Rope-A-Dope or Going for Broke?

The trial has been underway for more than a week now, and that’s long enough to get a good idea about where the state and defense are going. Where is this trial headed?

Please read what I think about it…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Smoke and Mirrors and Alligator Tears

Jose Baez promised to tell us why Casey Anthony kept quiet for 31 days. Do you believe what he said in the courtroom yesterday? Was it a smart move or an act of desperation?

Read what I think in 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 Daughter's Scorn; A Family Torn

 What transpired in the courtroom yesterday, May 6? The outcome is that George and Cindy will be allowed to attend the entire trial, despite being witnesses. Why was the Rule of Sequestration waived in their case?

Find out here…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Open the Door and Let Them In

In my new post, renowned attorney Mark NeJame explains George & Cindy Anthony’s motion asking the court to excuse them from the rule of sequestration. Should they be allowed to attend the entire trial?

Find out here…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

That Smell

Ooooh that smell
Can’t you smell that smell
Ooooh that smell
The smell of death surrounds you

- Lynyrd Skynyrd from “That Smell”

On June 27, 2008, Casey Anthony contacted her close friend, Amy Huizenga, about a peculiar odor emanating from her car. The message was clear, and it was confirmed during Amy’s deposition taken on February 14 of this year. Jose Baez asked her about it starting on page 32:

Q: Okay. Now, she sent you a text message in reference to the smell of the car; is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Okay. And that was on what date, do you recall?

A: I think it’s in here somewhere. I don’t know what day it was.

Q: I can help you if you want to look towards the date for your statement to confirm it.

A. That would be great.

Q: Okay. The 27th. June 27th.

As the interview progressed…

A: Okay. Yeah, the 27th is when she confirmed - - like, when she said it was. But there were definitely a day or two that she had been like, dude, my car smells and I don’t know what it is. Just, like, one of those - - I mean, I think everyone’s had the time you’re like what is that smell. I don’t understand. And she just said it smelled, like, you know, something had died in her car and she had no clue what it is. And I think it was - - she - - it was coming from the engine areaish is what she had said. And then when she - - you know, finally, it was - - she was letting me know she had found it was and that was a squirrel that she figured her dad had run over when he was driving the car.

Q: Let me ask you this - -

A: Yes.

Q: - - do you have any other text messages about the smell or was it just that one text message?

A: I don’t know. You have the text messages.

What’s so important about this exchange is the fact that Casey acknowledged the odor of death in her car, as confirmed by a text message written and sent by her. She also told Amy that the smell had been in the car for at least one day, perhaps two. Was this the start of attempting to pass the blame on to her father?

Q: Okay. Do you know if you spoke about it before the 27th or after the 27th?

A: Before, because the 27th was when she said what it was and there was at least a day, if not two days, that she told me about the smell.

We have now established that Casey freely admitted that the smell of death did, in fact, exist in her vehicle. This leaves us with two possible choices: Casey knew exactly what it was and she was working on an excuse to cover it up, or she had no idea what caused the foul odor.

Let’s fast forward a bit to Amy’s conversation with Cindy, after Cindy picked her up at the Florida Mall. Remember, Cindy called 911 that night and uttered those now famous words,  “I found my daughter’s car today and it smells like there’s been a dead body in the damn car.”

Within a week, she changed her tune. “It smelled like something had died in the car. I smelled it. I thought something had died in the car. I didn’t know what it was. It could have been a squirrel. It could have been anything. But when we opened the trunk and we saw the maggots in the trunk with all the pizza and stuff, it was a rancid smell.” (See: http://www.wftv.com/news/16981004/detail.html)

She also told FOX News, “Do me a favor, put a little piece of pizza or any piece of garbage in your car today and leave it shut up for 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 days in this heat and then come back to me in 19 days and tell me what it smells like.” (See: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,389642,00.html)

What she did was a complete spin. It meant that the smell of death was not really death at all, it was pizza and other garbage found in the trunk that reeked so badly. She told the 911 dispatcher about the smell of death for one reason only: to quickly bring law enforcement to the house. She didn’t really mean what she said. Excuse me. Never mind. Except for one major issue. It wasn’t only the dispatcher she told that to.

Starting from page 52 of the deposition, where Amy dropped Casey off at Anthony Lazzaro’s apartment in Winter Park…

Q: Okay. And then where did you go?

A: I went to the Florida Mall with JP [Chatt] in his car because he wanted to go pick up the new iPhone that had come out while we were gone. And the Florida Mall is fun to walk around in so I tagged along.

Q: Tell me about the conversation when Cindy calls you. What happened - -

A: She called me and asked me - - you know, obviously stated who she was and then asked me if I had seen Casey or Caylee. I was, like, well, I just saw Casey like an hour and a half ago, but I haven’t seen Casey - - or Caylee in a while. And so she proceeded to tell me that, like, she needed to find her, that she was going to be in really big trouble. I believe she mentioned jail for some reason. I don’t recll what the reasoning was why she was going to be going to jail, but just seemed very important that she find her and that she hadn’t seen her in a long time. So that the car - - her car had been impounded for two weeks and that she just really needed to find Casey.

Q: Did she say anything about the smell in the car?

A: I don’t think she said anything about the smell of the car on the phone conversation. She said - - she did later in the car, but not, I don’t believe, over the phone.

AHA! I received an e-mail yesterday afternoon. A very nice person, who shall remain anonymous, wrote this to me:

I read the deposition of Amy. In it, Cindy states to her that the car smelled like a dead body had been in it. She says the same thing on the 911 call later. Then much later she says that she would have said anything to get the police there ASAP. I think saying that to Amy BEFORE the Police might come back to really haunt her.

She makes a very valid point. Continuing with Amy’s depostion:

Q: Okay. So then [Cindy] picks you up at the Florida mall?

A: Yes.

Q: You got in the car and then what’s the conversation like as you’re going to Tony’s house?

A: Well, first it was a, it’s nice to finally meet you because I had yet to meet her at that point. And she told me - - like actually then told me then the whole story of the car impound, that was when she told me about the smell.

Q: What did she say in describing the smell?

A: She said that it smelled - - it was the most horrible smell that she had ever smelled and that they were terrified that it was either Casey or Caylee in the car - - in the trunk until they got it open. But that was - - that her fear and she was barely controlling, like, emotion in saying that. Like, it was - - you could see that that was still something [t]hat she remembered being upset about that that thought was in her mind.

Q: Did she say she smelled the car or did she say George smelled the car?

A: Both of them. I believe they were boh there.

Q: Okay. So she’s telling you this on the way to Tony’s house?

A: Yes.

If it wasn’t the odor of death, what prompted George and Cindy to immediately think of Casey and Caylee’s well-being? Here are two snippets quoting George and Cindy’s own words from a transcript of the HLN program, Nancy Grace, dated November 17, 2008:

GEORGE ANTHONY: You guys don’t know! The person who was in the back of my granddaughter’s (SIC) car is not my granddaughter!

CINDY ANTHONY, GRANDMOTHER OF MISSING TODDLER: My husband is a deputy sheriff. Years ago, he was a homicide investigator, as well. And the first thing he thought was human decomposition. I’m a nurse. I thought human decomposition.

It’s interesting, to say the least. Ooooh that smell!

Reference: Huizenga Depo 2_11

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.

Interesting day of discovery

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

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

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

Julie Ann Davis

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

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

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

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

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

Cpl. Mark David Hawkins

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

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

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

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

Anne Pham

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

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

Dr. Barry Logan

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

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

Dr. Timothy Huntington

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

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

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

 §

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

§

Depositions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Either Way

While attending court on Wednesday, I noticed a big difference in how Casey’s defense presented itself as opposed to past hearings. It was a dramatic improvement. It was also the first time I saw Dorothy Clay Sims, the Ocala attorney who specializes in aggressive cross-examinations of medical experts. She joined Casey’s team in September of last year. We will be hearing much more from her as we approach the trial, I’m sure.

On Thursday, Judge Perry opened the hearing by admonishing the gallery. He reminded everyone he does not want to see any smirking or hear any snickering. This includes moans, sighs and any sort of reaction that deviates from quietly sitting still and behaving ourselves. One thing I admire about him is the manner in which he handles issues on the surface. He seems to be rather uncomfortable with singling any person or group out. I would imagine if and when it ever reaches that point, the person(s) on the receiving end won’t be happy.

Thus began the day filled with testimony from detectives, deputies, jailers and the two Anthony men. When I arrived on the 19th floor, I expected to see a good number of OCSO’s finest, and I did. The first one I noticed was Sgt. John Allen, the lead investigator of this case. We had warm greetings and a firm handshake as we crossed paths. If you recall, Sgt. Allen interviewed me in December 2009 and I’ve spoken with him several times by phone since then; the last call was made in November 2010 concerning an idiotic conspiracy being promulgated on another blog.

I have an awful lot of respect for Sgt. Allen for several reasons. He made me feel very comfortable during our initial meeting. He was professional and courteous. He knew how to ask the right questions and he allowed time to talk about other things of interest, some personal, but mostly about the case. For instance, when Casey was initially arrested and all leads pointed to finding a victim, he and over 100 law enforcement personnel continued to search around the country for a living Caylee. You could clearly sense his dedication, focus and concern. No one ever gave up hope until after her remains were found. What I walked away with that December day was a good understanding of the man and the challenges he faces every day. I recall how OCSO and other personnel were castigated by family members for not doing more to find Caylee, but I knew they were. All they wanted was the truth.

I also had an opportunity to speak briefly to Cmdr. Matt Irwin and Cpl. Yuri Melich. During a more lengthy break, I had a good conversation with another detective, Cpl. Eric Edwards. Great guys, all. Of course, nothing about the case was discussed. Actually, the police had to wait outside the courtroom for two days waiting to be called. It’s my understanding that during the entire time, they were in limbo. In other words, no working on any present investigations. Everything was on hold. It seems like so much wasted time, but such is the case when charges are filed and trials ensue. It comes with the territory.

Agents of the State?

Just like I wrote in my previous post, I do not intend to relate a play-by-play account of what transpired in the courtroom. I will proffer my thoughts on the overall scheme of events and what the defense was after. The day before, it was the Miranda warning. On Thursday, it was Agents of the State.

First off, I think the M.O. of a cop is pretty simple. Cops do what cops do. They investigate. They uphold the law. They do a lot more than that, but let’s just stick with investigating and upholding the law for now, especially when the defense questioned both job descriptions. I understand what Jose & Co. were engaging in and while Wednesday may offer them hope, I’m not all that sure about Thursday. Taking a look at one of the angles Jose pressed was how he took it personally when the detectives allegedly told George his daughter could have found a much better attorney. OK, fine. So what? As soon as Casey lawyered up, she wasn’t going to open up to authorities any longer. That’s a given. Who she hired meant nothing because any attorney worth his/her weight in salt would have severed direct communications with law enforcement personnel, so who it was and how good or bad the person was wouldn’t have mattered. Cops and criminal defense attorneys are like oil and vinegar. Anything the law wants to find out from that point on just ain’t gonna transpire.

Because police act the way they do, they usually try any trick in the book to find answers. That’s what private investigators do, too. Short of anything illegal, that’s the name of the game. If you ever watch COPS, you’ll know that any and all people involved in suspicious activity are questioned separately. More information is collected that way. In this case, detectives knew that George was once in law enforcement and, naturally, he would be a better fit when it came to collecting additional information. He understood the lingo. As for Lee… well, Lee is a different breed of animal, but I feel that law enforcement sensed his desire to pursue the field of investigative work. Whether he’s a cop wannabe or not, he created his own agenda. He sure played into their hands. Remember, Dominic Casey told him to work on becoming a PI. There were two willing family members with George and Lee. Where it gets tricky is when the OCSO detectives offered to pick up George and drive him to the county jail to see his daughter, knowing that Baez was out-of-town. That in itself is not a big deal, but it is sneaky. Still, it’s nothing illegal. Where it becomes an issue, in my opinion, is when the detectives told Jose under oath that driving George to the jail was not an official trip. It was only to help him find the truth.

Hold on for a second… Uh… Hmm. Not an official trip. It most certainly was an official trip for four reasons:

1. It was a county vehicle filled with gas paid for by the county.
2. It was tape recorded without George’s knowledge.
3. George was accompanied by two detectives and one FBI agent.
4. Everything law enforcement does related to an investigation is most certainly part of the investigation.

Astutely, Jose asked why they would tape record the trip if it was not part of an investigation. He asked if any of them had ever done the same thing for any other person. Was it done out of the goodness of their hearts? He also put one of his former attorneys on the stand. Gabriel Adam may have had a problem with attorney/client privilege, but he was quick to point out the strange goings-on at the jail that day. Why was he not allowed to see Casey until much later? Because the detectives were in the building, setting up an appointment with dear old dad.¹ In the end, she did not see her father that day, she listened to her attorney’s advice, but I still find something to be a little bit problematic. Why say it wasn’t part of any investigation when, in fact, it was? That’s what cops do, after all. Is it enough to win the motion for the defense? No, not in my opinion and I’ll tell you why. While little lies may come into play during the trial, at issue now is whether the Anthony family was surreptitiously swallowed up by law enforcement to, unwittingly, do dirty deeds at their behest. Did they become Agents of the State?

No.

As desperate as law enforcement was to find the answers, so were the Anthonys. On the stand, all members of the family said they would have done anything to bring Caylee home. This was long before she was found. As a matter of fact, here is a direct quote from George:

“I would have sold my soul to the devil to get my grandchild back.”

They were in complete agony, yes, but as far as I’m concerned, if the Anthonys were Agents of the State, those detectives were just as much Agents for the Anthonys. Yuri Melich and John Allen were the only security blankets the family had at the time, if not all of them, then certainly George. What those detectives did was what they do every day. Sgt. Allen summed it up nicely:

“We were doing this at their request but certainly anything that if we had got of evidentiary value we would have used it and turned it over to the prosecutors.”

Another potential issue is the letter Casey wrote to then Sheriff Kevin Beary. Did the detectives coerce George into convincing her to do it without Jose Baez’s knowledge? Even so, should it matter? No one twisted her arm, and the police had no direct contact. That’s why this “agent” thing is such a big deal to the defense. If they can link the police directly to Casey, it could, potentially, mess with attorney/client privilege. Sgt. Allen told Lee on numerous occasions that “she has an attorney, we can’t talk to her but you can.”

Will the defense win this one? I’m inclined to think not. Everything up to that point was done voluntarily, all players were adults, and they shared one common goal - to bring Caylee home. The Anthonys were willing to do whatever it took and, in the end, the bottom line is simple. The police work for us. Right?

§

One of the nice things about being able to sit in the courtroom is that there is so much more to see than what’s viewed on television. The added depth and dimension are huge advantages. Jose posed a hypothetical question to George. He wanted to know, if he was subpoenaed to testify in court next week, knowing that if he chooses not to attend, it would save his daughter’s life, what would he do? Linda Drane Burdick vehemently objected. The judge overruled and wanted to know George’s answer. He told the prosecutor it could be discussed in a sidebar after he answered the question. Jose asked him again. George replied that he would stay away from court and risk it all, including any form of punishment, if it meant it would save Casey’s life. He broke down on the stand and cried all the way out the door after he was excused.

Ultimately, the judge overruled the prosecutor again after the sidebar, but what you couldn’t see or sense on TV was the emotional state of the gallery at that precise moment in time. The cameras couldn’t show you the welling tears of some of the spectators. It was then that we really felt the agony inside of that man. It was real. For whatever you think of him, this is something we can never deny.

If the defense succeeds in acquitting Casey, one thing is certain. It will never be the same. As cruel and distant as she has become toward her family, who she ignores, she will most assuredly never, ever go back to Hopespring Drive and what she left behind. No, George, she may win, but you will never be able to go back. Either way, for you, Cindy and Lee, it will be a lose/lose situation. Caylee already lost.

I want to say hello and thank you to my courtroom friends on Wednesday and Thursday. I had planned on attending Friday, too, but I had other obligations that almost slipped my mind. Hello to Diana in Asheville! I wish we would have had more time to talk. To Gloria and Jim, I enjoyed our “lunch” together and I look forward to hearing from you soon. And to Melinda and Pam, I really, really enjoyed your company.

¹When Gabriel Adam was through testifying, including the cross-examination, Judge Perry took the unprecedented step of continuing to probe him about his visit with his client. This may not bode well for the State. Something got his attention.

Arresting Development?

 

There are two basic Miranda warnings. One is quite minimal and the other is more verbose:

• You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.

• You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions. Do you understand? Anything you do say may be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand? You have the right to consult an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during questioning now or in the future. Do you understand? If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish. Do you understand? If you decide to answer questions now without an attorney present you will still have the right to stop answering at any time until you talk to an attorney. Do you understand? Knowing and understanding your rights as I have explained them to you, are you willing to answer my questions without an attorney present?

The general rule is that the first one is just an announcement of your rights, whether under arrest or not, and the second one is primarily to cover the bases a detainee might encounter while in police custody.

We have rights under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, but do we know each one of them by heart? Way back in 1963, Ernesto Miranda was accused of kidnapping and raping an 18-year-old woman. When brought in for questioning, he confessed. He was never told that he had rights at all. He was never told he didn’t have to speak to the police or that he could have had an attorney present. At trial, his counsel attempted to get the confession thrown out, but the motion was denied. In 1966, the case went before the U.S. Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled that Miranda’s statements to law enforcement could not be used as evidence since he had not been advised of his rights.

Since then, before any pertinent questioning of a suspect is done, officers of the law have been required to recite the Miranda warning. The above statements have the same key elements: the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. When you have been read your rights, you have been Mirandized.

Of great importance is the difference between being arrested and being questioned. When law enforcement asks you anything - anything at all, you have the right to remain silent. Period. Of course, this doesn’t include answering basic questions such as your name, address and other relevant information regarding your identity. Also, bear in mind that if you are not a suspect, the police do not need to Mirandize you.

At issue with Casey, and of great importance to her defense, is the precise moment when she shifted from being a person of interest (which could mean just about anything) to becoming a full-blown suspect involved in a crime. To be certain, prior to her being questioned, she was already suspected of stealing. That quickly changed when law enforcement learned of Caylee’s disappearance and possible kidnapping. What is so relevant at this point is the time investigators turned around and looked at her as a suspect. There are no clear-cut definitions; it is a gray area, but no doubt, police are trained to be suspicious of their own mothers, so after Casey told her first lie, the gloves came off and she became a prime target of investigation. What her defense did today was to paint her as a sitting duck, and there may be some weight to it. Were Orange County’s finest required to read Casey her rights before firing away, if just as a precaution? That’s what we are about to find out.

When Deputy Ryan Eberlin told defense attorneys on the stand today that he initially handcuffed Casey on July 15, 2008 and put her in the back of a patrol car - the “cage”, should he have read her her rights, right then and there? Remember, that would not have signified that she was under arrest. At that moment, the crux of the investigation was over a missing toddler, right? Yes, but Cindy had just showed him receipts that virtually indicted Casey of fraudulent use of her credit cards. She said she wanted to press charges against her daughter. It was at this moment the cuffs went on. Time to be Mirandized. She was a suspect in a crime.

This could be big. I have tried to maintain a decent semblance of neutrality throughout this trying case, although I will admit I falter at times, but I have got to admit that this could be problematic for the State. To be blunt, Jose Baez and Cheney Mason were very good in the courtroom today and I have to call it like I saw it. Give them their day in the sun, but don’t get in an uproar over my revelation, not quite yet, anyway. We don’t know how the judge will rule. There’s still much more testimony to come, but if he rules in favor of the defense, it means initial questions will be tossed. However, keep one important factor in the back of your mind…

Ernesto Miranda. Oh yes, his conviction was thrown out, alright, but he didn’t walk away a free man. Law enforcement still had tons of other evidence that was completely independent of the confession. When he was tried the second time, he was convicted again, and after his release, he was killed in a barroom fight.

Just remember, the State of Florida is still sitting on lots of other evidence against Casey.

§

There is much more I could address, but it was a long day. One little morsel of interest, I’m sure… Diana Tennis is no longer representing Dominic Casey. He is out of the woods, so to speak, and Ms. Tennis is free to say and write whatever she wants about the case.

Also, the State submitted two photographs into evidence. The defense objected, but Judge Perry overruled. The first one shows a happy Casey taken at OCSO Operations Center. The second one is walking out into the lobby to exit the building. Could the first one infer that she’s a mother not too worried about her toddler?

 

I’m going to bed. It’s going to be a long day tomorrow, I’m sure.

From the FRYE pan into the FYRE? Part I

Next month, two motions filed by the defense will be heard by Judge Perry. Because they are very important Frye issues, and of extreme importance to the defense, this post will focus on the motion about chloroform evidence. It will be in two parts.

PART I - The Frye Pan

Casey’s defense recently filed two Frye motions. The date reflects when they were filed with the Clerk of Courts. Both are stamped 12/30/2010.

MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO FRYE, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE (CHLOROFORM)

and

MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE (Plant or root growth evidence)

The state filed motions to strike, but today, I will just focus on the issue over chloroform. The other motions (defense and state) will come later, because in this particular one, there is much to discern, including a few errors. I will get to them, but first of all, what, exactly, is a Frye motion/hearing? Frye motions are generally held in limine, which means they are made before a trial starts. The judge then decides whether certain evidence may or may not be introduced to the jury. The Frye standard is a test to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence in legal proceedings. This standard comes from the case Frye v. United States (293 F. 1013 (DC Cir 1923) District of Columbia Circuit Court in 1923. Frye v. U.S. was a groundbreaking case that argued the admissibility of polygraph tests as evidence in a trial. Today, it’s designed to prevent both sides from unfairly exploiting expert testimony. Its intent is to assure that expert evidence is reliable.

In its motion, the defense cites Florida Statutes 90.401, 90.402 and 90.403, Amendments 5 and 14 of the U.S. Constitution, and Article 1, Section 9 of the Florida Constitution. Let’s take a look:

• 90.401 Definition of relevant evidence. — Relevant evidence is evidence tending to prove or disprove a material fact.
• 90.402  Admissibility of relevant evidence. — All relevant evidence is admissible, except as provided by law.
• 90.403  Exclusion on grounds of prejudice or confusion. — Relevant evidence is inadmissible if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, misleading the jury, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. This section shall not be construed to mean that evidence of the existence of available third-party benefits is inadmissible.
• Amendment V — No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
• Amendment XIV — All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
• Article 1, Section 9 — Due process.—No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, or be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense, or be compelled in any criminal matter to be a witness against oneself.

The first two Florida Statutes, I would imagine, were cited by the defense for the purpose of propping up the third, which questions the admissibility of evidence that may prejudice or confuse the jury. In the case of this motion, it’s chloroform evidence found in the trunk of Casey’s car the defense is questioning, specifically carpet and air samples.

After the preliminary introduction of the motion, the defense moved on to FACTS about the case:

FACTS

1. Miss Anthony is charged with First Degree Murder. The State of Florida has announced it’s [sic] intent to seek the ultimate penalty of death.
2. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory conducted tests on carpet samples and air samples taken from a vehicle (Pontiac Sunfire) driven by Miss Anthony at or near the time of the disappearance of her daughter Caylee Anthony.
3. Dr. Arvad Vass reported in his preliminary and final reports that there were unusually high levels of chloroform found on the carpet samples taken from the Pontiac Sunfire.
4. Dr. Vass additionally states that the levels of chloroform are much higher than normally found in decompositional events.
5. This information prompted investigators to search the Anthony family computer for searches of chloroform, which yielded positive results for “chloroform” and “how to make chloroform.” The hysteria begins.

Before I delve too deeply into the motion, remember the defense cited the above as FACTS, not assumptions or speculations made by Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Where it completely strayed from the truth is the final statement of fact, “The hysteria begins.” From there, it turned into a giant smoke screen. The defense went into, well, a defense mode, which is what is expected.

FACTS PART II: UNCOVERING THE FRAUD

In FACTS PART II: UNCOVERING THE FRAUD, law enforcement was accused of intentionally leaking information to the local and national media prior to “any official reports through the natural course of discovery.” I will acknowledge learning of the death smell from the news sometime in August of 2008, so there may be some merit to this particular aspect of the complaint. However, this information would have been released anyway, so it was not, by any means, an attempt to “either satisfy their own vanity or poison any potential jury pool” as the defense stated. Today, it’s two-and-a-half years later, and a fair jury will be seated in May come hell or high water.

What puzzles me at this point of the motion is how the defense contradicts itself. In FACTS PART II, they wrote that they traveled to Tennessee and took depositions from Dr. Arpad Vass and Dr. Marcus Wise. Both testified that the tests on the carpet sample were “qualitative” and not “quantitative.” One way to simplify this is to say it’s the motion in the ocean, not the size of the ship; but at the same time, no one is going to sail around the world in a canoe. That’s not to say flat out that the SS Casey is sinking, but it’s definitely listing. The smokesreen in this example comes from the statements that, “It should be noted that the Oak Ridge National Laboratory also took carpet samples from two Pontiac Sunfires… [and] one of the sample cars they tested ALSO had chloroform in the sample,” and “Dr. Vass, who is the author of the ORNL report is NOT a forensic chemist.” In my opinion, one not need be a forensic chemist to analyze chemical breakdowns. Dr. Vass could readily make analytical conclusions from tests of all kinds, and my guess would be that plenty of them have nothing to do with crime. Industrial spies, for example, have been tackling the secret recipe of KFC chicken and McDonald’s Special Sauce for years and years. That’s not forensics, but it takes real life chemists to break into the “Da Vinci Codes” of restaurant chain trade secrets. Who knows, maybe Dr. Vass could find out what’s really in Taco Bell’s beef. Now, that’s something that matters. Of course, it’s a civil matter, not criminal.

In the motion, the defense noted that the FBI Chemistry Unit in Quantico, Virginia, had tested four samples of the carpet and two of the four were “consistent with chloroform.” Dr. Michael Richenbach, Ph.D, told the defense during his deposition that “consistent with” means that the presumptive test results were positive, but the conclusive tests were not. Aside from all of the scientific mumbo jumbo, of which I will spare you the boredom, the point being made by the defense is, in a nutshell, that the results from ORNL and the FBI were different. Therefore, the results should be tossed out. In my opinion, the most consistent point to be made about this case to date has been the consistency of the two presiding judges, and ultimately, Judge Perry will leave it up to both sides to argue and let the jury take it from there. Laws around the country not only protect cross examinations, they encourage them, and this case is no different. The defense will have ample opportunity to shred the state’s evidence to pieces.

Here’s another interesting smokescreen, but I do not think the State, nor the judge, will fall for it. The motion makes it clear that “the other items tested by the FBI for chloroform (baby doll, steering wheel cover, and child car seat) all yielded negative results.” True, but the cab of Casey’s vehicle was separated from the trunk by a back seat. How much seepage should there have been? Police officers have been trained for years to detect the odor of marijuana in a car, and I’m talking about fresh, not smoked. It does have a pungent odor unlike anything else. While standing by the driver’s door, window down, would the officer smell it if it was tucked away in the trunk? No, probably not, but the nervousness of the occupants would be a sure sign that something’s not right. How much chloroform would it take to be overwhelming? I mean, it’s not even close to the smell of decomposition. Talk about pungent odors.

COMPUTER SEARCHES

Law enforcement ascertained that someone inside of the Anthony home searched for chloroform and chloroform recipes three months prior to Caylee’s disappearance. This is why it’s so important for the defense to crush this evidence, along with the air and carpet samples. This is highly incriminating. The defense wrote:

• Any forensic computer examiner including the ones in this case (Sandra Cawn and Kevin Stenger) will testify that you can never determine who ran what searches on a computer, especially when the computer is NOT password protected.

Okay, in and of itself, that may be true, but more about that in a couple of seconds. Incidentally, Cawn and Stenger work for OCSO and I think they know a thing or two about  computer forensics.

• The computer in question was in a “guest bedroom” and all family members not only had access to the computer, but also testified that they used the computer as well as guests who visited their home.
• Law enforcement cannot ascertain whether Miss Anthony was even home at the time the searches [were] run much less on the computer.

Now, had Judge Perry been born in the 19th century, the defense might be able to pull the wool over his eyes, but he wasn’t; nor was he born yesterday. Yes, of course the computer could have been accessed by anyone, but it is inside the Anthony home, and it’s a desktop, not a portable laptop, which could be moved around the house. By utilizing something simple, like a process of elimination, investigators can sift through a myriad of things, including time sheets. March 21, 2008, was a Friday - a work day. What time of day did the searches occur? I’ll bet you OCSO knows. If Cindy, George and Lee were not inside the house, it incriminates Casey, and with no other source, like a friend who has yet to come forward, her ship is really listing.

Here’s something the defense wrote that struck me as peculiar:

• The Oak Ridge National Laboratories (Some reports erroneously called them “body farm” perhaps for more shock appeal) reported unusually high amounts of chloroform in the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car.

What I would like to do is take to task the remark about erroneously calling ORNL a Body Farm for more shock appeal. In my opinion, the defense is trying to directly infer that the term Body Farm was something new and never used before. I assure you, that is not the truth. I can tell you I heard about the Body Farm long before I heard about the Anthony case and, as a matter of fact, thanks to my Gainesville friend, nika1, I am in the possession of a book titled, BEYOND THE BODY FARM, written by Dr. Bill Bass and Jon Jefferson. So what, you say? Yes, so what. The book was published in 2007, a year before Casey’s defense knew who she was. Jefferson & Bass (as Jefferson Bass) have written four novels about the Body Farm. The first one, Carved in Bone, was released in January 2006. In 2003, Bass & Jefferson released their first scientific book about it, Death’s Acre. To go further back in time, crime writer Patricia Cornwell published The Body Farm in 1994. She drew her inspiration from Dr. Bass and his work. As a matter of fact, he is recognized as the father of the Body Farm, long before Jose Baez was practicing law.

Why did I title this post From the Frye pan into the Fyre, you ask? Even the prosecution misspells…

MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO FYRE (CHLOROFORM)

In the second part of this article about chloroform evidence admission, I will delve into the scientific and legal aspects:

PART II - The FYRE

This information prompted investigators to search the Anthony family computer [duh?] for searches of chloroform, which yielded positive results for “chloroform” and “how to make chloroform.” The hysteria begins.

The Tale of Laura and the Barbarian Princess

If any of you are familiar with Florence Virginia King, you are aware that she is an American novelist, essayist and columnist from Mississippi. Born in 1936, alas, she put down her pen in 2002. Almost all of her works written under her real name have been non-fiction. You may recall 1975’s Southern Ladies and Gentlemen. You may also recognize her from the historical romance novel, Barbarian Princess, written under the pseudonym Laura Buchanan. Ironically, she’s not the only writer of fiction with that name. Another Laura Buchanan entered the fray more recently; one who seemingly attempted to parlay her name into the bright lights of stardom, tossing good judgment to the wind. She failed miserably and turned out to be the Clifford Irving of the Casey Anthony saga. Irving, in case you don’t know or remember, became famous  - infamous is more like it - for using forged handwritten letters from reclusive billionaire Howard Hughes in order to convince his publisher into accepting a counterfeit “autobiography” in the early 1970s. Hughes came out of the woodwork to prove it was nothing more than an elaborate hoax. Irving spent several years in prison, but later managed to publish some best sellers, including two aptly titled books, Final Argument and Daddy’s Girl.

On October 24, 2009, Laura Buchanan declared, under penalty of perjury, that, “On September 3, 2008, I was a volunteer for Texas Equus Search.” On that fateful September day, she began her odyssey into the treacherous path of this unyielding monster that’s chewed up and swallowed its victims at will. As innocent as Casey’s first victim was, Buchanan’s not one of them, and whether her initial intent was righteous or not, her ship sunk. Today, she’s just another part of the ever-growing, Titanic-sized, Casey abyss.

“On September 3, 2008,” she continued, ”the team in which I was assigned went to Suburban Street in Orlando and searched the area near where the remains of Caylee Anthony were found… I personally searched near the privacy fence and worked my way towards and then beyond where the body was found… It is my opinion that the remains of Caylee Anthony were not there during the time of our search.”

How quickly memories change when facing someone as intimidating as an Assistant State Attorney; intimidating in the sense that they represent the will of the people, and no one is more fastidious than Linda Drane Burdick when it comes to truth and justice. From her first statement under oath to her last, Buchanan’s story wavered dramatically, especially under the skillful questioning of the seasoned prosecutor. Just how did this begin and where are we today?

First of all, by her own admission, she is a “virtual” emergency/law enforcement groupie. She gets high at the sight of flashing lights and blaring sirens. Riding around with the law had been a favorite pastime and after taking a class at the citizen police academy, getting involved became a hobby of sorts. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that, but at the same time, a lot hinges on where it takes you and how far you want to go. At the end of August, 2008, her husband was scheduled to come to Florida for job related training. She wanted to go far, so she tagged along. Of course, by that date, many people across the country and elsewhere were enamored by the “Tot Mom” story made famous by Nancy Grace and, mostly, by the shocking audacity and hollow gaze of this young and single mother in the news who would ever lose her child, let alone for a month. Caylee was special, too. No child could have looked more angelic. Her wide-eyed innocence and eager smile were plenty enough to melt the coldest heart. There is no doubt in my mind that Laura Buchanan, herself a young mother of three, was one of those who became overtly fascinated and now was her chance. In her mind, I’m sure she felt the same way as all the others, but something took over. Something or someone made her change.

It took around 13-hours to drive from Kentucky to Portofina Bay, the resort inside Universal Studios just south of Orlando. Texas EquuSearch was in high gear and thousands of volunteers had already joined in the search for little Caylee, but they still needed more help. She went to the TES command post the following morning. After her search, she and her husband went to Disney. While waiting for the monorail, she spotted a toddler who she thought was Caylee and reported it to Kid Finders (or OCSO) the following day. That led to her initial contact with Cindy when she called Laura about the sighting. Laura was quick to tell her she and several other searchers had a lot of compassion for the Anthony family. This is where the ball started rolling. It began the back and forth e-mails and phone calls between her, Cindy, George and Mark NeJame, who represented the Anthonys at the time. In one of her initial e-mails to NeJame, she wrote, “I’ve heard so many disturbing things, like George was molesting Casey when she was younger and started to molest Caylee..? That Caylee Could possibly belong to George and or brother Lee???” She also hoped that NeJame had given Cindy and George her e-mails. This message was sent on September 15. In my opinion, it, quite possibly, could have been where Casey got the rather bizarre notion to accuse her father of molesting her, or at least, to plant the seed. I would surely guess the Anthonys discussed the allegations making the rounds while she was home on bond that final month.

Correspondence went back and forth between Buchanan and NeJame beyond the point when the attorney and the Anthonys parted ways near the end of 2008. Meanwhile, she had begun communicating with Jose Baez soon after her supposed sighting. On October 9, Laura sent an e-mail to Jose at the Baez Law Firm. She mentioned being in Florida a month or so earlier and of spotting a girl who looked remarkably like Caylee while waiting to enter either the Magic Kingdom or EPCOT. She lamented that deputies never followed up on her tip because they were no longer looking for Caylee. [This is not factual. While being interviewed by Sgt. John Allen in December, 2009, the lead investigator told me point blank that over 100 law enforcement personnel continued to search for Caylee all over the country up to the date her remains were found.] On Monday, January 12, 2009, she sent Jose this e-mail:

“I spoke with a person that I hadn’t spoke with in a while and she has told me some very strange information and I think we need to talk again ASAP… Oh my god this is horrible… [REDACTED]

By now, she was thoroughly ensconced in the mechanisms of Casey’s defense. So much so, that she sent him pictures of herself and one with her 5-year-old daughter. Life was good and she was getting more cozy with each passing day.

I can’t say for sure who started fishing first, but by all signs, it seemed that they both swallowed each other hook, line, and sinker. She had something for him and he coaxed her for more. She had become an integral part of Casey’s defense, only she had no idea about the massive freight train that was going to hit her; the Burdick Express. Maybe, just maybe, GULP, she didn’t look exactly where Caylee was discovered. No, not precisely.

There were several passages in Buchanan’s August 2010 interview with the prosecutor that immediately sent red flags up as far as I’m concerned, and it showed Burdick’s adeptness and professional flair. The first one dealt with Buchanan’s statement that she searched behind the Anthony home. That’s impossible because the Anthonys have a privacy fence that keeps their backyard, well, private. Totally so. There’s no gate that opens up to the beyond. The beyond, by the way, is nothing more than a private backyard in the adjacent development, also filled with homes.

The second one was a real laugher. She told the Assistant State Attorney that, while she was following the end of the privacy fence on Suburban Drive, she stepped on an alligator. Obviously, this woman has a wild imagination, wilder than any of the inhabitants of the Suburban Drive woods. I addressed the issue of gators early on, soon after I began writing about the case. Alligators generally live in or very close to bodies of water. By that, I mean lakes, ponds, rivers and swamps. Although the end of the woods where Caylee was found had been under water at the time of the searches, it is not in that state all year round, and that’s not very inviting to a gator. They like to remain dead still for hours with just the slightest movement of their eyes so their target isn’t aware they’re even there. Then they pounce. What Buchanan described was that the reptile was resting in the brush. That’s just not true. They want to see what’s going on all around them, so they lurk in the open or with just their eyes above water level. They take their quarry to the bottom of the water to rot before eating. Generally, anyway. I’ve been in the Orlando area for almost 30 years, and let me tell you, I have never stepped on one. Not only that, I WOULD NOT stand there waiting for the creature to run away like she said it did. I’d be gone in a flash - as far away as I could get. Also, there’s a school nearby. Snakes are hard to control, but gators? No way, not as much as they love to sun themselves in the open.

So, two of her stories have been debunked, and now, we come to the matter at hand. That would be the twisted TES report that somehow became a lie. Who instigated it, Baez or Buchanan? That’s the subject of another post, but a search volunteer by the name of Lori Fusco told investigators that she asked Buchanan if she was working for Baez. “She wouldn’t give me a straight answer. She wanted to know everything that I knew, which I didn’t know much. She kept asking me if I was in that area and if I was on a team with her which she should have known.”

How true, and in a recorded phone call with searcher and friend Ann Pham, Buchanan was questioned about her inconsistencies.

Ann Pham: The first one they showed me is legitimate. Right?

Laura Buchanan: Both of them are legit. Somebody else had that form before I had it because they (expletive) spelled my name wrong.

Ann Pham: Your name is signed at the top, Laura. That’s what I don’t understand. It’s got your actual signature and it matches the signature from the first form.

Laura Buchanan: I don’t know that I can’t explain.

Shades of forgery! Ultimately, several of her friends were convinced she wanted to be in the media spotlight, and at Caylee’s memorial service, she seemed more concerned about being on TV than she did about Caylee. Jose Baez was just hit with a new ethics complaint, according to the Florida Bar; quite possibly stemming from the comedy of errors regarding former Anthony attorney Brad Conway and those persnickety TES search documents. What a mess. Did Casey’s lead attorney allegedly misrepresent facts to the court? Time will tell, but it’s common knowledge that he has skated very close to the edge on several occasions, and so far, he’s managed to keep clear of falling through the ice. What about this time? It’s been harshest of winters, but Punxsutawney Phil did not see his shadow yesterday. An omen? No, and no karma moment, either, but will the ingratiating Laura Buchanan come to his rescue as spring rolls in? Not a chance. Today, she, too, could be facing charges, and she tells her friends she wishes she never got herself involved in this mess.

Good old Florence King. She said it best. “People are so busy dreaming the American Dream, fantasizing about what they could be or have a right to be, that they’re all asleep at the switch. Consequently, we are living in the Age of Human Error.” It sounds just like Casey’s defense. Back to square one. Where, oh where, will it turn?

State calls defense motions "in limine" lemons

“… most convictions result from the cumulation of bits of proof which, when taken singly, would not be enough in the mind of a fair minded person. All that is necessary, and all that is possible, is that each bit may have enough rational connection with the issue to be considered a factor contributing to an answer.”

- Judge Learned Hand in United States v. Pugliese, 153 F.2d 497, 500 (2d Cir. 1945)

The state of Florida just filed its  response to several motions in limine filed by Casey Anthony’s defense. Remember, in limine is just a fancy Latin way of saying “on the threshold.” They are motions filed asking the court to prohibit or limit certain testimony or evidence at trial. In this case, the prosecution struck back at seven of them, as if that’s a lucky number. I guess it depends on how Judge Perry interprets the law, which means that luck will have no bearing at all. They are:

1. Motion in Limine to Preclude Testimony or Alleged Statements of Witness Anthony Lazaro Connected to Inquiries, Conversations, or Interrogation by Corporal William Edwards Related to Sexual Relations with the Defendant
2. Motion in Limine to Preclude Testimony Connected to Questions and Responses of Witness Anthony Rosciano in the Interview by Corporal Yuri Melich and Sergeant John Allen Related to Sexual Relations with the Defendant
3. Motion in Limine Regarding any Testimony that the Defendant has a History of Lying and/or Stealing
4. Motion in Limine Regarding Testimony of Neighbor Brian Burner in Reference to the Shovel
5. Defense Motion to Exclude Irrelevant Evidence of Tattoo
6. Motion in Limine to Prohibit the Use, in any fashion of Internet MySpace References Attributable to the Defendant as “Diary of Days”
7. Motion in Limine to Prohibit the Use, in any fashion, of a Posting on the Internet MySpace References Attributable to Cindy Anthony, the Mother of the Defendant

Before I go any further, I must address a couple of things. I realize the prosecution and defense are not competing against each other in a spelling bee, but wouldn’t you think they would know how to spell Lazzaro and Rusciano by now? After all, both men will be crucial to the case, especially Lazzaro. Oh, and what’s with all those capital letters, if I may add my 2 cents worth? With all of the other letters capitalized, at least the $3.00 and $5.00 words, what happened to fashion, and since when was Myspace written with a capital S ? If you believe it’s MySpace or My Space, don’t think I didn’t do my homework. Am I nitpicking? Well, I guess it’s not all that important, except for the slight chance the defense will try to have the case thrown out on a technicality, which would be preposterous…

“Your Honor, my client dated Lazaro and Rosciano, not the other two guys.”

“Overruled.”

The defense was careful to point out the significance of following stringent due process standards established by the Supreme Court since this is a capital case and death is different. However, and in my opinion, each and every case argued in a court of law is important, regardless of its magnitude. I am certainly not alone in this view, and one thing any prosecution should never strive for is the conviction of an innocent person. This particular prosecution seems to be on the up and up and not overzealous. They are also much more organized than Casey’s defense, at least at this juncture, and they argue well. For example, the response was quick to point out that “in order for any evidence to be excluded, the evidence would have to have the effect of inflaming the jury, or improperly appealing to the juror’s emotions.” This is a recurring theme in the state’s rebuttals.

In some cases, it’s just plain common sense that should dictate the judge’s decision on the in limine motions filed by the defense. I understand fully the reasons why a good defense files a lot of motions, one of which I have explained before; that you throw everything at the wall and hope something sticks, and if all else fails, throw the kitchen sink and pray it pokes a giant hole in the wall the prosecution has built. “Relevant evidence is relevant evidence, hearsay is hearsay, and improper character evidence is improper character evidence despite the crime or the penalty.” Rules of evidence “should never be abrogated or applied any differently” because of the punishment the defendant is facing. In other words, it is what it is, or what you see is what you get. Florida Statute 90.401 states that relevant evidence is evidence tending to prove or disprove a material fact. The prosecution cited this statute and a quote from McCormick on Evidence §185 that says relevant evidence “has a tendency to establish a fact in controversy or to render a proposition in issue more or less probable. To be probable, evidence must be viewed in light of logic, experience and accepted assumptions concerning human behavior.” One way to look at this is simple. In and of itself, to borrow a neighbor’s shovel is meaningless, but coupled with other bits of circumstantial evidence, a clearer picture may arise about why the shovel was borrowed and for what purpose. As the state wrote, “Each item of evidence is a link in the chain of proof.” Also, as Judge Learned Hand wrote, “[I]ndividual pieces of evidence, insufficient in themselves to prove a point, may in culmination prove it,” because the “sum of an evidentiary presentation may well be greater than its constituent parts.”

The state’s response also looked into prejudicial v. probative analysis under F.S. 90.403, regarding exclusion on grounds of prejudice or confusion: “Relevant evidence is inadmissible if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, misleading the jury, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.” What happens here is anyone’s guess, because the state acknowledges that the “trial court has broad discretion in determining the admissibility of evidence and in weighing its probative value against any prejudicial effect.” It is at this point the state argues its case against the motions in limine filed by the defense.

ARGUMENT REGARDING MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OR ALLEGED STATEMENTS OF WITNESS ANTHONY LAZARO [sic] CONNECTED TO INQUIRIES, CONVERSATIONS OR INTERROGATION BY CORPORAL WILLIAMS [sic] EDWARDS RELATED TO SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THE DEFENDANT and MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY CONNECTED TO QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES OF WITNESS ANTHONY ROSCIANO [sic] IN THE INTERVIEW BY CORPORAL YURI MELICH AND SERGEANT JOHN ALLEN RELATED TO SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THE DEFENDANT

As I argued in an earlier post about the rather sticky subject of sex, the state was careful in wording its response. The relationship with Rusciano predated the disappearance of Caylee, so what transpired in the bedroom is of little to no value. Lazzaro’s, however, is a different story. Casey slept with him every night after Caylee was last seen. This continued until he left for New York, but of importance is what Casey was like. Common sense tells us that a mother, ANY MOTHER, would be so incredibly desperate to find her missing child, sexual intimacy would be totally out of the question.

The state adds that “the existence of an intimate relationship between the two during the time frame when Caylee Anthony was last seen and when she was reported missing by her grandmother is highly relevant.” I certainly agree. According to Lazzaro, Casey never mentioned her missing daughter to him other than to tell him she was with her grandmother, Cindy, or the nanny. This is extremely important in painting a picture of Casey’s demeanor on June 16, when the state says Caylee was last seen, through July 15, when the party door slammed shut. When Lazzaro learned of the “kidnapping”, one of his first text messages to Casey expressed incredulity that she never told him anything about it the whole time she was with him. How odd.

ARGUMENT REGARDING MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING ANY TESTIMONY THAT THE DEFENDANT HAS A HISTORY OF LYING AND/OR STEALING

As Cindy once said, a liar does not a murderer make. That’s true, but when it’s part of the time frame between June 16 and July 15, should it matter? The state acknowledges the difficulty of bringing it up if Casey never takes the stand and cannot be cross examined. There is also the issue over how long Casey had been doing it. Most of her life? While Cindy pursued the truth about her granddaughter and Casey continued to lie, I don’t see any evidence that this was the first time Casey lied about anything. She was (and remains) a born liar. To be honest, I don’t know any murderer who desires to tell the truth about what they did, so this defense motion in limine, in my opinion, could go either way with the judge. The state says her lies are “relevant to the conciousness of guilt which may be inferred from such circumstances.” To me, inferred is too flimsy of a word.

ARGUMENT REGARDING MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING TESTIMONY OF NEIGHBOR BRIAN BURNER IN REFERENCE TO THE SHOVEL

If you ask me, this one’s a no brainer and I shouldn’t have to cite anything from the state’s official response. Common sense dictates the answer. The child was missing long before anyone knew it, the car smelled like there was a dead body in it, a shovel was borrowed, but not used, and the body was eventually found tossed in the woods around the corner from the house. I say, if the judge decides the shovel is of no relevance because it “could” have been used to dig up some nonexistent bamboo roots, then the remains must be tossed, too, because there’s no solid proof Casey “could” have thrown them in the woods. Or did. Does that make sense? Good. By the way, I have bamboo in the front yard and I’ve never seen a root, let alone tripped over one. It grows in clusters and most of it was grown here for a reason. Usually, you find it facing north because if buffers the cold wind that comes down from the north. It was used to help protect citrus from freezing air.

As for the shovel, it will go hand in hand with what Brian Burner indicated he saw. On three separate days, the defendant backed a vehicle into the garage. That’s something he had never see her do before. We can draw our own conclusions, but the state left this question for the court: “Does the evidence of borrowing a shovel from the neighbor within two days of the child missing have a tendency to render a proposition in issue - that it was borrowed with the intent to conceal remains - - more or less probable?” You can decide for yourself.

ARGUMENT REGARDING DEFENSE MOTION TO EXCLUDE IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE OF TATTOO

Once again, this is an easy one to figure out, and the state said it best in its final sentence about this motion. “The tattoo is relevant to show the Defendant’s state of mind during this time period, and the inscription obtained can certainly be read either as an epitaph for her daughter, or signaling a new beginning for herself.” Does this seem like a person waging their own investigation into the disappearance of their child?

ARGUMENT REGARDING MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT THE USE, IN ANY FASHION, OF INTERNET MYSPACE REFERENCES ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE DEFENDANT AS “DIARY OF DAYS”

and

ARGUMENT REGARDING MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT THE USE, IN ANY FASHION, OF A POSTING ON THE INTERNET MYSPACE REFERENCES ATTRIBUTABLE TO CINDY ANTHONY, THE MOTHER OF THE DEFENDANT

I lumped these two motions together because they are similar, in my opinion. Casey wrote a passage in her Myspace page on July 7 that the defense attributes to a song written by Hayden Christianson. To be quite frank, I am of a completely different generation than Casey. As much disco/punk/goth/mosh/hip hop/etc., etc. styles that have passed by me through the years, and my own changes in music appreciation and lack thereof, I can’t make a call on it. Is it from a song? Is it from a poem? Did Casey make it up? Does it mean anything? I don’t know, and that’s where the wisdom of a judge takes control. Allow it and let the two sides battle it out if it’s all that important. The same thing is true with Cindy’s entry in her Myspace account. After not seeing her granddaughter for several weeks, she asked Lee to help her post an important message to Casey. As to the meaning of the posting, the state will not attempt to argue that Cindy knew her grandchild was dead. Cindy was desperately seeking Caylee and her daughter kept them apart. Casey ignored her mother’s pleas and this will show the relationship that existed between the two. There wasn’t much of one.

Well, there you have it. My thoughts on some of the motions that will determine the make-up of the impending trial. In order for the defense to mount a strong case, it will have to overcome the almost insurmountable evidence, albeit circumstantial, against their client. As of today, this is a case the state can readily win. Do I blame the defense for filing any of these motions? Of course not, but even if it wins 3 or 4 of them, it’s still quite an uphill battle. No matter what, how Casey acted during the month her daughter was missing will be her biggest hurdle to overcome.

One final thought regarding the $583 sanction against Jose Baez - I talked to an attorney about it and he said that it’s not necessarily a bad thing. I know Judge Perry refused to consider another look at it today, but sometimes a lawyer will find that the fine is worth it when it comes down to how much time the defense can buy to keep important information out of the state’s hands. Was this the case here? I can’t say, but in the long run, will it really hurt Baez? After the trial is over, life goes on and he continues to represent clients. Vita perseverat.

A wealth of misconduct

Time and a Word by Yes

In the morning when you rise,
Do you open up your eyes, see what I see?
Do you see the same things ev’ry day?
Do you think of a way to start the day
Getting things in proportion?
Spread the news and help the world go ‘round.
Have you heard of a time that will help us get it together again?
Have you heard of the word that will stop us going wrong?
Well, the time is near and the word you’ll hear
When you get things in perspective.
Spread the news and help the word go round.

There’s a time and the time is now and it’s right for me,
It’s right for me, and the time is now.

- Jon Anderson & David Foster

To be quite honest, I had no idea my brain would smash into a brick wall, causing my writing skills to atrophy. My word! Or lack thereof.  To say my life was a bit topsy turvy the past two weeks is an understatement. Generally, when I sit down to write, I like to do it with nothing in my way. I like my mind free from clutter. My mind has been anything but that lately. Even today, I can’t sit still. Too many responsibilities. I anticipate this post will take hours to write - hours to focus, too. To give you an idea, here’s how I began my post last week before sickness and death took it all away:

When I arrived on the 23rd floor on Monday, a handful of people were milling about. Sure, there are always journalists waiting for the courtroom doors to open, but I’m more intrigued by the new faces I see each time I attend a hearing. Among them this time were two of the friendliest people I had the privilege to meet, Suzie Jane and Roger, who came all the way from the great home state of our 16th, 18th and 44th presidents, Illinois. We had a very nice chat before the doors opened for us to enter. They sat to my immediate right. We glanced around the room before the judge entered at 1:30 sharp. Meanwhile, I had time to boot up my old laptop computer and crack open my old-fashioned notebook - no, not the electronic kind - it’s a simple and powerless device consisting of two covers, front and back, with lined paper inside. The only thing digital about it is the hand-held digits, also known as fingers, I use to grasp the necessary recording utensil that must accompany the notebook in order to work; a pen.

Suzie Jane quietly wondered where Cindy and her friend were. I whispered back that she is sometimes late, but she should definitely show up.

When…

And that’s where it ended. My father was in the hospital, my mother got quite ill with a bad flu virus, and my aunt passed away. I had a medical procedure done and I’m a little sore from that. Can I pick up where I left off? I guess so, but what’s the point? The motions are old and somewhat stale now, old in the sense that they’ve been discussed in the news and on blogs. Instead, I’ll look into another brewing storm, unrelated to the Anthony case, or maybe it is. I guess it depends on the way the cards are falling. You’ll see.

§

In May of last year, I published a post about James Hataway, the young man sitting in the Seminole County Jail accused of strangling a woman. Fortunately, she lived. Hataway is also the prime and only suspect in the disappearance of Tracy Ocasio. They left a west side bar together on the night of May 26-27, 2009, and she was never seen again. I mentioned that I knew who he was because of a bar I used to frequent way back when, before I gave up my Bacardi & Coke days. Nights, actually. I never was one for drinking during the day. By golly, I have my scruples.

Daniel SaylorMcGuintty’s has been closed at least three years now, possibly four. He and several other skinhead types used to hang out there but I never socialized with them. No, my skinhead came naturally, and I never looked at myself as any sort of tough-guy punk like they did. One night, I was standing at the bar chatting with some of the other regulars. It was a slow night. Sitting nearby was a guy who eventually joined in on our conversation. I don’t recall what we were discussing, but we really seemed to hit it off. It turns out, he was the police chief of Windermere, a small town southwest of Orlando. He even showed me his gold-plated badge. I wondered why he would have been drinking so far away from where he worked, but he told me he didn’t live in Windermere. He commuted from Seminole County, where I live. Windermere is the wealthiest little town in central Florida, or, at least its residents are. You may remember the town because Chief Daniel Saylor’s police department initially investigated Tiger Woods’ accident. The department was criticized for not asking Woods to take a breath test when he was pulled from his wrecked SUV. Florida Highway Patrol eventually took over the case because all vehicular accidents are run through that agency. Tiger was later cited for careless driving.

I used to travel to Windermere all the time. That’s where one of my ex’s mother lives - inside Isleworth, the exclusive gated community where the mishap took place. The reason why I brought this up has nothing to do with Tiger, but it does have to do with police chief Dan Saylor, or should I say ex-police chief? You see, he was arrested on Wednesday and charged with giving unlawful compensation for official behavior, a second-degree felony, and official misconduct, a third-degree felony. I haven’t traveled there in years, but the town of Windermere had a reputation for writing tickets for going 1 mph over the posted 25 mph speed limit. It’s not a joke that the town hired hand-me-down cops, too. The word on the street has pretty much been that officers sworn to uphold the law had problems doing it elsewhere. Some were fired from prior positions, in other words. As it turns out, the police chief held no sterling record, either. According to the WESH Web site, records “show reprimands from the Melbourne Police Department dating back to 1991. He was suspended for lying to Melbourne police supervisors in 1994. The next year, he was given an unsatisfactory review for professional behavior. Then, three months later, he was suspended for 160 hours without pay and put on probation for a year for not being truthful during an internal investigation. Higher-ups noted that they considered firing him but gave him ‘one last chance.; During that one year suspension, Orlando police accused Saylor of soliciting a prostitute. Police pulled him over on Parramore Avenue. According to the incident report: Saylor first claimed to be giving the woman a ride, then admitted he had been at a strip club and employees told him where he could go to pay for sex. Windermere’s town manager, Cecilia Bernier, says the town knew about the investigation but decided Saylor was ‘good material for our chief.’ No charges were ever filed in the prostitution case.”

Scott BushIt’s very interesting, too, that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the Orange County Sheriff’s Office had an ongoing investigation into him and the police department he ran. Just what were those charges related to? I mean, what do unlawful compensation for official behavior and official misconduct mean? Here’s where it starts to get ugly, and I mean UGLY! He’s good friends with a guy by the name of Scott Frederick Bush. Bush was arrested on Wednesday, too, and held without bond, charged with sexual battery and lewd and lascivious molestation of a child under 12 years of age. This took place over a three year period, between 2000 and 2003. Here, we have a police chief allegedly granting several of his own officers time-off with pay and other incentives to stonewall the criminal investigation of an alleged sexual deviant who raped a child. Officer Irving Murr was handling the case. He was offered money, a promotion and a day shift to cover it up. According to Saylor’s arrest warrant, he destroyed notes related to the investigation and offered bribes to lie to FDLE. The FDLE special agent in charge, Joyce Dawley, said, “Chief Saylor used his position to hinder our investigation.”

Saylor was suspended from his job without pay and released on bond Thursday, but with one stipulation: He had to agree to turn all of his personal weapons over to authorities. The locks on the doors of the police station were changed and an OCSO captain was named the interim chief. More heads are expected to roll. Meanwhile, Saylor’s career is ruined, and rightfully so if he’s actually guilty. One thing cops can’t stand is a crooked cop. It gives them all a bad name. What’s worse is the fact that he shut down the investigation into his friend who is now charged with raping a child. Of all crimes, who in their right mind would do something like that, let alone a police chief or anyone else related to law enforcement, for that matter? It’s disgusting. Child molesters are the lowest of the low.

Bear with me for a moment, please. I’m veering off course. Do we recall the time, early on, when a lot of people had gut feelings that George and Cindy knew what Casey was up to? Why didn’t they act before it was too late? How could they not see what their daughter was capable of doing? Remember, I’m not talking about after the fact, this is before the crime. Today, the Tuscon murderer’s parents could be compared to George and Cindy in the same light. How could the parents of Jared Lee Loughner not know? Again, I’m not talking about after the fact. How many people never see something coming? Especially parents? In George and Cindy’s case, Mark Nejame was their first attorney. Then, he got fed up, left, and was practically deified. He could do no harm. Next came Brad Conway. Today, it’s Mark Lippman, and he seems to be keeping the family in check. After Conway dumped George and Cindy, his reputation in the public went up a few notches. In the case of the Windermere police department, it’s quite evident the political powers in charge are now in the same boat as George and Cindy. Why didn’t they see what was going on? Town leaders knew when they interviewed Saylor that he came with lots of baggage, yet they hired him anyway. That was back in 2002.

Remember, everyone is entitled to legal counsel, and that includes Casey. Who would ever want to come to her defense and why would anyone want to, for that matter? These have been some of the recurring questions made by many, and Jose Baez and the rest of her defense team have been vilified over and over and over because of it. They are evil incarnate! Yesterday, Daniel Saylor’s attorney was able to secure bond. What attorney in their right mind would be interested in defending an alleged crooked cop who squashed an investigation into the rape of a child? That’s downright disgusting, right? Well, his attorney downplayed the state’s case against his new client and urged the public to remember Saylor has only been accused - not convicted - of crimes. Sure, we’ve heard it all before. At the bond hearing, this attorney told the judge that Saylor should be released because he didn’t belong in jail. “He should be released and he should not be here. This is a travesty that’s occurred and continues to occur.”

Who is this attorney? Just who would want to represent a police chief that used his power to cover up a rape investigation against a friend? Who would it be? Why, none other than everyone’s favorite, Mark Nejame!

§

I want to thank everyone who stood by me during my family’s recent setbacks. I got some lovely, caring comments. Also, I received quite a few e-mails and submissions through this blog. I have not forgotten you, I just haven’t had much time to respond. I will. As the dust settles, I will get back into writing about the Casey Anthony case, too. There’s plenty to discuss, including lots of motions and the sanction against Jose Baez. I had a good conversation with a very nice gentleman at the last hearing. I want to say hello to Jim Barthiaume who was visiting from Michigan. It was a pleasure meeting you. Today, I will not be traveling down to the courthouse.

Thank you for your patience.

'twill be a very good year

Monday Monday

The defense filed a NOTICE OF HEARING on Thursday of last year. The judge’s hearing (the man in charge) is set to begin on Monday at 1:30 PM and it is going to be a long one. Twenty-Two motions are on the wish list in Courtroom 23A. How many will actually be heard is anyone’s guess:

1. Motion to Restrict Telephoto Courtroom Photography and Audio Eavesdropping of Defense
2. Motion to Compel Judicial Administrative Commission to Pay for Transcripts of Oak Ridge National Laboratory Depositions
3. Request Court Determine Bad Prior Acts of Mr. Kronk based on Motion Papers filed
4. Motion in Limine - Sexual Interrogation of Lazzaro
5. Motion in Limine - Sexual Interrogation of Rusciano
6. Motion in Limine - Speculation of Defendant Knowledge by Texas EquuSearch
7. Motion in Limine - Neighbor and Shovel
8. Motion in Limine - Table Knife
9. Motion in Limine - Character of Stealing and Lying
10. Motion in Limine - Tattoo
11. Motion to Suppress - Jail Interview of Defendant by “Agents”
12. Motion in Limine - Jail Video of Announcement
13. Motion in Limine - Jib Jab Cartoon
14. Motion in Limine - Defendant Myspace “Diary of Days”
15. Motion in Limine - Cindy Anthony Myspace
16. Motion in Limine - Decomposition Chemical (Frye)
17. Motion in Limine - Chloroform (Frye)
18. Motion to Exclude - Root Growth (Frye)
19. Motion for Subpoena Duces Tecum RE: Joe Jordan
20. Motion to Exclude - Post Mortem Banding
21. Motion to Exclude - Stain in Trunk of Car
22. Motion in Limine to Exclude K-9 Alerts

In the MOTION FOR APPLICATION FOR SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM, the defense has targeted Joseph S. Jordan. A subpoena duces tecum is a court summons ordering a named party to appear before the court and produce documents or other tangible evidence for use at a hearing or a trial.¹ It is true, as the motion states, that “the defense is charged with the responsibility of investigating their case in an effort to search for the truth.” Snicker if you must, but in every trial, civil and criminal, both sides will insist they are telling the truth and, invariably, it is up to the court to decide.

Early last month, the defense deposed Joe. He testified that he was an active blogger on the Internet, and that he frequented the Websleuths and Scared Monkey forums that discuss various issues of the Casey/Caylee Anthony case The defense alleges that Jordan published photographs on both sites and on his now defunct personal Web site, josephsjordan.com. The motion further states that, “Some of the photographs illustrated areas searched that were near or on Suburban Drive.” The defense states that the “photographs are material to the preparation of the defense in this cause.”

Joe Jordan is listed as a Category A witness for the state. Both sides consider him to be crucial to the case. The problem the defense has at the moment is simple; Jordan published his images on Internet forums. The images have since been removed. Since they were made public by Jordan and not the state, they are not subject to discovery under Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 3.220 [See page 98/197]. The defense wants those pictures. Why? Do they show dry land?

Alleged photos by Joseph S. Jordan

CELL PHONE IN BAG?

HAPPY NEW YEAR, EVERYONE!

It should prove to be a great one.

Hark the Judge Reserves a Ruling

Yesterday, a hearing was held in courtroom 19D, four flights down from the main attraction on the 23rd floor. That courtroom is undergoing renovations at the moment. 19D is familiar because that’s where Judge Strickland held many of the hearings while bench pressing Casey Anthony and her many motions, too many to repeat here. What’s interesting to note is that he did the bulk of the work, meaning that he heard and ruled on the majority of motions filed in this case so far, # 2008-CF-015606-A-O.

I generally leave about an hour-and-a-half before the hearings are slated to start. That affords me plenty of time to arrive and relax or mingle with others for awhile, where we can discuss what we expect to hear in the courtroom. I’m certainly glad I left early yesterday because I usually drive down 17-92, Orlando Avenue, and hang a right onto Orange in Winter Park that takes me right in front of the courthouse. As bad as the economy is right now, you never would have known it by the heavy amount of traffic I had to deal with. Either people are wasting $3.00 gallons of gas driving around, or they are doing some serious Christmas shopping, which tells me it’s not as bad out there as we are led to believe. My less than half-hour trek took forty-five minutes, but I did arrive early enough to talk to a couple of deputies and to go to the 23rd floor to take a look around and sneak a picture in. Please don’t tell the court I did that.

Click to HERE enlarge

I ran into Attorney Ann Finnell before going down the elevator, and let me tell you, she is one fine lady. We had a nice chat about traffic and her drive from Jacksonville, which was very similar to my story. Lots of cars everywhere. That leads me to a wonderful person who traveled from the frigid north to spend Christmas on the west coast of Florida. I’m reminded of the old saying that caught me off guard when I first moved here in ‘81 - SOLD COAST-TO-COAST, only it really meant from Cocoa Beach to Tampa, or something like that. Growing up in New Jersey, coast-to-coast meant NY to LA. I was very pleasantly surprised when she walked up to me. I’d tell you who she was, but there are nasty, nasty trolls out there. Needless to say, it was a wonderful experience and I’m extremely happy to have met her.

On the 19th floor, a gentleman called me over to introduce himself. I’d like to share his name, too, but he doesn’t need the riff raff, either. Although he doesn’t always agree with me, he said I’m an excellent writer and to keep it up. He said that he’s more of a Hinky-Blinky guy and I said that’s great. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and who they like to read. The mere fact that he enjoys my writing is plenty enough for me. He then called his wife over and introduced me. It was a nice encounter.

We entered the courtroom and Chief Judge Belvin Perry made an entrance right around 1:30. Before the hearing started, my friend, who drove to the courthouse from the west coast, mentioned that the judge was late at the last hearing. I told her it was because Casey was late. A judge never starts without the defendant. After Judge Perry took his seat on the bench, he asked to hear the first motion dealing with sealing the penalty phase witnesses. As Ann Finnell walked up to the podium, I took a quick head count. Absent from the courtroom were Cheney Mason, Linda Drane Burdick, and Frank George. She opened by asking the court to temporarily stay access to the list of penalty phase witnesses. “Judge? We are simply asking, in this case, that penalty phase discovery… that the public be temporarily denied access until the issue of the penalty phase becomes a right, which would be after a jury has determined Miss Anthony’s guilt… or not guilty of first-degree murder.”

She said that there’s no constitutional right to pretrial publicity, especially if it would deny the defendant’s right to an impartial jury. She noted that the court had already agreed to a jury coming from a different county due to the immense publicity. To back up her motion, she emphasized that only the witnesses expected at trial were mentioned in public, and to “out” potential penalty phase witnesses would prejudice the jury. It is the trial judge’s duty to minimize publicity. The bottom line is, she asked the court to deny penalty phase discovery until after the jury decides whether Casey is guilty or not. Plain and simple.

I understand the request because it could be legally argued that it’s like putting the cart before the horse. In the 1966 case that overturned Dr. Samuel H. Sheppard’s 1954 murder conviction, the U.S. Supreme Court noted that his trial generated so much publicity, it was a veritable media circus. Set in Cleveland, the jurors were exposed to intense coverage until they began deliberations. Found guilty, he spent ten years in prison before the court ruled that the publicity deprived him of his right to a fair trial. Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333, 86 S. Ct. 1507, 16 L. Ed. 2d 600 (1966). He was acquitted at his second trial.

Ms. Finnell brought up a 1988 ruling. Finally, a case study! In that case, Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. McCrary, was ruled in favor of the defense by the Florida Supreme Court. The separation of powers within the legislature and the judiciary’s responsibility of providing a fair trial allow the court to, on occasion, step around the laws of the legislature in order to ensure a defendant’s constitutional rights and freedoms. Florida Statute 119.07(4) grants the court the right to close a part of a court file. She told the judge that this case was a fly speck compared to the national exposure the Anthony case has garnered.

Nine minutes into the hearing, she was finished and the judge asked if there was a response from the state. Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton said no, so Rachel Fugate arose and walked to the podium. Ms. Fugate, who represents the Orlando Sentinel and, by default, all of media, acknowledged that there could be prejudice, but the defense must demonstrate it to the court first. She cited the McCrary case as the standard which gives the court the right to temporarily seal the penalty phase witnesses, but she emphasized that a prejudice must be shown to the court.

While explaining her side, defense attorney Jose Baez stood and apologized to counsel (Fugate) for breaking in. “I would ask that the court instruct the photographer in the room to not photograph my client as she’s passing notes…”

The judge was right there and on the spot. “Mr. Baez, one counsel has the floor… She needs to object and not you…”

Ann Finnell then stood and objected.

“Well,” the judge added, “unfortunately, the objection will be noted and overruled.” Rachel Fugate continued. She felt that the release of the names of the penalty phase witnesses would not jeopardize Casey’s fair trial rights or taint jurors coming in from another county. It would not frighten potential witnesses from testifying because of all the public exposure.

Ann was allowed to counter, and she said when the media chases after counsel, down the sidewalk, for 3 minutes worth of sound bites, imagine what they will do to potential witnesses. She said the press doesn’t have the same interests as the SAO. She made a valid point.

Ultimately, the judge decided that he was going to take his time before making a decision. “The court will reserve a ruling on the motion.”

At the tail end of the hearing, Jose, Ann and Jeff approached the bench for a sidebar at the judge’s request. A gentleman sitting behind me tried to take a picture with his cell phone. That’s a no no and a deputy told him so. As the attorneys went back to their seats, the judge said he was changing the next status hearing from January 10th to the 14th since he has an out-of-town Innocence Commission meeting.  He asked Jose if he had abandoned addressing the situation with Roy Kronk and the admission of prior bad acts. Jose said he had until December 31 and the judge reminded him that he will not be near the courthouse next week. It could be heard on the 23rd. He also said he will be presiding over a murder trial the week of the third, so any issues would have to be worked out after 5:00 PM.

Jeff Ashton brought up issues over depositions of defense experts in January, particularly Dr. Henry Lee.

“Maybe Dr. Lee is not planning on testifying. There was some suggestion in his email that he might not, depending on the resolution of this issue,” Ashton said.

Apparently, costs of travel are what’s holding up Dr. Lee. The prosecutor said that he might not be testifying depending on the resolution of this issue. The defense attorney said that he would settle it by the end of the day.

“Mr. Baez, if you get me that, and whatever you need to do to get that cleared up, let’s get it to me. OK, we’ll be in recess.”

I left the courthouse with my newfound friend; new only because we had never met. We said our good byes and as I walked away, I ran into the gentleman with the cell phone. I told him that other than the video cameras, only Red Huber from the Sentinel has exclusive rights to still photography in the courtroom. Me? I can take pictures and I took some as I walked out. Plus the one inside.

§

Before the hearing began, I was discussing how the judge might rule with Mike DeForest from WKMG. He felt the judge would probably compromise and I agreed with his assessment. To me, one of the underlying factors in the case, and it reaches its claws all over the United States and in other parts of the world, is the insurmountable prejudice that does already exist. For example, I talked to Jim Lichtenstein after the hearing. On the elevator up to the 19th floor, someone (who shall remain nameless) asked him if he intended to continue making money off a dead child. This is what we face out there in the real world. Jim is a consummate gentleman and I know for a fact that he befriended George and Cindy from Day 1. He’s been there ever since. Regardless of what anyone thinks of George and Cindy, should outsiders make decisions for him over who he can associate with or not? His interest is not about money, but there’s no denying the media must be able to cover this case or you, the public, would have no access to any information whatsoever. You can’t have it both ways. He works in the media industry. The media people pay for information from the court, including TV rights in the courtroom. They, in turn, make tons of money off advertising revenues. ALL OF THE MEDIA, I might add, including the ones who ask the tough questions. That’s the nature of the business - ALL BUSINESSES. So what if one reporter is more aggressive than another? The bottom line is ratings because that’s what pays the bills.

He also mentioned something about where he sits. The person who accosted him in the elevator addressed the issue over where he sits in the courtroom. I went through the same thing. You sit where you want and it has no bearing whatsoever over which side we agree with. I told him I sit on the side of the cameras because it ticks off the password stealing trolls who broke into my e-mail accounts and a password protected page on my old WordPress blog, where up until then, it was a secure place to comment . Since they continue to try to make my life a living hell, they are going to have to put up with my face in the courtroom. I will try to be as up close and personal as I possibly can; absolutely more so from now on and its got nothing to do with fame. It’s all about the trolls who broke the law. Fa law law law law law law law law.

Friday Happy Hour with the Bar

“I, quite frankly, don’t know why we’re here.”

- Jose Baez

When Judge Perry asked Jeff Ashton to hear his motion, the prosecutor stood and thanked the judge for accommodating him at such a late hour. Yes, a 5:oo pm hearing on a Friday afternoon is an unusual time, but the judge has made it clear on numerous occasions that he would have no trouble taking the bull by the horns if the two sides were to fall into any sort of quagmire. They did, and yesterday, those horns were tamed a bit. It took less than 20 minutes to render a rather terse and quite succinct decision that was pointed at both sides.

I understand why the state filed the MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION/TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY. To read the back-and-forth between Ashton and Baez was, at times, comical, but upon further study, it became clear to me that the prosecutor was losing his temper. The defense, it seems, had offered a menu, but never served the meal.

There were two main points in the motion Ashton filed:

1. In its ruling, in response to the State’s Motion to Compel Additional Discovery, the court ordered the defendant to provide, as to its listed expert witnesses, “the subject matter of what they will be testifying to.”
2. In response to that order the State received an email at 10:47 this date [ Dec. 1] from defense counsel Jose Baez purporting to comply with the aforementioned order.

With the judge’s initial order, the state wanted more than what the defense offered up to that point. Ashton expected, at least, “a brief summary of what would have been contained in a report had one been prepared, not a recitation of facts easily gleaned from a quick Internet search.”

That’s true. Anyone could have searched the Internet. What the defense offered could easily be summed up by this simple and shallow sample:

Dr. Jane H. Bock (Botany: Reviewed Hall’s report and inspected the scene and will testify about BOTANY, PLEASE TELL ME YOU KNEW THIS) University of Colorado Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Dept. Boulder, Colorado 80309-0334

That’s not much of a report, but it is a brief summary if taken literally. Too brief, of course, so the judge dropped his hammer and ordered both sides to be more compliant.

“Since ya’ll can’t seem to agree and can’t seem to understand what I meant the last time. This is what I’m going to do… Where experts have not prepared reports of examinations or tests, both the state and the defense are required to provide the following:

the expert’s curriculum vitae, qualifications of experts,

the expert’s field of expertise or medical specialty,

a statement of the specific subjects upon which the expert will testify and offer opinions,

the substance of the facts to which the expert is expected to testify, and last but not least,

a summary of the expert’s opinion and grounds for each opinion …

All of this must be completed by 3:00 pm on December 23.”

Something tells me that the judge, out of the goodness of his heart, allowed both sides to vent. He could have issued an order from inside his chambers, but by calling a hearing on a Friday afternoon, as the courthouse prepared to shut down for the weekend, he fired a warning shot. There is no doubt in my mind that Ashton had every right to file the motion, but the timing of the hearing was a clear message that this judge won’t tolerate nitpicking from either side. If you feel the judge was pointing fingers at the defense in his ruling, you’d be wrong. Think about it. As with fighting children, a parent cannot single out one when they both are screaming at each other. In order to be fair, both children are warned because it takes two to fight. In his decision, the judge had to take into consideration the ramifications down the road. Would the defense team state prejudice as grounds for an appeal if Casey is ultimately convicted? The judge had to show balance. As poignant as he was, after the hearing was over, I asked Bill Sheaffer why the judge wasn’t more terse. Why didn’t he castigate the defense for not following through with his prior ruling? He responded by telling me that it’s not Judge Perry’s style. Yes, I had to agree, because even as succinct as the judge was, he offered wisdom over a lecture or a legal spanking. No doubt, he got his point across, loud and clear.

On another note, someone mentioned that Cindy was not wearing her wedding band. True, I saw it myself, but I don’t know what that is about, if anything at all. When she entered the courtroom with her friend, I immediately asked her if she wanted us to move. I was sitting next to Jacqueline Fell from CFNews13. She said, no, she would just slide over to the seats to our right. Her friend thanked me for standing to let them pass by me, as any gentleman would do. After the hearing was over, Cindy and the defense team did not want to talk to the media. Jeff Ashton offered this message: “Have a great weekend, everyone!”

As quickly as it started, it was over. After all, even judges enjoy their weekends.

I Swear

I have done my best to head to the courthouse early so I don’t have to rush once I arrive. Sometimes, going through security can be very time-consuming. Fortunately, Monday wasn’t all that bad. I never have to park in the parking garage, either, and that generally saves me $6-10 per hearing; not much, but in this tight economy, every bit helps. Because of where I park, I walk by the television trucks with their high microwave towers extending from the roofs. It’s interesting because they are filled with very expensive electronic equipment. On most days, that’s where the reporters put their well choreographed on air segments together. That in itself is a real talent. The trucks are all parked in an area designed for them, in front of the courthouse, in a nook off Orange Avenue.

I ran into Mike DeForest from WKMG, the CBS affiliate. I hadn’t seen much of him since the judge debacle, so it was nice to chat for a few minutes before I decided it was time to head up to the 23rd floor. He’s a good guy. Off to the side was Jacqueline Fell, from Central Florida News 13. She’s a very nice person and very approachable. She was the first one to interview me months ago. As I briefly chatted with her, I noticed Ann Finnell walking by herself. She had an almost lost look on her face, so I walked up to her. I promised I would say hello from her cousin, who comments occasionally on my blog. Last time, I didn’t remember her name. This time, I did. She was looking for the rest of her team and I couldn’t help her there, but she did ask what floor the hearing was on. I said it’s always on the top floor. I asked her if she wanted me to show her, but she said she’d wait and see if they showed up. We parted.

It was one of those days where the line that winds through the lobby to get to security wasn’t as jam-packed as usual, but it was moving rather slowly. About five minutes into it, Ann walked in and stood at the back of the line, where I was already halfway through. I beckoned her to join me. After all, she had important work to attend to. I lifted the rope attached to the stanchions and let her through. No one complained to me about letting her skip through the line, but I would have handled it. She went through security before me. I have to remove my belt every time I go through, so while I had to put it back on, she politely waited for me to finish. Besides, she wasn’t quite sure where to go since she was in the courthouse only once before, at least for this particular case. I thanked her and we walked toward the elevators. I was mostly making small talk about my trip to Jacksonville and the proton accelerator at Shands Hospital, where my best friend, Stewart, recently underwent treatment for prostate cancer. All in all, it was a delightful encounter and I must say she is a very nice and refined lady; every bit of what I thought she would be. When we got to the courtroom doors, they were locked. I peeked through the crack between the doors and saw that Jose Baez was already in there. We knocked on one of the doors and she was let in. As she entered, she thanked me for my help.

“You’re very welcome. See you in there.” Only lawyers were let in at that time.

I always feel comfortable around the media people, and in particular, Bob Kealing. He has been one of my strongest supporters as a blogger and he’s a very personable guy. Bob has authored three books and won three Emmys for his work. I’ve always admired him for his professional appearance and reporting and, no doubt, he did a great job on the Neal Haskell piece he put together during his trip to Indiana. After we took our seats, Casey entered and we could hear the now familiar clink-clank of ankle chains. Within a minute or two, Cheney Mason nodded and called Bob up for a brief, very hushed, chat. When he returned to his seat, I quietly asked him if he had a good story. Yup. The courtroom hushed as the judge entered at precisely 12:58. Dang, known for being prompt and on time, I was disappointed he was early. This is two times in a row. His track record was slipping, I thought.

The first order of the day was the motion the state filed to compel discovery. The judge made it clear that he had to leave by 1:40 because of a trial he was presiding over in Courtroom 19-Delta. That’s a familiar courtroom - the one Judge Strickland used and the one that changed my blogging life forever.

The motion addressed six key points:

1. Any contracts or agreements, in any manner or form, setting for the scope of work or expected compensation.
2. Any communications between expert and any member of the defense team, either past or present, or any member of their staff, or any one working on behalf of the Defendant.
   
3. All records of bills submitted by or payments made to the expert.
   
4. All records pertaining to payments for travel, meals or entertainment paid to or for the benefit of the expert or anyone traveling with the expert, by any member of the defense team, either past or present, or any member of their staff, or any one working on behalf of the Defendant.
   
5. Any notes taken by the expert or for the expert during, or referencing their examination of any evidence in this case.
   
6. Any photograph or video taken by the expert in connection with this case.
   

These were rather interesting demands because it encompassed a lot more than mere work product, which is privileged information, it also covered the entire time prior to Judge Strickland’s ruling on Casey’s indigence status. Personally, I thought the state was asking for more than the judge was willing to give, and as Jeff Ashton finished addressing his points, the judge made asked for a response from Mr. Baez.

“There is nothing that entitles the state to this.” He said there was no wining and dining going on, so there’s nothing like that to turn over. Besides, he said, he had no reports from his experts, which I found unusual. He said it was burdensome and it doubled the work for experts. Also, a lot of the work was done pro bono.

As Jose Baez, Judge Perry and discussed all six points, the judge asked Ashton a specific question that signaled, at least to me, that he did not fully agree with the motion.

“What in that rule or in what case authority does it signal the proposition for your request on 1, 2, 3 and 4?” It was then I realized the state was only going to get 5 and 6. The way he explained it to the prosecution was pure Perry style. If you want the information, you can get it through depositions and/or subpoenas, not through this motion. As much as the judge is perceived as a prosecutor’s judge, he is very fair to both sides of the courtroom aisle. 1, 2, 3, and 4 were denied without prejudice. The defense would have to turn over notes taken by the experts, and all videos and photographs. Incidentally, yesterday was the deadline for the defense to give the state their list of experts, but the judge did give them a two-week extension.

Time was drawing nigh for the judge to set sail for another courtroom, but he soldiered on. He asked about the defense’s outstanding motion on Roy Kronk. Baez said he may withdraw it until a later date; closer to trial. The judge reminded him, in no uncertain terms, that once the deadline for motions comes and goes, he will not hear them. He asked Baez if all the state’s witnesses had been deposed. Baez said yes. He told the state that all depositions of defense experts must be done by February 28. On that same date, all motions related to forensic evidence must be in. Any non-forensic related motions must be filed by December 31.

Ann Finnell finally had a chance to speak. It didn’t last long. Some may think Judge Perry cut her short as a, sort of, way of snapping at her, but I didn’t interpret it that way. I may be wrong, but the judge had no more time to hang around, and he told her he wasn’t going to be available the week leading up to Christmas, although a tentative date to hear her motion was discussed and the 20th and 21st were tossed about. December 20 was the agreed on date, at 1:30 PM. The week of Christmas. He also reminded her that attorneys for the media would object to her motion

Cheney Mason quickly stood up and told the court that the JAC is having issues over payment and he has a motion ready to file. Judge Perry said if it’s not resolved, he will gladly take care of it.

While we thought the hearing was over, it wasn’t. Jose asked for a sidebar. The judge complied and both camps stepped up to the bench. Whatever transpired, we weren’t privy to, of course, but it was very interesting to everyone when the judge raised his right hand and began to give some sort of oath to a young gentleman who was in the mix. It was also during this time that a legal assistant had Casey laughing. To be honest, I didn’t see it. Casey was directly in front of me, so I have no idea what it was all about.

Diana Tennis, Dominic Casey’s attorney, sat in the row in front of Bob, Jim Lichtenstein, Mike DeForest and myself, directly to the right of Cindy Anthony and her friend.  She surmised that it was the swearing-in of a new attorney. Some balked at that suggestion, but she was right. While no one knew who he was, I approached him after the hearing ended. William Slabaugh told me it was awfully nice of the attorneys to permit  Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. to swear him in as Orlando’s newest lawyer. It was an honor and a privilege. I congratulated him and wished him all the best. This is something he will forever remember, because a simple notary public could have done the same thing. I’m sure the judge enjoyed the moment tremendously, but back to the matter at hand…

The final thing the judge brought up was the reminder that the defense must give the state the list of new TES witnesses by January 31, so they can be deposed by March 30. With that, the hearing ended and I had my agenda in mind to find out who that new gentleman was. At the same time, I had something I wanted to say to Jose. Meanwhile, Cheney and Bob picked up their discussion where they left off. What Jose and I discussed was between us, but what appeared to be an embrace to some was far from that. Attorneys are used to talking up close and personal to keep inquisitive ears from eavesdropping.

When Jeff Ashton was walking out of the courtroom, I asked him if Judge Perry had addressed the John Huggins¹² case. Had he rendered a decision? If so, it passed me on by. No, he said and we walked to the elevators. Riding down to the first floor, he was asked about the decision on parts 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the motion. Would he refile? He said the judge did rule “without prejudice” on those key points and that leaves the door open.

As we left the courthouse, I thought to myself, the hearing didn’t get over until almost one o’clock. Oh me, oh my, Judge Perry was going to be late to his trial. Perhaps that’s why he asked for a deputy to approach the bench; to alert the deputies in 19-Delta.

...To Judge Perry's Court We Go

Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy by Aiobhan

In the United States, this past week was one of giving thanks to God, ourselves, others, and/or all of the above, for our many bountiful blessings - no matter how bleak the economy has been and might be in the future. As Thanksgiving fades and sugar plum fairies begin their month-long magical dance, the week ahead may very well be a time for the state and defense to give thanks for what they are about to receive in the courtroom. Or not.

Three motions were filed between November 18 and the end of this past week; one by the state and two by the defense. In the final motion, Casey’s attorneys have seemingly abandoned their two-step strategy that Texas EquuSearch volunteers Laura Buchanan and Joe Jordan searched the precise spot where Caylee’s remains were discovered. It seems they tiptoed to a different tune in the company of detectives and prosecutors bearing gifts recently, most likely time away from home, if you get my drift. After being deposed by the state, Buchanan’s attorney, Bernard Cassidy said, “I believe she signed an affidavit that she searched the area where the body was found. Somebody may have suggested where the body was found, but she has never been to that area to see precisely where the body was.” Cough, cough. Ahem.

Brandon Sparks seems to have changed his story, too, about Roy Kronk, his one time stepfather’s alleged “prior bad acts.” In lieu of any familiar faces to turn to for help, the defense is asking the court for state money to hire an expert who specializes in bones and fossilized remains. If something new could be determined by another reputable forensic anthropologist/osteologist, it might help debunk the state’s expert. Do I think it will do any good? I don’t know, but this defense needs all the help it can get. Will Judge Perry grant this motion? I don’t see why not, but he will, more than likely, wait until he hears what the JAC has to say about it.

§

The first motion filed on the 18th was from the state. Signed by Jeff Ashton, it’s a State Motion to Compel Evidence and it’s based on the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 3.220 (d) and (f).

In a nutshell, the state wants to know where the taxpayers’ money went. It wants to review every contract and agreement the defense has made to date. This includes communications between the defense, its entire staff and all of its experts; any notes taken by or for the experts referencing their examination of evidence, and all photos and videos. The state is also asking for all records pertaining to meals, travel expenses, lodging and entertainment. It’s demanding a reckoning of every penny the defense has spent and, gasp, that’s a tough one.

As much as the state is asking, the motion made it clear that it doesn’t expect the judge to give away the farm. Privileged information is going to be involved, so it requests that the court examine many of the documents in camera - privately, in other words - with the defense, and to redact whatever it sees fit. Redaction means to go over everything with a fine-toothed comb in order to find things not suitable for the other side or the public. Of course, the state would love to know the defense’s strategy in order to launch a strong counterattack, but that’s not fair, nor is it proper, and both parties are aware of it. The state definitely has the upper hand on this one because it has flooded the defense with so much evidence, some important, some not, but because there’s so much of it, it’s overwhelming. Consequently, the defense has had to sort through a slew of documents in order to discern what the state will use at trial. This is a common strategy, and by filing this motion, the state has caught the defense relatively flat-footed. It will most likely have to fork over all sorts of information and that takes time and money away from defending a client. It’s a distraction, but a very legal ploy. WFTV reported that it had read 322 pages of financial documents on Thanksgiving day, so some of it is already public knowledge.

One of the key points of 3.220 (d) is that, “any tangible papers or objects that the defendant intends to use in the hearing or trial” needs to be turned over. What’s interesting is that the state does not have to turn over any internal notes; those made by investigators in the course of their work. I would assume the same would hold true for the defense, and any attorney worth their weight in salt would know how to distinguish between what is and what isn’t privileged, and would know how to hide documents accordingly. All legal; all fair.

From my discussions with judges throughout the years, not that I am in constant contact with any today, I have learned that they look at both sides fairly and without prejudice. However, being human, they can readily sense when someone is or is not capable of representing their respective clients. By this, I mean the defense as well as the state. I have yet to meet a judge who seldom complains about one side while picking apart the other. Everyone who faces a judge has his/her own personality, and being human and all, the judge will look at all motions and have personal thoughts on how they were filed and whether they make sense. What I am trying to say, in other words, is that no judge looks forward to a motion like this; not if the court has to sift through thousands of documents in order to discern what is to be passed over to the state and what is to be kept behind closed doors. Fortunately, circuit court judges generally have a battery of scholarly assistants at their disposal, but my guess is that it’s not something anyone looks forward to. Since Channel 9 had access to some of the documents, I would say the defense has turned over discovery prior to this motion. I think the most important part of the motion pertains to where the money is going, past and present; and the state of Florida has every right to know, down to the very last penny.

§

The defense filed a very interesting motion on Tuesday, November 23. The Defendant’s Motion to Seal Penalty Phase Discovery Response also cites F.R.C.P. 3.220, but in this case, it’s (l) (1) it’s referring to - Protective Orders:

Motion to Restrict Disclosure of Matters. On a showing of good cause, the court shall at any time order that specified disclosures be restricted, deferred, or exempted from discovery, that certain matters not be inquired into, that the scope of the deposition be limited to certain matters, that a deposition be sealed and after being sealed be opened only by order of the court, or make such other order as is appropriate to protect a witness from harassment, unnecessary inconvenience, or invasion of privacy, including prohibiting the taking of a deposition. All material and information to which a party is entitled, however, must be disclosed in time to permit the party to make beneficial use of it.

What this motion requests is for every bit of penalty phase information it finds from here on out be sealed or exempted from future discovery, pursuant to Florida’s Rules of Criminal Procedure. Furthermore, it states that this case “has received an extreme degree of media attention not just in Orlando, Florida, but nationally.” Everyone reading this article is well aware of that fact, and if ever there was a truth to what the defense has said, this is indisputable. The motion specifically cites Florida Statute 90.202 (l), which states: Facts that are not subject to dispute because they are generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the court.

The motion goes on to state that intense media scrutiny has resulted in the media and public conducting their own investigations aside from what law enforcement has done. I will be the first one to admit that this case has grown multiple arms, many that far outstretch the reach of sanity and truth. Specifically, Internet sites, including blogs and YouTube are fingered, but not one in particular. This is also the truth. Anyone who writes a blog has been guilty to some degree; some a lot more than others.

How many blogs have been guilty of mocking the people involved in this case? The defendant? The entire defense team? All of the defense witnesses? How many times have we read that anyone who works for the defense is a liar? The attorneys must be disbarred? There is a long list of public demands, most of which are quite illogical in the practical sense. Sure, I’m not one who should talk, but I’ve tried to be fair, and in this case, I can empathize with the defense.

“To date, witnesses in this case, especially defense witnesses, have already been subjected to intense media pressure and harassment by the media and the public at large. This has resulted in a chilling effect with some witnesses becoming reluctant to come forward with information for fear of harassment and stalking.”

Boy, oh boy, can I relate to that one. I’m not a witness for the defense, but I have been harassed and stalked since Judge Strickland stepped down. Relentlessly. And if the defense ever needed a witness who could testify to that fact, it would be me.

It’s interesting that the order requiring penalty phase witnesses to be listed is due on November 30, the day after the hearing, so this motion could be two-fold; the other being that the list is not forthcoming. After all, how much time has Ann Finnell, the author of the motion, had to gather up all penalty phase witnesses?

The motion asks that the disclosure of these witnesses from the media and the public be restricted until a penalty phase has been established. This, the defense argues, insures that Casey will receive a fair penalty phase if it becomes necessary. In any event, if the judge refuses to grant the defense’s request, the motion asks for an evidentiary hearing on the matter, and that’s one I doubt the judge will say no to.

Overall, it has been my observation that there are a bunch of weirdos out there in the public who have grown some of the most mutated arms I have ever witnessed in my entire life. One such arm that has absolutely no merit is the one boasted by several inane commenters at an otherwise respected site; the one that states “as fact” that Jose Baez, Cindy Anthony, Melissa Earnest and myself conspired to remove The Honorable Stan Strickland from the bench. That one is disgusting, it has absolutely no legs to stand on, and it’s based purely on hatred for me and the others named. Only the stupidest of idiots would believe such a thing. It’s precisely what the defense is talking about, and it’s why the motion stated that the “intense media scrutiny of this case has resulted in the media and the public conducting their own independent investigations in the facts of this case…” I can’t say it enough times. No, this has nothing to do with my fact seeking field trips to Walmart, a la James Thompson, or a video I shot of a person who has yet to be called by the state. In both respects, I was well within my rights and all I was seeking was the truth. If Casey cannot get a fair trial, it is because of trolls. We all know who they are and so does the defense. It’s the trolls who insist they are the only ones who know “the truth” and they say so at the expense of federal and state law enforcement officials, not to mention prosecutors, bunglers all, and certainly not professional enough to see the light.

God forbid that my name would ever be placed on the defense witness list, but believe me, I sure do relish the thought of being able to tell a judge the truth about all of the horrible lies pertaining to this case. If Casey’s defense team has ever filed a good motion, this one is it. Let’s see what the judge thinks.

The Ballad of Casey

It is a well established fact that in America, Casey Marie Anthony is not guilty of murdering her daughter - not yet, anyway, and no matter what we think, it will take a jury of her peers to make that determination. Until then, she is presumed innocent and all we can do is speculate. No matter what the outcome next year, I truly believe her name will be synonymous with Lizzie Borden’s. Lizzie, of course, found her father, Andrew, and stepmother, Abbie, hacked up by a hatchet in their family home in Fall River, Massachusetts, on August 4, 1892. A week later, she was arrested and charged with their murders.

Today, the notoriety of Casey’s alleged criminal act is so vast, there’s hardly a person in the civilized world who hasn’t, at least, heard of her or her daughter, Caylee Marie; whether they follow the story in depth or not. Credit the Internet, where someone in Dogtown, Florida can make headlines five minutes later in Tick Bite, North Carolina. Tick Bite? Yes, Tick Bite. They are almost 700 miles apart, give or take as the flea jumps, but the speed of communication today is just fascinating, it’s worldwide, and it’s mind boggling!

In Lizzie’s time, it would have taken several days to travel from Dogtown to Tick Bite. Today, it can be done in 10 hours. Aside from cars, what the Interstate system did to our roads in the 1950s, the Internet has done to news reporting of the new millennium, only multiplied by a few quadrillion nanoseconds. It’s interesting to note that, while Lizzie’s trial was over in 1893, we still remember her name and what she was charged with. That’s 107 years ago, folks! Why? Because it was a horrible crime? Sure, but it can’t just be that. Granted, there are no “nice” ways to commit murder, but there’s something that sticks in our craw when a daughter kills her parents or a mother kills her child. There’s something more despicable about it and we seldom forget it because there’s no way to explain murdering our own flesh and blood. Spouses and ex-spouses are another story. Speaking of which…

Before the Internet, we relied on TV. An excellent example of television at its finest was the OJ Simpson debacle. How many of us watched the whole thing unfold live before our very eyes? It was the first real crime to hit the tube with such focused intensity, and to most of us, we will never forget the white Bronco. That chase will forever be one of those “I remember exactly where I was” moments. The trial was among the most publicized in American history, while the verdict was watched by more than half of the U.S. population. It was huge.

There have been a few notable murders in our recent history; recent being that there are still people alive who can remember. Today, there’s Casey. Fifteen years ago, OJ was found not guilty. Sixty years earlier, Bruno Richard Hauptmann was found guilty of murdering famed aviator Charles Lindbergh’s infant son and sentenced to death. Both were called “The Crime of the Century.” No one is alive that would remember Lizzie, but in all of these cases, most of the evidence was (and will be) circumstantial in nature. Lindbergh and Simpson were famous before the crimes, but not Hauptmann or Lizzie, and certainly not Casey. It was the murders that mostly shaped their destinies. It is what they were charged with that determined how history would view them. History books don’t teach folklore, though. It’s passed down, and Lizzie’s tale continues to be embedded in our memories. That’s how legends grow, good and bad. Sadly, the murder trumps the murdered.

In the case of Lizzie, no one else was a suspect at the time, and to this very day, people continue to argue over who really killed the Bordens. During the investigation, a hatchet was found in the basement. It was assumed to be the murder weapon, yet it was void of blood. Most of the handle was missing and the prosecution stated it was broken off because it was too bloody to clean. A police officer testified that he found the head of the hatchet right next to the handle, but a Deputy Marshall contradicted his testimony. A forensic expert said there wouldn’t have been any time to clean it so soon after the murders. No blood-soaked clothing was found and Lizzie would not have been able to change her clothes or dispose of any in such a short time. Fingerprinting was relatively new then and authorities chose not to use it. Some considered it the junk science of the day. Despite lots of other incriminating evidence and testimony, Lizzie was acquitted. It’s interesting to note that shortly before the murders, the entire family became violently ill. Mr. Borden was not a popular man and his wife suspected they were being poisoned. Their doctor diagnosed their illness as food poisoning. They believed their milk was spiked, but after the murders, it was tested and cleared. Both victims stomachs were sent to Harvard Medical School and examined for toxins. None were found.

We can almost sense a semblance of similarities between the Borden and Anthony cases. Cindy washed a pair of Casey’s slacks. A few days after the murders, Lizzie tore up and burned a dress in the kitchen stove, saying she had brushed it against fresh paint and ruined it. No murder weapon has been found in Casey’s case, and no murder weapon was found in Lizzie’s. The fact that no blood evidence was noted on Lizzie a few minutes after the second murder pointed to reasonable doubt. All of her inquest testimony was barred at trial, as was her attempt to buy hydrogen cyanide, which she claimed she planned to use to clean a seal skin cloak. A lethal poison? You bet. In the end, the jury deliberated a mere hour-and-a-half before handing prosecutors a final whack.

In Hunterdon County, NJ, where I grew up, Bruno Hauptmann’s guilt is still split into two camps and it continues to be debated. I believe he did it. My father doesn’t think so. I believe that’s what keeps the embers burning throughout generations. Will Casey be remembered the same way? Time will tell, but I certainly think so. It’s a big story. In Lizzie’s case, she was memorialized by a popular jump rope rhyme that began circulating in schoolyards and elsewhere prior to her 1893 trial…

Lizzie Borden took an axe

And gave her mother forty whacks.

When she saw what she had done

She gave her father forty-one.

In truth, Lizzie’s stepmother suffered around 18 blows and her father just 11. Still, the legend lives on. In light of that, I came up with my own little rhyme for the times. I’m not insinuating anything. It is not indicative of Casey’s guilt or innocence. I am not predicting an outcome and I am not pronouncing a verdict. I am not making a joke out of Casey or Caylee, either. This is merely something that popped into my head. By all means, PLEASE take it lightly, tongue-in-cheek, and with a grain of salt.

THE BALLAD OF CASEY

For the rest of her life

Her name will be Mudd

For taking the life

Of her own flesh and blood.

For what lies ahead

Is a brewing storm.

Her daughter now dead

Was fed chloroform.

Samuel Mudd was the doctor who was convicted and imprisoned for aiding and conspiring with John Wilkes Booth, another name that will forever be etched in our minds. He was guilty of being in the right place at the wrong time. He tended to Booth’s severely fractured leg. His role is still in dispute. President Andrew Jackson pardoned and released Mudd in 1869, but his name is still, well, Mudd.