Defense document - KC swears she didn't report.......

[lin]

Not exactly lin. Just a 'girl' with the responsibility of raising a child when she is but a child herself. It will go more to issues of maturity than insanity. Poor KC (*gag) caught between living at home with her parents and living as a partying, free teenager and the world of responsibility which she apparently is not ready for. JB will present her as 'trusting' and caring 'girl' whose trust (in 'Zanny') was misplaced. I can see many ways to get the jury to look at her as a horrible mom and yet understand her inability to act or react as a mature adult. I am also considering the fact a jury would not have benefit of much of the info presented here as WS and in the media. Just my opinion.

I'll agree to disagree --- being immature is not a valid defense to murder. Nor is being a narcissistic sociopath. I also highly doubt the court would allow much, if anything, to be presented along these lines.

 

[ThoughtElf]

I don't disagree, but as I read the part I bolded above, I found myself wondering if those videos of KC the smooth check forger/passer might help portray KC as the devious, skilled criminal she is. Just a thought. Or a hope, really.

I share this hope. Her ice-cold calm is very compelling evidence for me. Aside from the obvious actions she undertook to perform fraud & theft, I watched/reviewed those photos and tapes thinking to myself, "What if someone questioned her at the bank?"

And I came to the conclusion that she believes she could somehow talk her way out of trouble. Just as she believed she could talk her way out of the murder charges.

For me, it is not an illogical leap to see that brazen act at the bank and then ask myself, "If she can so easily commit these crimes without blinking, do I think she could just as easily commit murder?"

Give you one guess what my common-sense tells me that answer to that is.

 

[milliac]

Well, I wonder who she is planning on throwing under the bus. GA and CA have certainly not been worried about security (unless you count the protestors last year). So they evidently did not feel KC was protecting them from an outside threat. I have a feeling they need to be saved for "mitigating" circumstances.

So who was she "protecting"? Not JG or Amy, she could hardly wait to implicate them. I hope not AL or RM.

These witnesses are going to have to line up and take a number like in a deli to see who needs to lawyer up.

I don't see how they can throw GA and CA under the bus either. Maybe I am gullible, but at the beginning these appeared to be panicked, horrified, and sad grandparents and it was one of the few times they expressed their true emotions. I don't think it is very believable, unless one of them really lies and takes one for the A team. I am really at a loss about who she would protect that mattered to her more than her daughter. Hmmmmm...drawing a blank here! :waitasec:

I think you do have a good point about the parents needed for "mitigating" circumstances. Are you referring to AL's typical strategy of getting the death penalty of the table?

 

[Brini]

Hi ZsaZsa! Actually, the third 911 call was prompted by Casey's revelation that Caylee was in fact missing. The first two calls were kind of Cindy's way of trying to bluff. Recall she said she had someone in her home that she needed to be arrested for stealing money and a car? It was the third and final 911 call when we heard the frantic and almost hysterical Cindy stating her granddaughter was actually missing.:blushing:

Where JB is going with this monkey business is any mans guess...

Actually KC,s revelation was prompted by LA's confrontation of KC. When he reminded her that LE were on their way, and that she would HAVE to tell THEM where she left Caylee.

That's when she blathered out the "missing for 31 days" story.

 

[Mensch]

Yea, well JB good luck with that presentation. What is he gonna say when the duct tape is shown on the power point presentation, in vivid color? How many juror's will make a request to Judge Strickland to be excused to run to the bathrooms?

By the way, I am not about to describe what the jury will see. I think everyone knows what a horror that it is from reading the autopsy reports.

countzero, you and others here make excellent points. I am just playing devil's advocate (sort of) and trying to look at it from a strategic point of view. Trying to figure out the strategy defense. I am in no way disputing what is logical and reasonable as we have seen here.
As to the duct tape? If the duct tape, laundry basket and other items belonged to the Anthonys and were found in the Anthony car - this IS logical. I keep a laundry basket in my car. I also have tools there and at the moment some masking tape in that tool box. If my things come up missing from my car and used for illegal purposes and they are traced back to my car, that may make me a suspect, but not a criminal. All JB has to do is convince jurors that others , including the (imaginary) nanny had a key or access to the car.

p.s. you guys are good! Too bad your hats are not in the jury pool!

 

[Brini]

Well the SODDI had better be Mafia Martians, because so far we haven't seen anybody else who remotely qualifies as someone who would want to kidnap and kill Caylee. (And maybe ZFG was a "10" Martian.) I'm surprised KC hasn't heard "voices" yet repeating the script.

I cannot imagine how the defense will divert blame to CA simply because she finally called LE after 31 days and interrupted the partying, uh, the script.

Maybe one of our legal eagles could think of a reason this would fall in the category of defense strategy and not just idiocy.

Honey... please refer to earlier SODDI threads. We already TRIED the Martians. That theory didn't work, either. ;-)

 

[ThoughtElf]

Not exactly lin. Just a 'girl' with the responsibility of raising a child when she is but a child herself. It will go more to issues of maturity than insanity. Poor KC (*gag) caught between living at home with her parents and living as a partying, free teenager and the world of responsibility which she apparently is not ready for. JB will present her as 'trusting' and caring 'girl' whose trust (in 'Zanny') was misplaced. I can see many ways to get the jury to look at her as a horrible mom and yet understand her inability to act or react as a mature adult. I am also considering the fact a jury would not have benefit of much of the info presented here as WS and in the media. Just my opinion.

Interesting. I wonder how many WS members had their children around the same age as Casey? How many of those children are now young adults that turned out just fine?

I would like to think that the jury will include a cross section of adults (parents) like many we meet here who will see dissimiliarties in their own experiences - not a simplistic picture of an irresponsible 'youth'.

I'd have difficulty buying into the vision of Casey as a caring person. I agree that we have been exposed to much more detailed background information and research than the jury will, and I wish I could lay your fears to rest with some certainty. Unfortunately, we all just have to have faith that there is going to be justice for Caylee, and that there are far, far more people out there who don't see age as an excuse for evil.

 

[Friday]

Not exactly lin. Just a 'girl' with the responsibility of raising a child when she is but a child herself. It will go more to issues of maturity than insanity. Poor KC (*gag) caught between living at home with her parents and living as a partying, free teenager and the world of responsibility which she apparently is not ready for. JB will present her as 'trusting' and caring 'girl' whose trust (in 'Zanny') was misplaced. I can see many ways to get the jury to look at her as a horrible mom and yet understand her inability to act or react as a mature adult. I am also considering the fact a jury would not have benefit of much of the info presented here as WS and in the media. Just my opinion.

Re my bold and color highlighting: But, wait a minute--When Caylee vanished, KC was far past being a teenager. She was 22 years old and anything but naive and trusting. She was sleeping around, using drugs, forging checks, and committing theft. I don't think a jury is going to feel any sympathy for her plight as a 22 year old single mother, either--not when she was living at home free of charge, with eager parents to play babysitter, a nice car to drive, and she didn't even have to work at an honest job! The only thing about any of this that will work in KC's favor is that she was a cute and petite 22 year old with big "innocent" eyes. To offset this, the SA will need only to play that infamous jail interview with her parents when she lost it.

 

[Brini]

She is only swearing she SAID. Yep, I see defense new theory. She was protecting someone else.

Uh-huh. If so, they'll have to deal with the question of who and why. The jurors will NEVER be able to swallow that idea, with no who or why.

They we have the OTHER question that the jurors won't swallow-- who is more important to protect than one's child?

 

[Brini]

1. This has been bugging me for a few days now and now with this filing, it's too much. I demand to know who gave Muzikman permission to take a vaca??

2. ITA, QB. It will be soooo interesting to read exactly what KC wrote in her affidavit. Did she really swear she dropped Caylee at ZG's? Or did she swear she told investigators that? And so on. The point is to list the material facts and imo this is an important fact and an important differentiation.

IMO, from the brief description given, (thanks Macushla and news thread contributors Angel and QB!), this will not be found to be a statement of material facts, much less an adequate one.

Agree re: Muzikman! When he comes back, we should beat him with straws.

 

[Mensch]

Re my bold and color highlighting: But, wait a minute--When Caylee vanished, KC was far past being a teenager. She was 22 years old and anything but naive and trusting. She was sleeping around, using drugs, forging checks, and committing theft. I don't think a jury is going to feel any sympathy for her plight as a 22 year old single mother, either--not when she was living at home free of charge, with eager parents to play babysitter, a nice car to drive, and she didn't even have to work at an honest job! The only thing about any of this that will work in KC's favor is that she was a cute and petite 22 year old with big "innocent" eyes. To offset this, the SA will need only to play that infamous jail interview with her parents when she lost it.

Correct in all areas of your post Friday but consider the bolded part of your statement. Are these the actions of a responsible adult? I do not think the jury will have 'sympathy' on KC. I think they will see so much "ugly" coping as JB has coined, the focus will be on KC's inability to see anything sinister in the beginning regarding the imaginary nanny. I am not taking a stand on innocence and I am certainly not excusing KC. More to the point, I believe her to be self-centered and truly evil and guilty (moo). I am just thinking on the keyboard right now after seeing this document signed by KC put out there by her attorney.

 

[Brini]

Wait for it...wait for it.... CA. This is why she wanted to see GA alone-she wanted to convince him that she was protecting "mom" the whole time......just throwin that out there.

We still come back to having no "from what?" and "from whom?"

The jury won't buy it without a real danger.

THEN we get to the back that none of the As appear to be imperiled.

Then, we come around to whether implied danger to Mom is more of an immediate threat than material peril (back then- kidnapping) or murder (since remains found) of child.

 

[milliac]

I know a few people have thought that, but I just don't think CA has the acting chops (much less the impulse control) to fake that frantic 911 call about the dead body in the trunk, the martyr drama of her MySpace page and the spouting off to all and sundry about her evil daughter (before the fact) . Unless we are talking "Dueling Sociopaths" here. And if CA was that diabolical, GA would already be six feet under.

I also don't think KC would lose a New York nanosecond of her life protecting her mom (even if she did get a commissary account and all the cheese puffs she could eat for a year).

Those two can duke it out forever as to who is the most narcissistic, but the fact that CA went to work everyday (not Fusian or stealing from checking accounts), supported and babysat her granddaughter, and clearly desperately wanted to spend time with her to the point that she was calling KC wanting answers and sending out LA to find her, makes me think there is no way on earth CA had a thing to do with that baby's demise.

I just think that the best shot KC has is to use her dysfunctional family as mitigating circumstances to her state of mind when she murdered her daughter. No other suspect even comes close to motive, opportunity or intent.

Awesome post! :clap:

 

[Brini]

I know a few people have thought that, but I just don't think CA has the acting chops (much less the impulse control) to fake that frantic 911 call about the dead body in the trunk, the martyr drama of her MySpace page and the spouting off to all and sundry about her evil daughter (before the fact) . Unless we are talking "Dueling Sociopaths" here. And if CA was that diabolical, GA would already be six feet under.

I also don't think KC would lose a New York nanosecond of her life protecting her mom (even if she did get a commissary account and all the cheese puffs she could eat for a year).

Those two can duke it out forever as to who is the most narcissistic, but the fact that CA went to work everyday (not Fusian or stealing from checking accounts), supported and babysat her granddaughter, and clearly desperately wanted to spend time with her to the point that she was calling KC wanting answers and sending out LA to find her, makes me think there is no way on earth CA had a thing to do with that baby's demise.

I just think that the best shot KC has is to use her dysfunctional family as mitigating circumstances to her state of mind when she murdered her daughter. No other suspect even comes close to motive, opportunity or intent.

If that's the best she's got, she's in trouble.

Half the jurors either came from bad families, or have friends who did.

 

[Brini]

OK...FIRST...our little KC is soooo verrrry smart...IF my opinion is true.

By swearing to the fact of her mom calling 911 on the 15th....KC said "just one more day" when her mom confronted her.....hmmmm....seems like it justifies her not telling anyone...she needed to stick to the "script"...30 days...if I counted correctly, from the 17th of June -she probably started with that day...IMO. July 15th she gets found out by her mom..."just one more day" the 16th...would have her "30 day script" make sense. Therefore, the defenses new motion - AND, IMO, the defenses new strategy.

So...basically, she had her alibi all planned out probably right from the beginning...she KNEW she had 30 days of "freedom"....IMO

ETA : also helps support the fact that CA and DC still searching for Zanny, as the emails clearly show....

Then, she needs to tell LE who "really" took Caylee, and provide the "script."

 

[Brini]

She told her family and LE that the baby was kidnapped and that she had been doing her own investigation. They may try that to explain her behavior but it's easily disproven.

And, when LE confronted her with their superior investigative resources, she agreed that searching on her own was "stupid," but still has not given LE any usable information.

I think, folks, that KC has well and truly boxed herself in. Nothing the defense comes up with is gonna be even plausible to a jury.

 

[Brini]

IIRC - she told them the "nanny took her in order to teach her a lesson" but that she would speak to Caylee and that Caylee was fine - which is what she told LE during their interview - she said Caylee was happy and wasn't crying and was being well taken care of by ZG. She said she was trying to find her herself and should have called LE, but again she didn't feel Caylee was in danger.

It was only AFTER her arrest that the A's began their kidnapped stories about dangerous people and KC trying to protect everyone and Caylee being in harms way if the media didn't stop reporting on the case etc.

I don't think KC ever was recorded as saying ZG was dangerous and would kill Caylee - we got that from the A's.

Am I wrong?

KC could totally go to trial and say ZG was a real person, but gave her a fake name and purposely kidnapped Caylee to keep for herself, but then when the media reported on the case and everyone was searching for Caylee - ZG got scared and decided to kill Caylee and frame KC.

JUST because there is no proof of a ZG - doesn't mean the defense can't say there was an ACTUAL person that KC believed was named ZG - that the name was the name given to KC but may not have been her true identity. IMO

I am just trying to understand JB's thinking on staying true to the nanny story and how he will explain this mess at trial.

KC can totally say that ZG never wanted to be photographed or meet her friends or family for the purpose of her plan to steal Caylee from the begining.

That's pretty hard to buy.

At LEAST a woman whom KC had known for two years would have had a REAL physical and email addy, and a phone number.

And, we get back to wondering how this nanny communicated with KC? LE has every email, text, and phone call of KC's tracked. It all comes back to "non-existent nanny."

 

[Brini]

What about the phone number for ZFG that CA had "at home"?

Neither KC nor CA could ever quite come up with one.

THEN, KC said it was on the non-existent Blackberry, IIRC.

 

[Brini]

To add to you excellent analysis... How would that allegation even come to be made? KC on the stand accusing her mother?? I would pay extra to see that! And what evidence would support the testimony of the proven liar trying to profit by gaining her freedom through this particular testimony? So KC testifies (oooh, that is such an image!!) that CA did it. Then CA rebuts that testimony by denying. At best it would be a sociopathic narcissist said/narcissist said. And the rest of the evidence puts the perp right where she belongs -- lwop or dp.

Axis Two meltdown at local courthouse! Film at 11.

 

[yeknomaras]

I am sort-of offended that KC might be seen as a "child raising a child" or a teen with too much responsibility. I am KC's age, far from a child or a teen. Now, I do not have kids but if I did, my life would change for that child. KC did nothing to change her life for Caylee. She was purposely irresponsible because she did not care. Her age had nothing to do with it. I think a jury will see right through that sort of defense because there are much younger girls than KC giving birth these days and managing somehow NOT to kill their children in horrific manners and dumping their poor little bodies in the woods. KC just has something seriously wrong with her.