When Baez paid the bank back wasn't that tantamount to pleading guilty?

[AZlawyer]

The facts are simple, KC broke the law. 13 charges for 4 checks leads me to believe that the prosecution is using the check fraud case as leverage against KC, with the murder trial. That is what I have a problem with. She should be treated the way any first time offender would be in a normal check fraud case. No more no less. If it is normal for the state to bundle the charges, accept a plea, make her pay restitution and let her off with time served and or probation, then that is what should take place. The premeditated murder charge is another separate case entirely. Trying to convict KC of multiple felonies to help the prosecution in the murder case seems wrong to me. If the murder case against her has evidence so weak that the prosecution feels they need to bolster the murder evidence with multiple felony convictions of fraud, then I think they need better evidence. If the state wants the fraud charges to assist in proving KC is dishonest, I understand, however, one conviction of fraud proves to me she is dishonest, 4 or 13 convictions of fraud does not prove to me she is any more dishonest than one conviction does. At trial, I don’t know how it will play out. If I was a juror and learned she had written 4 checks but was convicted of 13 felonies for writing those 4 checks, it may have the opposite affect on me. I would wonder how and why she was convicted of 13 felonies while only writing 4 checks.
I would hope that every person who wrote 4 fraudulent checks does not receive 13 convicted felonies, with 5 year sentences attached and is not now serving 65 years in our prison systems, that we the tax payers are paying for, and will continue to pay for the duration of those years. Even if it was a Ted Bundy or Jeffrey Dahmer, I would not want to pay for 65 years of imprisonment for the writing of four fraudulent checks. Paying for them to spend their life in prison for murder, the answer there is yes, I would want to pay for that to keep them off the streets. If KC is convicted of murder, I feel the same way about her, keep her off the streets for the rest of her life. If on the other hand, KC is innocent, and the convictions of fraud are what pushes the jurors to wrongfully convict KC of murder, then that would be doubly horrific for Caylee. Not only would her murderer still be roaming the streets free to kill another innocent child, but her own loving mother would be facing the DP or Life in prison. As always MOO

I would think any multiple charges relating to the same check would have concurrent sentences--i.e., if she got 3 sentences of 5 years each relating to one check, she would serve all 3 sentences at once (5 years total instead of 15). This is IMO as I am not familiar with the specifics of Fla. law.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

First...Baez could have requested a bench trial. Baez could request a plea deal. You have no idea what will happen at sentencing. She could very well get credit for time served. But regardless, she will have a record when she faces her next court date.

PS- I suppose you don't believe in the 3 strike rule, either. Now that's some serious stuff.

No, I don’t even know what the 3 strike rule is. I do know that many years ago, when a criminal in South Dakota (where I was residing at the time), convicted of his 3rd felony was given a habitual criminal charge automatically and given a 5 year sentence to be served after the sentence for the third felony conviction was served, and so he was ineligible for any type of parole. These felony charges had to be violent in nature, as in armed robbery, or assault with a deadly weapon etc. If this is what the 3 strike rule is, yes I am all for it.
Would the 3rd Strike Rule apply if KC were convicted of 4 counts of felony fraud or 13 counts? What is the 3rd strike rule?

 

[Horace Finklestein]

The facts are simple, KC broke the law. 13 charges for 4 checks leads me to believe that the prosecution is using the check fraud case as leverage against KC, with the murder trial. That is what I have a problem with. She should be treated the way any first time offender would be in a normal check fraud case. No more no less. If it is normal for the state to bundle the charges, accept a plea, make her pay restitution and let her off with time served and or probation, then that is what should take place. The premeditated murder charge is another separate case entirely. Trying to convict KC of multiple felonies to help the prosecution in the murder case seems wrong to me. If the murder case against her has evidence so weak that the prosecution feels they need to bolster the murder evidence with multiple felony convictions of fraud, then I think they need better evidence. If the state wants the fraud charges to assist in proving KC is dishonest, I understand, however, one conviction of fraud proves to me she is dishonest, 4 or 13 convictions of fraud does not prove to me she is any more dishonest than one conviction does. At trial, I don’t know how it will play out. If I was a juror and learned she had written 4 checks but was convicted of 13 felonies for writing those 4 checks, it may have the opposite affect on me. I would wonder how and why she was convicted of 13 felonies while only writing 4 checks.
I would hope that every person who wrote 4 fraudulent checks does not receive 13 convicted felonies, with 5 year sentences attached and is not now serving 65 years in our prison systems, that we the tax payers are paying for, and will continue to pay for the duration of those years. Even if it was a Ted Bundy or Jeffrey Dahmer, I would not want to pay for 65 years of imprisonment for the writing of four fraudulent checks. Paying for them to spend their life in prison for murder, the answer there is yes, I would want to pay for that to keep them off the streets. If KC is convicted of murder, I feel the same way about her, keep her off the streets for the rest of her life. If on the other hand, KC is innocent, and the convictions of fraud are what pushes the jurors to wrongfully convict KC of murder, then that would be doubly horrific for Caylee. Not only would her murderer still be roaming the streets free to kill another innocent child, but her own loving mother would be facing the DP or Life in prison. As always MOO

I think that what the prosecution is doing is peanuts compared to the crazy hijinx of the defense. moo too

 

[cyberborg]

If I was KC whether this was 4 check frauds or 13 technical charges I'd be seeking a plea deal and to move on. She is guilty, she is on video camera and, she even used her own name on some forged checks.

If KC was to take the 'I am sorry' approach and seek compassion then maybe SA would offer a more favorable deal? In my experience if you thumb your nose at the SA, tell them you are taking this to trial with a Jury AND even requesting a CoV then the SA are motivated to come after you.

You cannot expect SA to give KC a break and sweeten a deal when KC, JB and the A's are so hostile to the Prosecution and LE.

As a classic example, maybe KC felt good on the motion connected to the murder trial to write in her own handwriting that she was innocent and SA is pi$$ed because she won't take a plea deal ...... that helps KC and her case how?

It is rather childish to thumb your nose while at the same time cry foul that SA is being cruel. IMHO.

 

[BeanE]

I think KC chose to break the law, and that when she did so, she chose the consequences along with it. She was fully willing to take the risk of having the proverbial book thrown at her. Far be it from me to deny her what she chose.

 

[LambChop]

The facts are simple, KC broke the law. 13 charges for 4 checks leads me to believe that the prosecution is using the check fraud case as leverage against KC, with the murder trial. That is what I have a problem with. She should be treated the way any first time offender would be in a normal check fraud case. No more no less. If it is normal for the state to bundle the charges, accept a plea, make her pay restitution and let her off with time served and or probation, then that is what should take place. The premeditated murder charge is another separate case entirely. Trying to convict KC of multiple felonies to help the prosecution in the murder case seems wrong to me. If the murder case against her has evidence so weak that the prosecution feels they need to bolster the murder evidence with multiple felony convictions of fraud, then I think they need better evidence. If the state wants the fraud charges to assist in proving KC is dishonest, I understand, however, one conviction of fraud proves to me she is dishonest, 4 or 13 convictions of fraud does not prove to me she is any more dishonest than one conviction does. At trial, I don’t know how it will play out. If I was a juror and learned she had written 4 checks but was convicted of 13 felonies for writing those 4 checks, it may have the opposite affect on me. I would wonder how and why she was convicted of 13 felonies while only writing 4 checks.
I would hope that every person who wrote 4 fraudulent checks does not receive 13 convicted felonies, with 5 year sentences attached and is not now serving 65 years in our prison systems, that we the tax payers are paying for, and will continue to pay for the duration of those years. Even if it was a Ted Bundy or Jeffrey Dahmer, I would not want to pay for 65 years of imprisonment for the writing of four fraudulent checks. Paying for them to spend their life in prison for murder, the answer there is yes, I would want to pay for that to keep them off the streets. If KC is convicted of murder, I feel the same way about her, keep her off the streets for the rest of her life. If on the other hand, KC is innocent, and the convictions of fraud are what pushes the jurors to wrongfully convict KC of murder, then that would be doubly horrific for Caylee. Not only would her murderer still be roaming the streets free to kill another innocent child, but her own loving mother would be facing the DP or Life in prison. As always MOO

Actually the fraud charges were not her first offense. Her child went missing first in June. The fraud happened in July. Problem is they don't have a video how Caylee died but they do have one of the fraud. It is stealing plan and simple. It's not like the State has to prove it they have her signature and a bank video. Then there is Target, don't get me started on Target.

You do not give juror's enough credit. Most people earn their money they don't steal from others and here's a news flash for KC.....she's not entitled anymore. You see juror's are not worried about how much it costs the State for KC's trial what they are thinking in their heads is every time someone gets away with stealing it cost YOU AND I money. Because those costs are recovered by raising the prices of the goods we buy..such as in Target.

What really gets me is I just read yesterday on one of the threads....not sure which one that CA in her statement, maybe the depo for the State, admitted that while KC was gone those 31 days KC would sneak back in the house for clothes, etc. and steal money. Knowing she is stealing, what kind of parent would encourage this type of behavior and leaving money around is doing exactly that. They will be studying this family's behavior for years. JMO

 

[ZsaZsa]

If I was to lend someone my car, I would assume that means the car the spare tire in the trunk, the tire iron and yes the checkbook in the glove box. So, I would not leave my checkbook in the glove box. I think the state will need Amy's help in pursueing this. Otherwise , Casey could just say, yes, she lent me her car with the checkbook in it.

If I were Amy (since I did not suffer a loss here), I would stay away from this whole thing. I would not want to feel responsible for Casey's death.

Casey is the only person responsible for all of this- the thefts, the death of Caylee and if justice is served, consequently she will have earned the death sentence. Amy was just another victim and it is frankly obscene of you to try to state that she would be responsible for anything that Casey chose to do of her own free will.

 

[ZsaZsa]

Who is it still pressing charges over the $700 in checks (that was already repaid), the bank, AH, or just the state? Weird. If it is AH, if I were her family I would sure be telling her not to let lawyers talk her into pursuing that further, just more time and stress for her, keeps her name in the public eye (which she claims she doesn't want) and for what? To get what?

Umm- to get Justice?

 

[cyberborg]

Umm- to get Justice?

It seems that as we get closer to the check fraud trial that some people fear for KC as she faces actual legal punishment -- for the first time in her life -- for her criminal actions.

The check fraud trial is not so trivial now, it is going before the murder trial and, as such, takes on a new significance in the grand scheme of things. Likewise ZFG is pushing for her day in court as well.

The first shoe drops and the A House of Cards will surely follow. It is time to pay the piper KC, time for justice. Justice for Caylee. And so it begins.........

 

[notthatsmart]

Actually the fraud charges were not her first offense. Her child went missing first in June. The fraud happened in July. Problem is they don't have a video how Caylee died but they do have one of the fraud. It is stealing plan and simple. b Then there is Target, don't get me started on Target.

b Most people earn their money they don't steal from others and here's a news flash for KC.....she's not entitled anymore. You see juror's are not worried about how much it costs the State for KC's trial what they are thinking in their heads is every time someone gets away with stealing it cost YOU AND I money. Because those costs are recovered by raising the prices of the goods we buy..such as in Target.

What really gets me is I just read yesterday on one of the threads....not sure which one that CA in her statement, maybe the depo for the State, admitted that while KC was gone those 31 days KC would sneak back in the house for clothes, etc. and steal money. Knowing she is stealing, what kind of parent would encourage this type of behavior and leaving money around is doing exactly that. They will be studying this family's behavior for years. JMO

Bold 1: I agree, so therefore really the murder trial should be first. That is her first offense. Imo

 

[notthatsmart]

In the name of Justice??

This is a check fraud case. It would not be worth it for Amy. If Casey died, Amy could feel guilt later in her life that she may have played a part in all of this. It is easy to say sitting on the outside. If I were her parent, I would say stay as far away from this as you can. You do not need that holding over your head. Justice was not meant to mess up a victims life. If Casey is guilty of Murder one in the first degree, it will stand up on its own, it does not need a silly check fraud case to drive it home. Imo

 

[babiesstolemydingo]

In the name of Justice??

This is a check fraud case. It would not be worth it for Amy. If Casey died, Amy could feel guilt later in her life that she may have played a part in all of this. It is easy to say sitting on the outside. If I were her parent, I would say stay as far away from this as you can. You do not need that holding over your head. Justice was not meant to mess up a victims life. If Casey is guilty of Murder one in the first degree, it will stand up on its own, it does not need a silly check fraud case to drive it home.

I don't consider the check fraud case to be silly. I bet Amy doesn't either.:furious:

 

[JBean]

In the name of Justice??

This is a check fraud case. It would not be worth it for Amy. If Casey died, Amy could feel guilt later in her life that she may have played a part in all of this. It is easy to say sitting on the outside. If I were her parent, I would say stay as far away from this as you can. You do not need that holding over your head. Justice was not meant to mess up a victims life. If Casey is guilty of Murder one in the first degree, it will stand up on its own, it does not need a silly check fraud case to drive it home.

Maybe Amy is ok with that and is prepared for KC to accept responsibility for what ever she may have done.

 

[Kentjbkent]

First...Baez could have requested a bench trial. Baez could request a plea deal. You have no idea what will happen at sentencing. She could very well get credit for time served. But regardless, she will have a record when she faces her next court date.

PS- I suppose you don't believe in the 3 strike rule, either. Now that's some serious stuff.

Funny you mention that....was looking for a different article on WFTV website and ran back across this article from November 20, 2009...

“I'm not going to comment on what we plan on doing. If that were the case, I might as well cash it in right now,” he said.

Eyewitness News learned that the defense isn’t finished. Baez plans to question Kronk again and said he's also considering a guilty plea in Casey's check fraud case which will be heard in January.


NEXT IN THE CASE AGAINST CASEY

The case against Casey will be back to court next month. A pre-trial hearing is scheduled in her check fraud case for December 11.

Casey is facing charges for stealing checks from her best friend. The fraud trial is set for January 25.

There's also a pre-trial hearing in her murder trial on January 21.

http://www.wftv.com/news/21668948/detail.html

 

[Kentjbkent]

In the name of Justice??

This is a check fraud case. It would not be worth it for Amy. If Casey died, Amy could feel guilt later in her life that she may have played a part in all of this. It is easy to say sitting on the outside. If I were her parent, I would say stay as far away from this as you can. You do not need that holding over your head. Justice was not meant to mess up a victims life. If Casey is guilty of Murder one in the first degree, it will stand up on its own, it does not need a silly check fraud case to drive it home. Imo

You are missing the most important point. It is NOT Amy who is charging KC with FRAUD......it is THE STATE OF FLORIDA!

Amy's not in charge here....

 

[LambChop]

In the name of Justice??

This is a check fraud case. It would not be worth it for Amy. If Casey died, Amy could feel guilt later in her life that she may have played a part in all of this. It is easy to say sitting on the outside. If I were her parent, I would say stay as far away from this as you can. You do not need that holding over your head. Justice was not meant to mess up a victims life. If Casey is guilty of Murder one in the first degree, it will stand up on its own, it does not need a silly check fraud case to drive it home. Imo

Well considering all the trouble she put Amy through may be KC should do the right thing and spare her friend from any guilt feelings and just admit she is guilty, beg forgiveness, over and done with. Okay, what's next? The murder trial would have taken place next month but defense asked for a later date that should not interfer with the fraud case. JMO

 

[LambChop]

You are missing the most important point. It is NOT Amy who is charging KC with FRAUD......it is THE STATE OF FLORIDA!

Amy's not in charge here....

Oh, that's right...like the horse is out of the barn...where have I heard that before?

 

[BeanE]

In the name of Justice??

This is a check fraud case. It would not be worth it for Amy. If Casey died, Amy could feel guilt later in her life that she may have played a part in all of this. It is easy to say sitting on the outside. If I were her parent, I would say stay as far away from this as you can. You do not need that holding over your head. Justice was not meant to mess up a victims life. If Casey is guilty of Murder one in the first degree, it will stand up on its own, it does not need a silly check fraud case to drive it home. Imo

I see not an iota of sincerity in these hollow words of mock concern for the victim. It is shameful.

 

[robotdog]

by not going after her for the check charges

IS exactly what her parents did year after year after year

they let her slide with stealing, telling lies, cheating and etc etc etc.


at some point, it catches up with them and in this case, the parents making excuses for her all the time for her whole life HELPED in creating the monster
who kills her own daughter...

take it to the bank.... no pun intended :croc:

 

[notthatsmart]

You are missing the most important point. It is NOT Amy who is charging KC with FRAUD......it is THE STATE OF FLORIDA!

Amy's not in charge here....

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this point. I don't believe the state stands a chance in this check fraud case without Amy. Casey will have the right to cross examine Amy. If Casey says Amy is involved with these checks somehow, then they will have to bring Amy in. So, I understand what your saying, but I think Amy will be involved either way.

That being said, the defense may opt to just plea on this since it probably will make no difference whatsoever to a jury. A jury can certainly tell the difference between a murderer and a thief.

I just feel bad for Amy and I think she should steer away from this whole thing. It could effect her emotionally for the rest of her life.