State releases Subpoena List, includes LA,CA and GA

[Theonly1]

I think Cindy will do just fine. The prosecution will be gentle with her because she is the victim's grandmother and the defendant's mother. They don't want to lose the jury's sympathy by brow-beating grandma. I don't know where people are getting the idea that the SA would subpoena a witness and then beat them up on the stand. :doh:

I think it's a safe guess that BC is working with her on limiting her responses to the question asked - tell the truth and say no more than necessary to answer the question.

Chilly, don't think "beat up" think Kato Kaelin from O.J. trial. They'll get what they need out of her and then they'll declare her hostile if she resists. Then they will get out of her everything they can by leading her down the garden path. I hardly think it is "brow beating" to require Cindy tell the truth under oath about what she knows about this case! Further, Cindy was essentially Caylee's primary caregiver regardless of the fact that Casey gave birth to her.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Chilly, don't think "beat up" think Kato Kaelin from O.J. trial. They'll get what they need out of her and then they'll declare her hostile if she resists and they will get out of her everything they can. I hardly think it is "brow beating" to require Cindy tell the truth under oath about what she knows about this case! Further, Cindy was essentially Caylee's primary caregiver regardless of the fact that Casey gave birth to her.

I responded to the general atmosphere on this thread, which sounded very much like posters expect the state to shred Cindy. I don't think that will happen at all. I think the questions that are asked of Cindy will be very limited and that she will answer truthfully and to the best of her ability, as she has all along.

 

[Theonly1]

I responded to the general atmosphere on this thread, which sounded very much like posters expect the state to shred Cindy. I don't think that will happen at all. I think the questions that are asked of Cindy will be very limited and that she will answer truthfully and to the best of her ability, as she has all along.

I think Cindy will only be "shredded" if she starts using mistruths, half-truths and hocus pocus excuses. If she answers the questions directly, honestly and without "but but buts" I predict it will be a respectful direct examination. The freedom to "baffle them with BS" will not be happening on direct examination.

If they take her as a hostile witness in order to lead her questions I still maintain they will be respectful with Cindy. However, if she starts arguing, finger pointing, refusing to answer, etc., I predict it could get rather ugly.

 

[TURBOTHINK]

As fragile as GA has been, I bet he breaks down on the stand.

George is cunning. He is not fragile, but manipulative.

 

[Baxter]

I think the questions that are asked of Cindy will be very limited and that she will answer truthfully and to the best of her ability, as she has all along.(snipped Chilly Willy)

Cindy Anthony answering truthfully like she has all along, will make her a hostile witness.

 

[countzero]

George is cunning. He is not fragile, but manipulative.

Living in that house, he had to be manipulative and playing the game to survive.

CA ..... BC has his work cut for him in a huge way and he will earn every penny of it until he quits representing them. The SA will not treat CA with kid gloves. They will treat her respectfully as they do all witnesses. No matter what amount of coaching BC gives CA, she will go in the direction she chooses at the given moment.

Once the jury pool has been selected and I suspect they all will be parents or have siblings who have children, they will see that CA's parenting is far different from theirs. They will learn what we already know; the disfunctional dynamics of the A's family unit. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out something isn't right with them. The SA will take their time to lay this out so there will be no need to treat any witness with kid gloves.

Besides, does anyone really think CA will want to be portrayed as a weak person about to break? Not in this lifetime. She will want to be put on a pedestal for her "motherly actions" and given praise. She will seek it out, demanding it.

 

[trafficsUP66]

I responded to the general atmosphere on this thread, which sounded very much like posters expect the state to shred Cindy. I don't think that will happen at all. I think the questions that are asked of Cindy will be very limited and that she will answer truthfully and to the best of her ability, as she has all along.

I'm just curious if you believe her changing "It smells like there's been a dead body in the d@%$ car. Something's wrong!"
TO
"There was a box of old pizza rotting in there for amount of days, it stunk so bad and there were maggots and everything......" is really telling the truth?

That's the one that pops into my head first and foremost when it comes to CA's 'truthfulness'.

I can't count the other 'mistruth's' or 'half truth's' that have come directly from her mouth. Do you think none of these ?'s will come up in court on the witness stand? Specifically, about the 'nanny' she never met or spoke to even once in all those years?

Just curious!

 

[Amil]

Are subpoenaed witnesses allowed to sit in the courtroom for the trial or are they kept out until they are called and then kept out for the whole rest of the trial?

 

[TURBOTHINK]

Are subpoenaed witnesses allowed to sit in the courtroom for the trial or are they kept out until they are called and then kept out for the whole rest of the trial?

In this state they are NOT allowed in the courtroom until both the SA and the defense is through with them. That is to keep them from being able to hear what someone else has said so they can say the same thing.

 

[whiteangora]

In this state they are NOT allowed in the courtroom until both the SA and the defense is through with them. That is to keep them from being able to hear what someone else has said so they can say the same thing.

How about this? The trial will most likely be televised so why can't
they sit home on their couch and watch?

 

[countzero]

How about this? The trial will most likely be televised so why can't
they sit home on their couch and watch?

In my state, they are in a closed room close to the court room. No tv, no paper, no phone, no talking. Just sitting and waiting to be called into the court room to testify. Then they may sit in on the rest of the trial.

Some bailiffs will allow a book to be brought in after they have completely checked it out. But generally not.

 

[whiteangora]

In my state, they are in a closed room close to the court room. No tv, no paper, no phone, no talking. Just sitting and waiting to be called into the court room to testify. Then they may sit in on the rest of the trial.

Some bailiffs will allow a book to be brought in after they have completely checked it out. But generally not.

So they would have to go to the courthouse everyday for the trial and wait to be called? What if the trial was into it's second week before they were called?
I thought the only day they had to be there waiting to be called was the actual day they would testify. That's why I said they could watch the trial from home before they testify and know what everyone had said.

 

[mitzi]

If she ever testifies. I think that CA will endeavor to wiggle out of taking the stand somehow. Remember BC's ominous reply of 'yet'.

You are right! Hopefully, CA will survive through her deposition with Morgan, if need be, SA can use that depo if she doesn't "make it" to October! :crazy:

 

[countzero]

So they would have to go to the courthouse everyday for the trial and wait to be called? What if the trial was into it's second week before they were called?
I thought the only day they had to be there waiting to be called was the actual day they would testify. That's why I said they could watch the trial from home before they testify and know what everyone had said.

The only court case I was personally involved in, the witnesses had to be in a separate room until it was time to testify. I have served on two jury trials and one lasted a few days and the other was over a month. All the witnesses were not allowed to view the trial until after their testimony. What I thought was strange was that we were allowed to go home in the evening and were instructed not to view the news, read the paper or discuss with anyone the on going trial. The witnesses were also told this. How many actually did it? I know I did.

This trial will last a couple of months and I don't know what the rules are in Florida now.

 

[Friday]

Respectfully bolded by me

I responded to the general atmosphere on this thread, which sounded very much like posters expect the state to shred Cindy. I don't think that will happen at all. I think the questions that are asked of Cindy will be very limited and that she will answer truthfully and to the best of her ability, as she has all along.

Chilly, you sly thing! :laugh: That bolded portion above is your subtle "escape clause" for dismissing Cindy's past blatant untruths. Right? 'Cause without that clause your last sentence would state that Cindy "will answer truthfully, as she has all along." :banghead: :blowkiss:

 

[Reality Orlando]

I'm just curious if you believe her changing "It smells like there's been a dead body in the d@%$ car. Something's wrong!"
TO
"There was a box of old pizza rotting in there for amount of days, it stunk so bad and there were maggots and everything......" is really telling the truth?

That's the one that pops into my head first and foremost when it comes to CA's 'truthfulness'.

I can't count the other 'mistruth's' or 'half truth's' that have come directly from her mouth. Do you think none of these ?'s will come up in court on the witness stand? Specifically, about the 'nanny' she never met or spoke to even once in all those years?

Just curious!

Personally, I think CA is a grandmother who very obviously adored her granddaughter and was looking for any and all explanations that would throw hope her way that the child was still alive and the smell wasn't that of her granddaughters body. Now, she must face losing her daughter as well...these two events in anyone's life would be earth shattering. I agree that her behavior has been bizarre and in some cases she made me want to scream. But, the bottomline is this woman stands to lose two people who were very important to her and she's not dealing with anything rationally. She's obviously still in a state of denial, at least in regards to KC's role in her daughter's death. We can all say what we want about how she should be acting...but none of us are in her shoes nor are we experiencing the horrendous nightmare that has become her life. Does she believe KC killed Caylee? I don't know if she can even bring herself to think that Casey could do something like that (how many of us, honestly could imagine that of our child)...or, that mentally she can even entertain the idea. I think she grasps onto whatever rope is near in her attempts to stay afloat. I, personally can't imagine being in her position and my prayers are with her and the rest of her family.

 

[countzero]

This case reminds me of the famous DC metro area sniper shootings. Granted the defendants were represented by court appointed attorneys and they were good ones. I followed that trial very closely because one of the killings was close to my home and I had been at the stop light by the gas station about 30 minutes before the shooting.

Malvo's attorney attempted to portray him as an innocent victim manipulated by an older man. He had a bad childhood, he was neglected and abused. I can see JB and crew using similar tactics defending KC.

All kinds of forensics were introduced as to who pulled the trigger, who was in the trunk, who was the leader, who was the follower. The SA did an excellent job of defining who did what and when and also had the jury understanding forensic science.

I expect the SA in KC's trial will do the same and the results will be the same, guilty on all counts for both defendants. KC and her family will discover after the depositions that there are consequences for illegal actions.

 

[Green-Eyed Blonde]

How about this? The trial will most likely be televised so why can't
they sit home on their couch and watch?

When I was a witness at a trial in the State of Ohio, I had to sit outside the courtroom in a hall until I was called. I wasn't allowed to sit in until after my testimony. The case I was involved with did not upset me a great deal personally and I was still nervous and concerned about it. Believe me, with all the eyes of a courtroom fixed on the person in the witness seat, that person is feeling a great deal of pressure. I was determined to answer as honestly as possible, was not emotional or truly connected to the people involved, and kept thinking how important it was to use the correct words. It was a strange, unsettling experience. I hope I never have to do it again. And I wasn't worried about being charged with a crime or trying to protect a family member or deal with the death of a relative.

I can't even imagine how the A family will feel: what a pressure cooker that trial will be for them, so emotionally involved as they are. IMO They have lied in the past to LE and they are continuing to try to protect KC. Example: LA's recent deposition. These depositions they are or will give in the civil case are NOTHING compared to being witnesses at KC's murder trial, IMO.

 

[Paintr]

You are right! Hopefully, CA will survive through her deposition with Morgan, if need be, SA can use that depo if she doesn't "make it" to October! :crazy:

Mitzi, this is not quite what I meant by my post. Sorry if I was unclear. I only meant that I felt that CA would use some 'health crisis' to avoid testifying, not that she wouldn't 'make it' to the trial. I should have taken the time to elaborate.

 

[mitzi]

Mitzi, this is not quite what I meant by my post. Sorry if I was unclear. I only meant that I felt that CA would use some 'health crisis' to avoid testifying, not that she wouldn't 'make it' to the trial. I should have taken the time to elaborate.

Oh I knew what you meant, but I also remember what BC implied...he spoke of "yet" in regards to Cindy, as he was focusing on George's suicide attempt. Kinda like "don't push her too hard or she might do the same thing."