Will Casey Testify?

[PaulaF513]

For the last two+ years I've been adamant she would never take the stand, but I never imagined Baez would come up with such a convoluted implausible defense. So now I think there's a 50/ 50 chance she will.

She and her ambitious lawyer have put forward an all or nothing defense that seeks her acquittal. She admits to no wrong doing whatsovever, save allowing her father to cover up the accidental death of his granchild :crazy: and her daughter. When Baez made the claims in his opening statements he assumed the burden of substantiating those allegations. Baez is stating Casey Anthony invented imaginery friends and became so **d up because of being raised in a very disfunctional family and being the victim of years of sexual abuse. He is imo actually putting forward a mental health defense but without any professional opinion to support it. :crazy:

Due to the States motion in limine and Baez failure to proffer any testimony that ICA was abused, Baez, it seems has no way of corroborating the abuse claims without putting ICA on the stand. Despite imo insermountable evidence Caylee's dead body was in that trunk, Baez is still going for broke and blaming it on the trash bag. :floorlaugh: He's damned if he does and he's damned if he doesnt. So this next wannabe Juanny Cochrane and his pathological liar of a client might just go for it.
MOO:crazy:

BBM

What exactly does "motion in limine" mean? I would think that the charges in the DT's opening would have to be substantiated, however, if they think that the state hasn't proven their case, can they rest without any further rebuttal? Can they simply reiterate their opposition to the evidence and leave it to the jurors to decide if the charges against her are true?

In other words, can the DT's opening statement be used as a viable alternative to willful murder? After all, they need only to raise a reasonable doubt.

 

[Marple]

BBM

What exactly does "motion in limine" mean? I would think that the charges in the DT's opening would have to be substantiated, however, if they think that the state hasn't proven their case, can they rest without any further rebuttal? Can they simply reiterate their opposition to the evidence and leave it to the jurors to decide if the charges against her are true?

In other words, can the DT's opening statement be used as a viable alternative to willful murder? After all, they need only to raise a reasonable doubt.

Not if the jurors heed HHJP's instructions. Opening statements are not evidence.

 

[lowens1975]

I do not believe she will and here is why....

It took years to develope this defense, look at everyone they have investigated /implicated over the years to get to this final story (fairy tale).

She has zero credibility, her defense team has made a point of convincing everyone that she is a liar from the start of this case.

BBM

The first 10 people up on the stand, who where her friends, testified she was a liar. Her own defense team painted her as a liar. I don't think the jury could trust anything that came out of her mouth at this point. The defense is better off keeping her off the witness stand, but then we are dealing with JB, aren't we? lol!

 

[stmarysmead]

I think she will testify because it suits both "agendas" on display at the Defense table.

In my opinion, Baez could never let Casey plead out...this would deny him the starring male lead in this mega-drama. IMO Baez isolated Casey from her family to gain complete control..so that he could be sure to roll this Gravy Train into his Big Payoff station. Baez' agenda is personal fame for himself...Nancy Grace gigs...the "high Profile" lawyer status that makes him a STAR not some newly minted guy with a law degree who trolls the jails looking for clients.

He is protecting and promoting himself first and foremost...therefore he will put Casey on the stand. This makes The Incest Story..HER story..not his. And if he loses the trial, the blame can shift to Casey as well.

Casey will willingly take the stand because she has been raised to believe she is stunningly beautiful and compellingly believable. All her interactions outside of the family have been Casey morphing into whatever works to make a friend, impress a lover, bond with a cellmate. She has cried (Boo! Hoo!) for the jury...and no doubt has her Abuse Excuse well rehearsed. Casey has supreme confidence in her superiority.She believes she can "con" her way out of anything. She is seething that Caylee is being perceived as the victim...when it is SHE who has lost everything! And she knows Cindy will forgive her anything. So no worries about that.

She will testify because it fits the agendas (different though they may be) of the two key decision makers...Baez and Casey.

Buckle up...it's coming.

 

[ZsaZsa]

No way.
She is too cowardly to face LDB.

 

[krisskross]

BBM

What exactly does "motion in limine" mean? I would think that the charges in the DT's opening would have to be substantiated, however, if they think that the state hasn't proven their case, can they rest without any further rebuttal? Can they simply reiterate their opposition to the evidence and leave it to the jurors to decide if the charges against her are true?

In other words, can the DT's opening statement be used as a viable alternative to willful murder? After all, they need only to raise a reasonable doubt.

It's a motion to prevent certain evidence from being introduced during the trial. In this instance, Baez made certain claims during his OS. This isn't evidence nor were any abuse allegations ever previously entered into evidence. But Baez tried to introduce the sexual abuse claims about George when cross examining State witnesses. The State complained to the Judge and he was made to proffer/lay a foundation. This was attempted by calling Tony Lazarro (without the Jury being present)and asking him if ICA had ever told him she had been abused by her father. It bombed, :floorlaugh: because Tony said, she only told him Lee had tried to "feel her up" and that her father had hit her when she was a child. Tony interpreted the hitting as discipline.
The State followed up with the written motion in limine. The Judge granted it.

I suppose he could try again by asking Jesse Grund what ICA told him, but IIRC she only told him about Lee. So looking like ICA is the only one that can substantiate the claims she was abused by George Anthony. And if she doesn't take the stand, Baez can't talk about it.

You'd think these lawers, I include Mason and Sims would think things through a bit more, when defending a DP case? :great:

 

[Betty Boop]

I think there is a good chance that ICA will take the stand because she is not yet to the end of the hall.

 

[Walk in IL]

I do not believe she will testify. Like she said in one of the jailhouse video's when encouraged to talk to law enforcement, "They'll just throw it back in my face." In closing JB will jump up and down and scream about junk science and say "We just don't know" about 50 times.

 

[What'sThatClue]

I'm on the fence. I didn't think ICA would take the stand but now I'm wondering if the State isn't aware that she will and therefore is winding up their case? Is that even possible that the State would be made aware that ICA will take the stand or is something like that kept secret from them until the final moment?

 

[Roze]

Interesting article/opinion over on Radar that ICA has to take the stand so that the defense can establish what was stated in opening arguments.

When you consider JB's showboating style and the "rock solid" legal advice he's been giving ICA all along, coupled with ICA's love of attention I can't rule it out.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusiv...y-murder-trial-daughter-caylee-danette-meyers

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

I'm still on the fence but ICA is arrogant enough to believe she can testify and pull this off...That the jury will believe her lies for she will win an acadamy award for her theatrics...she is the only one who can give the lies about what GA allegedly did to her from the tender age of 8...I don't buy it for a minute, I just believe ICA is pure evil....JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

“First degree murder means that there was premeditation. The jury could easily convict Ms. Anthony of second degree murder, with no premeditation. If the jury believes that Ms. Anthony chloroformed her daughter so that she could go out and party, then, second degree murder would be the appropriate verdict given that scenario. This jury needs to be very solid and a good jury that thinks concisely.

“The jury must look at all of the evidence, and take it to the logical conclusion that points to one person, Casey Anthony. From what I have heard so far, I'm convinced that Ms. Anthony did it, and that she is guilty," Meyers reveals.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusiv...y-murder-trial-daughter-caylee-danette-meyers

This is where I get confused...2nd degree murder is not one of ICA's charges...she does have aggravated manslaughter of a child under 12, which can also give her LWOP but is death also an option? JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[Roze]

I believe she can be charged with second degree murder or manslaughter - as a lesser included offense to first degree murder. I don't believe the DP is on the table if she is found guilty of either of these. A legal eagle will have to confirm though.

 

[marspiter]

I believe she can be charged with second degree murder or manslaughter - as a lesser included offense to first degree murder. I don't believe the DP is on the table if she is found guilty of either of these. A legal eagle will have to confirm though.

My personal opinion is that she will be found guilty of felony murder which does have the DP (that's been my opinion for a long time). You are correct in that 2nd degree and manslaughter are non DP offenses.

To go back on topic I'm kind of on the fence about ICA taking the stand. I think it would be suicide for her to testify. However the defense has kind of painted itself into a corner. The SA's case was pretty compelling and with JB's opening statements he is kind of forced to put her up there.

Like CM said it's gonna be a "circus of a trial" and they are just getting warmed up for the main show. Either way the defenses direct and the SA's cross should be entertaining.

 

[marlap]

I'm still on the fence but ICA is arrogant enough to believe she can testify and pull this off...That the jury will believe her lies for she will win an acadamy award for her theatrics...she is the only one who can give the lies about what GA allegedly did to her from the tender age of 8...I don't buy it for a minute, I just believe ICA is pure evil....JMHO

Justice for Caylee

I agree! I think that not only will ICA insist on taking the stand because she really does think she can snow the jury (as her interrogation videos show...cool as a cucumber lying to LE, not so much as a foot twitch or hard gulp), but she is also bullying her DT into the abuse allegations excuse for her behavior and throwing her father and brother and RK under the ICA bus.

She made her DT's job all the harder...much smarter if they had just poked as many holes in the prosecution's case as possible.

 

[celticgo]

It would be DT suicide for her to testify in my opinon. That being said, I would love to see her testify

 

[greycoupon]

It would be DT suicide for her to testify in my opinon. That being said, I would love to see her testify

I talked to a few lawyer friends this weekend, They don't follow the case but I showed them an article about Baez's "interesting" defense. They all said the same and one is married to a prosecutor, apparently he gets VERY happy when a defendant testifies. :floorlaugh:

In a sane trial, no way would she testify. In this case? I completely could see Jose "here are my markers and easil" Baez thinking that's a fine move. CM would put the kabosh on this but do they listen to him?

 

[Roze]

I talked to a few lawyer friends this weekend, They don't follow the case but I showed them an article about Baez's "interesting" defense. They all said the same and one is married to a prosecutor, apparently he gets VERY happy when a defendant testifies. :floorlaugh:

In a sane trial, no way would she testify. In this case? I completely could see Jose "here are my markers and easil" Baez thinking that's a fine move. CM would put the kabosh on this but do they listen to him?

Judging from KC's smirk leaving the courtroom today it sounds like she's getting ready to rip the A's a new "a" and JB is picking out a new pocketchief for his "Perry Mason" cameo. Should be interesting...

 

[mydailyopinions]

I'm praying Casey does take the stand.

I would love for the jury to see her fury when Jeff Ashton rips her apart on the stand. I don't think that she will cry because then she will be allowed to speak, I believe we will see her being the "spiteful B**ch" she truly is.

 

[Peachy Keen]

I had a dream last night that she testified. Unfortunately, I woke up before she started talking!

I have a quick question.....if she does not testify, then there is no evidence of abuse--just Baez's OS. How does the state deal with this in their closing statement? Can they bring this up and claim it was a lie, and that it was just thrown out there to prejudice the jury?