHSS wants her to serve that year and he states that was his intention and that is what he wants HHJP will find a way to carry out that Order. I think the Order is the most important issue here. And probation is not a sentence. If DOC agrees they can get her in and out without detection from the public I think he will agree with probation. If it becomes a problem with protestors there could be changes but there is no proof there will ever be a problem, just speculation at this point.

Kind of hinky here, too, that HHSS had to recluse himself shortly after KC was visited by the probation officer. Another coincidence???? jmo

 

[Murphismo]

What I think will happen:

She'll be made to serve some sort of probation with her address not made public, and phone check ins, be able to move out of state..etc.


What I want to happen:

HHBP will realize a severe miscalculation in her sentences and she'll be sent to jail for 4 more years...in gen pop...

I'm not calling any of us dumb, but HOW could HHJBP have done a miscalculation????? I mean, he's the boss dog?

 

[askfornina]

Okay, I can see him ruling out probation, I'm 50 50 on it right now. But then we are back to the fundamental question: If she was serving probation for a year, then she owes another year in jail, HHJBP said so today: you can't have it both ways. So do you think there's a chance she would have to go back to jail. Further, if she was on probation, couldn't the state charge her with violations for fraterazation with felons and contraband of letters?

weren't all of those letters sent to RA in 2009, before the probation started?

 

[21merc7]

Okay, I can see him ruling out probation, I'm 50 50 on it right now. But then we are back to the fundamental question: If she was serving probation for a year, then she owes another year in jail, HHJBP said so today: you can't have it both ways. So do you think there's a chance she would have to go back to jail. Further, if she was on probation, couldn't the state charge her with violations for fraterazation with felons and contraband of letters?

BBM

Never going to happen.

HHJP will do what he thinks is best for all the major legal issues that have arisen. He will research, he will confer with other judges. But I don't think more charging of KC will come about. This has got to be done clean as a bean, televised makes it more complicated than necessary.

 

[What'sThatClue]

Just reading tweets from Bob Kealing, WESH. Apparently HHJP just granted indigency status on an appeal for check fraud charges:

bobkealing bob kealing
Just found a new order from #JudgePerry which grants #CaseyAnthony indigency status for appeal in check fraud case.
42 minutes ago

bobkealing bob kealing
No this had check fraud case number and charges“@Badme27: @____Joan__ I think might mean the LYING TO LE charges.
20 minutes ago
»
bob kealing
bobkealing bob kealing
This order does not specify if the appeal is specific to new probation order from Strickland“@PaulaMoir: @bobkealing what does that mean?
31 minutes ago

bobkealing bob kealing
My sense is this is over the probation order but it's not clear“@FayeHamilton1: @bobkealing How can she appeal a case she plead guilty to?
3 minutes ago