It's Not Just Nuts and Dolts

Who are all these people? And what do you think of the cast of characters rolling into the courtroom?

Your opinion needed at Orlando Magazine.

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Interesting day of discovery

More documents were released today concerning the investigation into the death of Caylee Marie Anthony. Some of the discovery is not very revealing, while other documents are. For instance, several TES volunteers described receiving phone calls from private investigators stating they were “calling from the Orange County Courthouse.” While misleading, they were not illegal. Cpl. Yuri Melich wrote in his incident report that an “investigation was conducted in order to determine if a private investigator working for the Casey Anthony defense violated State Statute by falsely impersonating an officer as per Florida State Statute 843.08.” He added that “there is insufficient evidence to prove anyone violated this statute.” Yes, several people complained the callers had misrepresented themselves, but by merely saying they were calling “from” the Orange County Courthouse failed to constitute probable cause that a crime was committed. I have to agree. I’ve made phone calls from the courthouse and by merely telling the other person I am calling from that location reveals nothing. I could be there for a hearing or something else.

What I did find interesting is that, while a lot of people believe Jerry Lyons is working alone, or that Mort Smith is still somehow involved, two new names surfaced. AHA! We can now add Katie Delaney, Gil Colon and Scott McKenna to the list. What would be intriguing would be if the SAO decided to seek the cell phone records from all of the PIs to see if they really did call from the courthouse as they claimed.

(See: http://www.wesh.com/pdf/27161837/detail.html)

Julie Ann Davis

Julie Davis was a TES searcher who was a K-9 handler. Her dog was trained to find human cadavers. She searched the Suburban Drive area on September 7, 2008 along with Tammy Dennis, Karen Gheesling and Luther Peeples. Tammy Dennis was also a dog handler. None of the dogs alerted anyone to a body. She was clear in her memory of where she searched, and more signifiacntly, where she didn’t. She said she looked at the end of Suburban, across from the school, with her dogs. So did Tammy. They found nothing unusual. She also said she looked into the wooded are where the body was eventually found, but not with her dogs, that remained in her car at the time. Those particular woods were overgrown with brush and flooded, she told Cpl. Eric Edwards on February 3 of this year.

“Um, I got out of my vehicle, walked along the edge of the, the tree line there. Looking inside that vegetation ah, it was thick, but I could see through the thickness was a lot of water.”

One of her most significant statements she made was that it may have been very difficult to find a body. Many variables would come into play.

“It depends on the body if it was wrapped in bags whether or not that K-9 would be able to detect that.”

(See: http://www.wesh.com/pdf/27161880/detail.html)

Cpl. Mark David Hawkins

Mark Hawkins was a longtime friend of Casey and her family. She often talked about visiting him in California, where he was stationed as a U.S. Marine. He knew her from their high school days together. After finding (alleged) samples of human decomposition, samples of Caylee’s hair and chloroform in the trunk of Casey’s vehicle, Hawkins came forward and offered to help in the investigation since he had knowledge of the victim and her family. He admitted that his relationship with Casey was only plutonic; that they had never been sexually intimate together. He said that they both agreed that they should just remain strictly friends. He was in the military and constantly being sent to different locations. Casey said she didn’t want a transient life for herself or Caylee.

“In late June/early July 2008, Casey and I were talking regularly, as I was keeping her updated on some medical issues of mine. She was worried about me and stated she wanted to come out to CA to see me, although there were never any solid plans made. A week or so later, Casey called me and was noticeably upset nd frustrated. She said she had something to tell me and couldn’t say it over the phone. She said ‘something happened’ a long time ago, but wouldn’t say what it was. Casey said she told her mother and brother whatever it was and they became angry & frustrated about it. I asked Casey what happened and tried to get her to tell me, she just saind, ‘Hey Mark, it’s just something I want to tell you in person’. I thought maybe there were some issues between her and her father or thought she was possibly upset about something else and she was just sort of dancing around it.”

In my opinion, this could have been the start of her accusation that her brother used to molest her. NCIS, the U.S. Naval Criminal Investigation, sent Supervisory Special Agent Leroy Jethro Gibbs and Probationary Special Agent Ziva David - JUST KIDDING! NCIS sent Hawkins to Orlando where he agreed to be wired up by FBI Special Agent Steve Mackley. He met with Casey at her house on October 9 and 10, where she was under house arrest after Leonard Padilla bonded her out of jail. Casey never did make admissions related to the death of her child, although this was prior to Caylee’s body was found. Casey also told Hawkins her brother, Lee, knew most of the story about what happened to Caylee. She added she would tell him all about it one day. I doubt Lee was in on the murder, though, and he was never a suspect.

(See: http://www.wesh.com/pdf/27161404/detail.html)

Anne Pham

Anne e-mailed Yuri Melich on February 1 of this year to tell him that on the morning Caylee’s remains were discovered the two of them spoke over the phone as the news broke. Laura never said anything about searching that specific area of Suburban Drive. In fact, it wasn’t until weeks or months later that she started claiming she searched there. Pham continued by saying that other searchers had no idea about Buchanan’s claim. Buchanan thought Roy Kronk was somehow involved in the murder of Caylee.

(See: http://www.wesh.com/pdf/27161898/detail.html)

Dr. Barry Logan

Dr. Logan is an expert in toxicology and analytical chemistry for NMS Labs. He has been retained by Casey’s defense.He will argue that there is no standard operating procedure for the use of the equipment utilized by Oak Ridge National Laboratory. He also states that the database was established with a total of four cadavers buried underground. There’s no demonstration that the findings would apply to human bodies that decomposed under different circumstances, such as in the trunk of a car. As an expert witness, he bases his opinions on several factors, one of which is that Oak Ridge is not a forensic laboratory, nor is it ASCLD-LAB qualified.

(See: http://www.wesh.com/pdf/27161862/detail.html)

Dr. Timothy Huntington

Dr. Huntington concluded that the species of fly associated with the garbage bag in Casey’s trunk is unremarkable and of no forensic value. Also found in the trash was a single dermestid beetle larva that’s of no significant value. Of course, he acknowledged that the findings were open to revision and reinterpretation, but we are now seeing what some of the defense witnesses will testify to at trial. He continues by claiming that, given the conditions in the trunk, specifically increasded temperatures due to solar radiation, adult flies found in the trunk on July 16, the eggs should have not been laid before July 2. Of course, the two sides will be arguing over the insect evidence at trial. Big time.

(See: http://www.wesh.com/pdf/27161900/detail.html)

(See: http://www.wesh.com/pdf/27161900/detail.html)

 §

In a minor setback for the defense, DNA tests on a laundry bag and shorts that were found with Caylee’s remains came back negative. It may have helped raise reasonable doubt. 

§

Depositions

Several depositions were released yesterday. One that was filed comes from the Orange-Osceola Medical Examiner’s Office, where Dr. Jan Garavaglia works. In her September 28, 2010 deposition, she confirmed that the remains showed no signs of trauma. Nothing led up to the cause or manner of death. When defense attorney Cheney Mason asked her about other possibilities besides murder, such as playing with a plastic bag or drowning, she replied that because nothing was “reported immediately to the hospital or law enforcement to try to rescuscitate this person, or EMS, and this person is still found with duct tape on the face, I would still call that a homicide.”

I know many of us have already heard that revelation, and we may remember what Kiomarie Cruz said, too. Another deposition came from OCSO Deputy Appling Wells from his March 9, 2010 deposition. Kiomarie told him that Casey “didn’t really want the baby” and that she wanted to give it up for adoption. Cindy wouldn’t allow it.

Wells met with Cruz on July 19, 2008. She and Casey were friends from middle school and high school and they used to hang out in the woods across from Hidden Oaks Elementary School. She told wells that they used to go there to do adult things like fornicate and smoke wacky weed. “If Casey was to do something bad,” she told him, “maybe this is where she would put the baby.”

Jose Baez questioned him about Kiomarie’s mental health and Wells said, “I didn’t think that was an issue talking to her.”

Wells said that after Casey was first arrested, she was shocked and most likely “a little pissed off.” 

He discussed meeting with the Anthony’s neighbor, Brian Burner, about the time Casey borrowed his shovel. “She brought it back an hour later,” Wells said. “Nothing stood out as far as being something wrong.”

Later, he had a “police officer to police officer” chat with George looking for evidence that “someone, something had been buried” in the back yard.

Finally, and some in the media may find this a bit unsettling, Wells expressed his annoyance with the media throughout his deposition. He considered them to be obsessed with the story.”They’re just vultures,” he said.

(See: The Orlando Sentinel, March 11, 2011)

The Teflon Judge

During the closing remarks of the final presidential debate between then candidate Ronald Reagan and President Jimmy Carter, the GOP hopeful asked the nation a simple question, “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” As simple as it was, the query was powerful and poignant enough to resonate deeply within the minds of the American people, who went on to elect Reagan as our 40th president. The rest, they say, is history.

Today, just over 30 years later, I’d like to ask Casey Anthony’s defense team, particularly Jose Baez and Cheney Mason, a very similar question. Are you better off now than you were one year ago? Actually, by the time Casey goes to trial, by that I mean sitting in the courtroom facing a jury, precisely 2 years and 11 months will have passed since Caylee was last seen alive. For the first month, Casey was living la bella vita, although it was probably more la vida loco, until she was stopped dead in her tracks by her own flesh and blood; her mother. From there, it quickly plummeted from a lofty peak to the depth of the deepest ocean. I’m only interested in the past year, though. A lot of serious changes have taken place. One year ago today, Judge Stan Strickland sat firmly on the bench. Did the defense do the right thing by filing the motion for his recusal?

On January 25 of last year, Casey pleaded guilty to 13 third-degree felony fraud charges. She threw herself at the mercy of the court and came out a convicted felon, but ultimately, she was given no more time behind bars. Judge Strickland sentenced her to time served. In my opinion, that showed how fair, just and lenient - yes, lenient - he was. He could have slapped her silly, and the defense might have taken that punishment as a good sign; what to look forward to from this judge down the road. Instead, they threw caution to the wind. As a matter of fact, two days later, I wrote on my The Wisdom of Solomon post:

Judge Strickland gave the defense an opportunity to challenge the charges. We can discuss the lack of brevity or the levity of the arguments, but let’s cut to the chase – it came down to the judge. First, it should be noted that Casey had no prior convictions and she did make full restitution and Baez did bring up “equal justice” for his client. He asked for one year of probation and credit for time served, rather than the five years of incarceration the State sought. In the end, His Honor sentenced the 23-year-old Casey to (jail) time served – 412 days – plus $5,517.75 in investigative costs and $348 for court. The amount may be discussed and negotiated at a later motion hearing because the defense found the investigative charge too high and not justifiable. He also adjudicated Casey guilty on six of the fraud counts and withheld adjudication on seven, plus he tacked on a year of supervised probation, which could be problematic and complex later on, given that she still faces a huge mountain of charges ahead.

I finished the article with:

This was a sign of things to come, and what I saw was a very compassionate man behind the bench.

In his ruling, the judge wrote:

“I’ve done what I thought is fair based on what I know.”

One year ago, on February 12, I wrote on Why Casey Pleaded Guilty to Fraud:

Personally, I think the defense risked it all and I think it was the right call. Aside from any appeals, which she would lose had she gone a different route, she took her chances with a well-respected judge; one with a very fair track record. The Honorable Stan Strickland is not a hanging judge and odds were, he was going to mete out some fair medicine, certainly after she swallowed all 13 bitter pills.

What went wrong after that? Clearly, everyone knew that Judge Strickland was fair. Some argued too fair. Meanwhile, the defense filed motion after motion and in most cases, the judge denied them, but he based his decisions on case law, something somewhat alien to the defense as we have seen time after time.

It’s a fact no one can deny; that Judge Strickland heard the most motions this defense has filed to date. In the more than 20 months he held court, he judged wisely, and it is because of his focus and direction that this trial has stayed the course. Last January 25, the State submitted its NOTICE OF FILING that included a PROPOSED ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY, MOTION and HEARING DEADLINES and TRIAL DATE. On March 5, the judge responded with his AMENDED PROPOSED ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY, MOTION and HEARING DEADLINES and TRIAL DATE. I strongly recommend that you read Judge Strickland’s order. There, you will see all of the deadlines and a trial date of May 9, 2011. The State originally wanted May 2, but the judge accommodated Andrea Lyon, whose daughter was to graduate college that week. It is of importance to note that Judge Perry is following the schedule set by his predecessor. As a matter of fact, he has allowed deadlines to come and go, and in some instances, has reset them, primarily for the defense. In any event, this trial has been on schedule since the date was first set by Judge Strickland and it’s important to remember that. Today, Andrea Lyon is long gone and Judge Perry could have readily reset the date back to May 2. He didn’t.

Judge Strickland scheduled an indigency hearing for March 18, 2010. It was at that hearing that J. Cheney Mason made his debut. I remember it well because it was almost comical as he made his grand entrance outside the courtroom doors. While awaiting to enter, we all stood there. As he approached with Baez and Lyon, one journalist asked him if he was joining the defense team, to which he responded, “I will be in about five minutes or so once the judge arrives.” The comical part was that I had never seen so many thumbs tap away on cell phones. Tap, tap, tap. Text, text, text. It was the big news of the day up to that point. Of course, we remember the discourse between the judge and Mason:

If you watch the video, you’ll see I said to “Stay Tuned for Round 2!” Of course, the second round was a knockout blow to the judge, but did the defense really win anything? Well, yes. Sort of. The judge did grant Ms. Anthony indigent status, but everything went downhill from there. After a series of motions¹ denied by the judge, this defense showed how disgruntled it was with Strickland by filing the ridiculous motion on April 16 for him to step down. The DEFENDANT, CASEY MARIE ANTHONY’S AMENDED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY TRIAL JUDGE (amended version refiled Monday to correct expired notary) was filed at 4:48 pm on a Friday afternoon and it left the judge and myself incredibly shocked in what turned out to be a very bad, and I mean a VERY BAD, weekend to agonize. Of course, the people who matter in this (what I would call) legal fissure were quick to assure me it wasn’t my fault; that it was purely a defense strategy. In any case, the point of this article is not to argue the merits of the defense strategy as it relates to me, it’s all about whether or not this was a move in the right direction for the defendant. I must say that to a person, I was told, “Be careful what you wish for” in reference to the defense, and those words came from professionals in every field that had an element of interest in the case - journalists and attorneys, civil and criminal. It was a bad move.

What came down was simple and I’ve mentioned it before - Cheney Mason decided to throw his weight around the courthouse. By that, I mean he thought he had some big brass chips to trade in to get the judge of his choice; one who would be more inclined to remove the death penalty and be more amenable to his motions. I also know that the entire courthouse was stunned when the defense filed the motion to recuse. Strickland was (and remains to this day) one of the most respected judges on the circuit court. As a matter of fact, he’s highly regarded throughout the state. What Mason did was blow a circuit breaker. In the end, and there are things I’d love to discuss but won’t until the trial is over, Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. had no choice but to take on the case. No other judge wanted it and his docket was not as thick. It’s called a backfire.

Today, after the defense changed horses in midstream, is their defendant better off? Let’s see… many of Judge Strickland’s orders were left with the door ajar. In other words, they were ordered without prejudice, which means they could change some of the language and refile the same motions, which is exactly what they did after Perry took over². Did the judge overturn any of Strickland’s decisions? Not a one. Nothing. Zip. Zil. Nada. Do I feel subsequent motions ruled by Perry would have the same outcome today had the defense stayed the course? Yes, absolutely. Strickland did not become a reputable circuit court judge by making many mistakes. As I’ve also stated many times, the defense went from Strickland to stricter.

COMES NOW, the recent defense motions denied by the presiding judge:

• The motion to exclude testimony that Casey had a history of lying and stealing. The judge wrote the State successfully argued that getting caught lying and stealing by her relatives may have provided a motive to rid herself of the financial and social burden of raising a young child. Also, the lies are inextricably intertwined with the evidence of the defendant’s activities between June 16, 2008 to July 15, 2008. “Evidence of a defendant’s collateral acts is not admissible to show bad character or a propensity to commit the crime charged,” wrote the judge in his ruling. “However, the state may be able to introduce evidence of collateral acts – such as lying or stealing – which are inextricably intertwined with the crime charged if necessary to adequately describe the deed, provide an intelligent account of the crime charged, establish the entire context out of which the charged crime arose or adequately describe the events leading up to the charged crime.”
• The motion to prohibit the use of references attributed to her Myspace Diary of Days. The defense argued that her posts weren’t relevant and that they were unfair to use at trial. The State countered by saying the posts were inconsistent with a mother actively looking for her kidnapped daughter. The judge wrote, “It is relevant to show the defendant’s state of mind during the time when Caylee Marie Anthony was missing and ultimately, when it was determined that she had died. The weight of this evidence is a matter for the jury.”
• The motion to exclude testimony from the neighbor, Brian Burner, who Casey borrowed a shovel from him. The judge decided, “There is nothing inherently prejudicial about borrowing a shovel, nor is a shovel ‘gruesome’ evidence that would tend to inflame the passions of the jury.”
• The motion to disallow jurors from learning about the La Bella Vita tattoo Casey got on July 2, 2008, roughly 2 weeks after Caylee’s disappearance. The judge wrote, “There is nothing inherently prejudicial about tattoos, which are increasingly prevalent among the population, nor is this particular tattoo likely to inflame the passions of the jury. Thus, the potentially prejudicial effect of this evidence does not outweigh its potentially probative value. It is relevant to show the defendant’s state of mind during the time when Caylee Marie Anthony was missing and ultimately, when it was determined that she had died.”

I don’t think I need to mention the impatience of Judge Perry with this defense. We have all seen it live, up close and personal. Come hell or high water, there will be no delays. More motions will be filed. The court must address some outstanding ones, too, like the one to exclude any references of the decomposition odor coming from Casey’s car. The motion also makes note of statements made by an Oak Ridge National Laboratory official who described chloroform levels recovered from a piece of  carpet removed from the trunk liner.  There’s also the matter of the stain in the trunk and whether it was organic in nature. The FBI could not make a determination, but Oak Ridge wrote that it showed the presence of “volatile fatty acids consistent with the byproducts of decomposition.” Once again, I’m afraid the judge will rightly allow the jury to hear arguments from both sides.

As I’ve said a hundred times, a good defense will throw everything in its arsenal at the wall in hopes that something sticks. I must say I can’t blame them, but in a sense, Baez & Company remind me of the Democratic party under Ronald Reagan’s reign, at least during his first term. He was given the nickname the Teflon President by the media because nothing seemed to stick. In his administration, it dealt with scandals, but in Judge Perry’s court, it’s all about defense motions. No matter what they file, there isn’t much that sticks. If I were Casey, I’d be nervous right now. Her defense seems to be moving from the frying pan into the fire, and that’s no recipe for success.