"G (Guilty)" vs "NG (Not Guilty)" Where do you stand? #3

[leandjl]

Okay, if she was read her Miranda rights in that interrogation interview which I have listened to about 8 times, I missed it. I stand corrected.

I am not an attorney, but every law and order program I have ever watched shows the Mirandizing being done once an arrest is made, not before. The interview at Universal was when Casey was supposed to be assisting in the attempt to recover her daughter so no need to read her Miranda Rights.

 

[Wudge]

Wudge posting this again because I think you missed it. You have said before you don't see every post.

Florida Jury Instruction:

7.1 INTRODUCTION TO HOMICIDE

Read in all murder and manslaughter cases.
In this case (defendant) is accused of (crime charged).

Give degrees as applicable.
Murder in the First Degree includes the lesser crimes of Murder in the Second Degree, Murder in the Third Degree, and Manslaughter, all of which are unlawful.

A killing that is excusable or was committed by the use of justifiable deadly force is lawful.

If you find (victim) was killed by (defendant), you will then consider the circumstances surrounding the killing in deciding if the killing was (crime charged) or was [Murder in the Second Degree] [Murder in the Third Degree] [Manslaughter], or whether the killing was excusable or resulted from justifiable use of deadly force.

JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE
§ 782.02, Fla.Stat.

The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder or commit a felony upon the defendant, or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which the defendant was at the time of the killing.

EXCUSABLE HOMICIDE
§ 782.03, Fla.Stat.

The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:

1. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or

2. When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or

3. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.

Definition.
"Dangerous weapon" is any weapon that, taking into account the manner in which it is used, is likely to produce death or great bodily harm.

I now instruct you on the circumstances that must be proved before (defendant) may be found guilty of (crime charged) or any lesser included crime.

Comment

For complete instructions on self-defense, if in issue, see 3.6(f), (g).

This instruction was amended in 1990 [573 So. 2d 306], 1992 [603 So. 2d 1175], and 1994 [639 So. 2d 602].

If neither the State nor the defense were to request the addition of a murder two charge but the Judge were to add it, that would be a unilateral decision.

HTH

 

[marspiter]

Now based on the jury instructions for Florida can you supply the forum with any evidence to back up the fact that Murder two can not be considered by the jury?

You always demand such a high standard of evidence from prosecutors, and other forum posters. Do you hold yourself to the same high standard?

 

[RR0004]

Her mother said there was no accident. If you choose to believe what KC says then you have to believe her when she says there was no accident.

The evidence show's steps taken to cover up the death of a child. The evidence shows the last person to have Caylee in her possesion was the mother, who had the opportunity and means to kill her. The evidence shows that the last person to be seen in the company of Caylee was KC and that person's alibi and story as to what happened to the child is a lie. the evidence shows that the last person to have Caylee also had evidence in their car of a dead body and that this car at the admission of KC was dumped and abandoned.

The evidence shows several videos, photos and witnesses who spent over 24 hours with KC over several days and did not see or hear Caylee when she was to be in the possesion of the mother.

The evidence is clear that the child was murdered.

Yeah, I had forgotten about all that "motive, means, and opportunity". Thanks for reminding me!

 

[jon_burrows]

Then someone needs to email this to the defense because they sure haven't chosen to go that route.

That and with Casey's testimony....you know the whole thing about anything you say can and will be used against you.

Yeah that kinda puts a damper on the whole accident theory too in my opinion. You can't really claim SODDI then turn around and claim accident.

I realize this may sound crazy but I think the defense will change tactics and say it was an accident. Casey would have to take the stand and put on an academy award winning performance but I think it's her only shot at getting a sentence less than LWOP or the DP. The duct tape will be the hardest to explain. I can't see a jury analyzing ALL the evidence and voting NG if the defense sticks with zanny the nanny kidnapped/killed her. The jury will have to look at pictures of Caylee's remains, pictures of Casey grinning from ear to ear at Fusion, buying beer, bras, clothes, tattoo, and a bunch of other stuff.

The jury will need counseling when this trial is over.

IMO

 

[marspiter]

If neither the State nor the defense were to request the addition of a murder two charge but the Judge were to add it, that would be a unilateral decision.

HTH

Once again your point was the jury could not consider Murder Two.

Clearly according to the jury instructions they can.

Unless of course you can provide citation or evidence to the contrary.

Citation or evidence would be a web link, book reference, or something of that nature that can be analyzed.

Not just a statement.

 

[wonders]

Yes I have listened several times. I also went back and read it. It was clear to me that she was trying to help them out, but they would not have it. They just kept throwing accusations at her. I would not expect them to take her to the Ritz. I would expect them to continue to ask questions nicely so they can continue to interview her over a couple of weeks. They did not get any information what so ever by doing it in this manner. I can understand it because LE was doing 90 percent of the talking. And may I ask, how does that help to find Little Caylee? Why not just ask questions and listen.

yeah I saw the movie. That is Hollywood, not real life.

BBM
Huh? What? They were looking for a "MISSING" child. Maybe they should have craddled KC in their arms and cooed to her.

GOOD GRIEF.

 

[RR0004]

Yes I have listened several times. I also went back and read it. It was clear to me that she was trying to help them out, but they would not have it. They just kept throwing accusations at her. I would not expect them to take her to the Ritz. I would expect them to continue to ask questions nicely so they can continue to interview her over a couple of weeks. They did not get any information what so ever by doing it in this manner. I can understand it because LE was doing 90 percent of the talking. And may I ask, how does that help to find Little Caylee? Why not just ask questions and listen.

yeah I saw the movie. That is Hollywood, not real life.

Unfortunately...wrong...that was based on a true story.
Do you happen to know about any of the conversations that transpired during the day? You make it sound as if the one at Universal was the only "interrogation". IMO it was the culmination of a long day of questioning.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

This post deserves so much more than just a "Thanks". It deserves a standing ovation!

Nominating this one for "Post of the Decade"

I agree that cecybean's post is an excellent recap of the situation.

My personal favorite is OLG's post that stated, "I have no clue.".

I think all the twists and turns, lies and false statements, pointing fingers at others, denial, diversions and other tactics being used by the A team are for the purpose of messing everyone up to the point they can no longer think straight.

Keep the recaps coming!

 

[RainyGirl]

FYI for notthatsmart: JBean has bumped up the "Casey's Lies" thread for you. IMO, an excellent source of well-researched and documented information. I'd recommend reading the entire thread.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4443972&postcount=133"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Casey's Lies[/ame]

 

[OneLostGrl]

The evidence that we know of does not rule out Caylee dying from an accident. Hence, it is not true that Caylee necessarily died at the hands of anyone. Moreover, the evidence in the public domain is insufficient to convict anyone of murder.

For ME the lying, partying, telling nobody and 31 days of waiting rules out an accident. Perhaps that's not enough for you or for a jury but it is enough for ME.

 

[cecybeans]

Hmm - I wonder- doesn't appear that Miss Lyons has read all the comments 'out there' that she is the one who really needs a makeover...:innocent:

Well, the pyramids weren't built in a day...

 

[Wudge]

Now based on the jury instructions for Florida can you supply the forum with any evidence to back up the fact that Murder two can not be considered by the jury?

You always demand such a high standard of evidence from prosecutors, and other forum posters. Do you hold yourself to the same high standard?

Prior to trial, the State sets the charges. The Judge is trier of law, not the prosecution or the defense. They rule on motions for a directed verdict or to the amend the charges prior to their instructing the jury. They do not make unilateral decisions to do such.

(At a minimum, doing such would mean a certain reversal upon appeal that would result in jeopardy being attached to the original charges by the State.)

 

[OneLostGrl]

Hmm - I wonder- doesn't appear that Miss Lyons has read all the comments 'out there' that she is the one who really needs a makeover...:innocent:

 

[Searchfortruth]

I see Casey's main charges (on the Orange County Inmate Database) as being First Degree Murder, Agg Child Abuse and Agg Manslaughter of a child.

Wouldn't the additional Agg Child Abuse and Agg Manslaughter charges be a safety net for the state incase the jury didn't all agreee on premeditation ? And doesn't the Agg child abuse and Agg manslaughter charges equal Felony Murder in the eyes of the law in Florida ? I hope these questions are not too "out there", really I am trying to understand.

 

[RR0004]

I agree with you on all points, except, I'm not certain the state will be able to secure a conviction with what is unknown to us at this stage. In my opinion, if the state had anything more convincing than what is already showing they would have put it out there.

No offense...but NO WAY!

 

[marspiter]

Prior to trial, the State sets the charges. The Judge is trier of law, not the prosecution or the defense. They rule on motions for a directed verdict or to the amend the charges prior to their instructing the jury. They do not make unilateral decisions to do such.

(At a minimum, doing such would mean a certain reversal upon appeal that would result in jeopardy being attached to the original charges by the State.)

So your "fact" that the jury is not going to be able to consider murder 2 is based on conjecture.

You have yet to provide any real evidence that negates the statements found in the jury instructions.

As it stands in the instructions the jury can consider murder 2.

 

[notthatsmart]

Whose needs do you think should come first during that interview.... Casey or Caylee's

Caylee's, and LE certainly did not serve Caylee very well. I think if they would have been nice, perhaps they could have found out other things over the next couple of weeks to help them to perform a top notch investigation. Since they have been guessing now for a year, it does not surprise me that the reports are not panning out in their favor. This is another good reason for me to come to the NG side, is that LE could have done a much better job from the beginning.

 

[RainyGirl]

To avoid getting a time out, I am going to refrain from opining about the dangers of armchair pseudo-lawyers who make up legal rules and Constitutional protections. Instead, I am going to post only case law. But there are so many wonderful posters on WS and I would really really encourage you to take most of what people tell you "evidence" means or what "LE did bad" with a grain of salt.

Saying "the state has no evidence" is a baseless argument. THERE IS NO LEGAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. But don't trust me, trust the Supreme Court of the United States.

"The adequacy of circumstantial evidence also extends beyond civil cases; we have never questioned the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence in support of a criminal conviction, even though proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required. See Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121, 140 (1954) (observing that, in criminal cases, circumstantial evidence is “intrinsically no different from testimonial evidence”). And juries are routinely instructed that “[t]he law makes no distinction between the weight or value to be given to either direct or circumstantial evidence.” 1A K. O’Malley, J. Grenig, & W. Lee, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, Criminal §12.04 (5th ed. 2000); see also 4 L. Sand, J. Siffert, W. Loughlin, S. Reiss, & N. Batterman, Modern Federal Jury Instructions ¶74.01 (2002) (model instruction 74—2)."

So if you'd like to instruct others to acquit any defendant who doesn't bleed all over the victim, I suggest you become a lawyer and obtain an appointment to the Supreme Court to overturn 200 years of precedent.

bold is mine....
bumping up from earlier.....and a huge THANK YOU to Lawlady 84!!

 

[cecybeans]

Once again your point was the jury could not consider Murder Two.

Clearly according to the jury instructions they can.

Unless of course you can provide citation or evidence to the contrary.

Citation or evidence would be a web link, book reference, or something of that nature that can be analyzed.

Not just a statement.

Your patience is admirable. Murder Two and other red herrings aside, I was interested to find out that a FL judge can jury override a DP sentence if s/he feels it is not called for (and vice versa), which is a unilateral "check and balance" of sorts.

I try to get my medical advice from doctors and my vehicle advice from mechanics. When I need a lecture about the law; I have some very smart real attorneys I can turn to who will beat me about the head and shoulders. But I have noticed that Ysatters-Kajsa types tend to disappear when they arrive.