Justice Didn’t Take a Holiday

 Sitting in court yesterday, I found it ironic and so apropos that the fate of Casey Anthony was delivered into the hands of a jury of her peers on Independence Day. For nearly three years she has been afforded the presumption of innocence while the murder case against her slowly inched through our legal system. She has had the luxury of being ensnared by a judicial system that seeks to ensure a defendant’s right to a fair trial.

Share your thoughts on Orlando Magazine

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

The Long and Winded Road

Jury selection is moving right along… slowly, but surely. What do we make of it? When will the trial finally begin?

Hurry on over to Orlando Magazine and take a gander at what I think…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

A Snail's Pace

Jury selection is moving at the same pace as a race between a tortoise and a snail.

Hurry on over to Orlando Magazine and take your time reading my latest post…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Pinellas? You be the Judge

It looks like Pinellas will be the county where Casey’s jury will be plucked. What do you think about that idea?

Find out what I think…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Without Prejudice

Casey Anthony’s defense team has filed a lot of motions; too many to some, but plenty of them have been denied without prejudice by the presiding judge. With prejudice and without are fairly cut and dry. With prejudice means that once a judge rules, that’s the end of it; dead in the water, leave it alone and give it a rest. In other words, it’s a final disposition. Without prejudice means that the present form is not good enough to rule positively on, but the motion can certainly be filed again after tweaking and rewriting it. In other words, similar, but not identical. It leaves a party free to litigate the matter in a subsequent action. That’s not to say the latter outcome would be any different, but it leaves the door open for further explanation and review. A lot of the motions ruled against the defense by Judge Stan Strickland were ordered without prejudice. In my opinion, one of the reasons why Jose & Co. wanted him off the bench was made clear after Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. took over. Many of those motions turned down by Judge Strickland were refiled. They expected the new judge to be more favorable in his rulings. Unfortunately for Casey, Judge Perry didn’t overturn a single one of them, so they did nothing to help her cause.

In light of Judge Strickland’s rulings, I want to discuss something that’s been weighing on my mind - without prejudice, of course. Actually, there are two things, the other one being George and Cindy and where they sit in the courtroom; but first, I come to Judge Strickland’s defense - not that he needs it or anything.

Of late, I have been reading comments on blogs, including my own; personal testimonials that praise Judge Perry for keeping this trial on track; that he is expediting the schedule. Consequently, and because of him, the trial will start on time - his time. That’s simply not true. Not to take away from him or his regimented structuring at all, but the facts in this case are, in fact, facts, and facts don’t lie. Just where has Judge Perry sped up the process as it relates to deadlines and the like?

On March 5, 2010, just over a year ago, Judge Strickland affixed his name to an amended order setting deadlines. It’s titled [the] AMENDED PROPOSED ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY, MOTION and HEARING DEADLINES and TRIAL DATE. On February 7 of this year, Judge Perry wrote his ORDER MEMORIALIZING STATUS HEARING. Please make a mental note that these are orders written by both judges.

Judge Strickland wrote: Depositions of law enforcement officers or employees shall be completed by September 30, 2010.

Judge Perry wrote: Depositions of Law Enforcement Persons: Defense anticipates completion of all depositions by the February 18,2011 deadline.

That’s a four-and-one-half month discrepancy, folks, and Judge Strickland stepped down six weeks after his deadline order. Who reset the deadline? Please understand that this, in no manner, disparages Judge Perry. This is a complex death penalty case and tentative deadlines are meant to be broken. Recently, a very prominent attorney told me, “So much misinformation is out there,” and this stretches beyond the mundane aspects of this case.

Another good example of this is Judge Strickland’s original deadline for the depositions of defense expert witnesses. The date he set was February 28, 2011. Judge Perry extended it a bit to March 11, 2011 for the final one - Dr. Werner Spitz.

On a side note, we now know Dr. Spitz will argue that Dr. G’s autopsy results are flawed. We will look more into this aspect at a later date, but meanwhile…

Judge Perry said, by hook or by crook, this trial will commence to start on May 9, 2011. It’s etched in stone, but lest you think that he is speeding up what the defense tries to set back, guess again. While Judge Perry keeps both sides on course, it was Judge Strickland who set the trial date of May 9, 2011. I show you Exhibit A, right on schedule:

I remember when I told readers of my blog that I was going to attend my first hearing. It was back in mid-October, 2009. Everyone told me to sit on the prosecution side. If you sit on the defense side, it means you support the defense. I said, no it doesn’t, this isn’t like a wedding, where friends of the bride and groom sit on their respective sides. Oh yes it does, I was lectured. Well, I’ve always been the independent sort, and I told them I will sit wherever I want. It so happens that upon entering the courtroom, the only seat available was next to George and Cindy on the, you guessed it, defense side. That awarded me the opportunity to say a few words to George when the hearing was over, and I’m glad I did. As a writer, I try to remain neutral, although it’s downright impossible at times.

Nowadays, almost all I ever read, over and over and over again, is that because George, Cindy and Lee sit behind their daughter, it means they have “thrown their granddaughter under the bus.” They are not interested in justice for Caylee. At all. That brings me to one very important thought. It’s actually two separate pieces of the whole, but I think it’s worth pondering. No, I am not setting this in stone; let’s just say it’s a fresh perspective that most people haven’t given much thought to, if any at all. Please keep in mind that keeping an open mind usually means everything is not always hidden behind Door Number One. Answers can come from anywhere, and they usually do.

Suppose the Anthonys are seeking justice for their grandchild, but they just don’t like the fact that the state of Florida wants to kill Casey. Hey, life is okay, but death? No matter what your child has done, and I want you to think hard and heavy about this, would you beg the state to kill your child? No matter what? If you honestly answer no, then you will you understand why they refuse to support the prosecution. THEY WANT TO KILL MY DAUGHTER!!! To be realistic, I doubt that you could execute your own child. I couldn’t, because…

Personally, I am against the death penalty. My beliefs are my own and so are my reasons, but if you ask me why I feel the way I do, I will gladly explain my position. With that in mind, has anyone EVER asked George and Cindy what their positions are on the death penalty? If not, what if they feel the same way I do? Why would they want to support the state by sitting behind them? I wouldn’t if it were my child, but she’s not, and it’s not my call.

Think about how you would feel as poison flows into your child’s veins. Without prejudice, of course.

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.

Revisited: Casey Anthony must die!

As things are gearing up for the trial, I want to reflect on some of the issues that transpired during the past two-and-a-half years. On April 20, 2009, I published Casey Anthony must die! on my old WordPress blog. Four days short of one year later, Casey’s defense team filed a motion demanding that the Honorable Judge Stan Strickland step down from presiding over the murder case. This article was cited by the defense as the primary reason why Judge Strickland would not be able to judge fairly. Poppycock! The judge never read that post or any of the others the motion cited. Also, had Jose Baez and, particularly, Cheney Mason fully read what I wrote, they would have discovered that the title had nothing to do with delivering Casey’s head on a platter of any kind. 

Here is the defense motion, and here is Judge Strickland’s order granting the motion. Incidentally, the date I was called up in front of the judge was October 16, 2009, a FULL SIX MONTHS before the recusal motion was filed.

On the WESH Website, Richard Hornsby said on the day the motion was filed, “There is little doubt that one day the defense will look back on the motion (as) the worst move they’ve made,” He added that, “Judge Strickland has previously shown a fairness to Casey in the way he sentenced her in the check case, and now they don’t know who their judge will be.”

Anyone who reads my articles should know by now I am not a proponent of the death penalty. Incidentally, this was written before Casey was declared indigent. Also, the electric chair was taken out of commission and injection is today’s method of execution.

Casey Anthony must die!

From the Florida Department of Corrections Web site, here are some fun facts:

The case of Furman vs. Georgia was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in June 1972. In that landmark case, the Court held that capital punishment was unconstitutional and struck down state death penalty laws nationwide. As a result, the death sentences of 95 men and 1 woman on Florida’s Death Row were commuted to life in prison. However, after the Furman decision, the Florida Legislature revised the death penalty statutes in case the Court reinstated capital punishment in the future. In 1976 the Supreme Court overturned its ruling in Furman and upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty in the case of Gregg vs. Georgia. Executions resumed in Florida in 1979 when John Spenkelink became the first Death Row inmate to be executed under the new statutes.

In January 2000, the Florida Legislature passed legislation that allows lethal injection as an alternative method of execution in Florida. Florida administers executions by lethal injection or electric chair at the execution chamber located at Florida State Prison. The three-legged electric chair was constructed from oak by Department of Corrections personnel in 1998 and was installed at Florida State Prison (FSP) in Starke in 1999. The previous chair was made by inmates from oak in 1923 after the Florida Legislature designated electrocution as the official mode of execution. (Prior to that, executions were carried out by counties, usually by hanging.) The apparatus that administers the electric current to the condemned inmate was not changed. It is regularly tested to ensure proper functioning. 

Old Sparky - made of oak constructed by inmates

OR

Gurney used for lethal injections

Since the middle of July of last year, the name Casey Marie Anthony has permeated the airwaves, earwaves and print media of this country and many parts of the civilized world on a daily basis. Every day, something must be reported on the case against Casey, and no one has titillated more than Nancy Grace. All of her loyal followers must be tickled pink since the State Attorney’s Office of Florida announced last week that the prosecution will seek the death penalty against her for the murder of her daughter, Caylee Marie. State Attorney Lawson Lamar’s office said they want to kill Casey because, as the official explanation says, “sufficient aggravating circumstances” have come to light. Please take note that Lamar did not ask for the same thing against George, Cindy and Lee and some of you won’t sleep until the entire family is dead by the wheels of justice. How ironic that nearly 2,000 years ago and for hundreds of years, the idol worshippers of Rome demanded the heads of Christians as they begged for their lives. Now, it is the Christians making the same kinds of demands. There should be no trial. Casey Anthony must die! I am not going to delve into the pros and cons of this sort of punishment and I don’t really want to hear opinions one way or the other. This article is meant to just give you a taste of things to come.

Sentencing Casey to death might be what minions of people from around the globe are hoping for, but Lamar knows it’s no easy task. Here is a case I remember well: On November 25th 1998, police were called to the Central Florida home of Kayla McKean and told that she was missing. They began a search and as the story hit the news, hundreds more people gathered to help. Countless people spent Thanksgiving Day searching and continued through the weekend to no avail. On Monday, November 30, searchers were ready to begin again when Kayla’s father, Richard Adams, came forward and confessed that he had killed her the previous Tuesday in a fit of rage because she had soiled her underpants. In his confession, he told police where her little battered body was buried. Kayla’s stepmother, Marcie Adams, took police to the Ocala National Forest where Richard buried her. He was immediately arrested on charges of first-degree murder, aggravated child abuse, tampering with evidence and medical neglect. Like Casey, he faced the death penalty, but on May 15, 2000, Adams was sentenced to life without parole, plus 28 years. Because of her death, Florida enacted the Kayla McKean Child Protection Act.

Casey’s team will go to trial with a credible cast of legal experts, something Adams did not have. Although you may scoff at Jose Baez’s credentials, he’s got some strong talent behind him, including New York defense attorney Linda Kenney Baden [not now], famed criminologist Dr. Henry Lee [today, it was announced that Lee would not testify at trial], forensic scientist Dr. Larry Kobilinsky and Todd Macaluso [nope!], who excels at cross-examining technical experts. This will make the death penalty a tough win for Lamar, and he’s got to be concerned.

Some people feel this is nothing more than an old prosecutor’s trick. Well known law professor Alan Dershowitz, of Harvard Law School, claimed that Texas prosecutors used the same ploy to get a conviction against Andrea Yates, who drowned her 5 children in 2001.

“The prosecutors… never really expected, nor even wanted, the jury to return a death sentence,” Dershowitz wrote. “They manipulated the death sentence processing order to get a pro-prosecution jury, more likely to reject the insanity defense and return a verdict of guilt. This tactic, well known to those who practice criminal law, is becoming more widespread in states which authorize the death penalty.”

In Yates’ case, her conviction was overturned on appeal and she was ruled not guilty by reason of insanity. Because of the nature of choosing juries in death penalty cases, a potent problem exists for the defense. The selection process may give potential jurors an impression of guilt by merely asking for death instead of a lesser penalty. Ultimately, the State Attorney’s Office may be looking for a plea deal now that Casey faces being strapped down on a gurney to one day be fed intravenous shots of killer medications. No doubt, this will be a very long and costly trial since it doesn’t look like Casey is readying herself for some sort of confession. With this in mind, let’s examine how the death penalty works in Florida.

First off, death penalty trials are not cheap. The stakes are much higher because we are talking about taking a life. Because of that, more motions are filed, more interviews are conducted and lots more research is performed. The possibility of execution will prolong and complicate this trial and make it 10 times more expensive for the prosecution and defense than a maximum life in prison sentence.

Capital punishment cases need a very select type of person to sit in the jury box because they must be willing to sentence someone to die. Also, cases like these are two-parted: the guilt/innocence phase and the penalty phase, and that could almost double the length of the trial. Time costs money.

Unlike non-death penalty cases where potential jurors are questioned in groups, these jurors are interviewed individually. Sometimes, a process like this can take weeks. Once a jury is seated, the trial begins with the guilt/innocence phase, and like any other criminal trial, the state presents its case and the defense does its best to poke holes in the evidence presented against their client. After that, the jury decides guilt or innocence and if found guilty, the trial moves into the second stage, the penalty phase.

You’ll notice that in the State Attorney Office’s explanation of why it asked for the death sentence, “sufficient aggravating circumstances” was cited. These aggravating factors, all outlined by law, must outweigh the mitigating circumstances as put forth by the defense. Aggravating factors would include whether the killing was committed in a cold, calculated and premeditated manner. Mitigating circumstances would encompass areas such as whether the defendant acted under duress and why this life should be spared. It becomes a second trial within the trial and it is where the costs really start to add up.

Most of the time, it’s the defense that has to work harder and spend more time working out the reasons to spare their client’s life. To prepare for this phase, they must do extensive research into that person’s background. They must dig up every school record, medical record, where they were born and what doctor delivered them. If mental health issues never factored into the main trial, they will here. Mitigator specialists may be called in. I’ll bet you never even knew this type of career exists. All of this is very time consuming and expenses can soar into the 100s of thousands of dollars for this phase alone, just to pay for experts.

As of today, with the trial set for mid-October and more likely to be a year or two away [BOY, WERE WE WRONG ABOUT THAT!], it’s impossible to say how much it will cost the state, but the bill will rise tremendously now that it has asked for the death penalty. Prosecutors’ spokesman Randy Means said that death penalty cases are not budgeted separately from other cases, but because they take longer, they cost more. Anywhere from 3 to 10 times more effort is put into this type of case. If the defense puts many experts on the stand during the penalty phase, the state must counter those arguments.

Many of those aggravators have already been shown during the guilt/innocence phase and the mitigating circumstances will need to be fought again, with new testimony. We, the taxpayers, must fund the state. The money set aside to prosecute cases has already been budgeted and because of this, it takes away from other trials. That means someone else might not be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Keep this in mind as the state readies itself because prosecutors had better be sure they know what they are doing. Before you throw any “Lawson Lamar lament” my way, this is not meant to argue the pros and cons of the death penalty, nor is it to trash Casey for not fessing up. This is just to let you how the process works.

If she is found guilty and sentenced to death, she will go to the Lowell Correctional Institution Annex in Lowell, FL, outside of Ocala in Marion County. Her cell will be 6 x 9 x 9.5 feet high. She will be served meals three times a day, at 5:00 am, from 10:30 am to 11: am and from 4:00 pm to 4:30 pm. All food is prepared by prison staff and transported in insulated carts to the cells. Prior to execution, she will be able to ask for a last meal and the cost to prepare it must cost no more than $40.00 and all ingredients must be purchased locally. As for the final cost of arrest, trial, incarceration, appeals and execution, the price will run into the millions, a lot more than just a life sentence, and in the end, Lawson Lamar knows that a death sentence in Florida may end up being more about dying of old age in a stark jail cell than anything else.

To those of you so hellbent on Casey’s execution, I ask you where you were when Kayla McKean’s father sat on trial, charged with her brutal murder. I ask you where you were when he was sentenced to life instead of death. I guess you didn’t care. Perhaps that’s not it at all. Ten years ago, this precious child, every bit as beautiful and angelic as Caylee Marie, didn’t have Nancy Grace fighting for her. No Geraldo, no cable shows, no Internet and no public. Who cried for Kayla? Think about it.

Nunc pro tunc no slam dunk

In Latin, nunc pro tunc literally translates into “now for then.” In other words, retroactive. Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. listened to several matters brought up at the hearing held on October 29, including issues over funding that dated back to May, hence, nunc pro tunc. Four days later, on November 2, the judge delivered his ORDER ADDRESSING RETAINMENT AND PAYMENT OF EXPERTS, INVESTIGATORS, MITIGATION SPECIALIST, AND OTHER COSTS. Written in chambers, without bravado and with his usual brevity, it addresses three separate motions filed earlier by Casey Anthony’s defense.

MOTION ONE

On September 30, Ann Finnell filed the Motion to Determine Reasonable Budget for Due Process Costs in a Capital Case and Motion to Incur Certain Specified Costs. A long-winded title, indeed, that came with a short reply from the judge on each specific element. Casey had requested authorization for anticipated costs for the penalty phase, if this case ever truly reaches that stage, plus mitigation costs addressed previously in an order dated May 12, 2010 nunc pro tunc to May 6, 2010.

Private Investigator

The defense asked for the authorization of a $5,000 cap on the use of a private investigator “to provide services for the penalty phase such as locating and interviewing mitigation witnesses, documents, and other relevant evidence.” Judge Perry reserved judgment and told the defense to submit an itemized list, by November 5, of the investigative services needed to support the request. It sounds reasonable enough. After all, one of the key points the judge made at the hearing was that he was not going to write an open check.

Psychiatrist or Psychologist

Here, Casey’s defense asked for the authorization of a $7,500 cap “for services by a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist to examine and conduct forensic testing on Defendant, to render an opinion regarding cross-examination of any State expert, and if needed, to testify at the penalty phase.” The court granted this part of the motion, but set the cap at $2,500 for pre-trial services at JAC rates. Please note that this is pre-trial work and not money going to a possible penalty phase. That money will be addressed at a later date the judge left unclear. I also get the feeling the defense may be able to ask for more if needed, although there was no mention in his order.

Copying Costs

The defense asked for a $1,000 cap to cover copying costs during the penalty phase. Think Xerox. The judge gave them $500 at the approved JAC rate. When the judge asked Ms. Finnell whether that amount would work, she said it most likely would. She didn’t sigh, in other words, or beg for more.

Mitigation Specialist

Casey wanted the court to authorize an additional 100 hours for services of the mitigation specialist, Jeanene Barrett. The court granted her request in full - 100 hours to be provided by Ms. Barrett or another in-state investigator at the JAC rate of $40 per hour. That gives her $4,000 to work with at the full rate. Can she request more? Probably, but the judge wants everything to be itemized and explained.

Attorney Travel Expenses

Ann Finnell wanted a $4,000 cap for expenses she expects to incur as she travels back and forth between her office in Jacksonville and Orlando. The amount covered anticipated trips to and from Ft. Myers. George has family there. Despite public arguments over whether Jeanene Barrett has already been there, done that, it’s moot and nothing more. The judge denied the request because of JAC policies and procedures, and the earlier court ruling entered May 12, 2010 nunc pro dunc to May 6, 2010. This means the order is retroactive to May 6. No money, honey.

Travel Expenses for Investigator or Mitigation Specialist

Casey requested the authorization of a $1,500 cap on travel expenses for one investigator or one mitigation specialist to journey to Ohio to obtain records and interview potential witnesses. At the hearing, Judge Perry said to use the telephone wherever possible, and/or to try to hire someone within the state of Ohio who will work at JAC rates. That would save Florida a lot of money on round-trip airline tickets. Here, he reserved any ruling until the defense can offer reasons in support of their initial request. Explore the options first. Whatever the defense can figure out, the judge will meet with them in camera in order to shield the strategy from the prosecution.

Attorney Travel Expenses for Trial

The defendant asked the court to authorize payment of Ann Finnell’s anticipated travel expenses to attend the trial commencing in May of 2011. The judge had no choice but to deny the request because of JAC guidelines and the earlier order entered May 12, 2010 nunc pro tunc to May 6, 2010.

MOTION TWO

Motion for Additional Hours of Investigation (guilt phase)

On October 25, Jose Baez filed a motion on behalf of his client. He asked the court to authorize an additional 300 hours for in-state investigative services in order to “continue investigating the evidence alleged in the State’s on-going discovery.” Of course, this request was above and beyond the hourly cap addressed during the May 12 nunc pro tunc to May 6 approval. What he ended up with this time is not what he asked for, though. The judge granted an additional 60 hours to the tune of JAC’s $40 per hour rate. Instead of $12,000, he ended up with $2,400. For now. Although not stated in the order, the judge did leave the door open for additional funds later on, if the need arises and the defense can account for every single dime.

MOTION THREE

Motion for Clarification of the May 12th Order regarding both Travel Time and Reimbursement for Travel Expenses and Mileage of Out-of-State Experts, Mitigation Specialist, Investigators, and State Experts

This is in response to a motion filed by Jose Baez on October 25 “because the order entered on May 12, 2010 nunc pro dunc to May 6, 2010 did not specifically address the travel time and expenses incurred or anticipated for these persons. Accordingly, clarification is needed as to the authorization for payment of such costs” according to the order. The court granted this motion, nunc pro tunc to May 6, 2010, and authorized “the payment for travel time and reimbursement for travel expenses and mileage of out-of-state experts, the mitigation specialist, investigators, and state experts at the JAC approved rates and in compliance with JAC’s policies and procedures in this motion and its attachments.” In the May 12 order, ORDERS ADDRESSING MOTION TO SEAL RECORDS RELATED TO THE JUSTICE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSION/RETAINMENT AND PAYMENT OF EXPERTS, INVESTIGATORS, MITIGATION SPECIALIST, AND OTHER COSTS/RECONSIDERATION OF DEFENDANT’S REQUEST TO WAIVE APPEARANCE AT CERTAIN HEARINGS/PROCEDURES FOR FUTURE MOTIONS… hold on, I need to catch my breath after that one… the judge addressed many areas of the defense’s earlier motion. I’m not going to go over every aspect of it. This is merely to sort out the reason Judge Perry had to take another look at his order and why he decided to respond now. In essence, the earlier order listed the approval and caps for each individual he cited, but omitted travel expenses:

• Dr. Henry Lee - Criminologist Expert: A cap of 8 hours for in-court services and a cap of 25 hours for out services.
• Jeanene Barrett - Mitigation Specialist: 384 hours for services.
• One investigator (in-state): 300 hours for in-state services.
• One Investigator (out-of-state): 100 hours for out-of-state services.
• One K-9 Expert (out-of-state): 20 hours for services.
• One postmortem hair banding expert: 20 hours

For the following experts, caps as to the number of hours to be incurred has not been determined. Therefore, the judge ruled that they shall be approved by subsequent order:

• One forensic entomologist (out-of-state)
• One forensic anthropologist
• One forensic botanist (out-of-state)
• One forensic pathologist (out-of-state)
• One digital computer forensic expert (out-of-state)
• One DNA expert (out-of-state)
• One forensic chemist (in-state)
• One forensic chemist (out-of-state)

Also in that order, he found that the following experts were not relevant and necessary to provide Casey with adequate representation:

• Jury consultant (denied with prejudice)

I recall the judge saying at the motion hearing that Cheney Mason is a qualified jury consultant and that was enough. This was also before Ann Finnell came along.

• One additional DNA expert (denied with prejudice)
• One additional forensic botanist for consulting only (denied with prejudice)
• One additional forensic Biologist for consulting only.
• One trace evidence expert (denied without prejudice)

With prejudice is another way of saying forget about it. It’s a done deal. Without prejudice means a motion can be re-addressed later by taking on a different tack, or by rewriting an incorrect motion, or because - as is the case here - the defense needs an opportunity to decide whether Dr. Lee can provide the trace evidence services. If not, counsel could then request approval from the court for someone else.

• One taphonomy expert (denied without prejudice) to allow defense counsel to request a Rogers hearing.

In my unqualified opinion, a Rogers hearing (in this instance) may be requested if the defense’s expert opinion testimony is incomplete. Taphonomy, from the Greek taphos (death), is concerned with the processes responsible for any organism becoming part of the fossil record and how these processes influence information in the fossil record. Many taphonomic processes must be considered when trying to understand fossilization. See: Taphonomy

• One cell phone expert (denied without prejudice - to determine whether this expert is needed after the state’s expert is deposed.)

In his May 12 order, the judge granted a cap of $3,500 for the costs of public records requests and denied all travel costs incurred by defense counsel, meaning attorneys only, but it didn’t address travel costs for experts. What the judge needed to clarify to both the defense and the JAC is what JAC will be held responsible for paying. In its own response to the defense motion, JAC did not make that clear. At the same time, the official JAC Expert Billing manual states that:

“Experts may not bill for time spent traveling on a case unless an hourly rate has been established by law or a court order for the travel time. Generally, travel time is not reimburseable.”

In this case, the judge did not establish an hourly rate, but the JAC manual does address a mileage rate for reimbursement of $.0445 per mile when out-of-county experts travel more than 50 miles. Will the judge set an hourly rate for the experts’ travel time? The order did cite attachments, which were not released to the public as far as I know. The answer may be in those documents.

Personally, I can’t imagine a better judge when it comes to knowing law. And I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were the defense, expecting him to flub somewhere down the pike. As much respect as I have for Judge Strickland, Judge Perry has a clear docket, and that translates into one important thing: He’s got more time on his hands to make sure this case is handled by the book. That means less things to consider upon appeal. Of course, that’s only if Casey is convicted. Meanwhile, stare decisis et non quieta movere.  The defense must maintain what has been decided. In other words, it cannot alter the legal principle under which judges are obligated to follow the precedents established in prior decisions. That’s why the judge denied the defense counsel’s Motion for Reconsideration that dealt with the previously rendered denial of its motion to seal jail logs, including commissary records and telephone and visitation logs. Oh, I could go on, but that one’s for another day.

Casey McDingles

HERE’S WHAT REAL WITNESS TAMPERING IS ALL ABOUT

There is a no-brainer running around like a chicken without its head who insists she knows what witness tampering is all about. She doesn’t, and this will serve to quash any and all rumors she keeps firing into wasted Internet bandwidth. At the same time, it will explain exactly what it is. Merely interviewing someone is not. Suggesting they change the truth most assuredly is.

In reality, two Texas EquuSearch volunteers told WFTV that a private investigator working for the defense tried to manipulate them into changing their stories about what transpired down along Suburban Drive in September of 2008.

Brett Churchill and Brett Reilly have accused PI Jeremiah Lyons of slinging words their way that would cause them to alter their testimony about searching the area where Caylee’s remains were found three months later by Roy Kronk, another defense target.

According to the WFTV report, Lyons was recently in court examining EquuSearch records. The station reports that he’s keeping low key while talking to volunteers who are not very happy about it.

In this case, both volunteers are prosecution witnesses. Churchill has been deposed by the defense and Reilly has talked on record to investigators. Both have stated that the exact area where the toddler was discovered was under water and unsearchable at the time. According to Churchill, Lyons went to his house and lied about Reilly’s story. “He basically was asking me if what I said in my deposition was the exact story because he had others who fared differently, one of them being Brett Reilly.”

Reilly had earlier warned Lyons not to twist his words after witnessing what Casey’s defense had done to others involved in the case. Lyons promised him he wouldn’t.

Let me tell you, from first-hand experience, I know all about what a professional manipulator Jerry Lyons is. They don’t get any slicker, but in my case, the defense ended up with the short end of the stick. What he succeeded in doing was to somewhat change the tenor of this court. It abruptly went from Strickland to stricter. Strickland to stricter… trust me, they will be words that linger.

The report also states that Reilly complained to Cheney Mason and that both volunteers contacted the sheriff’s office.

A DATE WITH CASEY

Great news is coming right up for those who want to see what Casey’s new tooth looks like. She is slated to appear at next week’s hearing, which will be at 1:30 pm on the 29th. It had been scheduled to be a status hearing, but with her attendance announced, it signaled that there would be more to the hearing than just an update from the attorneys. She has not been in court since her mother and brother took the stand back in July. Of course, plain old status hearings don’t require her presence.

What this should mean is that Judge Perry will hear several arguments, two of which should be the simultaneously filed MOTION TO DETERMINE REASONABLE BUDGET FOR DUE PROCESS COSTS IN A CAPITAL CASE AND MOTION TO INCUR CERTAIN SPECIFIED COSTS filed recently by new attorney Ann Finnell, and quite possibly the prior rulings over the public’s access to Casey’s jail records. This would include phone calls, visitor logs and commissary purchases. In my opinion only, I don’t care if she pigs out on nachos or not. I do not need to know how many hair barrettes, hair pins, hair claws, banana hair clips or how many other products she buys, including female doodads. With the latest ruling in south Florida, this information may have to be rerouted through the state and released through document dumps instead of coming directly from the jail. Hopefully, I will know more about that soon.

With regard to the budget request made by Finnell, the funding agency, the JAC (Justice Administration Commission) doesn’t like her cost estimates. The commission filed a response last week that questions some of the estimates as being too high and others that shouldn’t be billed to taxpayers. In a post I published two weeks ago, I wrote:

The distance between Jacksonville and Orlando, from her office to the jail, is 145 miles each way. The distance from her office to Fort Myers is roughly 300 miles. She anticipates at least one trip per month to Orlando and back, and at least two trips to Fort Myers. Overnight lodging is expected for the trips to Fort Myers and some of the trips to Orlando, all of which is feasible. She’s asking for $4,000.00. Let’s see… a round trip from Jax to O’do runs about $134.00. Jax to Ft. Myers would be double that - $268.00. We are 7-8 months away from showtime, so 7-8 Orlando trips would run… let’s give her the benefit of the doubt and say 8 months. 8 trips would cost almost $1,100.00.  To Fort Myers and back twice would add up to around $540, bringing our total to $1,640.00, not including hotel stays, and I think it’s safe to assume she’s not going to spend the night at the No Tell Motel, but still, that’s over $2,400 in lodgings. Nope, that one should be questioned by the judge. If the court chooses to approve, it brings our tally much higher…

The JAC is requesting it shouldn’t have to foot the bill for attorneys’ travel expenses; that the costs should come out of the money the Baez Law Firm was paid by Ms. Anthony or be absorbed by the individual attorney.

Any way we look at it, the mere fact that Casey will be in the courtroom almost demands that some semblance of verbal chicken poop will be flying into the fan come next Friday afternoon. I’m looking forward to it, so I must admit, I will not quit. I will attend, as I intend.

Barking up the wrong plea?

“I found my daughter’s car today, and it smells like there’s been a dead body in the damn car.”

- Cindy Anthony

You know, I really wanted to title this post, Cryogenic oven-trapping gas chromatography for analysis of volatile organic compounds in body fluids, but it was already taken. Darn those three, K. Watanabe-Suzuki, A. Ishii and O. Suzuki. They left nothing for another man’s creative imagination.

On July 24, 2008, Investigator Mike Vincent of the Orange County Sheriff’s Office sent Oak Ridge National Laboratory a carpet sample from the trunk of Casey’s Pontiac, the one that contained the damn dead pizza with squirrel topping smell. All kidding aside, what tests were performed on the air quality in that trunk was a very serious matter. Whether or not the judge allows the forensic report to be admitted as evidence in the case against Casey is of tantamount importance to both the state and defense, where the life or death of the accused may be in the balance. The judge will have to weigh heavily the type of science it is - something never used in a court of law. Is it truly a valid science or is it junk, as Casey’s defense has implied? To grasp the basic concept of what it is, we must understand it first.

To begin with, there’s nothing quite like real, live witnesses; the ones who will testify in court that the car smelled like death and decomposition. There’s no escaping it. Cindy smelled it, George smelled it, Lee smelled it, and certainly, lots of law enforcement officials running around the Anthony home on July 15, 2008, smelled it, and many of those officials were duly trained in detecting decomposition of the human body. Just like the pungent smell of marijuana, there’s no escaping its uniqueness. Once you smell death, you never forget it. I believe it is in our primordial genes. The very first time it impacts you, you know what it is. No need for an education. No learning curve. No one need tell you what it is. Coupled with the scientific results, it could smell, er, spell doom for Ms. Casey. Even without it, the odor is what it is: decomp. No squirrels or other organic matter was found, lest a few crumbs of dried up pepperoni, if that.

The carpet sample sent in July was not the only thing parceled out. On September 3, Dr. Neal Haskell included air samples from the trunk, paper towels, and a white trash bag, both containing fly pupae. Dr. Haskell is a forensic entomology expert - forensic refers to investigation into the cause of death and entomology refers to insects. He is part of the faculty (Biology Department) at St. Joseph’s College in Rensselaer, Indiana.

According to Oak Ridge, compounds in all the samples were identified by mass spectral library match, which means they were compared against known samples that exist in a library. Without getting too complex, verifications were determined from standards purchased from the Sigma-Aldrich Chemical Company. It’s like comparing samples of anything against a known bank of information pertaining to that subject matter.

The first carpet sample was placed in a sealed metal can. A preliminary analysis was performed by extracting a small amount of air from the can. It was injected into a Hewlett-Packard Gas Chromotagraph/Mass Spectrometer (GC/MS) equipped with a Hewlett-Packard Mass Selective Detector. If this sounds anything like the Turbo Encabulator, it’s not even remotely close. Hewlett-Packard never made one. Alas, only a few compounds were observed in the sample, primarily chloroform, and it became apparent the sample wasn’t strong enough, so it was deemed necessary to increase the sensitivity in order to find a lower abundance of compounds - if they were present at all. According to the report, the technique selected for concentrating the sample was cryogenic trapping, which can improve detection of organic compounds ten-fold. Cryo-trapping is widely used for the analysis of fragrances and odors.

For these analyses, cryo-trapping was performed by injecting air into a short loop of inert stainless-steel tubing connected between the injector of the gas chromatograph and the head of the GC column. The stainless-steel loop was cooled with liquid nitrogen which condensed the organic compounds present in the air sample, while allowing the nitrogen and oxygen to be vented away from the GC/MS. Normal heating of the GC oven during analysis cycle vaporized the condensed organic compounds in the stainless-steel loop and allowed them to traverse through the GC column into the mass spectrometer.¹

If you are not familiar with cryogenics, think of cryonics, which is the “science of using ultra-cold temperature to preserve human life with the intent of restoring good health when technology becomes available to do so,” according to the Alcor Website. Rumor has it that Walt Disney’s head is frozen and kept under the Cinderella Castle at Disney World, here in Orlando, but that’s not true. His whole body is on ice in a hidden chamber beneath Pirates of The Caribbean at Disneyland. Actually, none of that is true. Dearly departed Disney was cremated, head and all, and his ashes rest in Forest Lawn Memorial Park in Glendale, California. Cryo no more.

Back to the matter at hand…

The carpet sample was removed from the metal can and placed in a Tedlar bag for 2 days at 35 degrees Celsius (C) and allowed to off-gas into the bag. Kind of like a silent, but deadly, if you get my drift. Tedlar bags have many uses in many industries, including air sampling, hazardous waste, and other gas sampling needs.

The report admitted that gasoline was found in the trunk and it was likely a source of significant hydrocarbon interference that caused an overlap with about 41% of the chemicals typically observed in decompositional events. This may wreak havoc on the state’s claims. The defense will jump on this like flies on… flypaper. Of the 51 chemicals identified on the carpet sample from Casey’s vehicle, 80% were consistent with decompositional events. A mere 17 of the 51 overlapped with known or possible gasoline constituents, leaving 24 compounds - 59% - associated with decomposing human remains potentially unaccounted for. In other words, there was no other way to explain their existence, such as pepperoni. There are lots more examples in the report, but to go into every aspect would be boring and quite tormenting. Suffice it to say that in its conclusion, the report summed up things nicely.

What the lab determined was that odor from early decomposition was present, including “an unusually large concentration of chloroform - far greater than what is typically seen in human decomposition.” There was also an increased level of sulfur containing compounds found, which are “particularly characteristic of decompositional events.” Certainly, of particular interest to the defense is the report’s conclusion that the possibility exists there could be a variety of products that could have contributed to the overall chemical signature.

How much credence should we, as untrained laymen, put into the Oak Ridge report? Laywomen, too. No discrimination intended or implied. Our opinions won’t count in court, but it makes for great discussion. What we may lose sight of are the lab tests conducted for OCSO because we keep wishing upon a star that Casey will be found guilty, so we sometimes skew the results. To be frank, we’re not even into what the defense experts will bring into battle, but we do have another report at our fingertips; the findings of Michael E. Sigman, Ph.D., Assistant Director for Physical Evidence at the National Center for Forensic Science on the campus of the University of Central Florida, right in Casey’s backyard.

Here is a list of what was analyzed and reported in Air Analysis Results: Caylee Anthony Missing Child Investigation²:

Some samples were not tested at NCFS, but an interpretation of the findings stated that“… dimethyl disulfide, tetrachloroethene  and Chloroform are known to be liberated from decomposition of human remains. These three compounds were not found in a representative gasoline sample in the NCFS database. Dimethyl disulfide occurs naturally in cabbage and onion.” Was that pizza ordered with onions and pepperoni? “Tetrachloroethene is used in dry cleaning and may be used in spot removers. Chloroform may be used as a degreaser and may be formed through the reaction of chlorine bleach with some organic chemicals.”

What Dr. Sigman concluded was that the presense of dimethyl disulfide, tetrachloroethene and chloroform did not conclusively demonstrate that human decomp was present in the trunk. There were too many other possible sources. 

These were the findings of Oak Ridge and NCFS, and not my opinion. In other words, I have no dog in this fight other than a cause similar to everyone else that’s compassionate about this case and looking for complete and final justice for Caylee. Speaking of dogs, though, the defense is going to look into all of this in a lot more depth and try to convince the jury a machine could never replace a canine nose. Therefore, it’s inconclusive. On the other hand, didn’t a dog also hit on human decompostion in that trunk? How is defense attorney Dorothy Clay Sims, a specialist in medical-expert witness cross-examinations, going to bark back at a dog?

I recommend reading Air science could be used for first time ever in Anthony case by Anthony Colarossi, Orlando Sentinel, October 8, 2010.

Pie in the sky?

The term “pie in the sky” originally meant to be a promise of heaven while continuing to suffer through living in the material world. It was coined by Joe Hill in a song written by him in 1911. Joe was a Swedish-born itinerant laborer who migrated to the United States in 1902. The Web site The Phrase Finder described his songs as radical as he fought for labor organizations. “The phrase appeared first in Hill’s ‘The Preacher and the Slave’, which parodied the Salvation Army hymn ‘In the Sweet Bye and Bye’. The song, which criticized the Army’s theology and philosophy, specifically their concentration on the salvation of souls rather than the feeding of the hungry, was popular when first recorded and remained so for some years.”

You will eat, bye and bye,
In that glorious land above the sky;
Work and pray, live on hay,
You’ll get pie in the sky when you die.

Today, pie in the sky can allude to many things, such as asking for more than you end up with or expect, for that matter. You may ask for the sky and end up with pie, which is better than nothing. It reminds me of an experience I had while selling advertising for a newspaper many years ago. Ed Mack, now gone, was the editor. He was also a member of the Rotary, the Chamber of Commerce and very active in the Hunterdon County YMCA, volunteering many hours of his personal time.

Ed and I got along great. A wall about 7 feet high is all that separated the editorial department from advertising and my desk sat closest to the line of demarcation. The ceiling was high, so we could hear each other as one side got stories and the other sold ads.

One afternoon, Ed came over to my side with an idea. Bear in mind, in the world of newspapers, in particular, a common argument prevailed and it probably still does to this very day. The Advertising Department pays the salaries, we’d cry, while the Editorial Department would adamantly point out that its news that sells a newspaper and without news, there would be no newspaper. In the end, those key points were muted by the mere fact that, either way, we had jobs, and that’s what mattered most. Today, it’s not so easy.

Ed knew that I was a member of the now defunct Flemington Area Jaycees. On this particular afternoon, he wanted to know if I could get a band of fellow Jaycees together to man phones at the telephone company, which had already given its permission to do so. It was a simple request. The intent was to ask for donations from members of the Y and the general population in order to build the first installment of a large complex that was in the works, an Olympic-sized swimming pool to the tune of $150,000. He knew I was an officer of the club and, with mild coaxing, that I could easily table the idea at our next meeting. Sure thing, I said, and to fast forward, about 8 or 9 of us showed up to sit in open booths at the phone company the following month. Ed was the man in charge and he gave us stacks of 3” x 5” filing cards with the names, addresses and phone numbers of potential donors. My close friend, Frank Foran, was and still is a top-notch sales rep, and he was in fitting form for the occasion.

Of course, we all focused on the cards we had. Initially, I called people and introduced myself as a member of the Flemington Jaycees and that we were proudly supporting the YMCA in their effort to bring our area a large and highly professional educational and recreational sports facility. We all know the Y. All of Hunterdon County would shine because of it. Perhaps you saw it written up in the newspaper? Oh, yes, of course you did. Well, the first leg is the swimming pool and we need to raise $150,000. Could you please help out by donating $50 toward our goal? No? How about $25? No? Yes, I understand times are tough. [Gee, that was back in the late 70s.] OK, well, thank you, and if you can ever help, please call me at the newspaper and I will make sure you are contacted by the right people. That meant Ed, whose office was a mere stone’s throw away from my desk.

After about a half-dozen disappointing phone calls begging for money, I got zero results and I thought about it. I had to change my tune or I would end up a major flop to the man who was directly under the publisher, my employer. This wouldn’t sit well with Bengt Gaterud, the sales manager, either. I rewrote some of the lyrics. I had my eye in the sky for pie in the sky.

Hi, I said, as I gave the same opening spiel with the hundred-and-fifty grand price tag. There was no need to change that, but when they asked me how much I was expecting them to give, it wasn’t $25 or $50 I requested. Instead, I asked for $2,000. Yes, $2,000 would be great. Of course, they exploded with raw emotion.

“Two thousand dollars?!!! You gotta be nuts! I can’t afford anything like that!”

“OK, how about a thousand?”

“You gotta be kidding me?”

“No, I’m serious. How about fifty?

“Fifty, you got it.”

And with that change in tactics - the rapid-fire subtle suggestions, I ended up making the second-most money of the night and it was a huge success. Of course, Frank made the most, and no one expected less from him. He’s that good.

The next morning, Ed and I purposely crossed paths. He thanked me and the fellow Jaycees. I asked him how well we did. He said it was huge, a lot more than he figured. He told me one other thing.

“I don’t know what you did, Dave, but I gave you a list of deadbeats. I didn’t expect you to make any money at all, but you came in second. I gave you that list because you are a salesperson for this newspaper. I wanted to see what you had in you. You really surprised me.”

OK, now you may think I’m strutting my stuff, but I’m not. As long as I’ve known Frank, he’s encouraged me to go into sales. When he’s 95-years-old and I’m 90, I can hear him in his decrepid, soft and gravelly voice, “Dave, you need to go into sales.”

I never will. I’ve found my niche; it’s writing, and there’s a point to my story - the case against Casey. I constantly hear from people who think she deserves the death penalty, but won’t get it. Some people think she should get life without parole so she can live out her days in prison, wallowing in the memories of her precious daughter and what she, herself, could have become in life. Some people don’t think she’s guilty of murder, but none of that is my point. To use the old cliché and cut to the chase, the state has requested the death penalty. Does the state seriously intend to execute her? You bet, or it wouldn’t have been placed on the table to begin with. This ain’t no dress rehearsal, as my old friend Tom Corkhill always said. This is the real deal, only there is a ‘what if’ formula here, just in case. Because of the death penalty, the jury must be made up of people willing to sentence a person to death. It doesn’t automatically mean they will, but means they might be more prone to finding her guilty. The odds increase exponentially with a death qualified jury and the state knows it. There’s the sky, but will the aim be too high?

In the end, the defense is going to put on a much better show than originally anticipated by us, the general public. Perhaps, in all their seasoned wisdom, the state knew that as time went on in the sweet by and by, things would get tougher. Today, with the recent addition of several more well-seasoned defense attorneys, please allow me one more cliché. I think that, from now on, this is not going to be a piece of cake for the state.

When karma strikes twice

At 6:13 PM EDT on October 26, 2006, Danny Harold Rolling took his final breath. Florida’s most notorious serial killer since Ted Bundy was executed by lethal injection for raping and carving up five college students in a ghastly spree that horrified and terrorized the University of Florida’s campus in Gainesville back in August of 1990, just as the fall semester got underway. Each one was murdered with a hunting knife. Some were mutilated, sexually molested and put in gruesome poses. One of his victim’s severed head was placed on a shelf, her body posed in a seated position.

Just before his execution, he confessed to the November 1989 murders of a 55-year-old man in Shreveport, Louisiana, his 24-year-old daughter and her 8-year-old son.

One of his victims at UF was Sonja Larson, a freshman who was killed along with her roommate in the apartment they shared. Her goal was to become a teacher. On that fateful night, she and her roommate, Christina Powell, went to a local Walmart to buy a few things. Danny Rolling was a drifter who just happened to be in the store at the same time. He followed the women back to their apartment and attacked them in their sleep.

Her brother, Jim Larson, who lives in Orlando, said, “He confessed to killing five people. He cut their heads off, then played with them. He did the worst things you can possibly do to somebody…”

During the trial, he was so  shocked by the details that at one point, he curled into a ball on the floor and sobbed. He might have never moved from that spot had it not been for his wife, Carla. She cradled him as he cried and sat with him during the remainder of the trial. She convinced him that evil had not infested the entire world, despite it touching so close to home. She was his guide and mentor; his beacon of hope and strength.

Fast forward seven years. Carla Larson got up on the morning of June 10, 1997, to go to work as a building engineer for Centex Rooney Construction Company. The project, a resort called Coronado Springs, was on Walt Disney World property. It was an ordinary day until she left for lunch and never came back. She went to a nearby Publix supermarket to buy grapes and strawberries when a small time convict named John Huggins kidnapped her in the parking lot, drove to a remote field, and strangled her, partially burying her in a shallow grave and covering her with leaves.

What did Jim Larson do to deserve this? They had a one-year-old daughter together. It was her idea, but he didn’t want to bring a child up in a world where murderers like Danny Rolling stalked innocent victims. After extensive counseling, Jim found inner peace and their daughter was born. They had bought a small house in the suburbs of Orlando, in College Park. They installed new locks and a home security system. They bought a Rottweiler. Carla drove a big Ford Explorer. Jim made sure he did everything he could do to keep his family safe.

John Huggins was a Sanford landscaper who had been in and out of trouble with the law most of his life. He was on vacation with his estranged wife, Angel, and their children, staying at a hotel directly across the street from that Publix. In broad daylight, he punched Carla in the stomach, forced her into her Explorer, and drove away, never to be seen alive again. Two days later, her nude body was found, partially clad in a beach towel. She was badly decomposed after only two days in the hot summer sun, but one of the medical examiner’s photographs suggested the possibility of a pre-mortem sexual injury. In other words, rape, without all of the details of the autopsy report. At the time, Dr. Sashi Gore was the Chief Medical Examiner for Orange and Osceola Counties. A different Dr. G back then.

I distinctly remember this murder. It’s funny how the mind plays tricks. After his arrest, John Huggins looked like an ordinary guy to me, unlike a murderer, but then again, what is a murderer supposed to look like? Someone pleasing to the eye, like Casey Anthony or Ted Bundy? When Jim Larson was interviewed on TV, he acted so unemotional and flat, he became a prime suspect in the minds of viewers. He’s hiding something! I even hesitated to believe him because of his indifference. He talked to the media, never shedding a tear, and never showing anger or sorrow. When he spoke, it was insipid, with a prosaic stare. Law enforcement officials were so perplexed by his strange behavior, they asked him to take a lie detector test, just to see if he was somehow involved. Of course, his only involvement was the incredible love he felt for his wife. It lasts to this very day. The murders of his sister seven years earlier, and now his wife, had completely drained him.

On the afternoon of the murder, Carla’s white Explorer was seen speeding away from what turned out to be her temporary grave, along the Orange-Osceola county border. Huggins was trying to patch up his broken marriage. He and his family had been staying in motel and hotel rooms mostly around the Melbourne area where his wife’s mother lived, before coming to Orlando. Angel, his second wife, later told police that her husband was gone at lunchtime that day and returned sometime later, all sweaty and nervous. She soon left with the children to stay with her mother, Fay, leaving Huggins behind.

Later that day, he arrived at Fay’s house driving a white SUV that matched the general description of Carla’s. It was a rental, he said. Although he and his wife were in the process of a divorce, they continued to stay together in the coastal area until her sister, Tammy, arrived to visit. During that time she and Huggins began a relationship. What happened next was something I remember because it was so obvious what this was all about.

Kevin Smith, who lived nearby, was a friend of Huggins. He had agreed to let him keep the SUV at his house for a few days. On the evening of October 26, police received a phone call that an SUV was engulfed in flames in a vacant lot near Kevin’s house. Instinctively, most of us knew what it was, and a subsequent investigation proved it was Carla’s and it was set on fire intentionally.

On the following day, seventeen days after Carla’s murder, Tammy returned to her home in Maryland with John in tow. Shortly after they left, Angel watched America’s Most Wanted, which featured Carla’s murder. She had wondered where John got the SUV and never believed his story. She called the show and reported that she suspected her husband of the murder. As a result of that call, investigators conducted two extensive searches of Fay’s house, but were unable to find anything incriminating. Angel and her mother searched, too, and one day while getting a can of bug spray out of the back yard shed, Fay noticed a screwdriver on top of an electrical box. On a whim, she unscrewed the lid, and found jewelry inside - jewelry that was later found to belong to Carla, including her pear-shaped diamond engagement ring.

John Huggins was arrested in Maryland and extradited back to Florida. After his indictment in front of an Orange County grand jury, he requested a change of venue, which was granted and transferred to Jacksonville in Duval County. On February 3, 1999, Huggins was convicted of first-degree murder, carjacking, robbery and kidnapping. During the sentencing phase, Jim Larson told the jury that, ”One night Carla and I were sitting on a bench outside her dorm room. We were just talking. Carla got up to do something. She walked a few steps and turned around and looked at me. It was just a moment. But when our eyes met, it was as if our souls touched one another. I smiled back at her. I felt so good my eyes filled with tears. I loved her so much. We set our wedding date for Dec. 1, 1990, after her graduation from college.”

After considering the aggravators and mitigators, the jury recommended the death penalty by an 8-4 vote. The court agreed, and John Steven Huggins was sentenced to death. Ironically, Danny Rolling and John Huggins were on death row together. Two murders unrelated except for one common thread - a man, two women and two families who did nothing in life to deserve this. Neither did Jim and Carla’s daughter, a mere one-year-old at the time, much too young to sin, and much too young to know anything about bad karma.

This is the end of PART ONE. Where am I going with this? Wait and see. The answer will come this week, when I weave it all together with what we are witnessing today in a case that has so much national exposure, it dwarfs the magnitude of Carla’s murder in scale, but certainly not in importance.

TO READ PART 2, CLICK HERE

PAID AD

BACKGROUND CHECKS

Trial By Ambush

PART I

I hate being late to anything, but on Monday, so many people were present at the courthouse waiting to go through security, it was a full 9 minutes before I entered courtroom 19D, meaning that I was 9 minutes late since Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. is a stickler for being prompt. When a hearing is set to start at 1:30, it starts at precisely that time. Courtroom 19D holds some bittersweet memories for me, too. It's Judge Strickland's courtroom, and the one where I was called up to meet him on that fateful October day last year. Alas, life goes on, but it's a date I will never forget.

What ensued on Monday was a heavy dose of the reality of Judge Perry's courtroom and a taste of things to come. One of the strongest statements he made and one that's clearly set in stone is that he will not budge when it comes to the timeline. On May 9, 2011, jury selection will start and exactly one week later, on the 16th, the trial will begin.

The reason for these status hearings is to keep both sides on schedule and to ensure that they share information with each other and get everything synchronized or suffer the consequences. “I would not want me setting your depositions,” he said. “I’ve been known to do some weird things like working on Saturday.”

One of the issues Jose Baez addressed was the timing of the state's release of discovery. He cited one example. Erica Gonzalez worked as a shot girl at Fusian Ultralounge. She told OCSO Cpl. Yuri Melich that she spoke to Casey on the phone on July 15, 2008, and heard her talking to Caylee.

Jose said he didn't receive this information until July 22 of this year, over two years later. Linda Drane Burdick responded that there are plenty of times witnesses take too long to respond. For example, PI Dominic Casey took forever to turn in documents and it took a week to scan all of the papers for release.

The defense turned over an amended witness list containing 63 Category A witnesses. The judge reminded both sides of their deadlines. Linda Drane Burdick mentioned that 300-500 more pages of discovery are coming, but they would be mostly bank records of no significance to the defense. She still needs to copy Yuri Melich's hard drive, she added.

The prosecution wondered how 35 people could possibly be deposed in one day, as stated by the defense. Cheney Mason piped in that he would get it done on September 15 as scheduled. Some might be a mere 5 minutes long. What I noticed during this exchange was a friendly banter between Mason and the judge. Quite clearly, the two men had experience with each other and were, no doubt, comfortable and aware of each other's unique personalities, strengths and weaknesses. I will elaborate on this at a later date.

When the defense filed its NOTICE OF STANDING OBJECTION OF ABUSE OF FLORIDA STATUTE 119.01, the judge interpreted it as meaning it was not requesting a hearing, but instead, stating on record that it objected to the media and public's right to know. Jose Baez concurred. The Orlando Sentinel filed a MOTION TO INTERVENE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF OPPOSING DEFENDANT'S STANDING OBJECTIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES CHAPTER 119.01. If this sounds complicated, it's not really. It's more of a formality on the defense's part and opens the door for a gag order later on, which Judge Perry will, most likely, write as the trial nears. This will be in order to keep potential jurors from reading about the case so close to jury selection. Mason brought up Murph the Surf, which addressed media coverage. Jack Roland Murphy was a famous surfing champion, musician, author and artist before his convictions; one being his involvement in the biggest jewel heist in American history at the American Museum of Natural History, and the other being the first-degree murder of Terry Rae Frank, 24, a California secretary. From lectlaw.com, Heidi Howard:

The Court examined the totality of the circumstances, and found that if the jurors were actually, provably prejudiced by pretrial publicity, or if the "general atmosphere in the community or courtroom is sufficiently inflammatory," the community sentiment can be so poisoned against the defendant "as to impeach the indifference of jurors who displayed no animus of their own."¹

In other words, the media may be restrained from reporting, at least prior to the impaneling of a jury in a criminal trial, when pretrial publicity is so pervasive that it, more than likely, would have an effect on jurors.

A final edict made by Judge Perry was that all future motions will be heard within 15 days of filing. This is the nature of this judge. Move, move, move! I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he keeps a fully charged cattle prod at his side behind the bench, waiting to use it.

PART II

One of the most compelling statements made by the judge was that the state of Florida has discovery rules that include trial by ambush. Trial by ambush? What's this all about?

In Florida, the standard  trial order entered by most judges  is that 45 days prior to the trial getting underway, both sides must submit to opposing counsel a written list of the names and addresses of all witnesses, impeachment, rebuttal or otherwise intended to be called at trial. It means this is the complete list of people who will be permitted to testify. It's intended to keep either side from suddenly finding a witness and surprising the other side. In this case, an act of this nature amounts to trial by ambush. Most judges will not allow it. Any witness not previously disclosed won't get near the courtroom unless certain circumstances warrant it. An example would be if the party diligently tried to find a witness and failed due to not being available until trial.

Another aspect of trial by ambush includes other discovery, as well. Discovery enables both parties to know before the trial begins what evidence may be presented. This way, one side doesn't learn of the other side's evidence when there's no time to obtain anything to respond.

In 1981, the Florida Supreme Court set the standard for the requirements of pretrial disclosure (See: Binger v. King Pest Control, 401 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. 1981). It gave trial courts ammunition to deal with faulty pretrial disclosure. In Marine Enterprises v. Bailey, 632 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), the Fourth District Court approved the trial court's striking four witnesses for violations of the pretrial order.

“In exercising its discretion to strike witnesses not properly disclosed upon pretrial order, the trial court may consider such factors as: whether use of the undisclosed witness will prejudice the objecting party; the objecting party’s ability to cure the prejudice or its independent knowledge of the witnesses’ existence; the calling party’s possible intentional noncompliance with the pretrial order; and the possible disruption of the orderly and efficient trial of the case.

Compliance with pretrial orders directing proper disclosure of witnesses eliminates surprise and prevents trial by ‘ambush.’ Binger, 401 So. 2d at 1314. Counsel who disobey a trial court order entered months earlier should not be rewarded for their conduct. Pipkin v. Hamer, 501 So. 2d 1365, 1370 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987).”

As a matter of fact, trial by ambush has been discouraged since the state of Florida adopted its rules of procedure in 1954. Judge Perry is well-versed in procedural law, and the fact that he brought it up at Monday's hearing means he plans on abiding by the rules. Remember: 45 days.

On a final note, one thing I understood from attending the hearing was the judge's determination to impress his rules on both sides of the aisle, not just the defense, as many people believe. I saw no discrimination or favoritism. He treated the two sides equally and he had words to say to everyone involved. He doesn't want to hear petty arguing or sniping, either. Such is the manner of any good judge. In this case, there's no doubt in my mind that what we have here is a great judge who will play Solomon if and when it's necessary. Of course, I never expected any less from Judge Strickland, so in that regard, nothing has changed. As the hearing progressed, I got a sense that the light at the end of the tunnel is coming into view. It's no-nonsense from here on out. When Linda Drane Burdick asked the court if closing arguments could be split between all of the attorneys, state and defense, that little tunnel lit up, and I liked what I saw. Justice was shining at that other end.

Here we go... over and over again

"Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet."

- Rudyard Kipling, in his Barrack-room ballads, 1892

What Kipling was lamenting was the vast ocean of opinions that separated the British and the inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent. I see similarities in the courtroom.

The governor of Florida is the top banana of the state Executive branch, just as the president of the United States is in charge of the federal equivalent. The governor of this state is the only person who has the authority to name a Secretary of the Department of Corrections. Therefore, as we have heard time and time again, jails and prisons fall under the auspices of the Executive branch, not the Judicial or Legislative.

COMES NOW, Casey Anthony's defense team has filed yet another motion regarding her lack of privacy in jail, including, but not limited to, what types of snacks she buys from the commissary. Titled the NOTICE OF STANDING OBJECTION OF ABUSE OF FLORIDA STATUTE 119.01, it, once again, “objects to the constant, unconstitutional and abusive application of [the statute] as it relates to this cause..." In other words, inquiring minds should not have the right-to-know if those nachos are Frito Lay or another brand, never mind what flavor.

For starters, here's what F.S. 119.01 says about the matter as it explains the general state policy on public records...

It is the policy of this state that all state, county, and municipal records shall be open for personal inspection by any person.

There are actually 4 parts to the statute, but the remainder are superfluous, in the sense that they address matters of technological advances, meaning we are no longer moving into a digital world, we are in the thick of it and the state is obligated to keep up with it. With that lone entry, all that should matter to the judge and Casey's attorneys are the simple words that need no further explanation, “shall be open for personal inspection.”

Judge Perry has no authority to usurp Florida statutes, which come from the Legislature, and he has no power to trump the Executive branch, either, which runs jails and prisons.

This is certainly not the first time Casey's lawyers have filed a motion like this. Each time, they have been turned back for the same reason. Whether it was Judge Strickland or Judge Perry, the same old, same old response has been delivered. “I have no power over the Executive branch of government. I cannot tell the jail how to run itself.”

Of course, those responses did nothing to stop this new request. I don't know whether to give the defense an “A” for perseverance or an “E” for filing another wasted motion. I know exactly what grade I would give, but instead, lets take a look at the meat of the motion.

1. This matter is a Death Penalty Case that has garnered national attention and local obsession by the media.
2. The undersigned counsel (Baez & Mason) has made repeated objections as to the application of Chapter 119.01 of the Florida Statutes.
3. The Defense has objected to information being released by Law Enforcement, Corrections, and the State Attorneys office in this matter.
4. It has been and continues to be the defense position that the First Amendment rights of the media must give way to the constitutionally protected rights of the accused, especially when the State seeks the ultimate penalty of Death.
5. This objection is standing and continues and the Defense invites this Honorable Court to either reverse any prior rulings as it relates to public disclosure or Sua Sponte order the aforementioned agencies to prevent any future abuses of Chapter 119.01.
6. On July 13, 2010, the media reported that the accused ordered "Crackers and Cocoa." This ridiculous coverage has become common in this case. The information was obtained from a public records request from the Orange County Jail. [A WESH Web story was attached to the motion.]
7. The only purpose of this type of coverage is to embarrass, harass and humiliate the accused and poison the potential jury pool.

It is that final argument that strikes me as peculiar. The only thing that has become an embarrassment is the amount of motions this defense has filed regarding, not only this matter, but others. It is no trade secret that the jail, the state attorneys and the sheriff's office routinely respond to media requests for public records and the agencies are obliged to hand over the goods. True, this is a capital murder case, but if we are a nation where all people are created equal, and that means Floridians and their state's Open Government and Public Records laws, it must clearly include Casey Marie Anthony, who has no special rights outside of each and every one of us. The rules will not be rewritten.

My advice for the defense would be to take the "Crackers and Cocoa" argument up with the governor. That's an executive decision, not the court's. As for tinkering with Florida's statutes, that's up to the Legislature.

And for what goes in Casey's belly behind bars? Without a doubt, potential jurors are not going to remember whether Casey squandered her jail allowance away on nachos and bean dip or saltine crackers. No, not at all. What those jurors will ponder is whether she squandered her life away by murdering her child, and nothing more. Besides, what's so embarrassing about liking Doritos?

Lyon Down

This is an opinion piece based on my observations in and out of the courtroom.

"You're really not going to notice any difference in the way the team operates."

- Cheney Mason

I never planned on writing anything about my interaction with Andrea Lyon because it wasn't all that relevant. Yesterday, that changed when she stepped out from the Casey limelight and the shadow of Cheney Mason. To be honest, it came as a complete surprise to me and I'll be the first person to say I thought she would be there until the end; that she would do her very best to keep Caylee's mother from the clutches of death, if it comes to that. Whenever anyone asked me if she would stay or leave now that another death qualified attorney joined the team, that was my standard answer. To me, she was the best chance Casey had. Well, that's no longer the case, and when I think about it and try to put everything in perspective, I never would have guessed that Judge Strickland would be off the bench, either. Interestingly, Judge Strickland and Andrea Lyon have something in common. Both left after Cheney Mason joined the illustrious defense. He's the common thread and the one that, in my opinion, had something to do yesterday's Motion to Withdraw Counsel. Time will tell if her absence becomes noticeable or not, but so far, I see no improvement after one fair judge stepped down, only to be replaced by another. I make it a point to say he went from Strickland to stricter, and because of his lengthy and seasoned career, he should have known you don't change horses in mid-stream. With yesterday's turn, I'm afraid it was brought about by conflicting viewpoints, along with other factors such as money and scheduling issues. We must consider that Mason had already assumed many of her responsibilities involving the death penalty and this should have been an overt clue. It was a natural transition I never recognized, but I still feel she was and could still be extremely essential to the case.

Under Mason's tutelage came a complete shift in strategy as witnessed at the last hearing and press conference. No longer was Roy Kronk the defense's main target. No longer will it embrace the theory that TES searchers went into those woods earlier on, when the area was flooded. Remember, it was Mason who said there's a difference between missing and disappearing. I'm not suggesting that there were problems with those issues. What I will strongly hint at are bones of contention we may never know about, and when push came to nudge in a battle of intellectual supremacy, was it really worth the trouble from all the way up Chicago way?

Today, I sense a strong possibility that, with Andrea gone, the trial date could be moved ahead at least a week. After all, it is her daughter who is graduating college the week of May 2nd. Judge Perry wanted it to begin that week but he graciously accommodated her. Suddenly, as the judge continues to poke and prod both sides to speed things up, it takes on a new and earnest meaning and that could come to fruition, only don't bet the farm just yet. Trust me, I've been wrong before.

♦

When Andrea Lyon's book, Angel of Death Row, was published, I wrote apost about it based on excerpts published on the Scribd Web site. Soon after, I attended a hearing and had a chance to talk to her. That was the day I "famously" handed my business card to Jose Baez. You know, the card that DOES NOT have my address on it. Walking to the parking garage, I had a friendly chat with Mort Smith, the defense team's private investigator who will, incidentally, remain with the team. As we continued to walk, I asked Andrea what she preferred to be called, ANN'-drea -- AHN'-drea, Ahn-DRAY'A or Ms. Lyon?

"ANN'-drea is just fine," she responded. Okay, Andrea it is.

I told her I had written a post about her new book. I also told her I found a typo in it. A couple of weeks earlier, I sent her an e-mail pointing it out and I wondered whether she received it or not. She acknowledged that she had and then thanked me. She said it would be corrected by the next printing. Along with several other bystanders awaiting the elevator, we all boarded together. Jose asked me if I was going to buy the book. I said, yes, if she would autograph it. Then, he turned to her and jokingly chuckled, "Good, at least one person will be buying it."

Needless to say, the garage elevator is a lot faster than the courthouse ones that go up 23 floors, and in a snap, we parted ways.

♦

The next time I spoke to her was after a later hearing. We were standing outside the entrance/exit doors at one of the now familiar post-hearing press conferences. Standing by her side this time was Linda Kenney Baden, who will also stay on. As Jose was finishing answering questions, I moved closer to the women and asked, "Andrea?"

"Yes, David," she quickly responded. What I discussed with her was of no relevance here, but we stood within inches of each other and I was surprised at how approachable, charming, and downright friendly she was. She was very relaxed, open and candid, too. She even introduced me to Kenney Baden. What I could see in her eyes was an extremely caring individual. Of course, I witnessed it in the courtroom, but, for the brief moment we talked, I sensed - up close and personal - a lot of compassion despite her well known courtroom theatrics. I was impressed that, out of all that was going on in her life, she remembered my name. That was duly noted and appreciated.

I will say this. When she joined the defense team 13 months ago, I thought she was a dedicated woman, it was certainly a step in the right direction, and she was a most positive addition. Up until yesterday, she was the only person of the main three members - meaning her, Baez and Mason - I had the most respect for. I guess I will always have a soft spot for a deeply humanitarian woman, but it was more than that. I happen to hold the same opinion regarding the abolition of the death penalty and I know how committed she is to that cause. That's precisely why her decision to part company came as such a surprise, but I should know better by now. Look what happened to one key player, not to mention little old me, but speaking of judges, here's something you never knew. Neither did she. She felt that a certain judge didn't like her. In the end, and I can say this in all honesty as I bid her well in her present and future endeavors... Andrea? You were dead wrong about that. Take heart, and as you take leave, take that with you.