Caylee 11/02,11/03

[caphill]

Originally Posted by Katprint

Sort of but not exactly. Casey was charged with Aggravated Child Abuse. Florida Statute 827.03(2) defines what Aggravated Child Abuse is i.e. to cause cause "great bodily harm, permanent disfigurement or permanent disability" to a child under the age of 18. Read Count Two on Page Two of the grand jury Indictment. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/media...0/42895889.PDF

IIRC, Aggravated Child Abuse is one of the special circumstances justifying imposition of the death penalty if the child dies.

Katprint
Always only my own opinions

Is the motion to dismiss also arguing that there must a Grand Jury hearing for death penalty procedures? The Oct Grand Jury indictment was not heard as a death penalty case. Is the argument that changing horses in the middle of the stream to a death penalty procedure should not have been done with cause being heard by the Grand Jury?

My layperson opinion was the motion was well presented with good supporting case law? The indictment gave a vague dates and no other facts of where, or how or when.

When the body was found in Dec with no new evidence of when, where or how Caylee died, why did her murder become eligible for the death penalty when the death penalty was not sought for the indictment of premediated murder in Oct?

[Scampi]

Originally Posted by caphill

Is the motion to dismiss also arguing that there must a Grand Jury hearing for death penalty procedures? The Oct Grand Jury indictment was not heard as a death penalty case. Is the argument that changing horses in the middle of the stream to a death penalty procedure should not have been done with cause being heard by the Grand Jury?

My layperson opinion was the motion was well presented with good supporting case law? The indictment gave a vague dates and no other facts of where, or how or when.

When the body was found in Dec with no new evidence of when, where or how Caylee died, why did her murder become eligible for the death penalty when the death penalty was not sought for the indictment of premediated murder in Oct?

I think the duct tape found on the skull had everything to do with this becoming a DP case.

[onlykaty]

Originally Posted by Scampi

I think the duct tape found on the skull had everything to do with this becoming a DP case.

Hi Scampi, I think your right, I remember when this came out as a fact about the duct tape, one of the detectives or lead person in charge of the investigation, was so angry and upset that little Caylee had died a horrible death. Right after that the charges was changed to add the DP. The duct tape has insured that there will not be a defense of accidental death. The nanny, Jessie, stranger theory has all but been a fluke by Casey and the defense, all these of things have little or NO credibility. In fact all the defense have so far is "DELAY"..jmo

[Dtviewer3]

Originally Posted by caphill

Is the motion to dismiss also arguing that there must a Grand Jury hearing for death penalty procedures? The Oct Grand Jury indictment was not heard as a death penalty case. Is the argument that changing horses in the middle of the stream to a death penalty procedure should not have been done with cause being heard by the Grand Jury?

My layperson opinion was the motion was well presented with good supporting case law? The indictment gave a vague dates and no other facts of where, or how or when.

When the body was found in Dec with no new evidence of when, where or how Caylee died, why did her murder become eligible for the death penalty when the death penalty was not sought for the indictment of premediated murder in Oct?

Because her skull was found with duct tape wrapped around her air passages.

It really quite simple..........

[caphill]

Originally Posted by Dtviewer3

Because her skull was found with duct tape wrapped around her air passages.

It really quite simple..........

The fact of the case is the cause of death unknown. This is not my opinion but the official autopsy opinion of Dr. G.

[Dtviewer3]

Originally Posted by caphill

The fact of the case is the cause of death unknown. This is not my opinion but the official autopsy opinion of Dr. G.

It doesnt matter what the 'official autopsy opinion' of the medical examiner is.

The state believes they have enough evidence to prove that not only is Casey responsible for Caylees death, but the circumstances are 'particulary heinous'.
(Dr G also is of the opinion that this was a 'homicide'.)


Like I said, quite simple.........

[LadyHam]

Originally Posted by caphill

The fact of the case is the cause of death unknown. This is not my opinion but the official autopsy opinion of Dr. G.

I don't think that matters. Look at SP. He is sitting on DR right now and they don't know all the specifics of how Laci was murdered either. I think the state has more than we know and I don't believe they would have put the DP back on the table unless it was justified.

[neid_77]

There are just some days!!!!! i would love to give OrlandEast AKA Cindy Anthony a piece of my mind face to face...should see what she wrote on the www.orlandosentinel.com today

she just erks me to NO END!!!

she could give a rats patutee about Caylee Marie the whole family makes me so very very very very very times a millions squared!! SICK

i hope they are charged by the end of this case i really do!

[tmw]

Originally Posted by neid_77

There are just some days!!!!! i would love to give OrlandEast AKA Cindy Anthony a piece of my mind face to face...should see what she wrote on the www.orlandosentinel.com today

she just erks me to NO END!!!

she could give a rats patutee about Caylee Marie the whole family makes me so very very very very very times a millions squared!! SICK

i hope they are charged by the end of this case i really do!

Where exactly am I looking for this?

[Julie Dupree]

Originally Posted by neid_77

There are just some days!!!!! i would love to give OrlandEast AKA Cindy Anthony a piece of my mind face to face...should see what she wrote on the www.orlandosentinel.com today

she just erks me to NO END!!!

she could give a rats patutee about Caylee Marie the whole family makes me so very very very very very times a millions squared!! SICK

i hope they are charged by the end of this case i really do!

Looks like several people posting there agree with you Neid.

[denjet]

Originally Posted by neid_77

There are just some days!!!!! i would love to give OrlandEast AKA Cindy Anthony a piece of my mind face to face...should see what she wrote on the www.orlandosentinel.com today

she just erks me to NO END!!!

she could give a rats patutee about Caylee Marie the whole family makes me so very very very very very times a millions squared!! SICK

i hope they are charged by the end of this case i really do!

Neid, she just sounds as desperate as the defense to me ... she went off the deep end some time ago with her arm-chair lawyering, expertise in EVERY field of forensics, inside knowledge of the workings of law enforcement and government ... and the crazy scenarios (don't get me started here) just keep rolling off of her forked tongue ... she's sounding more and more comical as time goes on ... maybe she should be Baker Acted before she implodes !!

[neid_77]

Originally Posted by denjet

Neid, she just sounds as desperate as the defense to me ... she went off the deep end some time ago with her arm-chair lawyering, expertise in EVERY field of forensics, inside knowledge of the workings of law enforcement and government ... and the crazy scenarios (don't get me started here) just keep rolling off of her forked tongue ... she's sounding more and more comical as time goes on ... maybe she should be Baker Acted before she implodes !!

hey Den i read your comments on there today ABSOLUTELY Brilliant and Bueatiful! she just pushes the wrong buttons for me sometimes i so look forward to posts like yours and everyone else who defends sweet little Caylee Marie on there..I have said this a million times i just cannot find a word one word to describe that family they are so beyond the word orendous!

[djmsmom]

Originally Posted by neid_77

There are just some days!!!!! i would love to give OrlandEast AKA Cindy Anthony a piece of my mind face to face...should see what she wrote on the www.orlandosentinel.com today

she just erks me to NO END!!!

she could give a rats patutee about Caylee Marie the whole family makes me so very very very very very times a millions squared!! SICK

i hope they are charged by the end of this case i really do!

She never ceases to amase me, about the check/fraud charges she states " a personal matter between friends". WOW.

[seeing_eye]

Originally Posted by djmsmom

She never ceases to amase me, about the check/fraud charges she states " a personal matter between friends". WOW.

I think Cindy also thinks that the murder of Caylee is a personal matter between family members. (Meaning that LE and the general public should just butt out!!)

[crimeq]

Originally Posted by djmsmom

She never ceases to amase me, about the check/fraud charges she states " a personal matter between friends". WOW.

A PETTY personal matter between friends. Right. Thirteen criminal counts against her for a PETTY personal matter between friends.

[crimeq]

Originally Posted by djmsmom

She never ceases to amase me, about the check/fraud charges she states " a personal matter between friends". WOW.

But it was just ONE time

[pixiejoolz]

Originally Posted by caphill

Is the motion to dismiss also arguing that there must a Grand Jury hearing for death penalty procedures? The Oct Grand Jury indictment was not heard as a death penalty case. Is the argument that changing horses in the middle of the stream to a death penalty procedure should not have been done with cause being heard by the Grand Jury?

My layperson opinion was the motion was well presented with good supporting case law? The indictment gave a vague dates and no other facts of where, or how or when.

When the body was found in Dec with no new evidence of when, where or how Caylee died, why did her murder become eligible for the death penalty when the death penalty was not sought for the indictment of premediated murder in Oct?

Why would the Grand Jury have anything to do with whether or not this is a DP case? Aren't they simply asked to indict or not indict on the charge according to the evidence that is presented to them at the time?

[caphill]

Originally Posted by pixiejoolz

Why would the Grand Jury have anything to do with whether or not this is a DP case? Aren't they simply asked to indict or not indict on the charge according to the evidence that is presented to them at the time?

I don't know. That is why I posed the question. I trying to understand a portion of the argument in the motion regarding the Grand Jury and death penalty procedures.

This legal argument will be most interesting. The Grand Jury apparently indicted without any argument of evidence regarding the time, where, manner of death or whether there was a death. At the time of Grand Jury hearing there was a missing child and a mother who was lying about her job to her friends, her family and the police. At time there was no evidence other than the LE believed that Casey's lies and money fraud were indicative of her murdering her child.

As the saying goes ....... The Grand Jury can indict a ham sandwich

[LadyHam]

Originally Posted by caphill

I don't know. That is why I posed the question. I trying to understand a portion of the argument in the motion regarding the Grand Jury and death penalty procedures.

This legal argument will be most interesting. The Grand Jury apparently indicted without any argument of evidence regarding the time, where, manner of death or whether there was a death. At the time of Grand Jury hearing there was a missing child and a mother who was lying about her job to her friends, her family and the police. At time there was no evidence other than the LE believed that Casey's lies and money fraud were indicative of her murdering her child.

As the saying goes ....... The Grand Jury can indict a ham sandwich

Bolding by me....

I disagree. I think they had the evidence from the trunk of the car. Specifically the air sample tests showing human decomposition and they also had the hair w/the death band on it that came from a deceased Caylee. I think they also had the testimony (probably from LE officers) the the stench coming from Casey's car was the smell of human decomposition, in their professional opinions. I would hardly call that "no evidence".

[pixiejoolz]

Originally Posted by caphill

I don't know. That is why I posed the question. I trying to understand a portion of the argument in the motion regarding the Grand Jury and death penalty procedures.

This legal argument will be most interesting. The Grand Jury apparently indicted without any argument of evidence regarding the time, where, manner of death or whether there was a death. At the time of Grand Jury hearing there was a missing child and a mother who was lying about her job to her friends, her family and the police. At time there was no evidence other than the LE believed that Casey's lies and money fraud were indicative of her murdering her child.

As the saying goes ....... The Grand Jury can indict a ham sandwich

I would imagine that when LE smelled the stench in the car trunk they had a pretty good idea that there was more to this than just "Casey's lies." And stealing checks and cash isn't fraud, it's theft.

[Ladygator]

If there is so little information in the Grand Jury indictment, as the defense claims, if should be that much EASIER to defend the case.

[Dtviewer3]

Originally Posted by caphill

I don't know. That is why I posed the question. I trying to understand a portion of the argument in the motion regarding the Grand Jury and death penalty procedures.

This legal argument will be most interesting. The Grand Jury apparently indicted without any argument of evidence regarding the time, where, manner of death or whether there was a death. At the time of Grand Jury hearing there was a missing child and a mother who was lying about her job to her friends, her family and the police. At time there was no evidence other than the LE believed that Casey's lies and money fraud were indicative of her murdering her child.

As the saying goes ....... The Grand Jury can indict a ham sandwich

Even though I believe this is a game to you, I have no problem refuting the nonsense.
As you are WELL aware, 'When', 'Why' and 'Where' are never and have never been elements neccesary to prove murder. Never. (A body isnt needed either.)
Thats no to say there wasnt plenty of evidence at the GJ to indict casey.
At the time of the GJ hearing there was a 2 yr old child missing and a mother who made up an invisi-person as an excuse as to where the child was.
There was also testimony from multiple people, including the grandparents, about the smell of human decomposition in the abandoned car.
There were also forensics that show signs of decomposition on a hair found in the area of the horrific smell in the car.
There was also the FACT the person who last had Caylee with her spent31 days lying about where the 2 yr old really was, and when questioned by LE to try to solve the case she made up lies about non-existent people, non-existent places, and repeatedly changed stories.

Beyond all of the above, you have NO CLUE as to what else was testified to at the GJ because you were not there, and no transcripts have ever been made public.

I would suggest you read all the released discovery from before the GJ and I'm sure you would have a better 'grasp' on this case. Certainly blogs and mainstream media are not the best places for you to gather your 'facts'.

[seeing_eye]

Originally Posted by BlueMartini

So,YOU were at the Grand jury or are privy to what was testified there at? I see this there is a 2 way modality here.

What are you saying? Either you're confused or my brain is so lacking in oxygen that I cannot comprehend. I urgently need to know which it is.

[pixiejoolz]

Originally Posted by BlueMartini

So,YOU were at the Grand jury or are privy to what was testified there at? I see this there is a 2 way modality here.

Dt simply restated the things that were made public about GJ testimony, and never claimed to be present a the Grand Jury. Does misunderstanding contribute to a 2 way modality?

[Dtviewer3]

Originally Posted by BlueMartini

Since the beginning of time a defense team has had a job to do when defending a client. Sometimes the defendant was even guilty and had confessed,the job was still to defend and get the least sentence,punishment possible.

This case is not different,except that the defendant claims innocence, therefore the defense team is defending the client.The defense is trying to make sure that the client has a fair trial. Many feel the defendant is guilty because of the circumstantial evidence, admittedly it does not look as though she is innocent, however they are raising serious doubts due to the evidence that has been collected thus far, which do raise some doubts.

The only real hard evidence I see is that she did not report her daughter missing, and appeared to be acting carefree in some photos.

The stain in the trunk was not from a decomposed body,that was ascertained from there being NO DNA, that one would expect to find from a stain presumed to be from bodily fluids, HUMAN decomposition.

Nothing at the crime scene connects Casey or her parents to the death. One would have expected to find finger prints on duct tape, but the 2 finger prints on the duct tape consist of one being from an agent of the police force and the other non identified, so WHO do the other fingerprints belong to? That raises some serious doubt no matter how you slice it.

There are serious problems with the duct tape that was said to be wrapped around the head. Yes I have read every stitch of evidence and there are reasons for doubt, the only thing i can't get around is not reporting the child missing, but I then go back to mom CINDY , CASEY was rebellious as we can all see, was she so rebellious that she did not let mom know at first not wanting back lash and not THINKING like an adult ,but the child she was " Oh it will be okay"

Who really knows, I don't claim to. should be an interesting trial for sure.

I guess you havent read EVERY stitch of evidence in 'THIS' case since there certainly wasnt even '1' fingerprint found on the duct tape, nevermind '2'.

I'm not sure what else to say to you since I really dont know what case you are talking about

[seeing_eye]

Originally Posted by Dtviewer3

I guess you havent read EVERY stitch of evidence in 'THIS' case since there certainly wasnt even '1' fingerprint found on the duct tape, nevermind '2'.

I'm not sure what else to say to you since I really dont know what case you are talking about

You're absolutely right, dtviewer! There were no fingerprints found on the duct tape according to the FBI report released to the public via the Florida Sunshine Laws. I guess some people just scan these documents and don't really read them.

FYI, it also seems as though some have evolved from soda-pops to alcoholic beverages!

[caphill]

Originally Posted by Dtviewer3

I guess you havent read EVERY stitch of evidence in 'THIS' case since there certainly wasnt even '1' fingerprint found on the duct tape, nevermind '2'.

I'm not sure what else to say to you since I really dont know what case you are talking about

You are correct that the forensic evidence on the duct tape was not reported as fingerprints. It was reported as DNA. BlueMartini was quite correct in one DNA was from the lab tech and the other DNA was foreign. How does the prosecution explain away the unsourced DNA on the tape.

[kakax]

Originally Posted by Dtviewer3

I guess you havent read EVERY stitch of evidence in 'THIS' case since there certainly wasnt even '1' fingerprint found on the duct tape, nevermind '2'.

I'm not sure what else to say to you since I really dont know what case you are talking about

That is what is so amazing to me about defenders of Casey. They haven't even read the information that is out there!

I will rest peacefully knowing that the jury won't be so ill informed.

[LadyHam]

Originally Posted by BlueMartini

Since the beginning of time a defense team has had a job to do when defending a client. Sometimes the defendant was even guilty and had confessed,the job was still to defend and get the least sentence,punishment possible.

This case is not different,except that the defendant claims innocence, therefore the defense team is defending the client.The defense is trying to make sure that the client has a fair trial. Many feel the defendant is guilty because of the circumstantial evidence, admittedly it does not look as though she is innocent, however they are raising serious doubts due to the evidence that has been collected thus far, which do raise some doubts.

The only real hard evidence I see is that she did not report her daughter missing, and appeared to be acting carefree in some photos.

The stain in the trunk was not from a decomposed body,that was ascertained from there being NO DNA, that one would expect to find from a stain presumed to be from bodily fluids, HUMAN decomposition.

Nothing at the crime scene connects Casey or her parents to the death. One would have expected to find finger prints on duct tape, but the 2 finger prints on the duct tape consist of one being from an agent of the police force and the other non identified, so WHO do the other fingerprints belong to? That raises some serious doubt no matter how you slice it.

There are serious problems with the duct tape that was said to be wrapped around the head. Yes I have read every stitch of evidence and there are reasons for doubt, the only thing i can't get around is not reporting the child missing, but I then go back to mom CINDY , CASEY was rebellious as we can all see, was she so rebellious that she did not let mom know at first not wanting back lash and not THINKING like an adult ,but the child she was " Oh it will be okay"

Who really knows, I don't claim to. should be an interesting trial for sure.

Bolding by me.....

Is that really all the hard evidence that you see? What about all the lies to LE? What about her tattoo? What about the evidence in the trunk of the car: hair w/death band on it, air sample tests, maggots, coffin flies, and paper towels that have grave wax on them? What about the duct tape and other items from the crime scene that connect back to the Anthony family home? What about the fact that Casey is the last known person to be seen w/Caylee?

Color by me....

For the record, there were NO FINGERPRINTS found on the duct tape. The duct tape was too degraded for that. There were 2 areas where DNA was found. One was matched to an FBI tech and the other one is believed to have come from another FBI tech, but since there is not enough of the DNA there could not be definitive testing. If the duct tape was too degraded to contain fingerprints then it makes sense that it would be too degraded to contain DNA from Caylee or her murderer. The FBI keeps their lab tech's DNA on file because as perfect as they try to be, sometimes their DNA does get on some of the evidence that they test.

Also, what about what we don't know yet. I don't think the state has shown their entire hand quite yet. When this case finally goes to trial we will see just what a jury thinks of the evidence in this case. I really think that Casey will be convicted.

[crimeq]

Originally Posted by BlueMartini

Since the beginning of time a defense team has had a job to do when defending a client. Sometimes the defendant was even guilty and had confessed,the job was still to defend and get the least sentence,punishment possible.

This case is not different,except that the defendant claims innocence, therefore the defense team is defending the client.The defense is trying to make sure that the client has a fair trial. Many feel the defendant is guilty because of the circumstantial evidence, admittedly it does not look as though she is innocent, however they are raising serious doubts due to the evidence that has been collected thus far, which do raise some doubts.

The only real hard evidence I see is that she did not report her daughter missing, and appeared to be acting carefree in some photos.

The stain in the trunk was not from a decomposed body,that was ascertained from there being NO DNA, that one would expect to find from a stain presumed to be from bodily fluids, HUMAN decomposition.

Nothing at the crime scene connects Casey or her parents to the death. One would have expected to find finger prints on duct tape, but the 2 finger prints on the duct tape consist of one being from an agent of the police force and the other non identified, so WHO do the other fingerprints belong to? That raises some serious doubt no matter how you slice it.

There are serious problems with the duct tape that was said to be wrapped around the head. Yes I have read every stitch of evidence and there are reasons for doubt, the only thing i can't get around is not reporting the child missing, but I then go back to mom CINDY , CASEY was rebellious as we can all see, was she so rebellious that she did not let mom know at first not wanting back lash and not THINKING like an adult ,but the child she was " Oh it will be okay"

Who really knows, I don't claim to. should be an interesting trial for sure.

Interesting name, "Blue Martini". I had Blue Martinis on a cruise once :-) Quite a buzz.

I don't understand what you're saying about mom Cindy, and Casey thinking it will be ok? It seems clear to me that Casey thought it would all be very ok.

[Dtviewer3]

Originally Posted by BlueMartini

So,YOU were at the Grand jury or are privy to what was testified there at? I see this there is a 2 way modality here.

I (correctly) pointed out to the poster I replied to that there was forensic and other evidence available BEFORE the GJ.

You are welcome to point out anywhere in my post where I said I was AT the GJ or that I knew what was testified to at the GJ.

You cant, because I didnt.

(BTW, changing nics to defend yourself doesnt impress me at all)

[crimeq]

Originally Posted by BlueMartini

So,YOU were at the Grand jury or are privy to what was testified there at? I see this there is a 2 way modality here.

Ummm, could you try that again, please? no comprende.