Spoliation Motion Sept 22, 2009 Includes Response

[whiteangora]

BBM: I had not seen that information posted anywhere before. Can you tell me where it came from?

I think it was during a live feed on the local Orlando news, I remember the news person saying Yuri got in the ME's van with Caylee. (they didn't say Caylee's name outright)

 

[faefrost]

bbm
This is a sticky one AFAIC. I really believe that the State DID know, not officially, since the DNA testing took some time. But, they held out as long as they possibly could before coming right out and saying it was Caylee.
I can't fault them because their goal was to preserve the dump site,
but the day that Yuri got in the ME's van and rode with Caylee's little bones to the ME's office - I knew that they knew.

There is a diference between the investigators being reasonably certain that the remains that they found were Caylee, and those remains and that site being legally confirmed to be her.

Yes it was obvious to all involved that this crime scene was probably related to the missing child Caylee Marie Anthony. But probably is not sufficient to let an investigative third party, particularly a hostile one into a sealed crime scene. The body was in a state of decay precluding simlple identification. To let JB or HL anywhere near those remains or that site without proper and confirmed identification would have been a crime in and of itself.

 

[MissJames]

bbm
This is a sticky one AFAIC. I really believe that the State DID know, not officially, since the DNA testing took some time. But, they held out as long as they possibly could before coming right out and saying it was Caylee.
I can't fault them because their goal was to preserve the dump site,
but the day that Yuri got in the ME's van and rode with Caylee's little bones to the ME's office - I knew that they knew.

Hi Whiteangora!
I think we all "knew".Even Judge Strickland,when he made his decison "knew".But it had to be officially verified.I think,IIRC,even the A's were saying it might not be Caylee.They were probably thinking of Trenton D.
So ,going by the book,they had to make it official.
Besides,most defense teams don't get a crack at the crime scene before LE AND H Lee has a judge "in court" stating he believes he removed a piece of evidence.If the defense had gained access,I wonder if the SA would have fought to keep H.Lee out.

 

[MissJames]

I think it was during a live feed on the local Orlando news, I remember the news person saying Yuri got in the ME's van with Caylee. (they didn't say Caylee's name outright)

He earned that right,IMO.He was not just doing his job,he was doing what he needed to do for Caylee.He stayed with her to the very end. I'm so glad you mentioned this.

 

[BeanE]

Yes, we all knew it was Caylee, but we didn't *know* until it was confirmed via the DNA tests.

My point in bringing this up is that if it had *not* been Caylee, whomever the baby was deserved all respect per the law and human decency, along with all opportunity for that other baby (had it been another baby) to have their crime scene preserved so that they could attain justice.

Had it not been Caylee, and JB and crew had been permitted to view that other baby's remains, and tromp around through that other baby's crime scene, my God, that would be horrible.

There was simply no choice but to wait for absolute confirmation of who that poor little baby was.

Lacking any dental records, I believe DNA was the only means of absolute confirmation available, wasn't it? Or did the defense unearth some other means by which the State obtained absolute confirmation prior to the DNA?

 

[whiteangora]

Yes, we all knew it was Caylee, but we didn't *know* until it was confirmed via the DNA tests.

My point in bringing this up is that if it had *not* been Caylee, whomever the baby was deserved all respect per the law and human decency, along with all opportunity for that other baby (had it been another baby) to have their crime scene preserved so that they could attain justice.

Had it not been Caylee, and JB and crew had been permitted to view that other baby's remains, and tromp around through that other baby's crime scene, my God, that would be horrible.

There was simply no choice but to wait for absolute confirmation of who that poor little baby was.

Lacking any dental records, I believe DNA was the only means of absolute confirmation available, wasn't it? Or did the defense unearth some other means by which the State obtained absolute confirmation prior to the DNA?

The reason I think it's sticky is because nobody knows exactly when the State knew for sure. It seems the defense is accusing them of withholding the info. Do we have any dated documentation as to when the OCSO got the "official results"? Or, do we just have their public announcement?

 

[whiteangora]

He earned that right,IMO.He was not just doing his job,he was doing what he needed to do for Caylee.He stayed with her to the very end. I'm so glad you mentioned this.

Yes, he certainly did. It was at that moment I felt Yuri Melich was a very special man.

 

[BeanE]

The reason I think it's sticky is because nobody knows exactly when the State knew for sure. It seems the defense is accusing them of withholding the info. Do we have any dated documentation as to when the OCSO got the "official results"? Or, do we just have their public announcement?

That's what I'm looking for. The documentation from the defense that they say in this motion they used to prove that the State knew Caylee's identification earlier. I can't find anything from the defense or anyone else.

Update: This article says a tentative ID was made on December 12, but it's from CNN, not the defense, and it's only tentative:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/12/12/caylee.anthony/index.html

The tentative ID could be what the defense is referring to, but lacking a document from the defense in which they claim to prove the state knew ID earlier than the DNA ID, I still dunno what exactly the defense is referring to in this motion.

 

[sarah7855]

You know, after the several weeks of cornholio motions from the defense, I think Judge Strickland has earned himself the right to a good ol' fashion "I'm half-past give a s***" speech. I'm hoping he cashes in that ticket at this week's hearing.

OMG, I'm dying over here!!! :floorlaugh: cornholio!!! hahahaha

 

[cecybeans]

You know, after the several weeks of cornholio motions from the defense, I think Judge Strickland has earned himself the right to a good ol' fashion "I'm half-past give a s***" speech. I'm hoping he cashes in that ticket at this week's hearing.

Cornholio motions - snort!:Banane35:

 

[magic-cat]

Is the defense saying, in their, as usuual, less than logical way, that the State, while crawling around and sifting buckets of dirt looking for Caylee's individual bones, should have been able to preserve the crime scene in its original state? I mean, to say they utterly destroyed the crime scene implies to me that they somehow believe the recovery could have and should have been conducted in such a way that the crime scene remained exactly as it was when she was first discovered??? Are they kidding? Perhaps in their way of thinking it would have been better to leave Caylee's remains scattered over that land so the scene would be intact?

Let's think about this, seriously. The officers of the law were risking life and limb in that area anyway, as it was loaded with snakes and God only knows what else. They had to clear out the dense undergrowth just to be able to get in there and safely search, and they had to escavate the scene to sift for this poor baby's bones...How is it that they should have been able to accomplish this again without disrupting the scene, JoseBGood? Unbefrickinbelievable!

 

[AlwaysShocked]

"The tentative ID could be what the defense is referring to, but lacking a document from the defense in which they claim to prove the state knew ID earlier than the DNA ID, I still dunno what exactly the defense is referring to in this motion."

Does anybody really think this defense team actually knows to what they are referring in their motions?? They obviously can't even figure out the difference between criminal law and civil law! The motions they file are rife with spelling and punctuation errors and vague statements with absolutely nothing to back them up. It is pitiful as an example of Mr. Baez's work product and that of anyone working with him.

The only thing I can think of that could possibly explain it all is that Jose is setting things up early to justify Casey's appeal after conviction - based of ineffective representation.

Not that any well-respected, reputable Florida attorney is going to publicly state how absolutely third-rate the defense team has been and continues to be in this case

 

[sleutherontheside]

In hiring the defense team he has assembled AL, TM, LKB, and the experts notable for their participation in high profile trials.......he has all but eliminated any chance of an appeal based on ineffective counsel. Even an average citizen with a high income couldn't afford to assemble this team. Sorry, that isn't going to fly.

 

[faefrost]

The reason I think it's sticky is because nobody knows exactly when the State knew for sure. It seems the defense is accusing them of withholding the info. Do we have any dated documentation as to when the OCSO got the "official results"? Or, do we just have their public announcement?

There is no stickiness there at all. The official notice of identification comes from the County Coroners office and Dr. G. Not OCSO. The Coroners office has very very clear and specific protocols on how the notifications to all involved parties are handled. And by all public appearences followed them closely in this situation. The formal public identification is when Dr. G goes up to the podium and says to all, this is Caylee Marie Anthony. That is the moment that legal actions and legal maneuvering can begin.

 

[cecybeans]

There is no stickiness there at all. The official notice of identification comes from the County Coroners office and Dr. G. Not OCSO. The Coroners office has very very clear and specific protocols on how the notifications to all involved parties are handled. And by all public appearences followed them closely in this situation. The formal public identification is when Dr. G goes up to the podium and says to all, this is Caylee Marie Anthony. That is the moment that legal actions and legal maneuvering can begin.

Unless this motion is implying (and even JB wouldn't be foolish enough to go there would he?) that OCSO had prior knowledge (based on overheard privileged conversations with the defendant) that it was indeed the crime scene. Are they trying to spin some "daisy chain" theory with this motion, and by way of perverted conclusion, saying that because LE and/or the SA had prior knowledge this was the crime scene that they deliberately frakked it up to destroy supposed "exculpatory" evidence?

I guess we've got "Imaginevidence" to put alongside "Imaginanny".

 

[whiteangora]

There is no stickiness there at all. The official notice of identification comes from the County Coroners office and Dr. G. Not OCSO. The Coroners office has very very clear and specific protocols on how the notifications to all involved parties are handled. And by all public appearences followed them closely in this situation. The formal public identification is when Dr. G goes up to the podium and says to all, this is Caylee Marie Anthony. That is the moment that legal actions and legal maneuvering can begin.

We'll have to wait and see I guess. Does anyone remember how long it took for the DNA results to come back? I remember someone saying that an ID could have been made by photos of Caylee's teeth since she had no dental records.

 

[faefrost]

Unless this motion is implying (and even JB wouldn't be foolish enough to go there would he?) that OCSO had prior knowledge (based on overheard privileged conversations with the defendant) that it was indeed the crime scene. Are they trying to spin some "daisy chain" theory with this motion, and by way of perverted conclusion, saying that because LE and/or the SA had prior knowledge this was the crime scene that they deliberately frakked it up to destroy supposed "exculpatory" evidence?

I guess we've got "Imaginevidence" to put alongside "Imaginanny".

Why exactly would OSCO need prior knowlege or overheard privileged conversations to have a working assumption that the crime scene they were processing and investigating was related to the open and active case of Caylee Anthony's homicide? But that does not change the states obligations to the citizenry. That crime scene was a grave site. Human remains were discovered there. As such the state is exclusively charged with protecting it, and maintaining a certain degree of the deceased's privacy and dignity until the deceased can be formally identified with 100% certainty and next of kin notified.

OSCO was processing the crime scene with the suspicion and working assumption that it probably was related to the defendant. This is part of any investigation. But The only people knowing with 100% certainty at that point who those human remains belonged to was the defense team. (Sorry but it is patently obvious to even the most skepticle observer that Mr Baez at the least had prior knowlege of that remains site.)

 

[TotallyObsessed]

Why exactly would OSCO need prior knowlege or overheard privileged conversations to have a working assumption that the crime scene they were processing and investigating was related to the open and active case of Caylee Anthony's homicide? But that does not change the states obligations to the citizenry. That crime scene was a grave site. Human remains were discovered there. As such the state is exclusively charged with protecting it, and maintaining a certain degree of the deceased's privacy and dignity until the deceased can be formally identified with 100% certainty and next of kin notified.

OSCO was processing the crime scene with the suspicion and working assumption that it probably was related to the defendant. This is part of any investigation. But The only people knowing with 100% certainty at that point who those human remains belonged to was the defense team. (Sorry but it is patently obvious to even the most skepticle observer that Mr Baez at the least had prior knowlege of that remains site.)

RIGHT ON. The Defense team and the Defendant knew.

 

[kew17]

We may have discussed this, but I need a refresher please. Does anyone think that the pros will try to use this in court, I mean the obvious fact that the defense seemed aware that this WAS Caylee? I just remember re-watching the hearing where JB is asking to be allowed to examine the remains site etc. and pushing the issue, when everyone was kinda, uh, duh, the remains have not even yet been identified. Sure, it was likely to be Caylee. But JB's insistence was always, well, over the top for me. So, I guess I'm asking, will the pros bring this up that they likely knew this was Caylee only because the KC was the one who put her there?

Also, would it be required for JB to show proof of any so called evidence that he's saying was purposely destroyed? I know, it's a stupid question, but hello, it's a stupid motion. :loser:
ETA: or maybe ask it this way: How would JB KNOW there was exculpatory evidence destroyed if he didn't know it existed in the first place?
Gheez - I'm gonna have to start drinking after all this! lol

 

[ClockWatcher]

We may have discussed this, but I need a refresher please. Does anyone think that the pros will try to use this in court, I mean the obvious fact that the defense seemed aware that this WAS Caylee? I just remember re-watching the hearing where JB is asking to be allowed to examine the remains site etc. and pushing the issue, when everyone was kinda, uh, duh, the remains have not even yet been identified. Sure, it was likely to be Caylee. But JB's insistence was always, well, over the top for me. So, I guess I'm asking, will the pros bring this up that they likely knew this was Caylee only because the KC was the one who put her there?

Also, would it be required for JB to show proof of any so called evidence that he's saying was purposely destroyed? I know, it's a stupid question, but hello, it's a stupid motion. :loser:
ETA: or maybe ask it this way: How would JB KNOW there was exculpatory evidence destroyed if he didn't know it existed in the first place?
Gheez - I'm gonna have to start drinking after all this! lol

BBM

Like, maybe, Dominic was supposed to leave something implicating someone else, near the remains?

That's what I'm thinking.