S.A. Concerned Defense will Sell Pics of Caylee's Remains

[Bev]

Yes, I am saying that this isn't "routinely done". The state cannot withhold evidence from the defense. The state and the defense can agree that certain evidence not be made public, but the defense cannot have the added burden of responsiblity for the inadvertant release of such evidence. It is unconstitutional, it is unlawful to restrict the defendant's right to confrontation of witnesses.

If the intent was to prohibit the Anthonys from viewing the autopsy report, which they have every right to see, it would have specifically asked the court to prohibit the Anthonys from seeing the autopsy report. In Florida, the autopsy report is a matter of public record.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I am thinking the anonymous donor is directly or indirectly the As, and that they got the money either directly or indirectly from selling photos of Caylee.

I am afraid I am going to have to disagree on this point. I don't think it is them.

 

[Chilly Willy]

I have just read the motion but didn't see anything that remotely suggests that they are 'specifically trying to have the As excluded from seeing/being provided with the pics'. There is no mention of the A's at all. The motion is concerned with the defense team and any other party that they may be planning to show the contents of the discs to for the purposes of the defence.

I can't really see any reason why Baez would show the A's pictures of Caylee's skeleton, can you? I know many people have a very poor view of him, but do you really think he would be that cruel and insensitive? I also can't, for the life of me, work out why people think that the A's would consider selling such heart-breaking pictures to the media either!

Good luck trying to get that point across, Devon. I gave up.

 

[Paintr]

Strange though isn't it, that if this was another motion from JB's camp, there would by now be a huge thread filed with expressions of outrage and disgust at his behaviour!

I would have no problem with JB trying to make sure these pic were not sold, leaked or disstributed in any way. As a matter of fact, I would have expected this motion to come from him in the first place and not the SA having to file.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Well the A's attorney Conway had a meeting over the pics for some reason. Of course as others have pointed out the "I" word was probably brought up. So if there is no mention of the A's why was Conway there?

I haven't read today's articles, but my guess would be that Conway was there because the A's have an interest in seeing this matter resolved so their granddaughter can finally be laid to rest.

 

[cuppy199]

You know, bunny, what I find sad? People who make accusations and assumptions without evidence or proof. I did NOT say that I approve or condone anyone selling or disseminating information in a case like this - I SAID that it is the right of the As to sell, license or lease their copyrighted material and intellectual property. That is the law and it is informed by our first amd. rights to freedom of speech and the body of law governing copyrighted property in this country, not to mention the copyright clause of the U.S. constitution. Whether we like it or not, it's the law.

The VI amd also protects the right of the accused to confront witnesses in court and that right is extended to physical evidence as well. It is a violation of KC's 6th amd rights to withhold or make conditional the release of evidence in her defense.

When it comes to a murdered victim or the crime scene the SA can request that the photo not be sold. Its not the A's to sell its evidence and property of the state. And the SA has every right to request this for the deceased its called repect and Florida has very sticted laws on a murder victims pictures. Some SA dont have to request it because not everyone would do something like that. not saying they would but I wouldn't be surprised if someone in this case sold those pictures.JMO

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Strange though isn't it, that if this was another motion from JB's camp, there would by now be a huge thread filed with expressions of outrage and disgust at his behaviour!

Please try to stay on topic...I don't want to lose this thread.

 

[MADJGNLAW]

We know that the SA has 14 days from the time they receive the reports and other to hand them over to the defense.

Do we know the exact date the SA office received the doc's?

Has the 14 days expired? Do Holiday and Weekends count?

Do they know that Baez/Anthony's have a deal to sell the video and so fourth and that is why they filed this motion?

Not to sure about Florida Law, but is there no protection for the murdered victims?

If the 14 days are not up yet then I don't see the problem with the SA filing a motion to protect Caylee's privacy and dignity.

 

[cuppy199]

I haven't read today's articles, but my guess would be that Conway was there because the A's have an interest in seeing this matter resolved so their granddaughter can finally be laid to rest.

You might be right Willy But IMO there asking the wrong person :crazy:

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

IMO ALL they care about is the MONEY they are making off little Caylee. They don't care how they look to anybody as long as they have the $$$$$$$$$$$$$
IMO, some disorder runs in this whole family.
sometimes i even wonder if this whole horrible event was planned because i find it difficult to wrap by mind around this entire circus.
again, imo

I have been wondering about the exact same for quite some time, since the first phone call between C & KC in jail...it didn't strike me as real.

 

[zoey]

When it comes to a murdered victim or the crime scene the SA can request that the photo not be sold. Its not the A's to sell its evidence and property of the state. And the SA has every right to request this for the deceased its called repect and Florida has very sticted laws on a murder victims pictures. Some SA dont have to request it because not everyone would do something like that. not saying they would but I wouldn't be surprised if someone in this case sold those pictures.JMO

with the last doc dump of crime scene photos SA already expressed concern over leakage....

also---aren't these "experts" pro bono????? being that shouldn't they worry about their own transprotaton....(I know I live in a different world that when people say they are working pro bono...I consider everythingis up to them)--but do agree that postering at the crime scene.....:furious:

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Yes, I am saying that this isn't "routinely done". The state cannot withhold evidence from the defense. The state and the defense can agree that certain evidence not be made public, but the defense cannot have the added burden of responsiblity for the inadvertant release of such evidence. It is unconstitutional, it is unlawful to restrict the defendant's right to confrontation of witnesses.

If the intent was to prohibit the Anthonys from viewing the autopsy report, which they have every right to see, it would have specifically asked the court to prohibit the Anthonys from seeing the autopsy report. In Florida, the autopsy report is a matter of public record.

They are not trying to withhold evidence from the defence. They have agreed for them to have it. They are trying to keep pictures of a dead 2 year old from being sold to the media. Why do you have a problem with that?

ETA...and I should add, that in the usual case, a family would be very grateful to the SA for taking such steps to ensure their 2 year old loved one suffered no further indignity in death.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Please try to stay on topic...I don't want to lose this thread.

This thread went off topic in the first post, when the A's were brought into it. They are not part of this motion.

 

[Bev]

Who said the As have any intention whatsoever of selling autopsy photos? Why would they? Why would the defense have any interest in selling photos of the remains when it can only damage the jury pool? The motion doesn't restrict the As from doing anything, it doesn't even mention the As.

I'd be a lot happier with the thinking going on outside the box, if I thought there was some thinking going on inside the box...

p.s. They are not "trying to withhold evidence from the defense" they ARE withholding evidence from the defense.

 

[tehcloser]

I have been wondering about the exact same for quite some time, since the first phone call between C & KC in jail...it didn't strike me as real.

At the very beginning, I too wondered. Look at all the money the McCanns raised. I thought maybe they were trying the same, but I don't think so any more.....but ya never know with them.

 

[Paintr]

I haven't read today's articles, but my guess would be that Conway was there because the A's have an interest in seeing this matter resolved so their granddaughter can finally be laid to rest.

Why do you think the defense experts need the ME photos before they can do their own examination/autopsy? Not disputing your post just asking?

 

[essies]

The A's now have Caylee's remains. So,they can do their own autopsy and take their own photos and x-rays. That would be their property. What's the problem? I still think it would be disgusting to sell or release them, but this is America and I suppose you can do what you want with your own property.

 

[MADJGNLAW]

When it comes to a murdered victim or the crime scene the SA can request that the photo not be sold. Its not the A's to sell its evidence and property of the state. And the SA has every right to request this for the deceased its called repect and Florida has very sticted laws on a murder victims pictures. Some SA dont have to request it because not everyone would do something like that. not saying they would but I wouldn't be surprised if someone in this case sold those pictures.JMO

Thank you so much for sharing this... I was praying that Florida had more laws to protect the "Victim"....Poor child is being treated like personal property.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I am certainly not a lawyer, but I can understand that the SA would NOT want pictures of EVIDENCE reproduced and/or sold. Clearly, these are pictures of where Caylee's remains were found and the condition they were found in and to be used at trial.

Of course the defense is entitled to any and all evidence as well as pics and x-rays, but should not be allowed to jeopardize it in any way, IE., selling pics of it. I believe that LE and the SA has evidence we have not seen yet. IF LE or the FBI are still investigating where the duct tape, garbage bag, and any evidence that was found with the body came from, then I am of the understanding that this particular evidence does not have to be shared even with the Sunshine Law that is in effect in Florida. LE and FBI may be doing testing on some of the evidence recovered, and until that testing is complete and forensics report is back, it does not have to be shared.

Sorry for the long post, but I just cannot understand why Baez does not agree that the pics and x-rays will be kept safe from being sold or reproduced in any way. JMO, it is because he wants to exploit it.

ETA: I would not be surprised if the Judge grants the States motion tomorrow.

Now I am going to go back to my corner because I am feeling such anger about all of it!

 

[Chilly Willy]

Why do you think the defense experts need the ME photos before they can do their own examination/autopsy? Not disputing your post just asking?

As someone mentioned earlier, they need to poke holes in the ME's findings. Much of Casey's defense (since there is so little else for the defense to work with) is going to be attempting to discredit everyone who worked on the case. Without knowing what the ME's findings are, they can't dispute them. And you never know, maybe they'll find something the ME overlooked. I doubt it, but they have the right to try.