Odds of the SA having solid proof?

[CuriousTwo]

I'm thinking that since they are tossing out a lot of evidence, that MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, they have some solid proof that we are not aware of?
Thoughts?

I totally and 100% agree!!!!!!!!!!:clap::clap::clap::clap:

The SA isn't going to waste our time and the state's $$$ with unnecessary filler ... their clear-cut evidence and reputable experts will let the facts speak for themselves.

 

[strach304]

Yepper..K..I..S..S.. is the rule of the way....No need to pile on ...there is quite enough already...and yikes..to think that ICA parents own testimony is ultimately going to part of the evidence that is going to finally PUT HER AWAY is Justice to me..even tho the "Anthony Team" did what they could to muddy the waters,,to no avail...Their words were documented and they can spin all they want...It is what it is.....

Is Casey's big bro going to be testifying?...havent heard much about his likelihood of being a witness?? Anybody know?..TYIA

He's on the witness list and also named in the motion as a witness.

 

[AZlawyer]

There is no way the SA has "solid proof" that hasn't been disclosed, because, if they did, they wouldn't be allowed to use it at trial!

Also, they are not tossing out anything useful, just separating the wheat from the chaff.

 

[logicalgirl]

Whether George intended to kill himself or not is really moot..He and Cindy are such dysfuntional parents at this point, and their whole private lives being exposed..and not to mention THEY were the ONES who actually CAUSED Casey's arrest, charges and Death Penalty Trial to be happening...They both have lost everything material ...lost all dignity, lost their gandchild (Caylee) and llikely Casey........... so whats left now??...Not much..I wouldnt want to be in their shoes!

George and Cindy have little or nothing to do with the guilt phase of the trial. There will be some testimony perhaps about what they heard or saw, but beyond that, the guilt phase is based on facts and actual events of the case against ICA and what ICA actually did or behaved that contributed to Caylee's death.

What contributed to this behavior in the past may enter into the penalty phase as mitigating evidence, but in the guilt phase, CA and GA will be very bit players , with little or nothing of value to offer beyond when did you last see Caylee, what did you observe ICA doing, etc. Their opinions are of no value as they are not expert witnesses. As much as their perceived behavior disgusts us, I don't see anything of real value they will contribute beyond the basics. IMO

ICA will be convicted on the forensics IMO. Even CA and GA testifying for ICA in the penalty phase or used as pawns to explain her behavior by the defense won't even put a wrinkle in the sentence, let alone have any chance of lowering it. Again IMO.

 

[txsvicki]

They don't even need to bring up any of the stuff that TV shows have gone on and on and on about, such as her hating Cindy, her reactions, whether or not Jesse liked Cindy, etc. The duct tape over the mouth and nose area, chloroform in the trunk, death band hair of Caylee's, stain in the trunk, and dog cadaver alerts all point to Caylee dying at home or at home in trunk, then being placed into things that came from the home. Cell pings prove that Casey never went anywhere that afternoon and computer records prove premeditation, which is why she never reported Caylee missing.

 

[OpenMind4U]

There is no way the SA has "solid proof" that hasn't been disclosed, because, if they did, they wouldn't be allowed to use it at trial!

Also, they are not tossing out anything useful, just separating the wheat from the chaff.

Dear AZ, I do agree with you that defense has received all 'discovery' documents on time, nothing new will be presented...however, I'm not sure that we (the public) has see them ALL!...or maybe it's my wishfull thinking?...IMHO, we probably saw 75%-80%..a lot of interviwes are missing...certain pages were not available...so, again, IMHO - we'll see/hear some 'suprizes'...

 

[CuriousTwo]

There is no way the SA has "solid proof" that hasn't been disclosed, because, if they did, they wouldn't be allowed to use it at trial!

Also, they are not tossing out anything useful, just separating the wheat from the chaff.

True ... just like all those useless jailhouse letters that have been released.

 

[suepitzl]

I am curious as to what Dominic will say, that could be the closest to a smoking gun, IMO. Why has he been so absent anyway? Anyone know?

 

[momtective]

I'm thinking that since they are tossing out a lot of evidence, that MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, they have some solid proof that we are not aware of?
Thoughts?

My first thought upon reading the Today's Current News thread...two words...latent prints.
Oh how I pray it's that solid....and from the looks of it the SA doesn't need all the little bs stuff, what they have is solid as a rock. jmo

 

[MD MOMMY]

I'm THANKFUL they aren't using the jailhouse display. I think it bordered on what shouldn't have been done in the first place. I'm also thankful they aren't using Maya..she was not the most reliable person to begin with. JMO.

 

[Teresa]

I do feel like there is great evidence. There's a huge trail of "bread crumbs" and they all lead to Casey.

 

[bunchy]

There is no way the SA has "solid proof" that hasn't been disclosed, because, if they did, they wouldn't be allowed to use it at trial!

Also, they are not tossing out anything useful, just separating the wheat from the chaff.

They have to give all evidence to the defense but it doesn't have to all be made public. There are exceptions to the sunshine law.

 

[AZlawyer]

They have to give all evidence to the defense but it doesn't have to all be made public. There are exceptions to the sunshine law.

True--but "solid proof" is definitely not one of the exceptions.

Also, "continuing investigation" is not one of the exceptions if the material in question falls within the disclosure rules. (In other words, the disclosure rules "trump" that exception.)

 

[LolaMoon08]

Agree with ya and all who believe GJ peeps had quite enough, even without Caylee at that point..and tho I really dislike Cindy..and George for how they conducted themselves post "Missing Caylee"..I actually feel sorry for them both, as they BOTH know that it was due to them that Casey was even encarcerated to begin with...and it snowballed from there.and Cindy and George could do NOTHING to stop it (tho they tried)....

Bottomline, as much as we dont like or care for these parents/grandparents..IF it wasnt for them..Casey likely could have gotten away with this horrific crime :twocents:

Unfortunately, these two (Cindy and George) have to LIVE with that FACT for the rest of their lives ...I dont really wonder why George attempted suicide...I do think HE knew full well what was coming down the tubes (not to mention Caylee's Fate)

Cindy gets no pass from me. This is the same woman who has admitted that she would have WAITED to call 911 if she knew then what she knows now. Yeah, she would have WAITED to report Caylee missing... I believe that had Cindy allowed herself to calm down enough... she would have NEVER called 911. Thank goodness for excited utterances!

 

[bunchy]

True--but "solid proof" is definitely not one of the exceptions.

Also, "continuing investigation" is not one of the exceptions if the material in question falls within the disclosure rules. (In other words, the disclosure rules "trump" that exception.)

I don't think there is solid proof but I do know that one of the exceptions to the sunshine law is evidence that is extremely inflammatory. After the grand jury met, I believe it was Lamar Lawson(?) who stated that the people on the jury had to endure some horrible evidence. The body hadn't even been found yet so you have to wonder what that evidence was.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

They have to give all evidence to the defense but it doesn't have to all be made public. There are exceptions to the sunshine law.

Very true, for anyone who hasn't read this, it's a very informative link on Florida Sunshine Laws.

The Evidence You’re Not Allowed to See
by Wendy Murphy

Wendy is a former child abuse and sex crimes prosecutor who teaches at New England Law/Boston. Wendy specializes in the representation of crime victims, women and children. She also writes and lectures widely on victims' rights and criminal justice policy. Her expose of the American legal system, And Justice For Some, came out in 2007. A former NFL cheerleader and visiting scholar at Harvard Law School, Wendy lives outside Boston with her husband and five children.

" Because of Florida’s ironically named “Sunshine Law,” we may not get to see the very evidence that could convict Casey Anthony of murdering her daughter."


http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-...1/the-evidence-yoursquore-not-allowed-to-see/

Oh, and I am 100% confident that Mr. Ashton and Ms. Drane-Burdick have solid proof. We have to be patient, Caylee will get her justice.

 

[Sherbie]

I don't think there is solid proof but I do know that one of the exceptions to the sunshine law is evidence that is extremely inflammatory. After the grand jury met, I believe it was Lamar Lawson(?) who stated that the people on the jury had to endure some horrible evidence. The body hadn't even been found yet so you have to wonder what that evidence was.

I think if there were something that important, we would've seen hints of it via other means, even if the discovery were sealed from the public: witness/expert witness names related to the evidence, along with deposition notices and expected testimony; mentions in open court/filings of sealed discovery; and, most especially, motions to suppress (or other obvious attempts by the defense to exclude/discredit).

That said, I have no doubt we're gonna learn details we didn't know, and we'll see the correlation and importance of some things we didn't realize were as significant as they will ultimately prove to be.

 

[faefrost]

I don't think there is solid proof but I do know that one of the exceptions to the sunshine law is evidence that is extremely inflammatory. After the grand jury met, I believe it was Lamar Lawson(?) who stated that the people on the jury had to endure some horrible evidence. The body hadn't even been found yet so you have to wonder what that evidence was.

Unless specified by a judge in an individual action (which we would know about because there would be motions and orders regarding it) the only default exceptions to the Sunshine Laws are Autopsy photos and similar (The Dale Earnhart exceptions), and evidence related to the sexual abuse of children. The state would have to request that anything else be sealed or withheld and show cause for it. Even if we do not know what it is that had been sealed, we would know that something had been.

 

[ynotdivein]

Unless specified by a judge in an individual action (which we would know about because there would be motions and orders regarding it) the only default exceptions to the Sunshine Laws are Autopsy photos and similar (The Dale Earnhart exceptions), and evidence related to the sexual abuse of children. The state would have to request that anything else be sealed or withheld and show cause for it. Even if we do not know what it is that had been sealed, we would know that something had been.

RBBM... fae, do you think this might be what we're talking about here? The autopsy photos were IIRC sealed and will not be shown until trial. Perhaps HHSS's decision to seal the actual photos of Caylee's skull as it was retrieved IS the exception to the Sunshine Laws referred to?

(ETA: Which would go to the DT's frenzy to get that duct tape excluded one way or another...)

 

[bunchy]

Unless specified by a judge in an individual action (which we would know about because there would be motions and orders regarding it) the only default exceptions to the Sunshine Laws are Autopsy photos and similar (The Dale Earnhart exceptions), and evidence related to the sexual abuse of children. The state would have to request that anything else be sealed or withheld and show cause for it. Even if we do not know what it is that had been sealed, we would know that something had been.

Well, we don't know anything about when the grand jury met. Things may have been sealed at that time and we wouldn't know it. We don't know the horrible evidence they heard.