CM:We don't have any obligation to put on a defense -JP:"Y'all lied to me

[Just Jayla]

I'm very concerned by this since it looks like the DT is trying to pull a fast one and go for a mistrial.
Can someone please explain the implications of this transcript?

Here's my take, and others have prolly written it before me-

Mr. Mason wants the judge to imply to the jury that, even though the defense has no obligation to put on a case, they are going to anyway because they so firmly believe that KC's truth, the real and pure truth, needs to be told. They have been so put upon and KC has been so besmirched by the state that the defense now has no choice but to tell you what really happened. They really didn't have to because the state has no case, but because of how cruel the state has been, they are left with no alternative.
So please, jury, remember that KC is the victim here and her attorneys are heroes.

 

[Just Jayla]

HHJP's response was a lawyer to lawyer response, less so an authority to subject response-To me, when HHJP basically called them a pack of liars, it was a dig at their integrity as advocates in this system that relies so much on truth at all costs.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Bill Sheaffer said today that if the DT rests without putting on a defense, that the jury will "crucify" the DT.

Has this been done before? I've never heard of a one sided trial. :waitasec:

 

[tapu]

Has this been done before? I've never heard of a one sided trial. :waitasec:

Oh yeah. It happens regularly. Burden of proof is on the prosecution; defense can rest, indicating that they believe the dA hasn't proven the case.

 

[katydid23]

OMG Dragonlady those 2 pics are freaky!!! lol.

They really are freaky. I wish they could be admitted into evidence. I hear people who are new to the case saying she 'looks so normal.' So did Bundy.

 

[citigirl]

I am just a little worried that the transcript makes it look like Judge Perry is not fair and impartial...that he is pro-prosecution--he was a prosecutor once, after all. I guess he'll just have to swear at the prosecution once and then we can call it even.

On a serious note, though, I had a different take on this when I read it. I think Mr. Mason may not be entirely on board with the defense strategy and was hoping to figure out a way to remind the jury that the burden of proof is not on the defense before they present their hopeless story. He really may not have been aware that Baez had given the judge so much information already.

I think both the defense and the prosecution are thinking a lot on their feet during this trial...the calling of witnesses seem to be almost like a chess game, with strategy on both sides shifting with the way each side handles each witness. So Mason quite rightly does not want to create any expectations about what the defense will do in the minds of jurors. He wants maximum wiggle room to put as few or as many witnesses as he wants, depending on what the prosecution does.

 

[Just Jayla]

They really are freaky. I wish they could be admitted into evidence. I hear people who are new to the case saying she 'looks so normal.' So did Bundy.

O/T for half a second-KC does not look normal compared to what she looked like in 2008. Her spirit is lost. Wait a minute, lemme grab a tissue, I think I might shed a little tear for her...

 

[katydid23]

Has this been done before? I've never heard of a one sided trial. :waitasec:

Absolutely. My Dad won a few cases that way. He only did that if the prosecution case was really weak though. So it is NOT going to happen here. Only if the evidence is next to nothing and really shaky. One time the only 'real' evidence against his client was an ex-gf and an inmate who said he heard something while they shared a cell. But it was shown that inmate was a regular snitch and a proven liar. And nobody believed the jilted gf either. So he just said the state had not proven their case and he was not going to say anymore.
Acquittal. [ And the guy WAS innocent so it was a nice outcome.]

 

[Carrington]

I do believe if a mistrial occurs, the prosecution has the option of not retrying, and set the inmate free. Allowing them to gather more evidence, if they so desire, and then rearrest with new evidence.

If the state decides another trial may be too costly, they can do just that.
I don't think FL would do that, but who knows.

IMO

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Sidebar:
http://www.clickorlando.com/download/2011/0614/28230782.pdf

Reads to me, that JP is telling Mason that JB told him (repeatedly) he has evidence.
Evidence, big word. Wonder whose hat JB is pulling the evidence out of......
Mason tries to dance with the judge and the judge steps on his toes.
JP is willing to fall on his sword, really not getting that, unless he admits the defense (JB not Mason) lied to him, and he bought it.
IMO

It almost sounds to me as if JP knows some evidence/information that needs to be brought to light. He's saying, If you're not going to say it; then I will.

But that can't be it. :waitasec:

 

[katydid23]

I am just a little worried that the transcript makes it look like Judge Perry is not fair and impartial...that he is pro-prosecution--he was a prosecutor once, after all. I guess he'll just have to swear at the prosecution once and then we can call it even.

On a serious note, though, I had a different take on this when I read it. I think Mr. Mason may not be entirely on board with the defense strategy and was hoping to figure out a way to remind the jury that the burden of proof is not on the defense before they present their hopeless story. He really may not have been aware that Baez had given the judge so much information already.

I think both the defense and the prosecution are thinking a lot on their feet during this trial...the calling of witnesses seem to be almost like a chess game, with strategy on both sides shifting with the way each side handles each witness. So Mason quite rightly does not want to create any expectations about what the defense will do in the minds of jurors. He wants maximum wiggle room to put as few or as many witnesses as he wants, depending on what the prosecution does.

BBM

I think you nailed it. I see it the exact same way. Mason knows that OS was blarney. I think he wants to focus on their own experts to rebut the forensics, and create reasonable doubt concerning the chloroform and the hair banding.

But Baez is like my German Shepherd with her bone. He is not going to let go of Kronk and George's Duct Tape. He is going to take us all on a wild goose chase, all the way to the end of the hall.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

I still cannot believe he said that in the sidebar. CM is like a petulant child. Well...we don't have to put on a defense, but wait, we are. Sheesh. Reminds me of a child that says "I know something you don't know!" and it turns out whatever they knew wasn't worth the taunting. They just wanted the other person to think they had some big secret. I am really getting tired of the defense's games. This is not a game, this is a case about a murdered child. Talk about being perfectly matched to their client. No wonder she won't get rid of them. She doesn't want a decent lawyer disagreeing with her and actually putting on a decent case she doesn't like!

And I don't think it jeopardizes the case because I don't think the jury is going to get to read about the sidebars. And believe me, HHJP has been very controlled and held back after dealing with this defense for I think at least two years now. I mean seriously, I could never be a judge because I would be cursing them out at this point, OMG. And the jury is also seeing how inept the defense is. Believe me, they're more pizzed off at the defense than they will ever be at HHJP. He's been good to them and takes care of them. The DT delays, doesn't give a carp about the jury having to show up for like five minutes tomorrow and acts like total...unusual people...right in the front of the jury. HHJP is not even registering on the jury's radar for anything bad right now, only the DT. They probably think he's a saint for putting up with the DT in the first place.

BBM ~ It dawned on me that they are submitting the death smell cans tomorrow. I'm not sure if they're going to open them or not but I bet if they do,
the DT wouldn't want to begin immediately after those cans are opened. It will take awhile for the Jurors to come back down to earth after that experience.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

So a mistrial is like a do over for the DT?

Also, if it is a do over, do they have to stick to the same story?
Can the DT present a different opening statement the second time?

 

[scmom]

Whether the defense puts on their case through witnesses or their client IMO it will be a waste, a huge waste.

 

[grandmaj]

The jury was given the instruction in the beginning. The jury is not supposed to consider whether or not Casey takes the stand and they were told that the defense doesn't have to prove anything that they are to consider whether the prosecution made it's case.

Now Baez told the judge they were putting on a defense. So Mason asked for more jury instruction in this area. Well the judge said no if I have made a mistake and you don't put on a defense case I will fall on my sword. But if you put on a defense there is no issue basically. The defense was looking for a freebie. All the judge did was announce that the trial schedule had changed a bit.

I'm not a lawyer but it was just the defense trying to use the judge to warn the jury that the defense doesn't have to prove anything. IMO because they know they have painted themselves into a corner and there is no way out. All they are trying to do now is cloud the issues. The prosecution will keep getting it straightened out.

 

[citigirl]

BBM

I think you nailed it. I see it the exact same way. Mason knows that OS was blarney. I think he wants to focus on their own experts to rebut the forensics, and create reasonable doubt concerning the chloroform and the hair banding.

But Baez is like my German Shepherd with her bone. He is not going to let go of Kronk and George's Duct Tape. He is going to take us all on a wild goose chase, all the way to the end of the hall.

LOL--I hope Mason writes a book when all this is over. The defense does not at all feel like a "team" to me. I believe Mason has become a marginal player here and his knowledge has not been tapped the way it ought to be. Jose Baez does not have the skills or the desire to manage or even play on a team.

 

[erinleigh]

i think it is just CMs way of saying the dont have to defend their opening statements but im sure they are gonna have their fun trying to tear apart each persons credibility. they want everyone to look as bad as their client

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Well, the DT is at the point where the rubber meets the road. When the client is guilty, how does the defense defend her? The jury has seen the tapes from the police interview, the jail...they've seen and heard that the grandmother called 911 immediately upon hearing that Caylee was missing. While the mother waited 31 days to even tell her family. Casey had the car and everyone says it smelled like a dead body. The ME says that parents always call 911 in accidental drownings, that duct tape is a sign of homicide. There's the dogs, the bugs, the hair, the chloroform, the computer search, the tattoo.

Is anyone going to believe that George is so dumb that he would use his own duct tape to cover Caylee's mouth (and for what reason?), leave the tape in his garage, and then use that same tape to put up missing posters? Or that George is so dumb he would dump the body less than a mile from where he lives, along with a bunch of stuff from his house? That a man who has worked in LE would keep a decomposing body in the trunk of his car and then leave it where any passer-by might find it? Or that Roy K is really the killer and moved the body around? After an intelligent and thorough prosecution case, built around the centerpiece that CA a mindboggling liar--who can they call? George? Lee? Roy K? Oh, please, please--that defense will be laughable. They couldn't dent any of the key witnesses on cross and they have no one who can testify to George as the guilty party. And if they call Roy K and he seems odd, that will reflect on the DT because he is their witness. Bottom line is the body was Caylee's and the prosecution proved with forensics that the body had been there all along. and the prosecutors will be able to rehabilitate him. After all, he was never in that car or that house.

My guess is that the smart ones on the DT know that it's all over but the penalty phase, that they
don't have days of witnesses that can withstand cross examination.

 

[Firefly]

Haven't finished reading this thread but......Dang, guess this means that they won't be putting Casey up!!! Is this why she is so happy?

I have always voted that she shouldn't be put up because she will undoubtedly impeach herself. Although, I would find it VERY entertaining to hear what comes out of her mouth if she ever takes the oath and steps into that box!!!

 

[tapu]

The jury was given the instruction in the beginning. The jury is not supposed to consider whether or not Casey takes the stand and they were told that the defense doesn't have to prove anything that they are to consider whether the prosecution made it's case.

Now Baez told the judge they were putting on a defense. So Mason asked for more jury instruction in this area. Well the judge said no if I have made a mistake and you don't put on a defense case I will fall on my sword. But if you put on a defense there is no issue basically. The defense was looking for a freebie. All the judge did was announce that the trial schedule had changed a bit.

I'm not a lawyer but it was just the defense trying to use the judge to warn the jury that the defense doesn't have to prove anything. IMO because they know they have painted themselves into a corner and there is no way out. All they are trying to do now is cloud the issues. The prosecution will keep getting it straightened out.

eeeYes............. I think you're on to something there. It's alternative to the scenario I was painting for myself, but this one makes sense, too.