Defense Motion to Seal Penalty Phase Discovery Documents

[jennyb]

It's not Jesse's responsibility to be a part of the decision to spare Casey's life or have her receive the DP. I don't care how religious you are, there's a limit. Jesse has a strong family unit and I don't believe for one minute they would support him feeling the weight of the responsibility.

If he's forced to testify, yes, he'll be honest when he's questioned directly by the defense. But he'll also be honest when he's cross-examined. It works both ways. He has a lot of negative things to say about her.

She lied to him about the baby being his, she lied to his family when they were so kind to babysit Caylee for free thinking she was working. Trying to help her out.

Jesse will not couch the truth. He'll speak the truth because I do believe he's a very moral and ethical guy.

But he's not going to go the extra mile for Casey. If she gets the death penalty it has nothing to do with him.

 

[Intermezzo]

I was trying to think who on the stand would convince me to spare Casey the needle. And I came up with three people.

The first two are Grandma Shirley and Grandpa (Alex? I can't remember his name). I mean, Grandma Shirley forgave Casey for stealing from her. Grandpa held Caylee one last time and might not want Casey dead because she was the one gave birth to Caylee. I know if I saw her elderly grandparents on the stand, I might have trouble giving her the needle. Her friends, no. Her ailing grandparents begging for her life? Ouch. I couldn't ignore that, and I don't think a jury could either. That's if they were willing to get up there and testify on her behalf in the penalty phase. Maybe that's who Baez was trying to protect? I would think if there's too much stress on them, they might not make it to trial.

The third powerful person would be Caylee's bio dad, if he was willing to testify on Casey's behalf. Of course, that's if he's alive. Caylee's father wanting to spare Casey's life might sway me. A man who never met his child, had that child kept from him her whole life, and his child was murdered by her own mother, getting up on the stand and begging for Casey not to be killed would be extremely persuasive to me and also a jury. Maybe Baez is trying to protect him too, if he's alive? Maybe he agreed to testify as long as he didn't get too much media attention for it? And I know HHJP said everyone is known to the case. It's possible the father is known, but hasn't been identified yet as Caylee's father, just maybe as a friend of Caseys? So that person would be known as a player in the case, just not Caylee's father. And maybe we won't be surprised by who it is. Just a thought.

I agree,her grandparents...would be good penalty phase witnesses..

I think the Defense NEEDS Penalty Phase Witnesses that are Not family members to help spare her life...and who do they chose but the friends she betrayed...

I would assume, but I don't know for sure, that they have been contacted and interviewd by Finnell and the mitigation specialist and for whatever reason the former friends and boyfriends are listed as Witness to help the Defense spare her life...
IMHO :innocent:

 

[jennyb]

And one more thing.

Yes, Jesse has compassion. And I do believe it's for Caylee and not the woman who murdered her and threw her out like trash.

 

[Intermezzo]

I think it is very hard for people to imagine how Jesse or anyone else could testify during the penalty phase. As much as this case has touched hearts, we have to remember that for some people, KC was a sister, a friend, a grand daughter, a girlfriend, a neighbor, a co-worker, a person.

Once you get to the penalty phase of a capital case....no longer are you trying to get off, but you are only fighting to save your own life.

From what we have read about Jesse, he has strong religious convictions. While angry with KC's family and others for the smear campaign against him, I tend to believe that he values life and would not support the death penalty.

Jesse could be the most important mitigation witness in the entire penalty phase.

I suspect that the defense, after recognizing that, put a halt on the smear campaign against him. Otherwise, how could they expect him to speak on her behalf.

If Jesse can help KC escape death...we can't fault him for doing so. It just shows how deeply rooted his religious values are.

IMO the only people that JB wants kept secreted away...are experts and other professionals that will "tip off" family members. The defense MUST have full support of KC's family. He likely doesn't want them pizzed off.

When you look at how much has been released from KC herself....letters to Cookie with comments on every topic from bikini zone grooming to recaps of her attorney meetings, do you really think that visitors are the issue??

It's what message the visitors will send to "certain players" that has the team worried.

Me thinks a good "Plan B" is in order.

Thank you Sleutheronthe side for this post.
You have put the words together better than I...

 

[Macushla]

You all make very good points about why people who once considered ICA to be a friend should feel they "must" or "should" testify. I hope they realize it is not black and white, and like Jennyb says, are not heartless or vindictive if they do not testify. It is after all the responsibility of the courts and the jury to decide her fate. I would particularly not like to see any of them testify if they are still carrying any influence or repercussions of their involvement with ICA into their current life. I suspect that would include all of them because how quickly can someone shake off this kind of tentacle like association with a so called friend.

I also wanted to add to my comments above re Cindy and the jury, that while the jury is able to observe Cindy as the caring mother and grandmother, they will also see ICA's court room behavior of "Hi Jose - this is soooo exciting! Baby, what baby? Stop those meanies from saying bad things about me, stop it right now!" etc., that is her normal hearing "self".

And the results of that comparison will not benefit ICA. Then go to penalty and try to blame both the evidence and ICA's demeanor a result of ICA's upbringing? Uh uh. Epic fail - IMO.

This is again, not me defending CA's behavior on any level, but projecting ahead to what I suspect the jury may observe.

IF this goes to trial you can be assured that KC will be well versed in what she should and shouldn't do or say. Someone will have worked with her extensively to get her ready for the intense scrutiny she will be under. You might even see her smile bravely at her parents or Cindy if George isn't there. The KC we are seeing now is not going to be the KC we will see at trial.

 

[Leila]

I am speculating that they may wish to see her punished, like going to Prison, but they may not wish the Death Penalty on her..

These people are State Witnesses in her Murder trial..they are her peers, former friends, fiance, lovers who have been betrayed by Casey.
it seems who better in the end (penalty phase) to have, other than family, to save her from getting the Death Penalty.
:twocents:

I think it's logical to think that those who've been hurt by Casey would want to see her punished and be given life in prison. But some of those former friends/lovers may not want to see the death penalty imposed. Some might feel guilty for testifying against her, thinking they bear responsibility for her getting the death penalty.

 

[Intermezzo]

jennyb,
I would like you to know that I respect your opinion.

 

[jennyb]

That's really nice of you to say, Intermezzo.

I don't comment here often these days but I used to!

Thanks for making me feel welcome.

(btw, I don't mean to sound so strident in my opinions or come on like gangbusters - it's just that I feel really passionate about some of these issues. I really don't think Casey's friends should be judged on whether or not they testify in the penalty phase, nor do I believe they think they have an obligation to help spare her life. I could be wrong, but some of the statements they made way back when were almost 3 years old. A LOT has happened since then. Not saying they will lie or retract those former statements, just don't feel anything they said at the beginning of this case necessarily reflects their feelings now and I really (personally) doubt they're at all interested in what the jury decides re: life vs. death. They could probably care less, they just would like to have their lives back.

Anyway, have a good day all and thanks for tossing around some ideas with me!

 

[MD MOMMY]

I would personally not judge any of her friends for anything. It's not my say on what any of them does or doesn't do. Can I see Jesse doing it? Yeppers I can. Would I do it? Probably not LOL, but who's to say? I woulddn't think any more or less of any of them for whatever they decide. I just want all of them to tell the truth during the trial and nail her for what she did. It makes no difference to me LWOP or Death, just that she never breathes fresh air on the outside ever again.

 

[logicalgirl]

IF this goes to trial you can be assured that KC will be well versed in what she should and shouldn't do or say. Someone will have worked with her extensively to get her ready for the intense scrutiny she will be under. You might even see her smile bravely at her parents or Cindy if George isn't there. The KC we are seeing now is not going to be the KC we will see at trial.

I'd like to think that's true Macushia, but I don't believe ICA will be able to keep that up for more than a few minutes. As soon as she is in the grip of strong emotions, or she is bored, she slips back to her old "own" emotional levels. If she is truly a psychopath as I believe, then she does feel emotions at the same level or depth you and I do, so she will only be imitating behaviors she sees others displaying, or thinks she should be showing. But the trial will be at least eight weeks long, and I feel quite sure she will be unable to maintain any charade regarding portraying "a distraught"mother, regardless of coaching.

She just doesn't have it in her.

I think the defense needs to be more concerned from stopping any Kabooms once Jeff Ashton really starts swinging, than ICA displaying "wronged and innocent mummy".

 

[Intermezzo]

That's really nice of you to say, Intermezzo.

I don't comment here often these days but I used to!

Thanks for making me feel welcome.

(btw, I don't mean to sound so strident in my opinions or come on like gangbusters - it's just that I feel really passionate about some of these issues. I really don't think Casey's friends should be judged on whether or not they testify in the penalty phase, nor do I believe they think they have an obligation to help spare her life. I could be wrong, but some of the statements they made way back when were almost 3 years old. A LOT has happened since then. Not saying they will lie or retract those former statements, just don't feel anything they said at the beginning of this case necessarily reflects their feelings now and I really (personally) doubt they're at all interested in what the jury decides re: life vs. death. They could probably care less, they just would like to have their lives back.

Anyway, have a good day all and thanks for tossing around some ideas with me!

Come and post often, the more the merrier..we are a lively and respectful bunch, at least I think so..

The exchange of ideas and feeling passionate about issues is a good thing!
Thanks for the stimulating exchange!

Now I'm off to help stimulate the economy...again.

 

[Intermezzo]

I'd like to think that's true Macushia, but I don't believe ICA will be able to keep that up for more than a few minutes. As soon as she is in the grip of strong emotions, or she is bored, she slips back to her old "own" emotional levels. If she is truly a psychopath as I believe, then she does feel emotions at the same level or depth you and I do, so she will only be imitating behaviors she sees others displaying, or thinks she should be showing. But the trial will be at least eight weeks long, and I feel quite sure she will be unable to maintain any charade regarding portraying "a distraught"mother, regardless of coaching.

She just doesn't have it in her.

I think the defense needs to be more concerned from stopping any Kabooms once Jeff Ashton really starts swinging, than ICA displaying "wronged and innocent mummy".

Just wondering, (not directed to you specifically LG)

What part does the Prosecution play in the Penalty Phase?
They get their Guilty Verdict but then what is their role in the Penalty Phase?

I would assume the Defense would take a stronger role here than the Prosecution since they have to fight for the life of their client.

Also, Does the Prosecution call their own Penalty Phase Witnesses?
OR do they rebut the Defense's Penalty Phase witnesses..which in this case just happens to be the ones they have listed for trial...?

Anyone?
Wait...am I making sense?

I found this case in it's Penalty Phase interesting...
http://www.statesmanjournal.com/article/20101218/NEWS/12180337/1002/UPDATE

 

[NoNameLeft]

Yes..I am perplexed why he is on the list...other than he has expressed he doesn't want to see her get the Death Penalty.

Perhaps the DT is planning to use his testimony in an attempt to prove she was promiscuous. Next they argue how promiscuity is common among survivors of sexual abuse. It would be rich if suddenly the 'inappropriate sexual interrogation' of her ex-boyfriends then becomes relevant for the penalty phase.

BTW, it seems WESH will not get this witness list anytime soon for us. The article on their site says 'If Casey Anthony's murder trial moves into a penalty phase, the defense's witness list will be made public'. So either they did not understand the order or it has something to do with Bob Kealing's warm friendship with the defense

 

[ZsaZsa]

I think it's logical to think that those who've been hurt by Casey would want to see her punished and be given life in prison. But some of those former friends/lovers may not want to see the death penalty imposed. Some might feel guilty for testifying against her, thinking they bear responsibility for her getting the death penalty.

Good point. If I were one of the people who call her my friend I would only be willing to answer factual questions; the possibility that my opinions would be one of the deciding factors as to whether she lives or dies would be too onerous.

 

[Leila]

I'm sitting here laughing rembering Rick when he came out on the internet about the A family. Do you remember that? He was a riot. What do you think Terry would offer the defense? Just curious!

I think the defense will steer clear of Rick......he has a habit of telling it like it is.

As for George's first wife, Terry, we don't know why they divorced and if the divorce was an amicable or a bitter divorce. If I recall correctly, they were only married for 2 - 3 years. If we were to speculate, if there were issues with George, and the defense goal is to throw George under the bus, Terry might add testimony supporting that goal.

 

[logicalgirl]

Just wondering, (not directed to you specifically LG)

What part does the Prosecution play in the Penalty Phase?
They get their Guilty Verdict but then what is their role in the Penalty Phase?

I would assume the Defense would take a stronger role here than the Prosecution since they have to fight for the life of their client.

Also, Does the Prosecution call their own Penalty Phase Witnesses?
OR do they rebut the Defense's Penalty Phase witnesses..which in this case just happens to be the ones they have listed for trial...?

Anyone?
Wait...am I making sense?

(
I found this case in it's Penalty Phase interesting...
http://www.statesmanjournal.com/article/20101218/NEWS/12180337/1002/UPDATE

Apparently there are three "death penalty schemes" acceptable to the United States Supreme Court.
I am going to quote directly from the Florida College of Advanced Judicial Studies (2009) Conducting the Penalty Phase of a Capitol Case.

"The Florida Scheme requires the jury to unanimously find a defendant guilty of first degree murder. Then, the same jury ( unless the defendant waives a jury) hears evidence to establish statutory aggravating factors and statutory or nonstatutory mitigating circumstances. The aggravating factors must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact finder must only be "reasonably convinced"as to the existence of mitigating factors.

While the jury is not required to recommend the death penalty in any case, if the jury finds one or more aggravating circumstances, and determines these circumstances sufficient to recommend the death penalty, it must determine whether mitigating circumstances exist that outweigh the aggravating circumstances. Based on these considerations, the jury then recommends whether the defendant should be sentenced to life imprisonment or death.

A simple majority of the jury is necessary for the recommendation for the death penalty. It is not necessary for a jury to agree on any particular aggravating circumstances. Florida is the only state that allows the jury to find the existence of aggravating circumstances and recommend the death penalty by majority vote."

So, long answer to your quick question - it looks like the State will be presenting aggravating circumstances. Florida requires at least one aggravating circumstance before the defendant can be sentenced to death.

Also: I remember we have threads on aggravating factors - it may be time to bump them again.:waitasec:

 

[logicalgirl]

HAHA - I flipped the page in the above manual I was reading and noted:

6.3.5 Intense and Multiple Scrutiny of the Courts Rulings.:rocker:

6.3.6 Intense and Multiple Scrutiny of Defense Counsels Performance:floorlaugh:

Still flipping for one that says the same thing for the SA :innocent:

 

[Aedrys]

Apparently there are three "death penalty schemes" acceptable to the United States Supreme Court.
I am going to quote directly from the Florida College of Advanced Judicial Studies (2009) Conducting the Penalty Phase of a Capitol Case.

"The Florida Scheme requires the jury to unanimously find a defendant guilty of first degree murder. Then, the same jury ( unless the defendant waives a jury) hears evidence to establish statutory aggravating factors and statutory or nonstatutory mitigating circumstances. The aggravating factors must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact finder must only be "reasonably convinced"as to the existence of mitigating factors.

While the jury is not required to recommend the death penalty in any case, if the jury finds one or more aggravating circumstances, and determines these circumstances sufficient to recommend the death penalty, it must determine whether mitigating circumstances exist that outweigh the aggravating circumstances. Based on these considerations, the jury then recommends whether the defendant should be sentenced to life imprisonment or death.

A simple majority of the jury is necessary for the recommendation for the death penalty. It is not necessary for a jury to agree on any particular aggravating circumstances. Florida is the only state that allows the jury to find the existence of aggravating circumstances and recommend the death penalty by majority vote."

So, long answer to your quick question - it looks like the State will be presenting aggravating circumstances. Florida requires at least one aggravating circumstance before the defendant can be sentenced to death.

Also: I remember we have threads on aggravating factors - it may be time to bump them again.:waitasec:

We so do! I will never forget that. Baez basically demanded to know the aggravating factors the prosecution was going to bring up, like he couldn't figure that out himself. The prosecution did it, but was very annoyed about having to doing it. I remember talk on here about it - we had the entire list before it was released! I mean DUH Baez!

Of course, I would think the duct tape rises to the top. Shoot, the way Ashton described how she died is nothing less than aggravating. Oh, and the fact that Caylee was under the age of ten and killed by her own mother. There's so many aggravating factors, it's almost ridiculous for the defense to let this go to trial. The jury is going to have too many aggravating factors to pick from when deciding on the death penalty or not. I don't think any witness Baez brings in in the penalty phase is going to be enough after the jury hears how Caylee died and how much her mother didn't care one bit about her.

Well, there might be some compassion, but my point is, if they need to pick an aggravating factor, it's not going to be hard to pick one.

 

[logicalgirl]

We so do! I will never forget that. Baez basically demanded to know the aggravating factors the prosecution was going to bring up, like he couldn't figure that out himself. The prosecution did it, but was very annoyed about having to doing it. I remember talk on here about it - we had the entire list before it was released! I mean DUH Baez!

Of course, I would think the duct tape rises to the top. Shoot, the way Ashton described how she died is nothing less than aggravating. Oh, and the fact that Caylee was under the age of ten and killed by her own mother. There's so many aggravating factors, it's almost ridiculous for the defense to let this go to trial. The jury is going to have too many aggravating factors to pick from when deciding on the death penalty or not. I don't think any witness Baez brings in in the penalty phase is going to be enough after the jury hears how Caylee died and how much her mother didn't care one bit about her.

Well, there might be some compassion, but my point is, if they need to pick an aggravating factor, it's not going to be hard to pick one.

Yes, I remember this also Aedrys - we had at least six solid ones. But what I didn't realize until I was copying that quote is the jury members can pick any one (each) of the aggravating factors, and as long as a majority have picked one (and don't have to all agree on which ones) it is enough to recommend a death sentence. And I agree - what an azzhat he was for "demanding" the list.

Honestly, if I was Baez I'd be sweating blood so close to the trial with what he's up against. Which is why I can't figure out why he is still smirking. He's like his client with the inappropriate emotions!

 

[MD MOMMY]

Apparently there are three "death penalty schemes" acceptable to the United States Supreme Court.
I am going to quote directly from the Florida College of Advanced Judicial Studies (2009) Conducting the Penalty Phase of a Capitol Case.

"The Florida Scheme requires the jury to unanimously find a defendant guilty of first degree murder. Then, the same jury ( unless the defendant waives a jury) hears evidence to establish statutory aggravating factors and statutory or nonstatutory mitigating circumstances. The aggravating factors must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact finder must only be "reasonably convinced"as to the existence of mitigating factors.

While the jury is not required to recommend the death penalty in any case, if the jury finds one or more aggravating circumstances, and determines these circumstances sufficient to recommend the death penalty, it must determine whether mitigating circumstances exist that outweigh the aggravating circumstances. Based on these considerations, the jury then recommends whether the defendant should be sentenced to life imprisonment or death.

A simple majority of the jury is necessary for the recommendation for the death penalty. It is not necessary for a jury to agree on any particular aggravating circumstances. Florida is the only state that allows the jury to find the existence of aggravating circumstances and recommend the death penalty by majority vote."

So, long answer to your quick question - it looks like the State will be presenting aggravating circumstances. Florida requires at least one aggravating circumstance before the defendant can be sentenced to death.

Also: I remember we have threads on aggravating factors - it may be time to bump them again.:waitasec:

BBM!
Right and they had to have that before asking for the death penalty in the first place so they are good LOL.

Also, the penalty phase is trial-like they will call witnesses etc. The defense will have as many people as they can trying to save her life. The prosecutor is Caylee's voice so I expect a compelling opening/closing statement. Justice for Caylee!