Motion to Take Deposition to Perpetuate Testimony of Jill Kerley

[Kentjbkent]

<< Today, the Casey Anthony defense team commenced, but did not complete, the deposition of Roy Kronk in the State v. Casey Anthony case. Shortly after adjourning the deposition, the Anthony defense team filed a Motion, Memorandum of Law,>>

So do we know if this deposition was eventually completed, or is the defense still waiting to get around to it???

 

[Kentjbkent]

Usually in the case of a disappearance or murder, LE will start with the persons closest (family-wise) to the victim, as the statistics show they are the most common to harm them. When the family/SO's are cleared, then they work outward to other suspects. Casey was never cleared by LE, in fact she demonstrated directly to them how she lies. And she was the last person known to see Caylee alive. Her alibi of work was blown.
Also, Roy Kronk had no motive, nor opportunity to harm Caylee. There was no valid reason to investigate him, especially when he called in reports of spotting her back in August!

I recall a thread in the past where it was debated whether or not LE had actually fully investigated RK, and some were under the impression that LE had NOT investigated him, due to lack of documents dropped indicating so....

But if LE had in fact investigated RK extensively, but found no connection between him and the crime (apart from finding body), those investigative reports would NOT be turned over to the defense (resulting in our viewing them) since they were merit-less, correct?

(BTW...I have complete confidence that LE did a thorough investigation of him. I have yet to see anything from LE in this case that leads to sloppy police work)

 

[rhornsby]

I believe the statement is "All suspects are presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law."[/U]

Actually, the "presumption of innocence" until proven guilty is not found anywhere in the U.S. Constitution (nor is the root word "innocent" - bunch of Casey Haters those founders were!).

In any event, it is a rule of jurisprudence that applies to the person on trial - not a person who is being pointed at by the person on trial to raise the reasonable doubt (also not mentioned anywhere in the US Constitution) that someone else may be the culprit.

If that other suspect is ever put on trial, they too would be able to then claim innocent until proven guilty and try to raise reasonable doubt that the other person did it - even though the other person was acquitted.

"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer", expressed by the English jurist William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, published in the 1760s.

 

[LambChop]

Could the attention be focused on RK because the FBI still has latent prints to release and obviously if RK picked up that black trash bag, if only for a second, he would have left fresh prints?

As far as JK it's basically his word against hers. But JK stating RK kidnapped her, took her to MD and held her there for two weeks. I find that hard to believe when she has an arrest record 6/93 and 12/93 for passing bad checks in MD. Did he make her do that too? If RK was never a suspect why would LE investigate him when they know who is responsible? Why waste taxpayers money when the only thing they lack is a confession from KC. Isn't the defense's job to point their finger at someone else and dig up dirt, not LE. The State is confident they have the right person.

KC has never given a statement to the fact that she handed her daughter over to RK. JK is just a bitter, bitter woman. I believe the marriage only lasted 4 months because she obviously had problems writing bad checks. If RK was a bounty hunter at this time it would have impacted on his reputation and career. If there were anything in RK's background, FBI, State and Local police, the Town of Orlando would have found it.

The look on JK's face during this video speaks volumes but not that of an abused woman but more like a person bent on settling a score. So her story could be true but if you put both of them on the stand, I would believe RK before JK as she just does not come off a credible. And let's not forget that woman are not always the one's being abused in a relationship as men have been, too. Men are less likely than women to EVER admit the abuse.

Unfortunately anyone who may find a body in the future who has a questionable past may never report it because it may cost them their job, their reputation, their family and friends. What if RK were married now. Can you imagine the impact it would have on his marriage? It is just not right to ruin someone else's reputation and life just to make your client look less guilty. If I were in the potential jury pool I would be discussed with this type of behavior. JMO

 

[The World According]

I apologize Ms. Bean. I shouldn't have even started this thread. I knew the answers to all of my questions, and indeed in the recent hearing the judge did address that the defense would need some supporting documents to support their claim that she was unavailable to testify. I had looked up the case law already, so I knew what the eventuality was. I was making fun of the defense. It was mean, uncalled for and not productive. Now we have some very good, good people arguing and getting upset. If I were a child my Gram would pull me up by the shirt collar and tell me I was too big for my britches. I wont do this again.

 

[LambChop]

I apologize Ms. Bean. I shouldn't have even started this thread. I knew the answers to all of my questions, and indeed in the recent hearing the judge did address that the defense would need some supporting documents to support their claim that she was unavailable to testify. I had looked up the case law already, so I knew what the eventuality was. I was making fun of the defense. It was mean, uncalled for and not productive. Now we have some very good, good people arguing and getting upset. If I were a child my Gram would pull me up by the shirt collar and tell me I was too big for my britches. I wont do this again.

I don't think you need to apologize, The World According, this is a very productive thread. It makes us realize that people from our past can come back to bite us even though we have done nothing wrong, we could end of defending ourselves. RK was not the only person looking for Caylee on Suburban Drive. We have proof of that. With all the searches that now reveal who searched that area and did not find her it was only a matter of time that someone did find her. Thanks to RK it was not some child walking a dog and the dog running into that wooded area and bringing out the skull. It could have happened and how tramatic it would have been for the child. I believe RK used his background experience and logical sense and found her because he knew what to look for. Certainly not because he put her there but because he was experienced with dealing with criminals from a LE prospective.

If we can see through Ms. JK the judge will see it too, and judge accordingly. To lie and have it cause another person to suffer substantial loses in their life does not sit well with any law abiding person. So don't feel sad....:blowkiss: JMO

 

[JBean]

I apologize Ms. Bean. I shouldn't have even started this thread. I knew the answers to all of my questions, and indeed in the recent hearing the judge did address that the defense would need some supporting documents to support their claim that she was unavailable to testify. I had looked up the case law already, so I knew what the eventuality was. I was making fun of the defense. It was mean, uncalled for and not productive. Now we have some very good, good people arguing and getting upset. If I were a child my Gram would pull me up by the shirt collar and tell me I was too big for my britches. I wont do this again.

well if you started the thread for nefarious purposes then i appreciate your apology.

 

[JBean]

I don't think you need to apologize, The World According, this is a very productive thread. It makes us realize that people from our past can come back to bite us even though we have done nothing wrong, we could end of defending ourselves. RK was not the only person looking for Caylee on Suburban Drive. We have proof of that. With all the searches that now reveal who searched that area and did not find her it was only a matter of time that someone did find her. Thanks to RK it was not some child walking a dog and the dog running into that wooded area and bringing out the skull. It could have happened and how tramatic it would have been for the child. I believe RK used his background experience and logical sense and found her because he knew what to look for. Certainly not because he put her there but because he was experienced with dealing with criminals from a LE prospective.

If we can see through Ms. JK the judge will see it too, and judge accordingly. To lie and have it cause another person to suffer substantial loses in their life does not sit well with any law abiding person. So don't feel sad....:blowkiss: JMO

Why are you so sure she is lying Lambchop?

 

[LambChop]

snipped - this story I am about to say is not quite off topic, I dont think -

around 2005 or so my ex saw a pic on the net from someone who had covered his entire sofa in duct tape. ex decides to cover his sad lil sofa in duct tape, too. so around 11 pm on a saturday he gets himself a few rolls of duct tape and gets to work. mind you, he lived in an apt consisting of 7 other units. much to his shock, within the hour, a large number of police arrive at his door.

neighbors heard lots of duct tape and got worried. did the right thing too IMO!

Funny. For a sec I thought you were going to say he sat down and could not move. LOL See, this is what I mean there are so many great stories and experiences out there and a great chance on this site to learn and in some cases become more aware of the injustice done to others. We can change things but we have to know what to do and how to do it. So everyone's input is valuable whether we agree or disagree. But the comic relief is great. Thanks. JMO

 

[LambChop]

Why are you so sure she is lying Lambchop?

I had body language in college with one of my courses. I find his body language more credible than hers. Not saying she is lying but the pursing of the lips, shifting eyes, the fact that the tape is choppy I would be asking her to take a polygraph myself because that would be proof.

With a long history of bad checks it's not an isolated incident so she obviously has some anger issues. You can see it in her face.

Do I see someone taping up her hands? Yes, I could see someone taping someone else's hands if they were trying to defend themself against being hit. I have yet to see anger on Mr. Kronk's face, but what I see during the whole video of JK is anger, bitterness and hate. My husband's whole family died from Cancer, sisters aged 51 and 53, father 71 and mother 75 all after long illnesses. Not once did I see that type of anger on their faces. I truly feel sorry for this woman. JMO

 

[The World According]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...,2772056.story
__________________

 

[The World According]

Casey Anthony's attorneys want meter reader Roy Kronk investigated
10:41 p.m. EST, January 27, 2010
<snipped>

The idea that Kronk should be a suspect &#8212; an idea first raised by Anthony's defense team in November &#8212; is one experts that say is designed to raise doubts among jurors during Anthony's murder trial.
Judge Stan Strickland is allowing her team to question Jill Kerley, one of Kronk's former wives, under oath.

If her testimony is entered into the record, it's likely prosecutors will point to her criminal past.

"It's one thing to spew venom to a private investigator, but a different scenario when you're under oath and being cross-examined," Evans said.
*Much More Info At Link!

Article:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...,2772056.story

 

[JBean]

feel free to continue discussion on this motion and its possible ramifications here.

 

[notthatsmart]

I see in the news thread that the OS put out a story. They talk about Jk and her crimes.

From the Os:
Tennessee criminal records show Kerley is a convicted felon who is on probation. Records show she has been charged several times with writing bad checks as far back as 1998.

Tennessee Bureau of Investigation records also indicate that Kerley, who is a nurse, was arrested in 2000 on a controlled-substance charge. The outcome of that case was not available.

If her testimony is entered into the record, it's likely prosecutors will point to her criminal past.

It will be interesting to watch the Sa impeach a very sick cancer patient that is a nurse. Nurses are noble people in my opinion. I wonder how Sa will approach this.. Moo

 

[whiteangora]

I see in the news thread that the OS put out a story. They talk about Jk and her crimes.

From the Os:
Tennessee criminal records show Kerley is a convicted felon who is on probation. Records show she has been charged several times with writing bad checks as far back as 1998.

Tennessee Bureau of Investigation records also indicate that Kerley, who is a nurse, was arrested in 2000 on a controlled-substance charge. The outcome of that case was not available.

If her testimony is entered into the record, it's likely prosecutors will point to her criminal past.

It will be interesting to watch the Sa impeach a very sick cancer patient that is a nurse. Nurses are noble people in my opinion. I wonder how Sa will approach this.. Moo

bbm, red
She does not exactly look like she is on her death bed to me.
We do not know what type of cancer she has nor do we know her prognosis, for all we know she may be doing quite nicely with her treatments.
With her criminal background, I highly doubt she will ever testify and if she does it will mean nothing because she is known to be dishonest with $.

 

[LambChop]

I see in the news thread that the OS put out a story. They talk about Jk and her crimes.

From the Os:
Tennessee criminal records show Kerley is a convicted felon who is on probation. Records show she has been charged several times with writing bad checks as far back as 1998.

Tennessee Bureau of Investigation records also indicate that Kerley, who is a nurse, was arrested in 2000 on a controlled-substance charge. The outcome of that case was not available.

If her testimony is entered into the record, it's likely prosecutors will point to her criminal past.

It will be interesting to watch the Sa impeach a very sick cancer patient that is a nurse. Nurses are noble people in my opinion. I wonder how Sa will approach this.. Moo

Unfortunately for defense, SA did not insist on putting this woman though this did they? It is the defense who contacted her and knowing how ill she is insisted on pushing her out there into national prime time instead of handling this through the proper procedures. As sick as JK may well be she still accused her ex of a vicious crime. She said quite clearly that in her gut she feels he murder Caylee. You can't accuse someone of a crime such a murder and expect not to be challenged on your statement whether you are ill or not.

It will be defense that is not looked too well upon because it is through their insistence that they are making JK endure this process. This is not helping her healing process by putting her through this but then she did make that statement and knows what is expected of her.

Nurse are people, they make the same mistakes as everyone else. It's just easier for them to gain access to controlled substances than it would be for you or me. Those charges are interesting.

Because of her past, I would hope SA asks her to take a poly. JMO

 

[logicalgirl]

bbm, red
She does not exactly look like she is on her death bed to me.
We do not know what type of cancer she has nor do we know her prognosis, for all we know she may be doing quite nicely with her treatments.
With her criminal background, I highly doubt she will ever testify and if she does it will mean nothing because she is known to be dishonest with $.

She apparently has Non-Hogkins(sp?) Lymphoma and is receiving chemotherapy. I believe I read her father died of it. However it's been said she is also bi-polar, so the check writing would fit. And no, she isn't looking at all frail.

 

[Trapshooter]

It will be interesting to watch the Sa impeach a very sick cancer patient that is a nurse. Nurses are noble people in my opinion. I wonder how Sa will approach this.. Moo

Snipped

Yes I agree that nurses are "noble" people, HONEST NURSES!!! Those that really take their job seriously, care for the ill and do NOT steal drugs! I wouldn't say that ALL nurses are noble, just a few with good intentions.

The defense will have to take this bullet, they are the ones that "shot" at JK.

 

[LambChop]

She apparently has Non-Hogkins(sp?) Lymphoma and is receiving chemotherapy. I believe I read her father died of it. However it's been said she is also bi-polar, so the check writing would fit. And no, she isn't looking at all frail.

Many Cancer patients do not look that ill at first. Once they start the chemo they really go downhill. My husband was 62 but a month before he passed I look at the pictures now and he looks as if he is in his late 80's. The disease is bad, the cure worse. But if the cure works, it is worth it. I once had a boss who came back from vacation with a beautiful tan. We all admired his tan. Then he was out again for about another week and I asked someone if he was on vacation again. They said no, did I not hear, he had liver cancer. He died the very next week. So I am kinda careful when I think people look well and they say they have Cancer. They can be very sick. JMO

 

[RainyGirl]

The OCSO said Kronk was never a suspect in this case. IIRC, he was interviewed thoroughly by both OCSO and the FBI.

Mr. Kronk's attorney is not concerned about what Jill Kerley may say under oath. I'm curious to hear what she may say under oath, as sworn testimony is an entirely different ball game. Even if she asserts the same opinions about her ex-husband, it does not change the facts of the case of the State of Florida Vs. Casey Marie Anthony.

The defense can try and discredit Kronk as a witness in this case, but that does not change the known facts surrounding Caylee's tragic demise. It does not reduce nor change the actions of the poor child's mother and legal guardian, Casey.

Moo

ETA: The Prosecution did not seek out Jill Kerley for interviews, depositions or edited, videotaped chats (not under oath) about the ex-husband from almost two decades ago. That one is squarely on the defense.