What Is the Defense Strategy #2

[Leila]

Ya have to wonder nums about it all now .... I wrote a scenario like this long, long ago. However now that the trial is going to start and all the sworn depo's and affidavits are now part of the case I cannot see this happening without the A's ending up in adjacent cells to ICA.

I still sit on that fence debating who actually murdered Caylee. I don't fence sit about any evidence that proves ICA participated in the clean up and disposal of Caylee into the woods in a laundry bag stuffed into two large black trash bags. But there isn't any reliable, verifiable evidence pointed at WHO had Caylee last. CA/GA/LA have all lied about June 15, 2008 and every date and every incident before and afterwards. None of the A's are innocent in Caylee's murder. Notta one of the bunch.

There is something more sinister that went on prior to June 15, 2008 that most of us cannot imagine. And CA wants it buried deep within histories pages. :banghead::banghead: And ICA has sat in jail for three years to hide it as well.

ITA!! The last person to see Caylee alive outside the immediate Anthony family, was Cindy's mother, Shirley Plesea. When they left the nursing home Cindy and Caylee went to Cindy's mother's home near the nursing home for a early dinner, and then from there home to Orlando.

No one outside of the immediate Anthony family saw Caylee alive after the late afternoon of June 15, 2008.

On June 16th, Casey is seen on surveillance video at the Blockbuster store with her boyfriend at about 7:30pm, and at that time Caylee wasn't with her.

We can make educated guesses based on the odor of decomp in Casey's car and the stain on the trunk liner, but we don't have any definitive proof of what happened to Caylee after the late afternoon of June 15, 2008.

 

[Leila]

The defense could be planning to pin Caylee's murder on someone else in Casey's family, possibly her father George.

Even the Anthonys' lawyer admits they're getting that indication.

http://www.wftv.com/news/27793602/detail.html

Maybe not so preposterous...:doh:

There's been a lot of speculation about blaming Caylee's death on another family member, and possibly George, for some time.

Yesterday I went through saved pictures of all that's happened in the past 2 and 1/2 years in this case, as I was looking for a specific picture.

As I went through the pictures, I noticed that there's a lot of violence with both GA and CA. There's been a lot of incidences of Cindy yelling at reporters and people. We've seen a lot of anger from them and especially so in the depositions they gave to John Morgan and Keith Mitnik.

I've got a picture of Cindy outside her home pounding "no trespassing" signs in her front yard and confronting reporters calling them maggots and waving the hammer in a threatening manner.

I've got a picture of George turning the hose on protesters and Cindy right at his side with a baseball bat.

I've got a picture of George pushing a man in anger and being restrained.

I've got a picture of Cindy going after a woman protestor and George restraining her, while an unidentified man restrained the woman.

I've got a picture and video of George going ballistic and destroying a cameraman/reporter's belongings - his umbrella, his chair, his small ice chest. George then goes after the man and another man has to restrain George. Even so, George does make brief contact. In the video, George is heard yelling, "I only touched him, I only touched him."

We've all seen George lose his temper and yell "the body in my daughter's car wasn't my granddaughter!"

We've read the deposition from a person who was present in the Anthony home the day Casey was bonded out. The person stated that George marched into Casey's room and physically tried to get answers out of her. George's friend from Ohio, and Cindy had to restrain George and pull him out of the room.

I suspect that the defense strategy is going to be to portray Casey as a victim of parental abuse. They will claim physical, emotional, and mental abuse took place in the Anthony home. They will claim that Casey was extremely fearful of her parents, even though there's video of her getting angry with them in one of the jailhouse visitation videos.

The defense will portray Caylee's death as an accident. They might state that Caylee's death was an accident while in Casey's care, but Casey was too frightened to tell her parents and made up the story of the kidnapping.

I don't think this defense strategy will fly, and I also think the state has plenty of evidence that refutes the accident theory. But the whole defense strategy is to introduce "reasonable doubt."

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

More depositions released in Casey Anthony case
May 06, 2011|
By Anthony Colarossi and Amy Pavuk,
Orlando Sentinel


More than 30 depositions filed by Casey Anthony's defense team were made public Friday. Many of the transcripts are short — some only a few pages.

Defense attorneys Jose Baez and Cheney Mason questioned Deborah Polisano, a director at Cindy Anthony's workplace, who said that Casey Anthony's mother was seeking counseling in June 2008.

"She said Casey and George were fighting a lot, and it was affecting their marriage," Polisano said.

Polisano talked about office gossip about Cindy Anthony. People talked about speculation that she and George Anthony were separated and he was having affairs.


more
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...06_1_cindy-anthony-robyn-adams-baez-and-mason

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Originally Posted by countzero
Ya have to wonder nums about it all now .... I wrote a scenario like this long, long ago. However now that the trial is going to start and all the sworn depo's and affidavits are now part of the case I cannot see this happening without the A's ending up in adjacent cells to ICA.

I still sit on that fence debating who actually murdered Caylee. I don't fence sit about any evidence that proves ICA participated in the clean up and disposal of Caylee into the woods in a laundry bag stuffed into two large black trash bags. But there isn't any reliable, verifiable evidence pointed at WHO had Caylee last. CA/GA/LA have all lied about June 15, 2008 and every date and every incident before and afterwards. None of the A's are innocent in Caylee's murder. Notta one of the bunch.

There is something more sinister that went on prior to June 15, 2008 that most of us cannot imagine. And CA wants it buried deep within histories pages. And ICA has sat in jail for three years to hide it as well.

By any account, ICA was the last one who had physical custody of Caylee...by her own admission to LE, she claims to have dropped Caylee off at the Sawgrass apartment 210 stairway, even as she doesn't clamp down on a time...she dropped Caylee off between 9am and 1pm....another huge red flag...since when doesn't a mother know the exact time they leave their child with their babysitter or a daycare...

I don't sit on a fence with who is reponsible for Caylee's demise...I wait to hear what the defense puts on as a defense...but by any account, ICA is the responsible party...She would not have sat in jail for almost 3 years if she truly were innocent...nothing to me so far shows innocence...her behavior, her not alerting authorities are huge red flags and I'd believe a jury would feel the same...No mother, who had no culpability in their childs demise would call for help, or alert authorities of an alleged babysitter never returned her...ICA has nothing as far as I can see to take the responsibility away from her...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[strawberry]

Yesterday Littman admitted that the DT might go after GA. He said if so it is just defense strategy and GA is not worried. I wish a reporter (calling KB!) had asked him why the DT would need such a strategy if JB has been saying since the beginning that there was a reasonable explanation? If THIS were the reasonable explanation, they should have spilled it 3 years ago so ICA could go free and GA could take her place. And ICA could have stopped pretending the invisinanny took Caylee.

 

[strach304]

I asked that on the lawyer thread; to me it sounded like a fatal slip also, not only does he NOT state it was an accident he confirms the date of the crime too! AZ thought he was stating it that way because the SA alleges a crime was committed.
If I had an accident or was defending someone who had an accident with a child it would not occur to me to call it a crime, regardless of what the SA alleged.

But...but...he would be giving away his top secret strategy that will make us all say "oh, now I understand". JB is such a drama queen.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

http://levipageshow.blogspot.com/2011/03/casey-anthony-defense-team-to-blame.html?spref=tw

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Yesterday Littman admitted that the DT might go after GA. He said if so it is just defense strategy and GA is not worried. I wish a reporter (calling KB!) had asked him why the DT would need such a strategy if JB has been saying since the beginning that there was a reasonable explanation? If THIS were the reasonable explanation, they should have spilled it 3 years ago so ICA could go free and GA could take her place. And ICA could have stopped pretending the invisinanny took Caylee.

GA had been investigated....he is going to be used as a scapegoat and I think it will backfire big time...the DT has alluded to an awful, tragic accident so how can this turn into GA did it??? Still grasping at straws at the 11th hour...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[countzero]

By any account, ICA was the last one who had physical custody of Caylee...by her own admission to LE, she claims to have dropped Caylee off at the Sawgrass apartment 210 stairway, even as she doesn't clamp down on a time...she dropped Caylee off between 9am and 1pm....another huge red flag...since when doesn't a mother know the exact time they leave their child with their babysitter or a daycare...

I don't sit on a fence with who is reponsible for Caylee's demise...I wait to hear what the defense puts on as a defense...but by any account, ICA is the responsible party...She would not have sat in jail for almost 3 years if she truly were innocent...nothing to me so far shows innocence...her behavior, her not alerting authorities are huge red flags and I'd believe a jury would feel the same...No mother, who had no culpability in their childs demise would call for help, or alert authorities of an alleged babysitter never returned her...ICA has nothing as far as I can see to take the responsibility away from her...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

I totally see where you are coming from. And I certainly don't disagree about ICA sitting in jail for three years being innocent. She sits there because of 31 days and three years of LIES. With more to come.

However, I have firmly believed from July 16, 08 nothing, not one of the wild stories concocted and told by any Anthony was true. ICA lied about Universal, yet people want to believe her story about Sawgrass. I no more believe that than that creative story of Tampa.

I am no way attacking you or anyone who believes this. I base my opinions on my far too personal knowledge of how a narcissistic personality goes about in their daily life. It's a life of lies and manipulations. I've lived with them for over 40 years so I think I can speak with first hand knowledge of how they can work ya over. And smile while their doing it. It's all in getting the details and most important, independent verification of what they say. If it cannot be verified, it's a lie. It's second nature for me, and it has yet to fail me.

And with all the lies ICA has told, not one has been true. Same with CA. She taught ICA and GA (although he isn't as good as they are) how to do it.

The DT knows this. I wrote at the beginning of this case that I for one would not be surprised if CA and/or GA stood up in court and declared they were the ones who let Caylee die. Then all three would argue which one actually did it, leaving the SAO the mess to figure it out. All the while claiming it was an accident. Then came out CAs and GAs personalities in full techni-color. More and more I realized, like the DT has picked up on, there is a certain degree of evil residing on Hopesprings Dr. With ICA nestled right in there. Please make no mistake, I know ICA is involved, deeply involved and I believe the DT knows this as well. So they can only attack what they don't know.

Only Cynthia, George and ICA know who had Caylee last. Only these three only lied about it since July 16' 08. Proven lies; admitted, sworn to lies in multiple depositions.

Side note here: I have come to the conclusion that after using my IPad for a year now, that I will have issues using it with the trial. :floorlaugh: It's taken me over 20 minutes to type and edit my typos. :crazy: back to my laptop I go.

 

[allycat1208]

Does anyone remember through evidence/discovery that Casey was planning to retrieve her Pontiac at Amscot after she drove Amy to the airport? Tony was back from NY and they didn't return to get her car. What was said about that? Since she bought another gas can with Amy what was she planning to do? Did she think if she waited a while the smell would disappear? Are there any discovery that points to her even returning to Amscot to see if the car was still there? Pings perhaps?

 

[LambChop]

Does anyone remember through evidence/discovery that Casey was planning to retrieve her Pontiac at Amscot after she drove Amy to the airport? Tony was back from NY and they didn't return to get her car. What was said about that? Since she bought another gas can with Amy what was she planning to do? Did she think if she waited a while the smell would disappear? Are there any discovery that points to her even returning to Amscot to see if the car was still there? Pings perhaps?

This is just speculation but it is assumed that when KC dropped Tony off at the airport she may have driven (in TL's Jeep) past Amscot and noticed her car was not there. She may have assumed that one of her parents picked it up. Apparently she did not know it would be towed because she planned on getting another gas can. Her excuse for not having the car to TL was her father brought it to the dealers for repairs. I believe, too, she may have texted one of her friends that she was getting a new car. Not sure about the last one but I think I remember reading that. jmo

 

[Leila]

The problem is the DT is between a rock and a hard place. They are duty-bound to protect KC's civil and legal rights, and must present some sort of defense.

The claim that someone else did it has been suggested from the beginning with CA claiming that JG, AH, or any of KC's friends were really the nanny. Later RK came under fire. But there's no evidence whatsoever that suggests anyone other than KC did it.

After Caylee's remains were found, the accidental death was put forth, and the DT has been pushing that claim in recent months. Last week CM was calling it an accidental death and stated that there would be devastating news about the Anthonys during the trial.

I think the defense will definitely be claiming an accidental death in an attempt to get the charges reduced from first degree murder to a lesser degree. Their client goes into this trial with public sentiment detesting her! To soften her image they have to explain why she appears so cold and unemotional and shows no remorse. They have to explain why she lied, why she happily partied, and why the duct tape, along with a host of other things she did. To create sympathy for KC they have to portray her parents as abusive.

In the past 2 and 1/2 years GA and CA's behavior has been a major focus of this case. I think the defense will show their behavior in pictures and video to show the jury how bizarre KC's parents are. They will claim that KC's behavior is the result of a lifetime of parental abuse.

I don't think the jury will buy it. The state will be able to refute the accidental death claim. But, it's the only thing the DT has at this point.

 

[amyg_momtothree]

Here's the only way I see it. March 25th 2010 George writes a letter to Casey. In it he says at CM's office JB delivered disturbing news and asked him 2 questions. Why, why, why destroy us all.
The news? Your daughter told us she killed your granddaughter, and the SA has enough evidence to ensure she gets the DP. The questions? Are you willing to allow us to use you as a scapegoat to create reasonable doubt and are you willing to go along with it. Will you do whatever you need to do in order to save your daughter's life?
They are going to use George and he knows. Maybe today's visit was a last ditch effort to plead with her to do anything, something different. Maybe Casey doesn't want them there because she really doesn't want them to hear her defense team blame her parents?

 

[Anais]

I think that the defense strategy is going to be that Caylee died of an absolutely horrific accident and Casey being utterly terrified of GA & CA made up the invisinanny story and cover up to hide because of it. They are going to come up with some absolutely horrendous stories, again made up by Casey as to her life growing up in some kind of house of horrors. Now I do believe that she grew up in one heck of a dysfunctional home with parents who aren't all right. However IMHO she was not abused in any way by GA or LA, nor was Caylee abused by anyone but ICA!

This wouldn't fly with me on the jury because I did grow up in a really bad house of horrors. I was abused beginning at age 2. However I grew up and worked hard to get past it all, got married and had 4 beautiful children. None of which have ever been abused in any way!

 

[logicalgirl]

Every once in a while I am able to say something pertinent about what I think the Defense Team is up to.

Most of the time I open up this thread and start laughing - even though it is pretty sad.

Ever see one of those movies where a couple of people are stuck at the bottom of a deep hole with no way to get up, and they try scrambling up the side, only to tumble back down again. Finally they get on their knees and pray that someone will come by and throw them a rope down?

That's how I see the DT the day before the jury selection is going to begin. At the bottom of that deep hole.
Only in the movies does someone actually come along and throw that rope down. And this is no movie with a happy ending. At least not for the DT and their defendant.

 

[Solace]

Every once in a while I am able to say something pertinent about what I think the Defense Team is up to.

Most of the time I open up this thread and start laughing - even though it is pretty sad.

Ever see one of those movies where a couple of people are stuck at the bottom of a deep hole with no way to get up, and they try scrambling up the side, only to tumble back down again. Finally they get on their knees and pray that someone will come by and throw them a rope down?

That's how I see the DT the day before the jury selection is going to begin. At the bottom of that deep hole.
Only in the movies does someone actually come along and throw that rope down. And this is no movie with a happy ending. At least not for the DT and their defendant.

The only thing I can glean from CMason's interview is that he intends to use the Anthony's - he says she is 100% innocent (and I realize he has to say that).

They just went through all these Frye hearings (which the jury will never know about) and it is interesting because they did everything they could to exclude everything. - SOOO, if they are going to NOW say that GA is responsible for this murder (which I believe they are) then they really did not need to refute the Frye hearings. Just say yes you are right there was a body in the trunk but KC did not put it there, etc., etc. and then bring on the sexual abuse.

I don't think this will work knowing how detailed the prosecution is, but I think they intend to use it per Cheney's recent statements about "disturbing" things in this family.

 

[legalmania]

I really think the defense is counting on this. When parents kill their own children, especially how juries react toward women.

http://www.slate.com/id/2063086/

 

[Solace]

ALTHOUGH, below Mason says it was an accident

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyloiXq_xN8[/ame]

So maybe he intends to say it was an accident and KC was afraid to tell anyone. Maybe he is going to bring in the sexual abuse as a mitigating factor in the 31 days.

Because I have no idea what he is going to say. Remember we know the case inside and out - the jury is hearing it for the first time. So when we hear this opening argumetn - have a beer handy. on the other hand, the jury will listen intently and try to process this unimaginable bs that he is going to try.

 

[Solace]

But he also tells JC that he will be objecting to all the experts as they testify. So, if it is an accident and she tried to hide it, there is no need to refute the expert testimony of her being in the trunk, etc. (Except for the chloroform - forgot about that - that is huge).

The accident could be the chloroform or the pool. HELLLLLLLLLLP. with this - what is he going to use?

 

[BigMomma]

I just hope they don't try and combine 5 or 6 different theories rolled into one to confuse everybody. Surely they are not that stupid, but after seeing all the other ways they tried to deflect this off on others, I wouldn't be surprised. Next thing we'll hear is nobody knows what happened because they all took a whiff of decomp and it compromised everybody's thought process. 3 years. Well, now it's down to 10 days before opening statements and then we'll know where they are going and it won't be down the yellow brick road.