Casey Anthony attorneys: Throw out murder indictment

[sleutherontheside]

If the defense does not attempt EVERY legal maneuver.....they will not have done their job. So...while I laugh at their legally flawed motions, incorrect use of terminology, missing pages in filed docs, and grasping at straws strategy.....I am comforted by the fact that at the trials conclusion they will have exhausted all efforts and KC will fail to be able to use ineffective counsel as a factor for an appeal. Additionally......the motions and hearings are entertaining. I look forward to LKB "educating" SS. I look forward to TM "proving" SODDI. I look forward to AL "emitting tears on command". I look forward to JB "trying to keep up". I look forward to LDB "schooling the defense". I look forward to KC "realizing" the gig is up.

 

[JBean]

BBM

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.... that's right, there wasn't any murder. See, after accidentally falling face first into the sticky side of a few 9" pieces of duct tape, that baby accidentally skidded feet first into a couple of bags and then the knots got tied by twisting in the blowing wind and then she slid out into the middle of the woods, all because she accidentally sneezed too hard from having had the flu, which of course can't be proven because she doesn't have any nasal passages left. THAT'S how she died! That's right. I remember now. It wasn't murder after all! Brilliant. I'm so glad you reminded me. Ok, everybody move along... nothing to see here, go back safely to your homes. Ga'head Casey, be free, and ah, ooops, sorry love. Don't hold it against us, 'k? xoxo love ya!

Well actually it is possible that it is not murder but could be manslaughter. So you have to consider that.

Let's not get sidetracked with this issue.

I think this motion is not that unusual.

 

[sleutherontheside]

The defense has already hinted at an accidental death due to overdose. Recall Terrence L's original efforts to get the DP off the table. Does anyone have the link to that or were we only privy to an excerpt? THe problem is.....that KC stuck by the nanny did it. We have seen the efforts by CA and DC to research all the ZG. We have heard comments made about JG. SO those things don't jive with accidental death. IMO

 

[celticthyme]

CASEY ANTHONY: " These are my lies and I'm stickin' to 'em"

Poor Poor duh-fence, stuck with this monster who has these attorney's dancing to her tune, and it's the only one she'll play . .

Let the games begin!

 

[Kentjbkent]

Genius....is this a copy paste from an SA motion regarding the compelling evidence the defense had proving Casey was not guilty???

You scare me sometimes!

That is EXACTLY what I was thinking when I read the Current News thread this evening!

The Motion to Dismiss Defective Indictment reminded me to LDB's comments about Baez' motions!!!

 

[marspiter]

The defense has already hinted at an accidental death due to overdose. Recall Terrence L's original efforts to get the DP off the table. Does anyone have the link to that or were we only privy to an excerpt? THe problem is.....that KC stuck by the nanny did it. We have seen the efforts by CA and DC to research all the ZG. We have heard comments made about JG. SO those things don't jive with accidental death. IMO

Yeah iirc JB pretty much tossed that idea right out the window. The defense shot themselves in the foot early on by not claiming accident and then dismissing it when TL mentioned it as a strategy. The defense is pretty much stuck with an all or nothing case now. She will literal live or die by the evidence presented in court to the jury. This motion is kind of expected but it also shows the desperation of the defense in my opinion. I'm wondering what will happen to AL once this case goes to trial and the death penalty is still on. Perhaps leave then come back during the sentencing phase?

 

[BeanE]

The defense has already hinted at an accidental death due to overdose. Recall Terrence L's original efforts to get the DP off the table. Does anyone have the link to that or were we only privy to an excerpt? THe problem is.....that KC stuck by the nanny did it. We have seen the efforts by CA and DC to research all the ZG. We have heard comments made about JG. SO those things don't jive with accidental death. IMO

Yes, I remember. And Terry L strongly recommended that KC take a mental health defense. KC/Baez rejected that strategy, and so Terry L quit. Very telling. And not very smart. Terry L would have provided KC a good defense, and likely gotten her LWOP, not to mention that TL would have brought less of a circus atmosphere to this whole thing. He took the case and KC's defense very seriously, and wanted very much to provide her the best defense possible.

Oh, and don't forget that Linda Baden said on 48 Hours recently that a stranger killed Caylee.

Accident is out. SODDI is the defense du jour.

ETA: Lord, I'm slow at reading these threads and typing up my posts...

 

[Snaz]

I think what they want is for the prosecution to just shake with uncontrollable fear at their motions and let KC go. As if. They know that a dead Caylee was in KC's car trunk. Not in Kronks. Not in JG's trunk. Not in his family's trunk. Not in Kiomarie's trunk. Not in AH's trunk. Not in any of KC's latest and greatest hits' trunks. Not in TL's trunk. Not in Tim Miller's trunk. The rest is just smoke and mirrors. Posturing. Throwing around documents as though they have a purpose. To wit: they are the ones that said KC would be exonerated in court. They were the ones that said in public without prompting that they had evidence in their possession to exonerate KC. They are the ones that keep insisting KC needs to have, deserves to have her day in court...and yet...don't file for a speedy trial. And yet they don't want a gag order put in place. Don't want the victim of KC's fraud and deception and theft to have her day in court. Don't want to accept the inevitable. All the while, whining to any microphone and television camera that they are being treated unfairly.

snipped and BBM

Along with all their other claims, didn't the defense (I think it was either TM or JB) also say they had a PICTURE of Zanny.... or they were tracking one down, or something like that? Has anyone seen that pic??? Oh, come to think of it, maybe we all have already seen the picture of Zanny.... I mean, after all, she is invisible!

ANOTHER bout of blowing smoke.

 

[sleutherontheside]

What is so frustrating for me, is that she had Terrence on her side and giving JB a map to the best defense for his client. JB and KC rejected it. Actually, do we know KC rejected it? When a reputable attorney offers to step in and "assist" and their efforts are thwarted, when they present a best case scenario and it is rejected, when there is a serious "disagreement" about strategy, and when her best chances for a story that will render a jury sympathetic are wasted, I have no pity. JS knew early on that her BEST chances for a reduced sentence were already rejected. Only JB and KC know their reasons. IMO...if this were an accident as opposed to premeditated murder, she would have leapt at a chance to get off on a lesser charge. SHe could have pled out under a lesser charge before the body was found. She could not have been retried and she likely would have been out by the age of 45 or so. She held firm, she dug her heels, she refused to ADMIT her involvement. KC has never wanted to accept responsibility. This is the one time she should have just done it.

 

[Tracey276]

I'm not sure if this of O/T or not, as it does have to do with the motions. Can someone explain to me the theft charges part of the multiple counts and how they are charged? I don't understand the defense position asking to have some of them dismissed as there are too many. I mean seriously, are they serious? What am I missing on this?

 

[sleutherontheside]

I'm not sure if this of O/T or not, as it does have to do with the motions. Can someone explain to me the theft charges part of the multiple counts and how they are charged? I don't understand the defense position asking to have some of them dismissed as there are too many. I mean seriously, are they serious? What am I missing on this?

I believe that the defense is attempting to "bundle the charges". As there are 4 checks at hand...the SA is charging based upon each check. The defense wants to argue that since the trial encompasses check charges as a whole that the charges should be reduced to a "bundle". Their reasoning is because that will allow KC to enter her murder trial with fewer felony convictions. Just becasue the SA chooses to hold one trial for all 4 checks does not change the fact that she violated those laws individually EACH time. THe defense is attempting to soften the blow to KC's record. While OT is does relate to the murder trial. Lawyers...am I correct??

 

[legalmania]

Well actually it is possible that it is not murder but could be manslaughter. So you have to consider that.

Let's not get sidetracked with this issue.

I think this motion is not that unusual.

I was wondering the same thing the ME rule it a homicide? There is a difference between murder and homicide.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/73160/homicide_vs_murder_the_differences.html?cat=17

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/19/florida.caylee.autopsy/index.html

 

[Nore]

snipped and BBM

Along with all their other claims, didn't the defense (I think it was either TM or JB) also say they had a PICTURE of Zanny.... or they were tracking one down, or something like that? Has anyone seen that pic??? Oh, come to think of it, maybe we all have already seen the picture of Zanny.... I mean, after all, she is invisible!

ANOTHER bout of blowing smoke.

_____________
Didnt they also say recently they are ready for trial? I read it on days news no discussion".The Prosecution should call their bluff,Judge come on schedule the trial soon.:woohoo:

 

[spqr]

I was wondering the same thing the ME rule it a homicide? There is a difference between murder and homicide.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/73160/homicide_vs_murder_the_differences.html?cat=17

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/19/florida.caylee.autopsy/index.html

782.03 Excusable homicide.--Homicide is excusable when committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution, and without any unlawful intent, or by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or upon a sudden combat, without any dangerous weapon being used and not done in a cruel or unusual manner.

1782.04 Murder.--

(1)(a) The unlawful killing of a human being:

1. When perpetrated from a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed or any human being;

2. When committed by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any:

a. Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),

b. Arson,

c. Sexual battery,

d. Robbery,

e. Burglary,

f. Kidnapping,

g. Escape,

h. Aggravated child abuse,

i. Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,

j. Aircraft piracy,

k. Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,

l. Carjacking,

m. Home-invasion robbery,

n. Aggravated stalking,

o. Murder of another human being,

p. Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person,

q. Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism; or

3. Which resulted from the unlawful distribution of any substance controlled under s. 893.03(1), cocaine as described in s. 893.03(2)(a)4., or opium or any synthetic or natural salt, compound, derivative, or preparation of opium by a person 18 years of age or older, when such drug is proven to be the proximate cause of the death of the user,

is murder in the first degree and constitutes a capital felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082.

(b) In all cases under this section, the procedure set forth in s. 921.141 shall be followed in order to determine sentence of death or life imprisonment.

(2) The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(3) When a person is killed in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any:

(a) Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),

(b) Arson,

(c) Sexual battery,

(d) Robbery,

(e) Burglary,

(f) Kidnapping,

(g) Escape,

(h) Aggravated child abuse,

(i) Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,

(j) Aircraft piracy,

(k) Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,

(l) Carjacking,

(m) Home-invasion robbery,

(n) Aggravated stalking,

(o) Murder of another human being,

(p) Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person, or

(q) Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism,

by a person other than the person engaged in the perpetration of or in the attempt to perpetrate such felony, the person perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate such felony is guilty of murder in the second degree, which constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(4) The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated without any design to effect death, by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any felony other than any:

(a) Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),

(b) Arson,

(c) Sexual battery,

(d) Robbery,

(e) Burglary,

(f) Kidnapping,

(g) Escape,

(h) Aggravated child abuse,

(i) Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,

(j) Aircraft piracy,

(k) Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,

(l) Unlawful distribution of any substance controlled under s. 893.03(1), cocaine as described in s. 893.03(2)(a)4., or opium or any synthetic or natural salt, compound, derivative, or preparation of opium by a person 18 years of age or older, when such drug is proven to be the proximate cause of the death of the user,

(m) Carjacking,

(n) Home-invasion robbery,

(o) Aggravated stalking,

(p) Murder of another human being,

(q) Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person, or

(r) Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism,

is murder in the third degree and constitutes a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(5) As used in this section, the term "terrorism" means an activity that:

(a)1. Involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life which is a violation of the criminal laws of this state or of the United States; or

2. Involves a violation of s. 815.06; and

(b) Is intended to:

1. Intimidate, injure, or coerce a civilian population;

2. Influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

3. Affect the conduct of government through destruction of property, assassination, murder, kidnapping, or aircraft piracy.


782.07 Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.--

(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(2) A person who causes the death of any elderly person or disabled adult by culpable negligence under s. 825.102(3) commits aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(3) A person who causes the death of any person under the age of 18 by culpable negligence under s. 827.03(3) commits aggravated manslaughter of a child, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(4) A person who causes the death, through culpable negligence, of an officer as defined in s. 943.10(14), a firefighter as defined in s. 112.191, an emergency medical technician as defined in s. 401.23, or a paramedic as defined in s. 401.23, while the officer, firefighter, emergency medical technician, or paramedic is performing duties that are within the course of his or her employment, commits aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.


Hope this helps

 

[JBean]

I was wondering the same thing the ME rule it a homicide? There is a difference between murder and homicide.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/73160/homicide_vs_murder_the_differences.html?cat=17

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/19/florida.caylee.autopsy/index.html

All murders are homicide but not all homcides are murder.

 

[Pattymarie]

Is there any possibility that this could, in fact, happen?

HEY...let it happen...let her come back home to Hopesprings dr....let her go back to work at Universal....let her call Zanny the Nanny to watch her kid...yea...let it happen...let CA and GA let her back into the house and "get back to normal"....let her get back to partying...I wonder which guy will get in line to date her....lets all watch...

 

[JBean]

Guys we are not doing this again. There are plenty of threads regarding premeditated murder vs felony murder vs lesser charges and our interpretations of each.
Drop it.

 

[seagull65]

Originally Posted by trusttheping
SNIP "Instead of starting wi...ing able to counsel their client accordingly?

 

[Bittiness39]

Back on topic: apart from the obvious and expected legal posturing, what does the defense hope to achieve from their latest boiler-plate motion? My guess is that we are due the bug evidence from the car. Not going into pre-meditation or murder...but hasn't it been the contention of the defense all along that there was no "dead baby" in KC's car? Since they can't disprove the obvious (that there was a dead Caylee in KC's trunk) why all of the legal motions (destruction of trees, wasting of time, etc...)? Yes I realize that they, the defense have to do all they can to defend their client to the best of their ability...but to me it still reaks of "KC is sticking to her bullcrud story of the nanny did it". They know just as well as most that there was a dead child in her trunk. That the dead child in question was Caylee...so now they would ask you to disregard the obvious and with a slight of hand do the expected...continue to delay and whine about unfair treatment.

 

[s1rebecca]

Why did it take over a year for the defense to file this motion. Seems like this would have been one of the first motions filed. Would have saved them time hiring experts etc, etc. I expect this to fall flat on its face.