Casey Anthony attorneys: Throw out murder indictment

[sleutherontheside]

IMO...they want to engage the State...they are fishing...and the State isn't biting.

I hear Kid Finders has a boat they'd probably rent for $$$.

 

[JBean]

Ya know Wudge...I get that...really I do. But how often do you get a group of really stupid criminals together to commit a crime on videotape?

(Geez...I sure hope the answer is "not often".)

Verdicts are a funny thing.
Even a video of the crime will not insure a correct verdict. The jurors still have to interpret what they see on the tape and you would be surprised as to what they "see" sometimes.
In the haidl gang rape trial, in which the gang rape was 100% videotaped, a couple jurors thought that the drugged girl thrust her hips forward at one point. they took that as a sign of consent on her part and voted to aquit! Mistrial on a violent crime that was videotaped from beginning to end.

I have seen cases where the jury instructions were so specific, that the jurors could not in good faith vote guilty because the evidence did not completely fit the instructions they were given. They felt the accused was guilty, but the facts did not support the instructions.

Look at Cameron brown's trial. Every single juror felt this guy was guilty of causing the death of his daughter. yet, they could not agree on the degree of murder or manslaughter and the end result was another mistrial.

These things are what make some of us wonder about the evidence, the defense CIC and the jury instructions and what the outcome will be. It doesn't make people pro-defense, it is just pro-reality.

 

[RR0004]

I hear Kid Finders has a boat they'd probably rent for $$$.

Geraldo, too.

 

[impatientredhead]

I don't believe that is true. Unless I mis-read the Homeland Security Act and Patriot Act. If you can provide a link or a specific title and paragraph I will definitely revisit and re-read.
Thanks

If they suspect you of terrorism the Patriot Act allows them to disregard all of your rights as far as search, seizure and detainment. Local LE is not likely to try to use that it a murder suspicion since all the evidence would be thrown out later since it would not be be terrorism related.

 

[cecybeans]

Ya know Wudge...I get that...really I do. But how often do you get a group of really stupid criminals together to commit a crime on videotape?

(Geez...I sure hope the answer is "not often".)

And then we'd have to listen to self-professed "the world is flat" experts that would tell us the videotape had been PhotoShopped because they are sure in their hearts that even direct evidence isn't good enough to overturn an emotional bias.

 

[RR0004]

Verdicts are a funny thing.
Even a video of the crime will not insure a correct verdict. The jurors still have to interpret what they see on the tape and you would be surprised as to what they "see" sometimes.
In the haidl gang rape trial, in which the gang rape was 100% videotaped, a couple jurors thought that the drugged girl thrust her hips forward at one point. they took that as a sign of consent on her part and voted to aquit! Mistrial on a violent crime that was videotaped from beginning to end.

I have seen cases where the jury instructions were so specific, that the jurors could not in good faith vote guilty because the evidence did not completely fit the instructions they were given. They felt the accused was guilty, but the facts did not support the instructions.

Look at Cameron brown's trial. Every single juror felt this guy was guilty of causing the death of his daughter. yet, they could not agree on the degree of murder or manslaughter and the end result was another mistrial.

These things are what make some of us wonder about the evidence, the defense CIC and the jury instructions and what the outcome will be. It doesn't make people pro-defense, it is just pro-reality.

What a travesty that rape trial was!

 

[RR0004]

If they suspect you of terrorism the Patriot Act allows them to disregard all of your rights as far as search, seizure and detainment. Local LE is not likely to try to use that it a murder suspicion since all the evidence would be thrown out later since it would not be be terrorism related.

Thank goodness it's been somewhat modified as of last month.

 

[Wudge]

You obviously didn't understand my post. Jurors DO rely on the totality of the evidence presented. A case is like a puzzle. When all the pieces fit together and any REASONABLE person can come to a conclusion that the evidence points to either guilt or innocence. There is NEVER a smoking gun that points with absolute certainty that a person is guilty. The totality of evidence does. And when you have a person such as yourself that is pro defense anyone can pick apart a single piece of evidence. Most cases today have overwhelming strong circumstantial evidence that when put together speaks to a persons guilt or innocence. And if you only want to convict someone unless there is one singular piece of evidence such as videotape showing the commission of the crime, then no one would ever be found guilty. The criminal justice system relies on the common sense of many jurors.

And I strongly disagree with your assertion that the state can't prove first degree murder. Premeditation only needs to be a nanosecond. That duct tape on Caylee's face proves murder one.

I did understand your post. and I do understand your position. Both are wrong. I don't want such falsehoods to be believed, because for some posters here, jury duty will certainly be in their future, and they should not be carrying such notions with them when called to serve.

I'm going to use a hypo to clarify why even if a 100% of the evidence were to work for the State with 0% favoring the defense, that would not necessariy be sufficient to validly convict Casey of first degree murder.

Hypo: Nancy Grace interviews the jury foreman, Mr. Badeye Hangemhigh, after the jury has convicted Casey of murder one.

NANCY: Badeye, the prosecution's case covered eight weeks, but the defense did not even present a case-in-chief. Was the jury surprised that the defense rested without presenting any evidence whatsoever?

BADEYE: Yes, we were Nancy, but that just made deliberations very easy for us.

NANCY: Badeye, as the triers-of-fact, what facts did the jury reach based on the evidence presented during trial.

BADEYE: Nancy, we found it to be a fact that Casey was the last person to be with Caylee. We also found it to be a fact that Casey put Caylee's dead body inside the trunk of her car and drove around with it there for several days. The jury also found it to be a fact that Casey wrapped Caylee in a Winnie the Pooh blanket and stuffed her inside black plastic bags and a laundry bag. And Nancy, we also found it to be a fact that it was Casey who put Caylee's body where Mr. Kronk found it.

NANCY: Badeye, this jury has done a great job. Out of curiosity, what evidence proved that it was a premeditated murder?

BADEYE: Well Nancy, the prosecutors never really produced a single item of evidence that made that clear. So what we did is we looked at the totality of the evidence, and we found that every single item of evidence worked in favor of the State. Not a single item of evidence favored the defense. So we decided that based on the totality of the evidence, the murder charge was necessarily proved beyond a reasonable doubt. After all, when the score is 100 to 0, how could it be any other way?

NANCY: Oh gawd Badeye, you make me so incredibly proud. What a wonderful jury. You are definitely my kind of people.

BADEYE: Thanks Nancy, I love your show. You really show true Americans how our legal system works. I knew she was guilty all the time.

 

[impatientredhead]

I did understand your post. and I do understand your position. Both are wrong. I don't want such falsehoods to be believed, because for some posters here, jury duty will certainly be in their future, and they should not be carrying such notions with them when called to serve.

I'm going to use a hypo to clarify why even if a 100% of the evidence were to work for the State with 0% favoring the defense, that would not necessariy be sufficient to validly convict Casey of first degree murder.

Hypo: Nancy Grace interviews the jury foreman, Mr. Badeye Hangemhigh, after the jury has convicted Casey of murder one.

NANCY: Badeye, the prosecution's case covered eight weeks, but the defense did not even present a case-in-chief. Was the jury surprised that the defense rested without presenting any evidence whatsoever?

BADEYE: Yes, we were Nancy, but that just made deliberations very easy for us.

NANCY: Badeye, as the triers-of-fact, what facts did the jury reach based on the evidence presented during trial.

BADEYE: Nancy, we found it to be a fact that Casey was the last person to be with Caylee. We also found it to be a fact that Casey put Caylee's dead body inside the trunk of her car and drove around with it there for several days. The jury also found it to be a fact that Casey wrapped Caylee in a Winnie the Pooh blanket and stuffed her inside black plastic bags and a laundry bag. And Nancy, we also found it to be a fact that it was Casey who put Caylee's body where Mr. Kronk found it.

NANCY: Badeye, this jury has done a great job. Out of curiosity, what evidence proved that it was a premeditated murder?

BADEYE: Well Nancy, the prosecutors never really produced a single item of evidence that made that clear. So what we did is we looked at the totality of the evidence, and we found that every single item of evidence worked in favor of the State. Not a single item of evidence favored the defense. So we decided that based on the totality of the evidence, the murder charge was necessarily proved beyond a reasonable doubt. After all, when the score is 100 to 0, how could it be any other way?

NANCY: Oh gawd Badeye, you make me so incredibly proud. What a wonderful jury. You are definitely my kind of people.

BADEYE: Thanks Nancy, I love your show. You really show true Americans how our legal system works. I knew she was guilty all the time.

As you are well aware jury instructions vary widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

Reading up on specific cases in Florida in regards to premeditated versus felony murder (despite the indictment charge) sheds some light on the topic. There are SEVERAL people on death row that were charged under the premeditated statute and the prosecution presented a felony murder scenario. The Supreme Court of Florida has upheld those convictions as long as the aggravating felony was included in the indictment .

In addition Florida does not require that the jury be in agreement regarding felony murder versus premeditated. Half of them can feel that she planned it, three of them can think she flipped out in a moments rage, and the other three can be undecided and they can still come back with a capital conviction if they believe Casey is responsible for the death of Caylee Anthony. Again, this issue has been taken to the Supreme Court and the convictions held up.

We can debate law theories all day but discussing them in the realm of them being one size fits all will always lead to these circular discussions. The relevant matter in this case is how Florida courts handle the charges and jury instructions, and it is NOT in the manner you are describing.

 

[sadyjade]

Verdicts are a funny thing.
Even a video of the crime will not insure a correct verdict. The jurors still have to interpret what they see on the tape and you would be surprised as to what they "see" sometimes.
In the haidl gang rape trial, in which the gang rape was 100% videotaped, a couple jurors thought that the drugged girl thrust her hips forward at one point. they took that as a sign of consent on her part and voted to aquit! Mistrial on a violent crime that was videotaped from beginning to end.

I have seen cases where the jury instructions were so specific, that the jurors could not in good faith vote guilty because the evidence did not completely fit the instructions they were given. They felt the accused was guilty, but the facts did not support the instructions.

Look at Cameron brown's trial. Every single juror felt this guy was guilty of causing the death of his daughter. yet, they could not agree on the degree of murder or manslaughter and the end result was another mistrial.

These things are what make some of us wonder about the evidence, the defense CIC and the jury instructions and what the outcome will be. It doesn't make people pro-defense, it is just pro-reality.

No Offense Jbean but, I can't comfortably call it PRO anyhting ... hurts my sensabilities

While I know it to be true, I hate it just the same. Like the commercials that say "Even kids know wrong, is wrong" saying that it's in the fine print ... well ... OJ is still a murderer and even a kid would be able to come to that conclusion ... so to speak.

 

[Searchfortruth]

I did understand your post. and I do understand your position. Both are wrong. I don't want such falsehoods to be believed, because for some posters here, jury duty will certainly be in their future, and they should not be carrying such notions with them when called to serve.

I'm going to use a hypo to clarify why even if a 100% of the evidence were to work for the State with 0% favoring the defense, that would not necessariy be sufficient to validly convict Casey of first degree murder.

Hypo: Nancy Grace interviews the jury foreman, Mr. Badeye Hangemhigh, after the jury has convicted Casey of murder one.

NANCY: Badeye, the prosecution's case covered eight weeks, but the defense did not even present a case-in-chief. Was the jury surprised that the defense rested without presenting any evidence whatsoever?

BADEYE: Yes, we were Nancy, but that just made deliberations very easy for us.

NANCY: Badeye, as the triers-of-fact, what facts did the jury reach based on the evidence presented during trial.

BADEYE: Nancy, we found it to be a fact that Casey was the last person to be with Caylee. We also found it to be a fact that Casey put Caylee's dead body inside the trunk of her car and drove around with it there for several days. The jury also found it to be a fact that Casey wrapped Caylee in a Winnie the Pooh blanket and stuffed her inside black plastic bags and a laundry bag. And Nancy, we also found it to be a fact that it was Casey who put Caylee's body where Mr. Kronk found it.

NANCY: Badeye, this jury has done a great job. Out of curiosity, what evidence proved that it was a premeditated murder?

BADEYE: Well Nancy, the prosecutors never really produced a single item of evidence that made that clear. So what we did is we looked at the totality of the evidence, and we found that every single item of evidence worked in favor of the State. Not a single item of evidence favored the defense. So we decided that based on the totality of the evidence, the murder charge was necessarily proved beyond a reasonable doubt. After all, when the score is 100 to 0, how could it be any other way?

NANCY: Oh gawd Badeye, you make me so incredibly proud. What a wonderful jury. You are definitely my kind of people.

BADEYE: Thanks Nancy, I love your show. You really show true Americans how our legal system works. I knew she was guilty all the time.

I consider the use of duct tape evidence of premeditation...the application of that tape took time, much longer than the pull of a trigger on a gun.

You are basing your "hypothetical" on the assumption that the state has divulged all of the evidence and their theory as to what points to premeditation...they have not. The trial hasn't even started yet and although we have received a good bit of information, I doubt we know everything the state does. I have confidence that this trial will be fair in all respects and that justice will be served. In my humble opinion true justice in this case will prevent Ms. Anthony from walking out of that court room, but my opinion doesn't mean anything concerning the trial of the State vs. Casey Anthony.

Mr. Badeye is one sharp cookie and I hope like **** he's on that jury !

 

[JBean]

No Offense Jbean but, I can't comfortably call it PRO anyhting ... hurts my sensabilities

While I know it to be true, I hate it just the same. Like the commercials that say "Even kids know wrong, is wrong" saying that it's in the fine print ... well ... OJ is still a murderer and even a kid would be able to come to that conclusion ... so to speak.

No offense taken of course. When i say pro-reality, I really mean I want to know the good, the bad and the ugly about a case;not just the information that favors a conviction if I feel a defendant is guilty. I want to know everything.
Still and all you shouldn't hate all of it. If the state cannot prove their case,then the jury should find a defendant innocent despite the fact that they 'feel" he might be guilty.
Most of our laws are designed to protect the innocent, it just doesn't always work that way.

 

[sadyjade]

*Hate* is a strong word, and even though I have very little doubt (myself) that KC is respsonsible for the death of her child, I'd still like to know the how & why's to be able to deliver a verdict, if I were a juror. I say like to know, not need to know. I know she was last seen alive with KC. I know KC alerted no one that anything was ever a concern where Caylee was concerned. On the contrary, KC acted as if life was great, Le Bella Vita ... or sumpin like that.

 

[akashana]

So true - and the only reason they were even brought there to begin with was because, after over 24 hours of getting a silly stories and a wild goose chase from KC, LE realized (perhaps from the DAMNED DEAD BODY in the trunk call from a FAMILY MEMBER) that they should check that out and stop looking for errant imaginannies.

What is also interesting is that KC's parents apparently were not swallowing the Nanny theory either because - even though they had not seen Caylee in over a month - they SEARCHED THE BACK YARD themselves.

LE did not view the Anthony home as a crime scene because a) KC had not been living there and b) the crime was supposedly a kidnapping and had taken place elsewhere

I'm sure that if LE had been given reason to suspect that perhaps a crime had taken place inside the Anthony home they would have had the dogs inside. And I am equally sure that if LE had been given a reason to suspect anyone else of foul play they would have done the same thing.

In fact, I feel sorry for all of the people that have been unnecessarily scrutinized and investigated and taped and had their records pored over and published and been commented on in the media and blogs in this case simply because KC refused to answer truthfully and her family corroborated her lies. In fact, if anyone should be up in arms and suing for invasion of privacy it's everyone in this investigation who has had their lives turned inside out "on a whim" by a lying, thieving little brat whose parents are STILL coddling by using all kinds of scapegoats and wild excuses.

It may work to blame everyone else when your kid is too lazy to make up a high school credit, but it just doesn't cut it when you blame everyone else for the death of a toddler.

What she said.

 

[lisalei321]

Not sure about that, TotallyObsessed, (Are you referring to a delayed notification warrant?) but I know that does not apply to local police.

Sheesh, cops can't even pull someone over for not wearing a seatbelt to enforce Click It or Ticket. How messed up is *that*???

fftopic:

In FL they can...and it's a moving violation!

And to go back on topic...

I have a friend who has seen nothing of this case, except what is on the news, he thinks that KC is guilty...and the defense attorneys are idiots LOL

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

No Offense Jbean but, I can't comfortably call it PRO anyhting ... hurts my sensabilities

While I know it to be true, I hate it just the same. Like the commercials that say "Even kids know wrong, is wrong" saying that it's in the fine print ... well ... OJ is still a murderer and even a kid would be able to come to that conclusion ... so to speak.

From the moment the media caught wind of the murder of Nicole Simpson, the blitz in the court of public opinon began. The media accused, tried and convicted OJ in the court of public opinion. The court of public opinion was SHOCKED by the verdict of NOT GUILTY. Today, if you ask 100 people on the street Do you think OJ did it, 99 will say yes. In my opinion, the media and the court of public opinion in this case is remarkably similar to the situation that occurred with OJ. I think also if somehow, in the end the verdict of not guilty happens that, 20 years from now if you ask 100 hundred people in the street if CASEY did it 99 will say yes.

 

[sadyjade]

From the moment the media caught wind of the murder of Nicole Simpson, the blitz in the court of public opinon began. The media accused, tried and convicted OJ in the court of public opinion. The court of public opinion was SHOCKED by the verdict of NOT GUILTY. Today, if you ask 100 people on the street Do you think OJ did it, 99 will say yes. In my opinion, the media and the court of public opinion in this case is remarkably similar to the situation that occurred with OJ. I think also if somehow, in the end the verdict of not guilty happens that, 20 years from now if you ask 100 hundred people in the street if CASEY did it 99 will say yes.

Maybe, just maybe what happens before the murder trial will showcase the upstanding citizen KC is/has been. Unlike the OJ case where many likened Mr. Simpson to a Real celebrity, an athlete, a role model even, to some. I'd love to know who, if anyone has ever likened KC to anything even close to a role model. laughable! The public at large would be even more shocked if KC is given a not guilty verdict, IMHO.

 

[cecybeans]

From the moment the media caught wind of the murder of Nicole Simpson, the blitz in the court of public opinon began. The media accused, tried and convicted OJ in the court of public opinion. The court of public opinion was SHOCKED by the verdict of NOT GUILTY. Today, if you ask 100 people on the street Do you think OJ did it, 99 will say yes. In my opinion, the media and the court of public opinion in this case is remarkably similar to the situation that occurred with OJ. I think also if somehow, in the end the verdict of not guilty happens that, 20 years from now if you ask 100 hundred people in the street if CASEY did it 99 will say yes.

And if you ask a crack prosecuting attorney like V. Bugliosi, who wrote a book about why the prosecution mucked up the case and did not get a guilty verdict, he'll say that the court of public opinion was correct, their assumptions were proven in trial, and that the mishandling of the prosecution and the excellent deflection tactics of the defense won out to have OJ acquitted. Of course the civil trial did not go the same way and OJ himself has openly implied he did it, and privately practically admitted it. So the court of public opinion, contrary to your supposition, has really no important influence over the actual trial or ultimately to do with what kind of verdict is given and cannot be unnecessarily demonized as a culprit; it appears that the most important element in a not-guilty jury, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, is a Dream Team.

 

[essies]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OUvMPqo1ks"]YouTube - Defense "Get Serious" & Check Fraud Trial Moved to December 11![/ame]

 

[reeseeva]

Wondering what was in the latest 2,000 pages of discovery, handed over to the Defense on Oct. 21st, that many are waiting to see......Are they basing their new motions on this latest evidence from the SA?

Maybe someone can e-mail Kathi B., as to why they haven't posted anything on this??

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/21361234/detail.html