Prosecutors have new material and information that they dont want released to the pub

[chefmom]

Well, this little guessing game sure is fun! At this point in time, my top 3 choices are:

1) Something they have found out from DC.

2) They know who Caylees father really is through DNA.

3) They have evidence of another A family members involvement.

I hope what it actually is is half as exciting as what we are all speculating! Lol!

 

[Tulessa]

hmmm... I don't recall that. I recall BC releasing stuff that had all ready been released, acting like it was new stuff, wasting our time. And I haven't seen anything proving that the tape was from different rolls all together.

Thank you. I have been going crazy trying to find that info. Guess I was looking for nothing. I wish links would be provided with these claims.

 

[Kentjbkent]

It must be DC finally coming forward and telling law enforcement that CA told him to go get the body from where KC told them it was and to call them first in order to dispose of it.

I am convinced this happened. ALL MY OPINION.

I completely agree with you.

I strongly suspect this whole motion is in regards to DC and the investigative subpoena. I think it is possible that DC finally came clean, and at the urging of CA, Mr Baez is the next one going under the bus.

This makes sense to me because....

1. We know SA was going to issue an investigative subpoena, and as such, JB would not be in attendance.

2. We have speculated plenty in the past about Hoover's (?) statement that DC was directed to search the Suburban area and report back to JB (not LE) should he find anything.

3. IF this is what DC finally confessed to SA, I believe SA may be investigating these claims further.

I also think it could be possible that DC finally came clean at the urging of CA (pillow talk?) as it would certainly take care of her problem with Baez as KC defense attorney...moo

I suspect...

SA has found DC's story credible and is continuing the investigation into JB's role in the "woods search by DC". I suspect SA is just not sure how to proceed with the allegations that are being made against JB.

This would explain why they want the private meeting with Strickland and do not want the defense to attend. I believe it is possible that they do not want to alert the defense that they are working to substantiate DC's claims against Baez' involvement, until they can be proven, but want Judge Strickland's guidance as to how to proceed. I would imagine this is a situation that the prosecutors have never dealt with before (a defense attorney hindering an investigation).

If this is even close, get out your umbrellas cause the $%*^ is gonna hit the fan!!!

 

[LambChop]

SA is taking it before the Judge, they are not trying to hide the information. The Judge will decide if there should be a delay or not. He is responsible for protecting KC's rights and should this information be damning for the defense, JS may decide to inform the defense and then seal the records until trial just as he did with the video. I would think if it is an investigation by LE that they have not completed, SA is just making the Judge aware that this information has been brought to their attention. But I would not say SA is hiding anything....why go to the Judge if they wanted to hide evidence. JMO

 

[SallyLu]

I completely agree with you.

I strongly suspect this whole motion is in regards to DC and the investigative subpoena. I think it is possible that DC finally came clean, and at the urging of CA, Mr Baez is the next one going under the bus.

This makes sense to me because....

1. We know SA was going to issue an investigative subpoena, and as such, JB would not be in attendance.

2. We have speculated plenty in the past about Hoover's (?) statement that DC was directed to search the Suburban area and report back to JB (not LE) should he find anything.

3. IF this is what DC finally confessed to SA, I believe SA may be investigating these claims further.

I also think it could be possible that DC finally came clean at the urging of CA (pillow talk?) as it would certainly take care of her problem with Baez as KC defense attorney...moo

I suspect...

SA has found DC's story credible and is continuing the investigation into JB's role in the "woods search by DC". I suspect SA is just not sure how to proceed with the allegations that are being made against JB.

This would explain why they want the private meeting with Strickland and do not want the defense to attend. I believe it is possible that they do not want to alert the defense that they are working to substantiate DC's claims against Baez' involvement, until they can be proven, but want Judge Strickland's guidance as to how to proceed. I would imagine this is a situation that the prosecutors have never dealt with before (a defense attorney hindering an investigation).

If this is even close, get out your umbrellas cause the $%*^ is gonna hit the fan!!!

Agreeing big time with you guys!:woohoo:

I was so teed off when I heard the trial date that I was ready to pick up my sticks but this has got me quite excited about seeing some justice - finally!

 

[JSR]

Why wouldn't the prosecutors want that information released if it were the case?

Because they still have to seat a jury. And a fair and impartial one. No matter what the "new" evidence is the prosecution still has to go on the premise that they're going to trial and that KC will not plead guilty. And the SA sure as hell isn't going to offer a plea of any kind. If any "bombshell" evidence gets out it WILL taint a jury.

 

[RainyGirl]

With all due respect, from everything I have read the SA has been above board on EVERYTHING. If we have a moment of truth, it will be from Casey Anthony, and we ALL know, that's not gonna happen.:innocent:

I agree....and so does Bill Sheaffer!
To quote briefly from his latest post:
“The State has put forward its best team to represent the People. However, in the event the State, in my view, makes a misstep, I will not be shy about bringing that fact to your attention. So far, it hasn’t happened.”
:clap::clap::clap:

Thank you to QB for the link.
The post is called "No Cake for Casey" and can be found at
http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

 

[Leila]

It must be DC finally coming forward and telling law enforcement that CA told him to go get the body from where KC told them it was and to call them first in order to dispose of it.

I am convinced this happened. ALL MY OPINION.

There's always been something very strange about DC searching the woods off Suburban near where Caylee's remains were eventually found. Cindy's confession that she sent someone (DC) to search that area, and his confidence that the remains were there - his comment to Jim Hoover that "we're going to go get Caylee today", all indicate that Casey told them where she left Caylee's body.

It's very possible that DC has told the truth about what happened and how he knew with certainty that Caylee's remains were in the woods off Surburban.

If that's the case, the new witness and information may very well be DC and there may be an on-going investigation based on what he's told authorities. He may have been given immunity from prosecution for withholding information on the location of Caylee's remains. Investigators may be gathering evidence for eventual prosecution of George and Cindy. If JB had a role in this, that may also be under investigation.

If this is the case, I can see that the prosecution would want to withhold this evidence from the defense and those involved in the defense until their investigation is completed.

 

[Intermezzo]

I respectfully disagree. Earlier the Sa withheld information about the duct tape fabric coming from a different source\roll. Bc had to release that doc dump. So not above board at all imo. What is it with all the secrets?

1. Fbi and bodyfarm discovery.

2. Dc interview sealed.

3. JJ tape and anything said in it sealed.

There is much more missing. Just read the what would you like to see in evidence thread.

This is suppose to be a fact finding mission. We don't need any secrets. If the Judge approves this motion, it is only going to look bad on the States part.

The state brought these charges, they need to be forthcoming. Get it all out on the table. No more secrets. This is crazy. This is also how they ended up with the Sunshine Law in the first place, I am sure.

If the public wants Kc to be convicted of this crime and executed, then they need to do it knowing the whole truth. Otherwise how is the public suppose to sleep at night not knowing. No More Secrets. Moo

NTS,
If the Judge approves to HEAR this LEGAL motion it does not mean he will grant what they are asking for, which is a DELAY. Not to keep it Secret.

So you think the SA will look bad because they filed a legal Motion under the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure? one that they and the Defense are allowed to do?

The SA is not asking to withhold evidence they are only asking for a delay We are well aware here on WS that once the SA hands it over, and they will hand it over, to the Defense it will be released to the public by the media in accordance to the Sunshine Law and then it will out on the table for everyone to see, no secrets.
Patience dear sleuther.

I hope the Defense decides to let the Judge and the SA in on a secret that Todd M blurted out ..that they have proof of Casey's innocence..but alas they are unable to be forthcoming with that truth and because so it allows their client to remain in a tiny cell all alone in the Orange County Jail.
I truly hope if they do have that evidence that they would use it to get her out of jail pronto.

With all due respect

 

[Kentjbkent]

Agreeing big time with you guys!:woohoo:

I was so teed off when I heard the trial date that I was ready to pick up my sticks but this has got me quite excited about seeing some justice - finally!

Just to follow up....and I posted this on the thread about the new trial date...

As suspicion grows, I am now wondering if this new trial date PROPOSED by the PROSECUTION for 15 months from now (which seemed odd at first) is not being suggested by the SA in anticipation of a new attorney replacing Baez' should suspected allegations against Baez be proven and he is reprimanded and removed from case.

15 months for a new attorney to get up to speed on all the discovery released, plan for depos, etc......would seem logical to me! :dance:

 

[Kentjbkent]

Because they still have to seat a jury. And a fair and impartial one. No matter what the "new" evidence is the prosecution still has to go on the premise that they're going to trial and that KC will not plead guilty. And the SA sure as hell isn't going to offer a plea of any kind. If any "bombshell" evidence gets out it WILL taint a jury.[/QUOTE]

But doesn't this conflict with the Sunshine Laws in Florida?

 

[RainyGirl]

Just to follow up....and I posted this on the thread about the new trial date...

As suspicion grows, I am now wondering if this new trial date PROPOSED by the PROSECUTION for 15 months from now (which seemed odd at first) is not being suggested by the SA in anticipation of a new attorney replacing Baez' should suspected allegations against Baez be proven and he is reprimanded and removed from case.

15 months for a new attorney to get up to speed on all the discovery released, plan for depos, etc......would seem logical to me! :dance:

Excellent! I was just typing up the same thought, but you did far more eloquently! The Judge may have no choice but to remove Baez from the case due to (alleged) ethics and criminal violations. JMO....

 

[sumbunny]

Perhaps it isn't politically correct to destroy baez's career as a (cough) attorney in the public eye. So the S.A wants a meeting with JS behind closed doors without Jose to discuss what needs to be done prior to letting this discovery be released?

Seeing as the trial has been pushed way back, without much fuss from the SA, perhaps they know a new attorney may be needed? ( dc comes to mind with this latest new discovery)

sorry for quoting myself, but you said it better then i did Kentb

I also believe baez's lack of ethics might be a big factor in this new motion for an in camera hearing Did we ever learn for a fact that dc had the interview with the SA? The last I heard it was canceled.

 

[Kentjbkent]

sorry for quoting myself, but you said it better then i did Kentb

I also believe baez's lack of ethics might be a big factor in this new motion for an in camera hearing Did we ever learn for a fact that dc had the interview with the SA? The last I heard it was canceled.

As I recall, there was a deposition scheduled but the defense was trying to fight the depo and during the hearing, JS advised the SA to issue an investigative subpoena?

If I am recalling correctly, the cancelling was for the original time set aside for the deposition, and we did not expect to hear if SA took JS advice and issued the investigative subpoena (and Baez would not be present either)?

Maybe someone else can explain it better than I can?

 

[Leila]

Yes! DC was definately dragging his feet about talking to LE. I can't help but wonder if he may have told them not only what he was looking for in those woods that day, but also what he was looking for at that abandoned house. IMO, they are clearly 2 different things. He was SOOOOO close to Caylee's remains in those woods that it is a stretch to think he didn't know they were there, having been told by someone. So, what was he digging for at the house? If you assume he knew the remains were "in the woods", to borrow a phrase from CA, then he must have been looking for something else at that house. Maybe he has admitted to finding something. MOO.

The abandoned house is intriguing and there may have been some physical evidence he was looking for at that location. But, Cindy's confession to Yuri Malich in Dec. 2008 when Yuri and other detectives were serving a search warrant on the Anthony home, ties Cindy to DC's search of the woods. She said, "I sent someone to search that area (where Caylee's remains were found) last month and nothing was there." Clearly, Cindy was involved in DC's search.

If DC has told authorities the truth, then the real daisy chain may be Casey to Cindy to DC. If DC is the "new witness and new information" source, this could be explosive evidence! It would destroy the defense's claim that "somebody else did it" if the new evidence shows that Casey told Cindy where she left Caylee's body, and Cindy was directing DC where to find Caylee.

Edited to add...............this would be cause for a private meeting between the judge and prosecution. If investigators are still working on this aspect and in the process of verifying what the witness has told them, and if the disclosure of this would hamper further investigation, I could see a reason for withholding this from the defense and the public for a specific period of time. If the new evidence is the "smoking gun", release of that information publicly would taint a future jury pool.

 

[Kentjbkent]

The abandoned house is intriguing and there may have been some physical evidence he was looking for at that location. But, Cindy's confession to Yuri Malich in Dec. 2008 when Yuri and other detectives were serving a search warrant on the Anthony home, ties Cindy to DC's search of the woods. She said, "I sent someone to search that area (where Caylee's remains were found) last month and nothing was there." Clearly, Cindy was involved in DC's search.

If DC has told authorities the truth, then the real daisy chain may be Casey to Cindy to DC. If DC is the "new witness and new information" source, this could be explosive evidence! It would destroy the defense's claim that "somebody else did it" if the new evidence shows that Casey told Cindy where she left Caylee's body, and Cindy was directing DC where to find Caylee.

Edited to add...............this would be cause for a private meeting between the judge and prosecution. If investigators are still working on this aspect and in the process of verifying what the witness has told them, and if the disclosure of this would hamper further investigation, I could see a reason for withholding this from the defense and the public for a specific period of time. If the new evidence is the "smoking gun", release of that information publicly would taint a future jury pool.

BUT....if it only involves a daisy chain from KC to CA to DC, why would SA request the defense NOT be a party to this meeting with Strickland?

I think you are on the right track, but I still say that I think JB is part of this daisy chain, IF it is true that he had knowledge that CA directed DC to that area, and HE (JB) then contacted DC requesting that HE be notified if anything was found BEFORE LE was contacted...

So perhaps daisy chain is KC - CA - DC - JB

I think THAT connection is why SA wants to meet privately without the attendance of the defense team.

 

[Kentjbkent]

I've been holding my breath/hoping that Mallory is/has been going rogue, and needs this 'protection'.

OR better yet.........

What are the chances that KC communicated with LE finally w/out JB's knowledge? I have heard and seen her time and time again kind -of- wanting to do this, only at the 11th hour being stopped by JB. Could this be the case? Is it possible? (prolly not)

It says: “ Certain materials and information have come into the possession of Law Enforcement”
Certain materialS: - What exactly are these materials? Plural.AND Information: - What kind of “information”?

Who could have and or give LE anything material? AND Information?

*When they refer to materials, I’m asking/wondering is this a legal term or actual materials as in noun, things?

Perhaps KC or CA provided DC with a hand drawn map and directions of sorts which he has finally turned over?

 

[RR0004]

As I read your post, if the information is in regards to a witness and information that witness has, the one person who came to mind is DC.

...ooh...I like #1!!! ya know the whole "inter-related" stuff.

From AZlawyer's post (in part):

BBM
(1) "If the court determines, in camera, that any police or investigative report contains irrelevant, sensitive information or information interrelated with other crimes or criminal activities and the disclosure of the contents of the police report may seriously impair law enforcement or jeopardize the investigation of those other crimes or activities, the court may prohibit or partially restrict the disclosure."

 

[notthatsmart]

NTS,
If the Judge approves to HEAR this LEGAL motion it does not mean he will grant what they are asking for, which is a DELAY. Not to keep it Secret.

So you think the SA will look bad because they filed a legal Motion under the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure? one that they and the Defense are allowed to do?

The SA is not asking to withhold evidence they are only asking for a delay We are well aware here on WS that once the SA hands it over, and they will hand it over, to the Defense it will be released to the public by the media in accordance to the Sunshine Law and then it will out on the table for everyone to see, no secrets.
Patience dear sleuther.

I hope the Defense decides to let the Judge and the SA in on a secret that Todd M blurted out ..that they have proof of Casey's innocence..but alas they are unable to be forthcoming with that truth and because so it allows their client to remain in a tiny cell all alone in the Orange County Jail.
I truly hope if they do have that evidence that they would use it to get her out of jail pronto.

With all due respect

That may be what this is all about. Perhaps the defense did indeed provide that information and upon checking it out, Le discovered it was true. Perhaps they need to protect Kc. Just speculating. Moo

 

[RR0004]

As I recall, there was a deposition scheduled but the defense was trying to fight the depo and during the hearing, JS advised the SA to issue an investigative subpoena?

If I am recalling correctly, the cancelling was for the original time set aside for the deposition, and we did not expect to hear if SA took JS advice and issued the investigative subpoena (and Baez would not be present either)?

Maybe someone else can explain it better than I can?

...and I guess for some unknown reason, JB didn't want to hand over a witness list with DC on it.