How is Casey Anthony going to get a fair Trial?

[iluvmua]

You'd have to be living under a rock to have not heard about this heartbreaking case.

Does anybody know how long the Whitness list is?

[febreze]

You'd have to be living under a rock to have not heard about this heartbreaking case.

Does anybody know how long the Whitness list is?

most people in Flordia know about this case but, believe it or not hundreds of people are not following the case, i have friends and relitives in Flordia and have mentioned this case at one time or another over the months since it began and i have been told no they are not following it, it's just to sad to read or hear about.

[barskin&co.]

Oh, for pity's sake; is Casey Anthony the first high profile defendant to go to trial in the history of the U.S. justice system? Yes, a lot of people have heard of this case, but many, many of them do not think about all the time. She will be able to get an impartial jury, IMO.

[bluwaters]

Oh, for pity's sake; is Casey Anthony the first high profile defendant to go to trial in the history of the U.S. justice system? Yes, a lot of people have heard of this case, but many, many of them do not think about all the time. She will be able to get an impartial jury, IMO.

Yes she will. The majority of the state is NOT obsessed with this case as we are. The is nothing wrong with seating a jury with people who have heard of the case. That is not a bar to jury selection. A potential juror may not have already formed an opinion about the case. That is the qualifier.

The owner of the motel in Daytona who registered George did not know who he was.

If Judge Strickland grants the motion for COV, I think it will not be because he himself believes it is necessary, but because he wants to be cautious against COV becoming an issue upon appeal.

Personally, I will not be surprised if Strickland denies the COV motion.
I base this on his earlier statement when he denied the State's motion for a gag order. At that hearing, Strickland said that denying the gag order would make seating a jury more difficult, but not impossible. He also said that they have had high profile cases in the past, but had been able to seat an impartial jury. He seemed confident that it can be done again in Orlando.

[Hey Paula]

I sure hope that there will be an impartial jury. Otherwise I think Casey may just get away with what she has done. I would think that a change of venue might be the appropriate way to go, but I do not know for sure. I just pray that justice will be served in this case.

jmoo

Sometimes, in very high profile cases, COVs are denied. Because COVs are very costly to the County where the crime was committed, the thinking is that the notoriety would still exist throughout the State. IOW, despite the sometimes prohibitive cost of moving a trial, the defendant would not reap the benefit of obscurity. Given the unfavorable financial climate, I wonder if a COV will be granted.

Personally, I believe most jurors take their responsibility seriously. They realize that both the Prosecution and the Defense have evidence and information which isn't disclosed to the public and are willing to weigh all of it objectively, and render the fair and appropriate verdict.

IMO

[StarShine]

Sometimes, in very high profile cases, COVs are denied. Because COVs are very costly to the County where the crime was committed, the thinking is that the notoriety would still exist throughout the State. IOW, despite the sometimes prohibitive cost of moving a trial, the defendant would not reap the benefit of obscurity. Given the unfavorable financial climate, I wonder if a COV will be granted.

Personally, I believe most jurors take their responsibility seriously. They realize that both the Prosecution and the Defense have evidence and information which isn't disclosed to the public and are willing to weigh all of it objectively, and render the fair and appropriate verdict.

IMO


Hi Paula!

While I would like to agree with you regarding jurors taking their responsibility seriously, my two encounters sitting on a jury proved to me that this was definitely not the case. The strong jurors usually are able to be so vocal that some jurors just go with the flow rather than "buck" them.

I sometimes think it is better to have professional jurors.

[Hey Paula]

Hi Paula!

While I would like to agree with you regarding jurors taking their responsibility seriously, my two encounters sitting on a jury proved to me that this was definitely not the case. The strong jurors usually are able to be so vocal that some jurors just go with the flow rather than "buck" them.

I sometimes think it is better to have professional jurors.

Hiya Star!

I see your point, and I don't doubt there are instances where dissenting jurors might feel overwhelmed/bullied by the majority. But, I still feel in the majority of cases, jurors do take their responsibility seriously and based upon the evidence presented, do hand down the proper verdict. Of course, that is no consolation to the few who are wrongly convicted and their families.

However, on the other side of the coin, I fear professional jurors might allow many guilty defendants to go free. Based upon the arguments I've heard coming from TH Defense attorneys, they often appear to dismiss circumstantial evidence and consciousness of guilt ("everyone behaves/grieves differently" is one such argument). And many trials, if not most, are based upon CE. I actually favor CE over direct evidence inasmuch as people make mistakes and sometimes aren't truthful.

IMO

[farrahrani]

I don't think she'll have a problem
Once Baez presents his "Aha! moment" everyone will be convinced of Casey's innocence! :thumbsup:


ok...i think i just choked myself on my own coffee there...

[neid_77]

as i have said on the previous thread the defense team amassed for her is good enough don't you think??? who in the world has a defense team like this..anyone before?...i think that speaks for itself. when your defense team is full of high profile people and a liar like Lee who knows what these people will be up to!...i agree a good jury must be picked..but with a high powered team like hers....caylee needs someone on her side!!!

[Grins]

In my lifetime, I have never seen a case where the sheriff or other investigative agency has given to the media all their files for the prospective jury pool to read.
Nor have I ever seen the DA or state attorney do the same. Have you?
Not leaks, but regular doc dumps of hundreds of pages each time.

Long before jury selection begins, the prosecutor released for all to read and remember this horrific visual:
an FBI report finding
=Duct tape around the mouth area and skull of 2 year old Caylee
=a heart sticker on the duct tape

If this is required in Florida why did we not see the same dump of docs in the other Fla cases like Jessica Lunsford?

Add now the cable news and the cable stars proclaiming new bombshells of acts of degradation by the presumed innocent defendant and you have a problem which is serious.
If you were on trial, would you consider this fair treatment?

[Grins]

Any conviction will be likely reversed on appeal.
Why?
Does anyone recall the Dr Sam Sheppard case?

Bottom line is no matter what a statute allows to be published in media prior to trial, any appellate court may strike down that statute if it conflicts with a Constitutional right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.

U.S. Supreme Court
Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333 (1966)

"...Held:

1. The massive, pervasive, and prejudicial publicity attending petitioner's prosecution prevented him from receiving a fair trial consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 384 U. S. 349-363.

(a) Though freedom of discussion should be given the widest range compatible with the fair and orderly administration of justice, it must not be allowed to divert a trial from its purpose of adjudicating controversies according to legal procedures based on evidence received only in open court. Pp. 384 U. S. 350-351.

(b) Identifiable prejudice to the accused need not be shown if, as in Estes v. Texas, 381 U. S. 532, and even more so in this case, the totality of the circumstances raises the probability of prejudice. Pp. 384 U. S. 352-355.

(c) The trial court failed to invoke procedures which would have guaranteed petitioner a fair trial, such as adopting stricter rules for use of the courtroom by newsmen as petitioner's counsel requested, limiting their number, and more closely supervising their courtroom conduct. The court should also have insulated the witnesses; controlled the release of leads, information, and gossip to the press by police officers, witnesses, and counsel; proscribed extrajudicial statements by any lawyer, witness, party, or court official divulging prejudicial matters, and requested the appropriate city and county officials to regulate release of information by their employees. [All emphasis supplied] Pp. 384 U. S. 358-362.

2. The case is remanded to the District Court with instructions to release petitioner from custody unless he is tried again within a reasonable time. P. 384 U. S. 363.

346 F.2d 707, reversed and remanded."

http://supreme.justia.com/us/384/333/case.html
~~~~~~~

Did the Judge here do what the US Supreme Court requires? What will they do when they see the doc dumps in this case?
One option is to reverse; another is to dismiss all charges with prejudice if the Court finds prosecutorial misconduct.
This is indeed a serious problem.

[Mairi II]

Quite frankly, I couldn't care less if it's a fair trial - as long as the freak goes to prison for the rest of her life.... or, preferably, she becomes one with Old Sparky. From the perspective of a possible successful appeal, I sure hope no stones go unturned in seating a jury that is unbiased, though. After listening to the motel gal, there are people out there who aren't aware of every nuance of the case - she had no idea who George was when he registered. Who woulda thunk it.

[girlspell]

I don't really understand the question. What is a "fair" trial. Because 12 people never heard of the words Casey Anthony, then those people would be hearing a fair trial?

They have to have a trial. They have to hold it somewhere in the US. Otherwise, let her walk out free forever. They can scream and carry on if it was a "fair" trial afterwards.

[VII]

OJ got 2.....
Scott Peterson got one ....
Ted Bundy
Jeffrey Dahmer
etc....

Casey is NO different.
She'll get "HER day" in court.
She will be pr o u d.
Everything will be about HER.

[Neffy]

"GRINS STATES: Wny conviction will be likely reversed on appeal.
Why?"


Hi Grins, I didn't recopy due to band width.

Please correct me if I'm wrong and if you can explain why.

It's my understanding that state asked for this to be blocked but it was Baez the defendants attorney who requested other wise.

Baez is asking for a change of venue which he will be granted.

So if you state is true then your saying that no where in the US will Casey ever be given a fair trial?

I would think if that's true Baez would file now to drop all charges because it's to late for a fair trial anywhere. Why go thru a trial at all?

[MichelleP]

In my opinion Casey can receive a fair trial even if the jurors have heard about it.

[Grins]

"GRINS STATES: Wny conviction will be likely reversed on appeal.
Why?"

Hi Grins, I didn't recopy due to band width.

Please correct me if I'm wrong and if you can explain why.

It's my understanding that state asked for this to be blocked but it was Baez the defendants attorney who requested other wise.

Baez is asking for a change of venue which he will be granted.

So if you state is true then your saying that no where in the US will Casey ever be given a fair trial?

I would think if that's true Baez would file now to drop all charges because it's to late for a fair trial anywhere. Why go thru a trial at all?
On July 28, 2008 JB filed a motion to prevent publication of D's jail conversations and other prejudicial material. This was only 13 days after C was declared missing.

Much later, the state filed a motion to prevent D's attorney from responding publicly, which ethics rules permit, to the flood of documents.
The same day the state made anther huge doc dump!
Here is the info on the July 28, 2008 defense motion.
http://www.wesh.com/news/17026786/detail.html

"Motion Denied To Block Anthony's Phone Calls
Judge Says He Was Going To Err On Side Of First Amendment
July 29, 2008
ORLANDO, Fla. -- In a hearing on Tuesday afternoon, Judge Stan Strickland denied the motion filed by Casey Anthony's attorney, Jose Baez, asking that jailhouse phone calls made from the mother of a missing toddler cease to be released.
Strickland said he was going to err on the side of the First Amendment..

..Baez said he also feels that the information out there has negatively portrayed his client.

..Eric Dunlap from the
Orange County Sheriff's Office also went to the podium during the hearing to argue the motion filed by Baez. He said that what has been released is simply public record, and that the sheriff's office should be able to conduct their own investigation and make decisions about what information goes out and what stays with them -- not Casey Anthony, her attorney and her family...

The court requested that the attorney for the
Orlando Sentinel be a part of the hearing to represent the media.
She said the information is public record, just like a mug shot. She also said that secrecy is not the answer in a case like this -- transparency and openness are.

Baez said the argument that the information being released is not sensitive is absurd.

Strickland told Baez that, through his motion, he and the Anthonys want to dictate the flow of information -- contrary to the First Amendment. The judge described the conversations as "sterile."

..Baez filed the motion Monday, asking that the flow of information be cut off to protect his client's right to a fair trial and to protect the integrity of the investigation.

Sheriff's spokesman Deputy Carlos Padilla said so far the releases have not harmed the investigation."
http://www.wesh.com/news/17026786/detail.html

D may be able to get a fair trial but why did the prosecutor and LE make it much more difficult and jeopardize their own trial by publishing so much prejudicial material, much of which they knew was inadmissible in court? [such as a private email by an uncle saying he thinks D killed her daughter.]

What do you think of the ruling by the judge? If we are entitled to see all police files and all discovery delivered to defense counsel, where is the rest of it?

Most especially, where is the report about any fingerprints on the duct tape? Did the FBI forget about that when they told us about the heart on the duct tape? Where is the tox report? Where is the Inventory they said was attached to the warrant to search?
Where is all the material asked for by defense last October?

[Grins]

Good answer, Grins.Many thanks Exiled, I appreciate that and you. My research and work takes a lot of time and is mostly ignored so I will retire from the proceedings.

[Babes]

IMO she's getting a better trial than other people - Cant believe the "experts" or they call them the "dream team" that will defend her despite of all the lies and stupid actions she did while her daughter was missing... She's quite lucky honestly...IMO if she's my family member - i'll request that she gets a public defender since she isnt going to win after all IMO...

Sorry but am just being realistic. - ( But my opnion can always change when i see or hear all of the forensic evidences lol )

[Neffy]

Grins,

I WISH I had the answers to what your asking.
Everytime I think I understand this sunshine law something comes out that I'm not sure is wrong but question myself that I don't know enough about the law.

As far as the ruling by the judge I'm afraid I'm going to give you a non-answer as I have the utmost respect for Judge Strickland and I believe him to know the law more then me.
I believe during the last hearing I was impressed quite a bit with him as he seemed to care more about Casey's rights then Baez showed concern for.

As far as the reports I have to resort to my non-answer type answer. IMO all the reports are not being released. Again I refer back to my inexperience with this sunshine law and reading it on my own. Are part of the documents still being used for investigative purposes so this type of information is not being released?

Just as Baez is claiming he can't release Caylee's remains because he's awaiting more information are the documents that have not been released due to them needing more information? Does the sunshine law allow for this.

Is it that we were given to much information or not enough information. (I don't mean to our liking I mean legally) . I'm sure this is not the reply you were looking for but all I have are questions myself.

[Babes]

I don't think she'll have a problem
Once Baez presents his "Aha! moment" everyone will be convinced of Casey's innocence! :thumbsup:


ok...i think i just choked myself on my own coffee there...

What's that AHA moment? Care to share pls... TIA:smile:

[Grins]

Hi Neffy
Exemption from the Sunshine Act of "Criminal intelligence information" and "criminal investigative information"
Here is the actual statute:
http://tinyurl.com/7gpdkn

The 2008 Florida Statutes
Title X
CHAPTER 119
PUBLIC RECORDS
119.01 General state policy on public records.
...
section
119.011
"...
Definitions
...
(3)(a) "Criminal intelligence information" means information with respect to an identifiable person or group of persons collected by a criminal justice agency in an effort to anticipate, prevent, or monitor possible criminal activity.

(b) "Criminal investigative information" means information with respect to an identifiable person or group of persons compiled by a criminal justice agency in the course of conducting a criminal investigation of a specific act or omission, including, but not limited to, information derived from laboratory tests, reports of investigators or informants, or any type of surveillance.

(c) "Criminal intelligence information" and "criminal investigative information" shall not include:
...
5. Documents given or required by law or agency rule to be given to the person arrested, ...
~~~~~~~
Then see:
Section
119.071 General exemptions from inspection or copying of public records.--

(1) AGENCY ADMINISTRATION.--
..
(c)1. Active criminal intelligence information and active criminal investigative information are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
[Emphasis supplied]
~~~~~~~
Now we have legal argument as to interpretation of the above "Definition:"

=1. does it mean all "Criminal intelligence information" and "criminal investigative information" are exceptions to the Sunshine Law and unavailable to the public until after a trial
or
=2. does it mean all info given to D is available to public
or
=3. D has an exception to exemption and can get the information when otherwise he could not get it. It does not mean the public can get it.
~~~My opinion favors 1 and 3.

[Grins]

My opinion is that the Exemption statutory section I cited in s.119.071 gives to LE and SA a protection in the form of an an exception to the general rule of making all agency documents available to the public.

Homicide detectives do not want the product their investigation in the news every day in my experience.
We have heard forever that, "We cannot give out any evidentiary information because this case is under investigation."

SO the question then is: well if the case info is secret then how can the defendant get it in discovery to prepare for trial?

Aha=the law gives the defendant that right by this provision from 119.011:
(c) "Criminal intelligence information" and "criminal investigative information" shall not include:
...
5. Documents given or required by law or agency rule to be given to the person arrested, ...
Sooooo
~~that as to her/him the exception will not apply and discovery may be obtained.
There is no language to justify any meaning beyond that. Paragraph 5. is a Definition and not a substantive clause granting rights to media.

My posts are my opinion based upon research and not legal advice.

[Grins]

Judge any judge=lol=time for bed== by what the US Supreme Court said in the Dr Sam Sheppard opinion I quoted above.

[dref99]

What's that AHA moment? Care to share pls... TIA:smile:


Whenever I see an Aha moment mentioned I assume it relates to Dr Baden's Aha in the Phil Spector trial 1.

Whether or not there is another such moment and despite the publicity, said PS has had 2 extremely fair trials. The judge seems to bend over backwards to accommodate his every requirement & that of his many lawyers. I am sure there will be thousands of potential jurors who have never heard of the Anthony family. Whether some events are cause for appeal of a jury decision, I know not & have no legal or other knowledge of the issues. I do find it strange that the records of phone calls, emails, interviews etc are continually released.

jmo

[Neffy]

Now we have legal argument as to interpretation of the above "Definition:"

=1. does it mean all "Criminal intelligence information" and "criminal investigative information" are exceptions to the Sunshine Law and unavailable to the public until after a trial
or
=2. does it mean all info given to D is available to public
or
=3. D has an exception to exemption and can get the information when otherwise he could not get it. It does not mean the public can get it.
~~~My opinion favors 1 and 3.

#1 & #3 - Without a doubt I find valid.

Now as to why the delay. If the prosecutors don't have it they can't give it. There are so many departments being dealt with I don't know enough about the chain that's to be followed. What is the time frame that's needed to complete this. What was the departments case load when this case was sent to them. I'd think that Quantico or the State are not sitting around or I should say weren't sitting around with nothing to do waiting for something to come along. I do know the State was given 10 days from the time they recieve it to turn it over. Did they recieve it?

We'd found out after the fact why the delay in autopsy photos and I've found the pros to have valid reason as this has turned to beyond circus and $$ proportions. Before that I thought it was wrong and a stall tactic but I agree with their concerns. With that said, IMO the state had informed Baez of this before the motion hearing. As is his perogative he did not agree with it which leaves the pros and def in a stand still to wait until a hearing whereas the Judge needs to decide.

Perhaps something along this line is going on again?

Next hearing is on the 30th 8:30 am IIRC. The state will be made to be accountable with reasons why these are not in the hands of the defense.

For lack of a better word do you see something more sinister into this?

[Neffy]

Judge any judge=lol=time for bed== by what the US Supreme Court said in the Dr Sam Sheppard opinion I quoted above.

I guess my confusion re: Shepard is how can pre-trial publicity taint prospective juror deliberations when this "sunshine law" allows for it's release and Judge Strickland ruled it to be allowable. Was he wrong? Maybe, maybe not. Can every case argue this in sunshine law states?

I do understand your postion after reading everything over again but by no means do I feel this will be a slam dunk appelate issue although I do see it's merit and why you believe this is a very real prospect.

[Neffy]

Hi Grins going back to Shepard decision.

This would can be the case in all high profile trials.

Other then Shepard do you know any other verdicts that were overturned using this argument?

[farrahrani]

What's that AHA moment? Care to share pls... TIA:smile:

A while back in one of his interviews, JB said that we don't know the full story and there was still a lot that hasn't been revealed yet, and when the case goes to trial and we hear the facts there was going to be an "Aha! moment" and we'd all know the truth...or some nonsense like that :rolleyes:

[Grins]

Neffy=excellent analysis and questions!
You would make a good trial lawyer.

Reasons for delay~
Sure some tests take time but look at each item individually:
=Fingerprints=THE most important report in my opinion!!!!!!!!!
where is it???????
Remember=who told us all about the heart shape on the duct tape after careful analysis???????? =it was the
FBI LATENT PRINT UNIT!!!!!!!!!
ok
FBI=how long did it take you to look at the duct tape =while you were spotting the heart shape=and the bags to determine if there were any fingerprints????? You had it right in front of you right? No delay here==
SO
where is your report saying:

yes we found prints and they belong to_________ or someone unknown.
or
No prints were found on anything.

Did the fingerprint report accompany the heart report in your envelope sent to the state attorney? Did they have it when they chose to only release the heart on duct tape outrage to us?/?????????/???????.?????
Are the SA selectively releasing info to us??

[i_pickle]

IMO she's getting a better trial than other people - Cant believe the "experts" or they call them the "dream team" that will defend her despite of all the lies and stupid actions she did while her daughter was missing... She's quite lucky honestly...IMO if she's my family member - i'll request that she gets a public defender since she isnt going to win after all IMO...

Sorry but am just being realistic. - ( But my opnion can always change when i see or hear all of the forensic evidences lol )I agree. She is lucky to have the representation she has (with the exception of Baez, of course). What other unemployed defendant could afford the kind of experts that are working on this case? None that I know.

Casey Anthony is no different than any other high profile defendant and will get a fair trial.

JMO

[cherish]

My husband travels a lot, he's a workaholic, and only watches sports. He did watch Dateline with me, but that's all he really knows about this.

Last week he called from Korea to ask if I knew about the 300 page doc dump.

[cherish]

A while back in one of his interviews, JB said that we don't know the full story and there was still a lot that hasn't been revealed yet, and when the case goes to trial and we hear the facts there was going to be an "Aha! moment" and we'd all know the truth...or some nonsense like that :rolleyes:
Here's one:
Jose Baez press conference 10/14/08
http://www.truveo.com/Jose-Baez-press-conference-101408/id/3893168168

"I sincerely believe that when we have spoken, everyone and I mean everyone, will sit back and say now I understand. That explains it."

[Neffy]

Neffy=excellent analysis and questions!
You would make a good trial lawyer.

Reasons for delay~
Sure some tests take time but look at each item individually:
=Fingerprints=THE most important report in my opinion!!!!!!!!!
where is it???????
Remember=who told us all about the heart shape on the duct tape after careful analysis???????? =it was the
FBI LATENT PRINT UNIT!!!!!!!!!
ok
FBI=how long did it take you to look at the duct tape =while you were spotting the heart shape=and the bags to determine if there were any fingerprints????? You had it right in front of you right? No delay here==
SO
where is your report saying:

yes we found prints and they belong to_________ or someone unknown.
or
No prints were found on anything.

Did the fingerprint report accompany the heart report in your envelope sent to the state attorney? Did they have it when they chose to only release the heart on duct tape outrage to us?/?????????/???????.?????
Are the SA selectively releasing info to us??

Hi Grins and tx.

You pointed out one of my biggest downfalls. Not going back to the date of something happening and instead using the date it was released to the public. (bows head in shame) I start out with that in mind then obviously lose it in my train of thought.

Back on track,

If you can recall my mention of the state holding back the autopsy photo's and how my line of thinking was the same as yours (well on all the evidence of this nature) "why the delay/stall". The state and the defense were at a stand still about this where it was taken back into court for a Judge to decide.

The state IMO can not shake the fact that something is being sold from the defense whether it be the family, Baez or Casey. Although the state has been very careful and not making a public accusation what has come to light is Baez being under investigation.

Who filed that? You have to concede that these high salaried high profile experts look awfully suspicious. First they claimed pro bono then they recanted their claim to it's anonymous.

Finger prints the duct tape and the heart shaped adhesive scream to me tabloid must have material and if as you've referred to the "snake" photo brought in $10,000.00 can you imagine what the above information w/photo can bring in.

You posted an article (which I'd like to thank you) about an another attorney weighed in (name escapes me) who mention there are still no prints. What didn't escape me was his asking price of 1 million to take this case. How much and who is paying this defense teams experts?

Two parter.
So we go back to ethics. Is the state overstepping it's boundries if they do not release these items as they feel these items are being sold? Is it the state who filed to have Baez investigated? Is it as Baez says none of anyones business?

How does the mother being on trial who has legal rights to this even with the Dale Ernhardt law (her right to have the autopsy photo) now being the defendant get overruled. Is there a stipulation there? I mention this again even though the trial court ruled the procautions to be put in place that Baez would not be a part of this. How about his client taking a different route with a promise of future profit to be paid by her existing attorneys/experts. The wimpy plan. I'd gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.

As I've said the state is being very careful not to point the finger and name names of who may sell or release these other to say or ask WHAT IF they are obtained by nefarious means. They're asking for an upfront word from the defense that EVERY procaution be taking and they want it in writing.

Is it REAL or just IMPLIED that the State IMO won't trust the defense on an ethical level?

[neid_77]

WOW!! guess no justice for caylee marie anthony huh?

[NYGalPal]

WOW!! guess no justice for caylee marie anthony huh?

What do you mean? Casey hasn't gone to trial yet. We have a ways to go. Don't fret. Caylee will get her justice.

[FrankieBones1]

Hi Paula!

While I would like to agree with you regarding jurors taking their responsibility seriously, my two encounters sitting on a jury proved to me that this was definitely not the case. The strong jurors usually are able to be so vocal that some jurors just go with the flow rather than "buck" them.

I sometimes think it is better to have professional jurors.I like that idea, too.

For the thread starter:

As for Casey Anthony getting a fair trial or not: I'm sure she will. Just because everyone these days reads the papers and follows crime stories doesn't mean they cannot serve on a jury. They are asked by a judge at the beginning if they can remain open minded and see her as innocent until proven otherwise.

I think it would be frivolous to move the trial elsewhere. It's costly and unfair to witnesses and all parties involved.

[sunstar]

I also believe Casey will receive a fair trial, even if the COV isn't granted. All the state has to do is carefully select a jury who will listen to all of the evidence and make their decision based on that. There are probably many people in Orange County who don't follow the case every day and unlike us, don't read the documents from beginning to end. Baez does have a good team now with LKB, who is experienced, so I don't see any appeal being granted for ineffective counsel. The only problem I see, no matter where the trial is, is that "one juror" who may be sympathetic towards Casey because of her age & appearance. MOO

[Grins]

Hey Neffy

The law requires reciprocal discovery; complete and timely. Neither can refuse to comply out of some fear of sale of material.
That is another matter for another proceeding.

[VII]

I also believe Casey will receive a fair trial, even if the COV isn't granted. All the state has to do is carefully select a jury who will listen to all of the evidence and make their decision based on that. There are probably many people in Orange County who don't follow the case every day and unlike us, don't read the documents from beginning to end. Baez does have a good team now with LKB, who is experienced, so I don't see any appeal being granted for ineffective counsel. The only problem I see, no matter where the trial is, is that "one juror" who may be sympathetic towards Casey because of her age & appearance. MOO


IIIIIII dunno.

Since "day 1"
I've NEVErrr felt an ounce of empathy for her.
I don't care HOW young, innnocent or sweet she LOOKS
she strikes me as
evil, coniving, arrogant, egocentric,
did i say EVIL ....
and all that.
Just something about her has never sat well with me.
One of those *things*.

[Neffy]

Hey Neffy

The law requires reciprocal discovery; complete and timely. Neither can refuse to comply out of some fear of sale of material.
That is another matter for another proceeding.


That's what I'd thought to but it had already worked and that's what they used , well, to an extent anyways in why they wouldn't turn the autopsy photo's over. I don't know if Baez ever got that secure server to get these photo's either.

I was just applying that argument to the rest of what's missing.

This where I come back to I read the law and see what's being done and I think I'm not understanding something about this law and how it works and I'm misinterpreting it or not understanding the exemptions and how or who they apply to.

Now Baez has a complaint filed about how monies were obtained for this expensive team. He still doesn't have items turned over which in my mind are the money makers. Could be total coincidence also.

[Pebbles]

You'd have to be living under a rock to have not heard about this heartbreaking case.

Does anybody know how long the Whitness list is?

I have many friends and neighbors here in Florida that have heard about the case, but they do not follow it, and there are even a few that say they have no idea what I am talking about when I mention "the woman who killed her little girl" - Casey Anthony.

[Dunlurken]

Casey can easily get a fair trial, contrary to Geragos' comments on LKL. JMO.

[gnm109]

Sometimes, in very high profile cases, COVs are denied. Because COVs are very costly to the County where the crime was committed, the thinking is that the notoriety would still exist throughout the State. IOW, despite the sometimes prohibitive cost of moving a trial, the defendant would not reap the benefit of obscurity. Given the unfavorable financial climate, I wonder if a COV will be granted.

Personally, I believe most jurors take their responsibility seriously. They realize that both the Prosecution and the Defense have evidence and information which isn't disclosed to the public and are willing to weigh all of it objectively, and render the fair and appropriate verdict.

IMO

Not only are changes of venue costly and inconvenient, they would have to find somewhere that doesn't have satellite or cable tv -a rather daunting prospect. If you only look at tv, Nancy Grace and other commentators have already convicted CA and sentenced her to death, despite Jamie Floyd's best efforts. LOL.

Just because the entire world has heard about the case doesn't automatically prevent a fair trial. The defense will have their turn and that will be that.

Heck, OJ got a fair trial, didn't he....In mean on the last one, you know, the robbery, kidnappng, conspiracy and gun deal?

:rolleyes:

[Dogmatic]

NOTE TO FUTURE MURDERERS:

If you want a positively fair and unbiased trial, then don't wait 31 days until someone notices your child is missing. Also, don't make up a kidnap story. Don't make up a "nanny has the baby on a three week vacation story". Don't throw your friends under the bus.

If you are looking for a fair trial, don't create excess drama in the case that attracts the media. Simply kill your child, report them missing, and let the chips fall. Then, you will receive an unbiased jury that has probably never heard about your case.

Casey will receive a fair trial. It will appear to some that she does not, because in my opinion, I believe the state will have a very strong case and it will be an air tight case.

JMHO. (p.s. sarcasm is appropriate on one line, so don't flame me.)

[nana6]

Any conviction will be likely reversed on appeal.
Why?
Does anyone recall the Dr Sam Sheppard case?

Bottom line is no matter what a statute allows to be published in media prior to trial, any appellate court may strike down that statute if it conflicts with a Constitutional right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.

U.S. Supreme Court
Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333 (1966)

"...Held:

1. The massive, pervasive, and prejudicial publicity attending petitioner's prosecution prevented him from receiving a fair trial consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 384 U. S. 349-363.

(a) Though freedom of discussion should be given the widest range compatible with the fair and orderly administration of justice, it must not be allowed to divert a trial from its purpose of adjudicating controversies according to legal procedures based on evidence received only in open court. Pp. 384 U. S. 350-351.

(b) Identifiable prejudice to the accused need not be shown if, as in Estes v. Texas, 381 U. S. 532, and even more so in this case, the totality of the circumstances raises the probability of prejudice. Pp. 384 U. S. 352-355.

(c) The trial court failed to invoke procedures which would have guaranteed petitioner a fair trial, such as adopting stricter rules for use of the courtroom by newsmen as petitioner's counsel requested, limiting their number, and more closely supervising their courtroom conduct. The court should also have insulated the witnesses; controlled the release of leads, information, and gossip to the press by police officers, witnesses, and counsel; proscribed extrajudicial statements by any lawyer, witness, party, or court official divulging prejudicial matters, and requested the appropriate city and county officials to regulate release of information by their employees. [All emphasis supplied] Pp. 384 U. S. 358-362.

2. The case is remanded to the District Court with instructions to release petitioner from custody unless he is tried again within a reasonable time. P. 384 U. S. 363.

346 F.2d 707, reversed and remanded."

http://supreme.justia.com/us/384/333/case.html
~~~~~~~

Did the Judge here do what the US Supreme Court requires? What will they do when they see the doc dumps in this case?
One option is to reverse; another is to dismiss all charges with prejudice if the Court finds prosecutorial misconduct.
This is indeed a serious problem.

OMG You are telling me that she may go free? Ok I am going to go with the theory that maybe LE has more and I think maybe they do. The prosecutors surely are covering all their bases. imo

[barskin&co.]

Remember, the Sheppard trial took place fifty five year ago. A lot of changes were made, because of that trial. That case has no relevance to this one.

[gnm109]

IMHO, it would be much easier for anyone to get a fair tiral if the media would quit trying the cases in order to raise ratings, and just report when there is actually something new, rather than rehash the facts and leaks constantly.

Personally I get tired of hearing the same BS day after day while there must have been dozens of other children missing or killed during the Casey media blitz, which the media ignores.

I agree. And with regard to the media, wouldn't it be nice if we could get Nancy Grace to stop using the term "totmom". It's so dumb.

She puts on the same show night after night. Lots of pictures of CA and the parents. Lots of jailhouse tapes. Lots of Leonard Padilla Face time and the same panel to yell at. Nothing new, hiowever.

Same for Fox, CNN and Larry King. Same stuff over and over and over again. It's maddening. I know, someone might say not to watch it. How do you avoid it?

[gemsbmw]

You'd have to be living under a rock to have not heard about this heartbreaking case.

Does anybody know how long the Whitness list is?

The same way Scott Peterson and O.J. did.

[i_pickle]

nail lady, cleaning person, my dad, many friend no NOTHING about this case. Of course, we're in CA. If you live in Florida, I can't imagine there's anyone who doesn't know about it.

Perhaps Baez could move it to San Diego. We're certainly used to high profile cases here (Molesterfield, Danielle Van Dam, and let's not forget Peterson was arrested here).

Best,I agree. Some that I know, know nothing about this case. Many others have heard of it but none follow it the way people do here.

[TxLady2]

I don't really understand the question. What is a "fair" trial. Because 12 people never heard of the words Casey Anthony, then those people would be hearing a fair trial?

They have to have a trial. They have to hold it somewhere in the US. Otherwise, let her walk out free forever. They can scream and carry on if it was a "fair" trial afterwards.

I'm sure someone has already answered this, but I will take the chance. They do not have to have a trial. If she were to change her plea to guilty, the judge could just sentence her.
Everyone deserves a fair trial, which includes a lot of things, but mainly a jury that either has not heard or read anything about the case, OR can base their decision on the evidence alone, and not have any preconceived notions of her guilt or innocence. Of course, that is not taking into account some who will lie to get on a jury, which has happened in some other cases.
It also can include having an adequate attorney, AND a fair-minded judge who will conduct the trial within the laws, and make rulings based on the law and not a preconceived opinion.
I'm sure there are a few people in Orlando who have not followed the case, and don't watch NG every night, but if there are not, or they can't seat a jury who will comply with the rules, they might have to grant a change of venue.

[CatBallou]

You'd have to be living under a rock to have not heard about this heartbreaking case.

Does anybody know how long the Whitness list is?

Such a tragic case, but I must ask did Caylee get a fair trial?

The victims of crime, never get a Judge or Jury, or a fair break.

[Grins]

1.=In none of the other cases mentioned above was there thousands of pages of official doc dumps directly from the offices of LE and SA. These dumps were slowly spread out over 6 months and include obvious hearsay and inadmissible evidence and statements, none of which had been considered as proper by any court.

2.=The Sunshine Act does not authorize the release of police investigative files as many contend as they are exempt from the Act by the Act itself: Everything that has been released by LE and state attorney is exempt from the Sunshine Law disclosure requirements and should have not been released.

Here is the law:
The 2008 Florida Statutes Title X PUBLIC OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, AND RECORDS

Chapter 119 PUBLIC RECORDS 119.071

General exemptions from inspection or copying of public records. (1) AGENCY ADMINISTRATION.-- ... (a) All criminal intelligence and criminal investigative information received by a criminal justice agency prior to January 25, 1979, is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
(b) Whenever criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information held by a non-Florida criminal justice agency is available to a Florida criminal justice agency only on a confidential or similarly restricted basis, the Florida criminal justice agency may obtain and use such information in accordance with the conditions imposed by the providing agency. (c)1. Active criminal intelligence information and active criminal investigative information are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.

2.a. A request made by a law enforcement agency to inspect or copy a public record that is in the custody of another agency and the custodian's response to the request, and any information that would identify whether a law enforcement agency has requested or received that public record are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution, during the period in which the information constitutes active criminal intelligence information or active criminal investigative information. b. The law enforcement agency that made the request to inspect or copy a public record shall give notice to the custodial agency when the criminal intelligence information or criminal investigative information is no longer active so that the request made by the law enforcement agency, the custodian's response to the request, and information that would identify whether the law enforcement agency had requested or received that public record are available to the public. c. This exemption is remedial in nature, and it is the intent of the Legislature that the exemption be applied to requests for information received before, on, or after the effective date of this paragraph. (d) Any information revealing surveillance techniques or procedures or personnel is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.
Any comprehensive inventory of state and local law enforcement resources compiled pursuant to part I, chapter 23, and any comprehensive policies or plans compiled by a criminal justice agency pertaining to the mobilization, deployment, or tactical operations involved in responding to emergencies, as defined in s. 252.34(3), are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution and unavailable for inspection, except by personnel authorized by a state or local law enforcement agency, the office of the Governor, the Department of Legal Affairs, the Department of Law Enforcement, or the Department of Community Affairs as having an official need for access to the inventory or comprehensive policies or plans. (e) Any information revealing the substance of a confession of a person arrested is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution, until such time as the criminal case is finally determined by adjudication, dismissal, or other final disposition. (f) Any information revealing the identity of a confidential informant or a confidential source is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I ... [all emphasis supplied]

http://tinyurl.com/8ggcq2

~What will an appellate court say about what was done here prior to trial?

[AlohaRainbow]

1.=In none of the other cases mentioned above was there thousands of pages of official doc dumps directly from the offices of LE and SA. These dumps were slowly spread out over 6 months and include obvious hearsay and inadmissible evidence and statements, none of which had been considered as proper by any court.

2.=The Sunshine Act does not authorize the release of police investigative files as many contend as they are exempt from the Act by the Act itself: Everything that has been released by LE and state attorney is exempt from the Sunshine Law disclosure requirements and should have not been released.
*snip*http://tinyurl.com/8ggcq2

~What will an appellate court say about what was done here prior to trial?
what does the below mean, then? i interpreted it to mean that any records provided to the "person arrested" (defendant, via atty if that's the case) is not exempt (unless the court ordered the records to be sealed)??

119.011 Definitions.--As used in this chapter, the term:
c) "Criminal intelligence information" and "criminal investigative information" shall not include:

1. The time, date, location, and nature of a reported crime.

2. The name, sex, age, and address of a person arrested or of the victim of a crime except as provided in s. 119.071(2)(h).

3. The time, date, and location of the incident and of the arrest.

4. The crime charged.

5. Documents given or required by law or agency rule to be given to the person arrested, except as provided in s. 119.071(2)(h), and, except that the court in a criminal case may order that certain information required by law or agency rule to be given to the person arrested be maintained in a confidential manner and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1) until released at trial if it is found that the release of such information would:

a. Be defamatory to the good name of a victim or witness or would jeopardize the safety of such victim or witness; and

b. Impair the ability of a state attorney to locate or prosecute a codefendant.

[starling]

NOTE TO FUTURE MURDERERS:

If you want a positively fair and unbiased trial, then don't wait 31 days until someone notices your child is missing. Also, don't make up a kidnap story. Don't make up a "nanny has the baby on a three week vacation story". Don't throw your friends under the bus.

If you are looking for a fair trial, don't create excess drama in the case that attracts the media. Simply kill your child, report them missing, and let the chips fall. Then, you will receive an unbiased jury that has probably never heard about your case.

Casey will receive a fair trial. It will appear to some that she does not, because in my opinion, I believe the state will have a very strong case and it will be an air tight case.

JMHO. (p.s. sarcasm is appropriate on one line, so don't flame me.)

Bravo
And no matter how Baez tries to package it..it's still going to be burnt toast stuck in a fresh loaf


JMO

[Grins]

what does the below mean, then? i interpreted it to mean that any records provided to the "person arrested" (defendant, via atty if that's the case) is not exempt (unless the court ordered the records to be sealed)??

119.011 Definitions.--As used in this chapter, the term:
c) "Criminal intelligence information" and "criminal investigative information" shall not include:

1. The time, date, location, and nature of a reported crime.

2. The name, sex, age, and address of a person arrested or of the victim of a crime except as provided in s. 119.071(2)(h).

3. The time, date, and location of the incident and of the arrest.

4. The crime charged.

5. Documents given or required by law or agency rule to be given to the person arrested, except as provided in s. 119.071(2)(h), and, except that the court in a criminal case may order that certain information required by law or agency rule to be given to the person arrested be maintained in a confidential manner and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1) until released at trial if it is found that the release of such information would:

a. Be defamatory to the good name of a victim or witness or would jeopardize the safety of such victim or witness; and

b. Impair the ability of a state attorney to locate or prosecute a codefendant.Hi Aloha Rainbow!
It means what it says:
=the exemption applies to everyone except the person arrested. He can get the info in discovery generally BUT even he may not get info if the court finds that to give it to defendant would be
a. Be defamatory to the good name of a victim or witness or would jeopardize the safety of such victim or witness; and

b. Impair the ability of a state attorney to locate or prosecute a codefendant.

=this is a definition section only applicable to defendant and does not say anywhere that the public is entitled to "Criminal intelligence information" and "criminal investigative information."
This is the way LE has operated through hundreds of years and the last thing they want is to release confidential case material prior to trial! Ask a detective and prosecutor you know.
Now we have an appeal issue which may cause a reversal of a conviction. Do we want that?
~~
Look again:
"c) "Criminal intelligence information" and "criminal investigative information" shall not include: ...

5. Documents given or required by law or agency rule to be given to the person arrested, except as provided in s. 119.071(2)(h), and, except that the court in a criminal case may order that certain information required by law or agency rule to be given to the person arrested be maintained in a confidential manner and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1) until released at trialif it is found that the release of such information would[/B]:
a. Be defamatory to the good name of a victim or witness or would jeopardize the safety of such victim or witness; and
b. Impair the ability of a state attorney to locate or prosecute a codefendant"

[Grins]

My husband travels a lot, he's a workaholic, and only watches sports. He did watch Dateline with me, but that's all he really knows about this.

Last week he called from Korea to ask if I knLOL ew about the 300 page doc dump.LOL amazing Cherish [great nic!]
=well scratch Korea for a COV site!

[Grins]

This case will be considered on appeal. Did the trial judge err in denying defense motions in October 2008 and thereafter to order a stop to the release of investigative material?

Recall that such material was released starting in July 2008 and defense did not ask for discovery until October. How does LE defend those releases July to October since no statute authorizes it?

Supreme Court of Florida

FLORIDA FREEDOM NEWSPAPERS, INC., Petitioner,
v
ROBERT L. McCRARY, JR., Circuit Judge, Fourteenth
Judicial Circuit, State of Florida, Respondent.

February 11, 1988
SHAW, J.

520 So2d 32

"In summary, there is no first amendment right of access
to pretrial discovery material. There is in Florida a statutory
right of access to such material when it becomes a public
record, but that statutory right must be balanced against the
constitutional rights of a fair trial and due process.

There is no constitutional impediment to a court prohibiting prosecutors, defense counsel, witnesses, and other interested parties
involved in the case before the court from making prejudicial
pretrial comments which are intended for publication.
We approve the decision below.
It is so ordered..."
[emphasis supplied]

http://tinyurl.com/cpm64vSupreme

[Grins]

Trial watchers! Can you name another case where LE and SA made thousands of pages of doc dumps from their offices prior to trial? [not leaks here, official releases]

Have you ever seen in any case in all your life where all this is given to the media prior to trial:
=all the expert reports, FBI reports, private family emails, private telephone records, search warrant affidavits, private computer seizures and reports of searches and contents, photographs of crime scenes and automobiles, witness interrogation videos and transcripts, defendant interrogations with transcripts and audio and more plus all the rest to come~some this very week!

I have not seen the like in Florida or anywhere ever. This is not an issue of pretrial publicity; we have had many of those.

These are some of the issues in this case:

=what are the consequences of case investigative and intelligence material gathered by law enforcement released to media prior to defense requesting discovery and the veritable flood of such over seven months and continuing by LE and the state attorney
and
what effect does that have upon the prospective jury pool
and
whether such was likely to be prejudicial to a defendant in a pending murder case
and
whether a fair trial is possible under these unique circumstances
and
whether sanctions will be imposed for any conduct by any party in interest.

[SavannahStar]

Wonderful post, as always, Grins. :thumbup:

I can answer your first two questions with a resounding, NO, NEVER!!!

:smile:

[n/t]

Grins, if it's such a big no no, why isn't the defense doing anything to stop it? Have they? I don't mean whining to Geraldo or any camera that's put in Baez's face!

My understanding is when discovery documents are requested, the documents become public. They're not "released" to the media per se. The media gets a hold of them as is their right to do so.

[Grins]

Wonderful post, as always, Grins. :thumbup:

I can answer your first two questions with a resounding, NO, NEVER!!!

:smile:Ahhhhh SavannahStar, you give me courage to struggle on~~
,,,,,,,,, :rolleyes:

[Grins]

Grins, if it's such a big no no, why isn't the defense doing anything to stop it? Have they? I don't mean whining to Geraldo or any camera that's put in Baez's face!

My understanding is when discovery documents are requested, the documents become public. They're not "released" to the media per se. The media gets a hold of them as is their right to do so.On July 28, 2008 JB filed a motion to prevent publication of D's jail conversations and other prejudicial material. This was only 13 days after C was declared missing.

Much later, the state filed a motion to prevent D's attorney from responding publicly, which ethics rules permit, to the flood of documents.
The same day the state made anther huge doc dump!
Here is the info on the July 28, 2008 defense motion.
http://www.wesh.com/news/17026786/detail.html

"Motion Denied To Block Anthony's Phone Calls
Judge Says He Was Going To Err On Side Of First Amendment
July 29, 2008
ORLANDO, Fla. -- In a hearing on Tuesday afternoon, Judge Stan Strickland denied the motion filed by Casey Anthony's attorney, Jose Baez, asking that jailhouse phone calls made from the mother of a missing toddler cease to be released.
Strickland said he was going to err on the side of the First Amendment..

..Baez said he also feels that the information out there has negatively portrayed his client.

..Eric Dunlap from the
Orange County Sheriff's Office also went to the podium during the hearing to argue the motion filed by Baez. He said that what has been released is simply public record, and that the sheriff's office should be able to conduct their own investigation and make decisions about what information goes out and what stays with them -- not Casey Anthony, her attorney and her family...

The court requested that the attorney for the
Orlando Sentinel be a part of the hearing to represent the media.
She said the information is public record, just like a mug shot. She also said that secrecy is not the answer in a case like this -- transparency and openness are.

Baez said the argument that the information being released is not sensitive is absurd.

Strickland told Baez that, through his motion, he and the Anthonys want to dictate the flow of information -- contrary to the First Amendment. The judge described the conversations as "sterile."

..Baez filed the motion Monday, asking that the flow of information be cut off to protect his client's right to a fair trial and to protect the integrity of the investigation.

Sheriff's spokesman Deputy Carlos Padilla said so far the releases have not harmed the investigation."
http://www.wesh.com/news/17026786/detail.html

Investigative material at best may only be released after D asks for discovery which was October. This release by LE was JULY.
D may be able to get a fair trial but why did the prosecutor and LE make it much more difficult and jeopardize their own trial by publishing so much prejudicial material, much of which they knew was inadmissible in court? [such as a private email by an uncle saying he thinks D killed her daughter.]

What do you think of the ruling by the judge? If we are entitled to see all police files and all discovery delivered to defense counsel, where is the rest of it?

Most especially, where is the report about any fingerprints on the duct tape? Did the FBI forget about that when they told us about the heart on the duct tape? Where is the tox report? Where is the Inventory they said was attached to the warrant to search?
Where is all the material asked for by defense last October?

[n/t]

I didn't follow the Jessica Lunsford case as close as I am with this one....but here is one example ..

====
BLOOM: Because we know what the evidence is. Florida has Sunshine Laws, and this is all public information. There are several square inches of Jessica Lunsford's blood found on the mattress in his bedroom.

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:SrxVde4BfYAJ:transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0607/11/lkl.01.html+jessica+lunsford,+sunshine+law&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=12

[n/t]

Carlie Brucia murder case...

Media win right to examine photographs


http://www.brechner.org/reports/2006/01jan2006.pdf

[Grins]

n/t
Are you saying that in those 2 cases we had the same quantity of detailed doc dumps as here????????????

[n/t]

n/t
Are you saying that in those 2 cases we had the same quantity of detailed doc dumps as here????????????

I don't know. I said I didn't follow the Jessica Lunsford case as closely as I did this one. I didn't follow the Carlie Brucia murder case at all. All I'm doing is giving you examples of the 2 cases where the Sunshine Law and information released to the public. As you can see, Lisa Bloom noted the blood evidence and she said this was public record!

[Grins]

Unfair Choices
If you are arrested and charged with a crime you are faced with an unfair, outrageous dilemma.

=you have a right to obtain discovery of the evidence against you from the state,
BUT
=if you exercise your right to discovery you will thereby make possible the release to the media all of the evidence against you!
[That is, according to the current interpretation of the Sunshine Act which I believe is incorrect and will be amended to clarify or struck down by an appellate court]

Why should you have to make such a decision? It is unfair to penalize you with the unfavorable pretrial release of otherwise exempt and confidential case investigation information solely because you exercised a statutory right to discovery.
SO
what do you do?

Get discovery and see the case file on TV that night
or
give up your right to discovery, keep the case info out of the news and thereby hinder your ability to defend yourself?
How would you feel?

This is unconstitutional interference with the right to informed counsel, a fair trial and due process of law.

[SavannahStar]

n/t
Are you saying that in those 2 cases we had the same quantity of detailed doc dumps as here????????????


They sure don't, IMO. At least the Jessica Lunsford case which I am much more familiar with, since it happened just a couple of counties north of me, here in FL. We had NOTHING like what we have in the Caylee case, with that one. Absolutely not comparable.

[n/t]

They sure don't, IMO. At least the Jessica Lunsford case which I am much more familiar with, since it happened just a couple of counties north of me, here in FL. We had NOTHING like what we have in the Caylee case, with that one. Absolutely not comparable.

It's not comparable because in this case....the MOTHER is the accused murderer! A young 22 year old who never reported her child missing. Her mother did after 31 days. It has everything....almost soap operish! It grabs the audience and that's what the media wants for ratings so they will get a hold of any document that is released to make it "bomshell" or "breaking news".

No the two cases are not comparable but the Sunshine Law applied to both. Whether the media took advantage of the public documents in Couey trial is irrelevant. They are in this case.

[msgatorslayer]

They sure don't, IMO. At least the Jessica Lunsford case which I am much more familiar with, since it happened just a couple of counties north of me, here in FL. We had NOTHING like what we have in the Caylee case, with that one. Absolutely not comparable.

Agreed, Savannah.

Alot of information was given in the Lunsford case. But the docs weren't released. The media just said what was in them, for the most part. Course, anyone could have ordered a copy for themselves. Things like the autopsy, the cocaine traces on the bags, we knew she was tied with speaker wire, that her blood was on the mattress, etc.

The biggest doc dump didn't occur until days prior to the trial trying to happen in Lake County. That is when Couey's full confession, in audio and print was released. Alot of the jail guards who he talked to. And many interviews with the family, IIRC.

There were also the videos of interrogations that LE did on Gramps Lunsford that didn't come to light till well after Couey was on DR. When ML was suing LE. So, alot of things were never brought to light.

JMO

[Regina.Lampert]

Most of the trials I have followed have been out of Texas and CA, so no, I can't cite the ones I've followed (which clearly do not have the Sunshine laws in effect) to show these doc dumps are the exception rather than the rule. I do hope however everyone realizes there is a HUGE difference between discovery and those videos of the visits from the Anthony family. As for discovery, the state sought a gag order, but Baez fought it.

I do know however that the judge in this case knows Florida law better than posters on a message board. To automatically assume that this WILL be an appellate issue on down the road is absurd and implies this judge is a moron, or is in the Anthony camp.

As for blaming this on LE, this was out of LE's hands. To suggest it's their doing tells me all I need to know about one's true knowledge of the matter.

Oh, and correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't it Baez who wanted the last video released because he said it was going to show how heavy handed LE had been where this case was concerned? My guess is, since we know Baez was out of town when George and Cindy visited Casey, in what, late August, he somehow felt since he told Casey no visitors, that it somehow is LE's fault?

Spare me, please.

Great to see you Ray!! :seeya: You're right, brilliant baez filed a special motion for the 8/14 video tape to show that LE did something "illegal." I agree with you, seems many posters do not understand the sunshine law in Florida. I have complete faith in Judge Strickland, who I am certain knows the entire law, not just snippets and comprehends it so he can apply it to this case.

I am not so sure baez does.

As for the question How is Casey Anthony going to get a fair Trial? There 's not a doubt in my mind that she will have her criminal rights, as they all do and receive a fair trial. The Judge will see to it.

A much better question to me, is will the people of the State of Florida get a fair trial. Afterall, they are facing a defendant and witnesses who are proven liars. Not to mention an attorney who had to be reprimanded for inappropriate contact with his client in her jailcell and attempting to sneak in contraband.

Also, an "expert" who was publicly admonished by a Judge, during another high profile case, for removing and hiding critical evidence from the crimescene, so the prosecutors couldn't use it at trial.

Yep, my concern is fairness for the State.

[Regina.Lampert]

Did we ever find out what LE allegedly did that was illegal? I've never heard.

As always, it's great reading you too, my friend.:seeya:

I'm not sure I'm right on this, but I thought it was the fact that baez left "instructions" that no one was to see his client and then mommy and daddy show up, perhaps thru the suggestion of Sheriff Beary and company.

As usual, a baseless claim on his part, imo. casey anthony decides who she sees and who she does not, not him.

[n/t]

Agreed, Savannah.

Alot of information was given in the Lunsford case. But the docs weren't released. The media just said what was in them, for the most part. Course, anyone could have ordered a copy for themselves. Things like the autopsy, the cocaine traces on the bags, we knew she was tied with speaker wire, that her blood was on the mattress, etc.

The biggest doc dump didn't occur until days prior to the trial trying to happen in Lake County. That is when Couey's full confession, in audio and print was released. Alot of the jail guards who he talked to. And many interviews with the family, IIRC.

There were also the videos of interrogations that LE did on Gramps Lunsford that didn't come to light till well after Couey was on DR. When ML was suing LE. So, alot of things were never brought to light.

JMO

How did the media know what was in them if they were never released? TIA

Is Lisa Bloom lying when she said the information is public record (see my post above)? If you look at the transcript...Geragos argued why have a trial...in reference to the Sunshine Law.

[Grins]

July 28, 2008=Motion by Defendant for Gag Order preventing release of video as well as other prejudicial case information by LE and SA.


November 26, 2008 Motion by the State for Gag Order preventing only the Anthony Family and Attorney Baez from making public statements about the case. No request was made to prevent release of case information to the media.

=============================

On July 28, 2008 defense filed a motion to prevent publication of D's jail conversations and other prejudicial material. This was only 13 days after Caylee was finally reported missing.

"Motion Denied To Block Anthony's Phone Calls
Judge Says He Was Going To Err On Side Of First Amendment
July 29, 2008
ORLANDO, Fla. -- In a hearing on Tuesday afternoon, Judge Stan Strickland denied the motion filed by Casey Anthony's attorney, Jose Baez, asking that jailhouse phone calls made from the mother of a missing toddler cease to be released.
Strickland said he was going to err on the side of the First Amendment..

...Baez said he also feels that the information out there has negatively portrayed his client.

..Eric Dunlap from the
Orange County Sheriff's Office also went to the podium during the hearing to argue the motion filed by Baez. He said that what has been released is simply public record, and that the sheriff's office should be able to conduct their own investigation and make decisions about what information goes out and what stays with them -- not Casey Anthony, her attorney and her family...
...
Baez said the argument that the information being released is not sensitive is absurd.

Strickland told Baez that, through his motion, he and the Anthonys want to dictate the flow of information -- contrary to the First Amendment. The judge described the conversations as "sterile."

...Baez filed the motion Monday, asking that the flow of information be cut off to protect his client's right to a fair trial and to protect the integrity of the investigation.

Sheriff's spokesman Deputy Carlos Padilla said so far the releases have not harmed the investigation."
http://www.wesh.com/news/17026786/detail.html

Investigative material at best may only be released after D asks for discovery which was October. This release by LE was JULY.
D may be able to get a fair trial but why did the prosecutor and LE make it much more difficult and jeopardize their own trial by publishing so much prejudicial material, much of which they knew was inadmissible in court? [such as a private email by an uncle saying he thinks D killed her daughter.]

===========================
Judge Denies Gag Order in Caylee Anthony Case

November 26, 2008
...
..."Today, Strickland denied the motion.

'The State Attorney's[/] office argued that [b]the defense team, as well as the Anthony family's lust for the 'limelight' may well sabotage the potential jury pool when the case is ultimately tried. While this argument has some appeal it does not rise to the level of being a serious and imminent threat to the administration of justice,' Strickland wrote in his order. 'Further, this court is confident that even with a 'gag order' the publicity and media attention would continue unabated.'"
[emphasis supplied in all of above]

http://blogs.discovery.com/criminal_report/2008/11/judge-denies-ga.html

[msgatorslayer]

How did the media know what was in them if they were never released? TIA

Is Lisa Bloom lying when she said the information is public record (see my post above)? If you look at the transcript...Geragos argued why have a trial...in reference to the Sunshine Law.

The media went to the courthouse and got their own copy/ies. "Released' as in through Discovery, and no longer being something vital to the case which can be held back through the Sunshine Laws.

They'd say, on the news, 500 pages of new information today, showing stacks of paper in their hands. They'd give a quick synopsis of the info, similar to what the Orlando outlets are doing in this case. BUT, they didn't place all 500 pages on the net like what is being done in this case.

Anyone could have, and still can, go down to the courthouse and get their own copies. You just pay per page copy, and must show ID. It is all public record. You don't need a relation to the criminal or civil files that you're seeking unless it is for a minor. In that case, only the parents or lawyers can get the papers.

[caphill]

Hi Grins and tx.

You pointed out one of my biggest downfalls. Not going back to the date of something happening and instead using the date it was released to the public. (bows head in shame) I start out with that in mind then obviously lose it in my train of thought.

Back on track,

If you can recall my mention of the state holding back the autopsy photo's and how my line of thinking was the same as yours (well on all the evidence of this nature) "why the delay/stall". The state and the defense were at a stand still about this where it was taken back into court for a Judge to decide.

The state IMO can not shake the fact that something is being sold from the defense whether it be the family, Baez or Casey. Although the state has been very careful and not making a public accusation what has come to light is Baez being under investigation.

Who filed that? You have to concede that these high salaried high profile experts look awfully suspicious. First they claimed pro bono then they recanted their claim to it's anonymous.

Finger prints the duct tape and the heart shaped adhesive scream to me tabloid must have material and if as you've referred to the "snake" photo brought in $10,000.00 can you imagine what the above information w/photo can bring in.

You posted an article (which I'd like to thank you) about an another attorney weighed in (name escapes me) who mention there are still no prints. What didn't escape me was his asking price of 1 million to take this case. How much and who is paying this defense teams experts?

Two parter.
So we go back to ethics. Is the state overstepping it's boundries if they do not release these items as they feel these items are being sold? Is it the state who filed to have Baez investigated? Is it as Baez says none of anyones business?

How does the mother being on trial who has legal rights to this even with the Dale Ernhardt law (her right to have the autopsy photo) now being the defendant get overruled. Is there a stipulation there? I mention this again even though the trial court ruled the procautions to be put in place that Baez would not be a part of this. How about his client taking a different route with a promise of future profit to be paid by her existing attorneys/experts. The wimpy plan. I'd gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.

As I've said the state is being very careful not to point the finger and name names of who may sell or release these other to say or ask WHAT IF they are obtained by nefarious means. They're asking for an upfront word from the defense that EVERY procaution be taking and they want it in writing.

Is it REAL or just IMPLIED that the State IMO won't trust the defense on an ethical level?


To cut to the chase.....The arguments that the defense might use any discovery and/or autopsy pictures to profit now or in the future is most ridiculous. Any prosecutors who wants to delay or hold on to discovery could use the same argument they don't trust the defense.

This argument is prejudicial to the defendant and her choice of counsel IMO.

Where have the leaks been coming from in this case? Who is the witness for the State that has been reported selling pics from the crime scene? What has been sold, released or sold to the media from the defense?

Has it been denied that someone from the prosecution anonymously sent ethics complaint to the Fla Bar? It took only 10 days for the Fla Bar to close and dismiss the complaint against Mr. Baez?

[Neffy]

To cut to the chase.....The arguments that the defense might use any discovery and/or autopsy pictures to profit now or in the future is most ridiculous. Any prosecutors who wants to delay or hold on to discovery could use the same argument they don't trust the defense.

This argument is prejudicial to the defendant and her choice of counsel IMO.

Where have the leaks been coming from in this case? Who is the witness for the State that has been reported selling pics from the crime scene? What has been sold, released or sold to the media from the defense?

Has it been denied that someone from the prosecution anonymously sent ethics complaint to the Fla Bar? It took only 10 days for the Fla Bar to close and dismiss the complaint against Mr. Baez?

Prejudical or ethical complaint? Who filed it. From my understanding many attorney's are shouting foul over this.

I believe we heard the arguments. In light of the new evidence could be re-opening the complaint.

If not I guess Baez could use your thought and file a the "ridiculous" motion.

[n/t]

The media went to the courthouse and got their own copy/ies. "Released' as in through Discovery, and no longer being something vital to the case which can be held back through the Sunshine Laws.

They'd say, on the news, 500 pages of new information today, showing stacks of paper in their hands. They'd give a quick synopsis of the info, similar to what the Orlando outlets are doing in this case. BUT, they didn't place all 500 pages on the net like what is being done in this case.

Anyone could have, and still can, go down to the courthouse and get their own copies. You just pay per page copy, and must show ID. It is all public record. You don't need a relation to the criminal or civil files that you're seeking unless it is for a minor. In that case, only the parents or lawyers can get the papers.

Thanks for the reply MsGator. If I understand correctly, the difference in this case is that the media gets ahold of the documents through the OCSO via the internet versus going down to the courthouse to physically get the documents? Is that correct?

I hope you know I'm not picking on you, I just want to understand the difference between this case versus Lunsford case as to the discovery documents.

:smile:

[SavannahStar]

All your grandstanding Grims does NOTHING to show that the videos are automatically public record. It is not bound by the same rules of discovery. Jose' only wanted to block what he wanted blocked. So, why object to the gag? Why was he the one who wanted the Aug. 14th (thanks Scamp for providing the actual date since I had forgotten it), released?

Why didn't HE ask for a gag on discovery?

Regardless of who does or does not like the fact that the videos were released, it fails to address what grounds the judge would have had to withhold them. He erred on the side of Florida law, whether you like that or not.

Now, I am fully aware that ANY issue could theoretically be cause for an appeal on down the road, and I will NEVER say this will NOT rise to that level, but according to the law as it's written right now, the judge made a correct ruling. The record has been set, so it'll have to be left to the higher courts at this point. My guess is, this is a non issue.


Grandstanding......:confused:

[n/t]

Absolutely. She keeps wanting to post links about discovery and the rules thereof, but fails to take into consideration that the videos were not released because of the rules of discovery.

Grins is a he. :smile:

I agree with you that this is a non issue and that ANY issue could theoretically be cause for an appeal (from your previous post)! People may not agree with the Sunshine Law but it is what it is.

[msgatorslayer]

Thanks for the reply MsGator. If I understand correctly, the difference in this case is that the media gets ahold of the documents through the OCSO via the internet versus going down to the courthouse to physically get the documents? Is that correct?

I hope you know I'm not picking on you, I just want to understand the difference between this case versus Lunsford case as to the discovery documents.

:smile:

YW, and I understand you're not picking on me.

I guess it would depend on if they want to wait till some clerk at the OCSO types or scans the files onto the web or do it themselves.:biggrin: They can save money by waiting for that to happen.

I believe, that even OCSO has to wait till the docs are officially stamped through the clerk of court before putting them to the web.

I just thought of another case where information was put to the web in a case. But the docs are listed through the Tampa Clerk of Court. Not the LE. And are under 'high profile'.

http://www.hillsclerk.com/PublicWeb/HighProfileCases.aspx?id=176

[msgatorslayer]

Absolutely. She keeps wanting to post links about discovery and the rules thereof, but fails to take into consideration that the videos were not released because of the rules of discovery.

They were released because they are public record. Anyone wanting more info on this aspect can do a search for Nick Bollea. He wasn't to happy about it either.:tongueside:

[Grins]

Thank you NatalieB.

[johnielee333]

she will get a fair trial. not everyone pays attn to crime & things of the sort. believe me, i have some friends here in toledo that has never heard about this case at all. i also have a brother in-law who lives down there in orlando fl. who has only heard about it when it first came out. all he knows is some girl named casey anthony's daughter was missing & casey told a bunch of lies & got arrested & he saw pics of caylee hanging in places. he heard it by mistake while he was in the emergency room when it came on the news. he never listens to or watches news,never reads the paper or anything & never watches any kind of court cases or anything. i'm sure there are alot more like him down there. i used to be like him up until the OJ murder case. now i'm all over it. i have to know everything about whatever it is thats going on. so yes she will get a fair trial IMO

[fairlaw]

Once the trial is moved out of Orlando and the public learns how much of what was fed to them by the Cops, was pure crap, she can get a fair trial.

I do not believe that there was tape around Caylee's mouth, with or without a heart sticker. The tape likely was used to close the bag and became dislodged and ended up around the head area of the body.

If Casey ever comes clean on this, I think that it will become clear that Caylee either died because of an accident or that she was taken and killed by someone else.

For me, the whole wrapped in a Winnie the Pooh blanket and toys inside, tells me that this was not an intentional murder by Casey. Who kills their child, meliciously, then wraps them in their blanket and puts toys with them.

The whole clorofoam (sp) issue is moot. A dead body exudes a clorofoam like gas.

Casey's boyfriend had a "funny" pic on his myspace. Casey saw it. She may have also found it funny, and was searching for that pic so she could place the pic on her myspace. To Youngsters, it could easilly be seen as funny, no deep dark sickness there.

The disgusting total disrespect for women displayed by many young men today is common, and many young women laugh at their own expense.

I believe that the DA's case will pretty much fall apart in a fair trial.

[SavannahStar]

Once the trial is moved out of Orlando and the public learns how much of what was fed to them by the Cops, was pure crap, she can get a fair trial.

I do not believe that there was tape around Caylee's mouth, with or without a heart sticker. The tape likely was used to close the bag and became dislodged and ended up around the head area of the body.

If Casey ever comes clean on this, I think that it will become clear that Caylee either died because of an accident or that she was taken and killed by someone else.

For me, the whole wrapped in a Winnie the Pooh blanket and toys inside, tells me that this was not an intentional murder by Casey. Who kills their child, meliciously, then wraps them in their blanket and puts toys with them.

The whole clorofoam (sp) issue is moot. A dead body exudes a clorofoam like gas.

Casey's boyfriend had a "funny" pic on his myspace. Casey saw it. She may have also found it funny, and was searching for that pic so she could place the pic on her myspace. To Youngsters, it could easilly be seen as funny, no deep dark sickness there.

The disgusting total disrespect for women displayed by many young men today is common, and many young women laugh at their own expense.

I believe that the DA's case will pretty much fall apart in a fair trial.

Well now that's an interesting post.

[n/t]

Once the trial is moved out of Orlando and the public learns how much of what was fed to them by the Cops, was pure crap, she can get a fair trial.

I do not believe that there was tape around Caylee's mouth, with or without a heart sticker. The tape likely was used to close the bag and became dislodged and ended up around the head area of the body.

If Casey ever comes clean on this, I think that it will become clear that Caylee either died because of an accident or that she was taken and killed by someone else.

For me, the whole wrapped in a Winnie the Pooh blanket and toys inside, tells me that this was not an intentional murder by Casey. Who kills their child, meliciously, then wraps them in their blanket and puts toys with them.

The whole clorofoam (sp) issue is moot. A dead body exudes a clorofoam like gas.

Casey's boyfriend had a "funny" pic on his myspace. Casey saw it. She may have also found it funny, and was searching for that pic so she could place the pic on her myspace. To Youngsters, it could easilly be seen as funny, no deep dark sickness there.

The disgusting total disrespect for women displayed by many young men today is common, and many young women laugh at their own expense.

I believe that the DA's case will pretty much fall apart in a fair trial.


So you believe a stranger would murder this child, wrap her in her favourite blanket, looks for a laundry bag, puts her body in a laundry bag then goes to search for garbage bags, puts her in a garbage bag but before sealing the garbage bag with duct tape, proceeds to locate a toy to put in the bag?

:unsure:

ETA: Did the stranger in your scenario bring the stuff? If not, where did they get the blankie, laundry bag, garbage bag, duct tape?

[johnielee333]

Once the trial is moved out of Orlando and the public learns how much of what was fed to them by the Cops, was pure crap, she can get a fair trial.

I do not believe that there was tape around Caylee's mouth, with or without a heart sticker. The tape likely was used to close the bag and became dislodged and ended up around the head area of the body.

If Casey ever comes clean on this, I think that it will become clear that Caylee either died because of an accident or that she was taken and killed by someone else.

For me, the whole wrapped in a Winnie the Pooh blanket and toys inside, tells me that this was not an intentional murder by Casey. Who kills their child, meliciously, then wraps them in their blanket and puts toys with them.

The whole clorofoam (sp) issue is moot. A dead body exudes a clorofoam like gas.

Casey's boyfriend had a "funny" pic on his myspace. Casey saw it. She may have also found it funny, and was searching for that pic so she could place the pic on her myspace. To Youngsters, it could easilly be seen as funny, no deep dark sickness there.

The disgusting total disrespect for women displayed by many young men today is common, and many young women laugh at their own expense.

I believe that the DA's case will pretty much fall apart in a fair trial.

ok so we know how you feel about it now but in the end you will feel different. you'll see. mark my word. Casey is Guilty of Murder & will get LWOP. IMO-JMO

[gnm109]

Once the trial is moved out of Orlando and the public learns how much of what was fed to them by the Cops, was pure crap, she can get a fair trial.

I do not believe that there was tape around Caylee's mouth, with or without a heart sticker. The tape likely was used to close the bag and became dislodged and ended up around the head area of the body.

If Casey ever comes clean on this, I think that it will become clear that Caylee either died because of an accident or that she was taken and killed by someone else.

At that point, if she "ever comes clean" it won't matter since she has zero credibility right now. Do you think anyone would believe a story that it "was an accident" at this point? If my child had an accident and was injured or killed, I'd call 911, wouldn't you?

For me, the whole wrapped in a Winnie the Pooh blanket and toys inside, tells me that this was not an intentional murder by Casey. Who kills their child, meliciously, then wraps them in their blanket and puts toys with them.

I can answer that - an uncaring, lying, cheating, hedonistic, antisocial murdress, that's who.

The whole clorofoam (sp) issue is moot. A dead body exudes a clorofoam like gas.

That would be a good theory had someone on a computer in the house not looked up chloroform. You mention a "a chloroform-like gas. " And which gas might that be? Maybe it was really chloroform.

Casey's boyfriend had a "funny" pic on his myspace. Casey saw it. She may have also found it funny, and was searching for that pic so she could place the pic on her myspace. To Youngsters, it could easilly be seen as funny, no deep dark sickness there.

The disgusting total disrespect for women displayed by many young men today is common, and many young women laugh at their own expense.

I believe that the DA's case will pretty much fall apart in a fair trial.

I sincerely hope that she geta a fari trial. I also hope that the people of Florida get a fair trial, too. The criminal justice system is designed to protect the people at large from miscreants like CA. Hopeflly, it will work here.

[??WHATthe??]

Sorry for my bluntness... but...

The only way I see this trial as being fair is when all twelve of the jurors picked stand up... walk over... duct tape her fugly face really good... put her up on the Judges bench so he can slam a heart shapped gavel down on her vile mouth... then wrap "it" all up by putting "it" in a trash bag and throwing "it" in the dumpster at the back of the Court House!

That's what I would call a "fair" trial for "it"... but that's just me...:blink:

Done with my opinionated rant... all IMO of course.

[msgatorslayer]

Sorry for my bluntness... but...

The only way I see this trial as being fair is when all twelve of the jurors picked stand up... walk over... duct tape her fugly face really good... put her up on the Judges bench so he can slam a heart shapped gavel down on her vile mouth... then wrap "it" all up by putting "it" in a trash bag and throwing "it" in the dumpster at the back of the Court House!

That's what I would call a "fair" trial for "it"... but that's just me...:blink:

Done with my opinionated rant... all IMO of course.

:lol: If only!!!

[Mayasmimi]

Watched NG tonight. Just me, or is there some question as to where the trial might be moved to? Out of state??????? Has this ever happened before? Sorry to be so dense.

[Mayasmimi]

First of all, I would think if you're going to use a quote as your signature line that you should at least get the spelling correct. It's Laci Peterson, not Lacy.

As for the rest of your post, you're certainly entitled to any opinion that you want in these here United States, but all you've managed to do IMO, is play a guessing game. There is nothing to suggest that the duct tape was used to close the bag, but you somehow feel this is likely based on nothing? Caylee is in 2 bags. Maybe you can explain how that duct tape got so tangled in her hair that the hair had to be cut away to remove the duct tape?

As for much of the rest of your speculation, the defense will be able to come up with alternatives to explain much of the evidence on an individual basis. It's the totality of it all that they will NEVER be able to overcome. When jurors have a completed puzzle before them, it's my opinion that they will only be able to opt for guilt. I am however willing to hear any and all evidences, speculations, innuendos, and theories that the defense can come up with. When they choose to ignore the evidences that can't be so easily explained away, well, that's when their house of cards will fall.

BTW, I would love to know what you mean about evidence fed to everyone by the cops? There certainly have been a few leaks, but the vast majority of the evidence has come out via the discovery process and/or the videos being released and ARE official documents. Casey's own words are a STRONG part of that evidence. We heard her lies with our own ears, so I'm not sure how you think jurors will ever simply turn the other cheek. We saw the videos (which were discovery) of her cashing Amy's checks and buying beer, sunglasses, clothing, etc...with that money, but then she turns around and claims she'll do anything including stealing to get the resources to look for her daughter? We see her at Fusion night club. Well guess what? She'd not been to Fusion before she started dating Tony, so, we know those photos were taken AFTER Caylee went missing.

Why don't you be a little more specific about what LE has fed us?

Oh, and at trial, if Casey wants to acknowledge that she killed Caylee accidentally, she could use it as part of her defense. It may reduce the charge, but she will have to admit that she did indeed kill her child. There is ZERO chance of that happening, IMO.

I agree that the chloroform is probably going to be a moot point, but for vastly different reasons than you've stated here. Since there was no tissue left, and chloroform does evaporate, they won't be able to prove conclusively that it played a part in the actual death. Searches for it along with neck breaking sure aren't going to help the defense, though.

As for whose case is going to fall apart, I have a 180 degree difference of opinion from you. IF and right now it's only an IF, but IF Casey's prints are on that bag or tape, there won't even be a need to hold a trial (though I am certainly not advocating denying her that basic right). It will already be, game over. Jurors will have NO problem finding Casey guilty. They are going to absolutely hate her. There is just nothing sympathetic about any of her actions. She claims she tried to help LE, but from day 1, you knew she was lying just because her mouth was moving.

AMAZING. Random, I know. Just had to say it.

[msgatorslayer]

Watched NG tonight. Just me, or is there some question as to where the trial might be moved to? Out of state??????? Has this ever happened before? Sorry to be so dense.

It has to stay in Florida. It cannot be moved to another State. No matter what Baez would like to do the law must be followed.

The first thing he needs to do is pick up a copy of "Change of Venue for Dummies" and learn how to file the correct paper work to get the Judge's attention that he wants the trial moved. To another area, of Florida.

[gnm109]

It has to stay in Florida since it's a state case. The Superior Court, or whatever they call it down there, has no jurisdiction to act in another state.

Besides, is there anyone, anywhere that hasn't already formed an opinion about CA's guilt? As far as the jury pool, the case has been so widely publicized, there's little point in moving it anywhere else in Florida.

[Kazzle]

Hi Paula!

While I would like to agree with you regarding jurors taking their responsibility seriously, my two encounters sitting on a jury proved to me that this was definitely not the case. The strong jurors usually are able to be so vocal that some jurors just go with the flow rather than "buck" them.

I sometimes think it is better to have professional jurors.

My experience on a jury was that the jurors were only interested in getting out of there, not reaching the right decision. It was a dwi case and there was video of the defendant who was clearly intoxicated at the scene and then again in the jail. He failed a breathylizer and later his bac indicated he was 3 times over the legal limit. Out of 6 jurors, only two wanted to convict. One was angry because the prosecutor had not "looked" at her enough, one thought the police had beaten the man up and that's why he appeared to be intoxicated ad naseum. Another wanted to go have margaritas with her husband and the deliberations were interfering with that. One juror indicated a severe hatred of authority and refused to even acknowledge the evidence. I felt like I was in a bizarro world once the deliberations started and we began discussing the case. It seemed to me that the 4 jurors hadn;t even been at the same trial I had been at. Two of us did stand up and argue for a conviction and sadly enough, when we made it clear that we weren't going to change unless there was a legitimate reason to do so, the other jurors suddenly changed their votes. So much for matters of the conscience. The point is that you never know what you get in a jury, and they all come with prejudices and issues. Hopefully, there will be a few who are intelligent enough and truly objective enough to follow the evidence. If there was a COV, I have no idea where she would be tried, unless Florida has an agreement with Mars, lol. Her behavior has turned this into a fiasco and she is the only one who can end it, especially for her parents.

[shadoww]

It has to stay in Florida. It cannot be moved to another State. No matter what Baez would like to do the law must be followed.

The first thing he needs to do is pick up a copy of "Change of Venue for Dummies" and learn how to file the correct paper work to get the Judge's attention that he wants the trial moved. To another area, of Florida.

Hi ya gator. Long time no see! How've you been? I think its been since before the other board went down, since I've seen you.

I think my answer to the question, "how will Casey get a fair trial in Orlando"? Its my guess that the upcoming church service for Caylee in the gigantic church is just a sneaky backdoor trick from Baez to get the trial moved. When there are 5-10,000 people show up for the service, all he has to do is go to the judge and say "see all the people who hate Casey, how will she ever be able to get a fair trial here". Why else is there such fanfare for this big service? The service is supposed to be put on by G & C and it will be, but its my guess that its all being orchestrated by Casey & Baez. I could be wrong, but how do we know that this is totally the grandparents idea? I'd love to hear your theories on it.

[Kazzle]

It has to stay in Florida since it's a state case. The Superior Court, or whatever they call it down there, has no jurisdiction to act in another state.

Besides, is there anyone, anywhere that hasn't already formed an opinion about CA's guilt? As far as the jury pool, the case has been so widely publicized, there's little point in moving it anywhere else in Florida.

Often in jurors is a hidden assumption that if the defendant is on trial, he or she has to be guilty. After all, why else would they be on trial? The point is not that jurors come with NO prejudices, but that they put them aside to hear the evidence and allow their decision to flow from the evidence, not those prejudices. No jury is totally without prejedices against a defendant. Its possible to hear and see the evidence and weigh that evidence against the questions they will be required to answer. They won't necessarily decide on yes or no, but may be required to respond to a series of questions. It depends on how the jury charge is written, I think. In this case, its almost impossible to assume she's innocent. She's made a fiasco out of this and she'll be worse at the trial. Just look at her smirking in court. She loves the media attention and she courts it. It will be her show. The Casey Anthony Show. She's fueled all the media attention.

[Kazzle]

Once the trial is moved out of Orlando and the public learns how much of what was fed to them by the Cops, was pure crap, she can get a fair trial.

I do not believe that there was tape around Caylee's mouth, with or without a heart sticker. The tape likely was used to close the bag and became dislodged and ended up around the head area of the body.

If Casey ever comes clean on this, I think that it will become clear that Caylee either died because of an accident or that she was taken and killed by someone else.

For me, the whole wrapped in a Winnie the Pooh blanket and toys inside, tells me that this was not an intentional murder by Casey. Who kills their child, meliciously, then wraps them in their blanket and puts toys with them.

The whole clorofoam (sp) issue is moot. A dead body exudes a clorofoam like gas.

Casey's boyfriend had a "funny" pic on his myspace. Casey saw it. She may have also found it funny, and was searching for that pic so she could place the pic on her myspace. To Youngsters, it could easilly be seen as funny, no deep dark sickness there.

The disgusting total disrespect for women displayed by many young men today is common, and many young women laugh at their own expense.

I believe that the DA's case will pretty much fall apart in a fair trial.

You will b e extremely disappointed. They have more evidence and the totality of the evidence will convict Casey. I jsut pray her parents are able to finally see her for what she is so that they can heal.

[shadoww]

*snipped for space* Now that's an interesting prospective and one I had never would have even thought of. Just because 5000 to 10,000 people show up however, doesn't mean they all feel that Casey is guilty. I can see how Baez might jump on it, though.

Again, I am very hopeful that the trial is moved, for no other reason than to prevent it from becoming an appellate issue. I truly believe the verdict is going to be guilty regardless of where the trial is held. That's assuming we don't get a stealth juror (which is always a possibility).



I don't really mean there has to be 5000-10000 people who think she's guilty, just as long as Baez throws it out there so the judge can see "how much of a public enemy she is", regardless of how many of that large group actually DO think she's guilty. I think if he figured it would be a good tool to use, why not use it? He would have no way of knowing how many people at that service think she's guilty or not but as long as it helped his case.................Thats just my opinion and I don't have anything to base it on, just my own feelings.

I also hope it isn't moved for COV, but I do feel like you, I think it will be a guilty verdict. Where is it going to be held where this case hasn't been number one in the headlines? Maybe only on the moon, and even that's debatable. LOL I am praying for a just and deserved verdict and that little Caylee can finally have some peace.