More Proof Zimmerman Lied...

… And the Sanford Police Department was Duped

Take a look at the results of George Zimmerman’s CVSA Truth Verification test administered by SPD. It only takes a third grader to understand the test is fatally flawed. Or is it? Zimmerman passed the test with flying colors, but look again…

To this simple question, check out his response:

HAVE YOU EVER DRIVEN OVER THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT?

NO

He passed! Is there a legally licensed driver alive who has NEVER driven above the speed limit? Not even once, perhaps? Yes! George Zimmerman. So he claims. This proves he knows how to lie and get away with it. Obviously, this guy is a seasoned pro.

PLEASE CLICK ON LINKS TO ENLARGE

 ************************************************************

From the defense Motion To Take Additional Deposition

Call Me A "Gagnostic"

 As a writer and journalist, I don’t particularly believe in gag orders, so when the second gag order motion was filed by the State on October 18, I had a feeling it, too, would be turned down, just like the first one on April 30. Sure, the first one was denied by a different judge, but the law is pretty clear about what a gag order is, and George Zimmerman’s defense team has not reached the brink of breaching the legal levee to a point of overflowing; when the public is flooded with pre-trial information that may possibly prejudice a jury down the road. Of course, this is assuming that the State passes its first hurdle — the ‘not yet filed’ defense motion for immunity. We won’t go there. Not now, anyway.

The definition of a gag order is quite simple. Law.com describes it as “a judge’s order prohibiting the attorneys and the parties to a pending lawsuit or criminal prosecution from talking to the media or the public about the case.” The description further states that a gag order “has the secondary purpose of preventing the lawyers from trying the case in the press and on television, and thus creating a public mood (which could get ugly) in favor of one party or the other.” A gag order would apply toward law enforcement officials and include all witnesses.

The second part of the description is intriguing because attorneys have been trying cases in the media since the first stone tablet announced something of legal merit thousands of years ago. Before then, it was grunt of mouth that spread the news, and I’m sure that, back then, there were lawyers that hung their slate shingles over cave entrances advertising their services. In those days, they probably wore custom-tailored saber-toothed fur ensembles to court instead of more mundane beaver skins.

Back to the present. The only thing that’s new about the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case is that the Internet has evolved over the years. We didn’t see it during the O.J. Simpson era of the mid-90s because, unlike today, there wasn’t really a huge need for it. Cell phones were the size of bricks, they were very expensive, and most people were still content with their beepers, fax machines and copiers. I went online sometime in the mid-to-late-90s, but I was in information superhighway diapers until the early 2000s. That’s the way it is in the courtroom now because most laws regarding trial publicity were written prior to the massive explosion of the digital age. If we only go back four years, we witnessed it with the bombastic blast of information regarding the Casey Anthony case, the likes of which we’ve never seen. Thousands of documents were released to the public due to Florida’s liberal Sunshine Law. It wasn’t without problems, though. Case in point: If two different sized tires were found in the woods where Caylee was found, you’d better bet the public retreaded them and overinflated their minds to believe that Casey threw those tires there for a reason. They dissected everything. Why were those tires there? What was Casey hiding? Who helped her? Roy Kronk? God forbid that they might have been there since 2003. Yes, they became Casey’s tires, yet they never swayed the jury one way or the other. There’s a reason for that. They weren’t hers and they were never introduced as evidence at trial. Those woods had been used as a dumping ground for years. That’s the problem with evidence. It’s not always evidence.

Granted, the Zimmerman defense had been publishing all sorts of information on its site, the gzlegalcase, about their client and some of the evidence that’s been released to date, but it was nothing more than what’s been released to the public, anyway. The defense has merely been offering their own interpretations, and some conflicts with the way the State thinks. While the State has been very tight-lipped, that doesn’t mean the defense must play the same game. Most certainly, it doesn’t mean that we have to believe what anyone says, either.

§

During the gag order aspect of the hearing on October 26, Bernie de la Rionda rambled on. At times, I found him to be inconsistent and somewhat disheveled, wordwise. He asserted that the defense Website had been somewhat unethical. Zimmerman & Company called witnesses liars and tried to bypass the media by offering their own version of the case instead of how the media might interpret it. I disagree. We are given the same information in discovery. We can write our own commentary. For instance, Zimmerman’s medical records indicate he may have sustained a broken nose during the fight with Trayvon the night of February 26. O’Mara clearly said it’s a fact and undisputed that his client’s nose was broken. I don’t have to believe O’Mara and neither do you, and that’s the whole point.

Discovery impacts potential jurors a heck of a lot more than anything the defense throws out, in my opinion, and no proof exists either way. His nose was broken, his nose wasn’t broken. You decide. Ostensibly, both sides will offer tons of rhetoric at trial. It’s the name of the game. There is one point where I may agree with de la Rionda. It’s when he commented about the defense site’s quote asking for donations from those who would do the same thing if they were in Zimmerman’s shoes. That’s pretty tasteless and crass, not to mention cold-hearted and grossly opinionated. SEND MONEY IF YOU THINK TRAYVON DESERVED TO DIE. Never mind that O’Mara’s job is to defend his client, not bark for money. If O’Mara has a fault, it’s that he can be overtly insensitive at times.

When O’Mara got up to explain why he had done nothing wrong to warrant the gag, I agreed with him until he asserted that the attorneys for Trayvon’s parents were using the race card. Yes, early on, it turned ugly in a racial kind of way, but O’Mara practically accused Benjamin Crump of inciting a race war. That’s just not true. I attended the National Rally for Justice on Behalf of Trayvon Martin in Sanford on March 22, and all I heard from the speakers, including Rev. Al Sharpton, was nothing but justice, justice, justice. Take it through the court system! That’s all they have been seeking. Not retribution. O’Mara claimed that Crump called Zimmerman a racist murderer and, I’m sorry, but I never heard that. If you can show me where Crump did, in fact, say it, I’ll eat my hat.

He also accused Crump and Natalie Jackson of being surrogates for the State. That’s not true, either, any more than saying that Robert Zimmerman is working for the defense. O’Mara claims that, as a surrogate for the State, Crump must be as bound to Florida Rule 4-3.6 as the immediate attorneys involved in the case. I disagree. Crump does not represent the State. His represents Trayvon’s family. Period. Even if a gag order were in place, it would have no bearing on him. I feel that the intent of this sort of strategy in the courtroom was to throw the judge off course. “They went thataway!” It didn’t work because Judge Nelson didn’t blink. She would not budge, and she often had to remind the defense and prosecution to stay on the road.

§

I was fairly certain before the hearing began that Judge Nelson was going to rule against the gag order motion. While I had some problems with the defense, did anything ever rise to the level that I would consider iffy? No, but I can understand some of the issues at hand. For instance, what separates bloggers from mainstream media? The Huffington Post is a blog, but it’s the media. Daily Kos is as much a part of the media as the New York Times Website. So is NewsBusters. Then there’s Marinade Dave. We won’t go there, but my point is clear. There’s no single distinguishing line that separates media outlets, so why can’t the defense have a blog?

When O’Mara slightly belittled de la Rionda by reminding him this is 2012 and that law books are no longer on shelves, it reminded me of the final presidential debate on foreign policy, when Obama ridiculed Romney about the armed forces no longer fighting with bayonets. While I understood the president’s point, I knew he was wrong. Marines still carry bayonets. In that vein, not all attorneys are Internet savvy. The last time I checked, Office Depot and Staples still sell legal pads and writing instruments with ink, not just digital tablets and capacitative touch screen pens.

But now that we are in the midst of a technology frenzy that continues to skyrocket into the future, at a time when my six month old 3rd generation iPad is already obsolete, I question what good a gag order would do in today’s world. Just how would it impact a jury seven months into the future when we live in an age of lightning LTE speed? The old saying, today’s news is at the bottom of tomorrow’s birdcage, no longer applies because you can’t clean up birdpoop with the Orlando Sentinel dot com. This morning’s news is already old and who can remember what happened yesterday? Other than something that impacts us tremendously, like Superstorm Sandy, who cares? By the time George Zimmerman goes to trial, no one will remember O’Mara’s ramblings from last month, let alone care. Trust me on that one (but I do find it peculiar that nothing new has been posted on the gzlegalcase site [as of this writing] since October 23.)

Ultimately, Judge Nelson denied the motion because alternatives are available to the court to “ensure that an impartial jury can be selected. Those tools include a change of venue, a larger than normal jury venire, individualized voir dire, and stern instructions to the jurors as to their sworn duty to decide the issues based only upon the evidence.” I fully concur, but I think the best news to come out of her order was one simple, yet important, thing. Had a gag order been placed, other than Benjamin Crump, the media would have had no one else to talk to but Robert Zimmerman, Jr, and no one but the media and his own family care about him. And he only matters when there’s nothing better to report. Count your blessings. It’s good to be a gagnostic.

[Prior to the start of the hearing, I wasn’t sure I could get an Internet connection on my iPad. I did, but in the meantime, I asked Rene Stutzman, senior reporter at the Orlando Sentinel, if she had any paper to spare. She gave me her legal pad without hesitation. That was very kind and generous of her. Of course, I gave it back.]

Cross posted on the Daily Kos

Bond, Revoke Bond

Call me old fashioned or set in my ways or something, but I got used to the courtrooms run by Orange County judges Stan Strickland and Belvin Perry, Jr. By that, I mean, when we went to the Casey Anthony hearings, chances were good that the honorables would have been inclined to rule on new motions — ones presented that day — at a later date, giving the prosecution and defense (and us) time to ingest and digest the gist of what had just been presented. In other words, the judges routinely gave the opposing side an opportunity to work up a legal response to be argued at a subsequent hearing.

Don’t get me wrong. In no way am I questioning the manner in which Seminole County judge Kenneth R. Lester, Jr. (yes, another junior) runs his courtroom. As a matter of fact, I sensed from the start that this was a no nonsense judge; one who knows the law and how to interpret and implement it. Fair and firm… that’s what I’d call him. Balanced, too, but while attending the hearing last Friday, I never expected to hear a motion that had been filed a mere two hours earlier, followed by an immediate decision from the judge. Where did that come from, and why didn’t Mark O’Mara, George Zimmerman’s lead defense attorney, protest? Well, there’s more to the story, but first, the matter at hand. While the ending may have shocked us, it wasn’t the reason why we were there to begin with.

The hearing was to argue for and against releasing information pursuant to Florida’s rules of discovery, otherwise known as the Sunshine Law. The state said that the names of witnesses should be kept out of public view for their own protection. The defense agreed, and added that things should be kept at a slow pace for now. There’s no reason to release the information at the moment because there are a lot of people to interview further. This will take time.

The media wants everything made public because that’s the law, argued Orlando Sentinel attorney Rachel Fugate in response, and, eventually, the names will be made public anyway. Why not now? So far, she said, the state and defense haven’t shown good cause why any information should remain behind closed doors, and to be honest, it all depends on which way you look at things. Here, the crux of the matter goes well beyond protecting innocent witnesses, unlike the Casey Anthony case, which she compared it to. Casey never admitted that she killed anyone. George did, and that’s part of the problem, aside from race and outrage being major factors. Most of the public agreed with the prosecution in State v. Casey Anthony. Here, it’s deeply split.

Aside from race, the state contends that George Zimmerman’s statements to investigators add up to a confession, and because of that, they are exempt from disclosure. Of course, the defense disagrees. Yes, the defendant admitted he shot and killed the victim, but it was not a murder. It was in self-defense.

Judge Lester called it a matter of what’s inculpatory and what’s exculpatory. One says it’s a fish; the other says it’s a fowl, he added. Inculpatory is evidence that can establish a defendant’s guilt, while exculpatory is evidence that tends to clear a defendant of guilt.

In the end, the judge decided to follow the law and release the discovery documents, but not without poring over them, piecemeal, in camera, and redacted, which means he will most likely censor some of what’s released, like in the first document dump. And just like Judge Perry, Judge Lester reminded the attorneys that this will be no trial by ambush! What you see is what you get.

Incidentally, defense attorney Mark O’Mara said he expects to see a new round of discovery by Monday or Tuesday, so keep your eyes open, folks.

§

When Judge Lester abruptly revoked George Zimmerman’s bond on Friday, it caught me off guard. Like I said at the beginning of this post, I pretty much thought the court would allow time for the defense to prepare. After all, the motion was filed that morning. But I missed something along the way.

At the April 27 hearing to discuss the motions filed by media attorneys, O’Mara stated that his client had misinformed the court about his financial standing at the bond hearing held a week earlier, on April 20. (This signaled the prosecution to go on the offense and dig up some damning information.) While George sat silent in the courtroom, his wife Shellie, out of camera view, lied under oath about their financial situation. He was fully aware of what she was saying and doing. Instead of being flat broke like she testified, he had amassed a small fortune in excess of $135,000, give or take a few truckloads of chicken feed.

That’s not all. There was a problem with the passport — or passports — George held. At the bond hearing, he surrendered his U.S. passport and “tendered it to the court.” It was due to expire in May anyway. So far, so good, except that he failed to inform the court that he held another passport. It seems the first one was lost and he had applied for a replacement in 2004. Passports are good for ten years, so that means the new one is still good for another two years. Meanwhile, the old one resurfaced and that’s the one he turned over. While there is nothing illegal about it, the state had every right to cry foul. George is, after all, a defendant in a murder case, and the state takes EVERYTHING seriously. So does his team of defense attorneys.

And then there’s the judge.

While Judge Lester overlooked George’s indiscretion concerning the passport, he may have done so because of George’s overt lies concerning his finances. Obviously, that was the case in court last Friday, and because defense counsel had previously mentioned the money issue back on April 27, it was no real surprise when the state smacked George with its MOTION TO REVOKE BOND that day.

Did the defense see it coming? I don’t really know, but I will say this. Upon entering the courthouse, you have to pass through a security screen which includes removing your shoes. When you get to the 5th floor courtroom, you must pass through another security checkpoint before entering. As I was placing my personal items back in my pockets, Mark O’Mara came upon me. We spoke briefly. I told him how polite and respectful he was to me when Bill Sheaffer introduced us during the Anthony trial. Mark, if you recall, was hired as a legal consultant for WKMG. If you think back, you may remember Mark NeJame was also with the CBS affiliate. Anyway, whenever O’Mara and I saw each other again during the trial, we always exchanged greetings. He’s a real gentleman. This time, I did wish him the best in the courtroom and he didn’t seem preoccupied with anything that may have been coming down the pike. After the hearing, I spoke to him again, and he agreed when I said it wasn’t a good day.

“No, it wasn’t,” he admitted.

If I had to take an educated guess, I would say that the defense team did not expect this broadside from prosecutor Bernie De la Rionda, and to be honest, I don’t think it was the motion itself as much as it was De la Rionda’s blow-by-blow vocal delivery and the judge’s abrupt decision to revoke bond. It was a veritable wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am, slam dunk, bada-bing sorta thing.

Here’s the bottom line. George Zimmerman lied. While you may not have heard his own voice doing the lying, he did so through his legal counsel and through the testimony of his wife, in sickness and in health; through good and through bad. And the bad part about it was that he manipulated his attorneys and his spouse. That, in my opinion, is what really perturbed the judge the most. And lying to the court, of course. It’s a cold day in hell when you can pull the wool over a judge’s eyes, let alone get a chuckle out of him for trying.

While he sat in the Seminole County jail awaiting his bond hearing, George played his sudden fortune like a Wall Street pro, only he did it in code, assuming the law would never understand a word of it. Well, George, those plastic decoder rings you used to get in cereal and Cracker Jack boxes as a kid were invented a long, long time ago, before Dick Tracy, and it doesn’t take much of a brainiac to figure out that $135 = $135,000 in code-speak. Duh. It’s stuff like this that truly makes me wonder if George actually thinks of himself as some sort of comic book superhero who’s above the law. It’s not Superman… it’s… it’s Zimmerman!

Despite George’s immature attempt at deception, I’m going to go out on a limb and take a stab at how the judge will respond to a second bond motion filed by the defense requesting his release. Sure, it will be granted, but the judge is out of town this week, so George will have to sit and stew for awhile. God knows, he earned it. Of course, when the hearing is eventually held, he will kiss a good chunk that money in limbo good bye. Bond should be set to the tune of $1,000,000 if you ask me, which, when decoded, translates into a $100,000 down payment; still a mere pittance to a guy like him and his loyal minions, but a huge slice of the pie when it comes to the not so small matter of mounting legal fees.

[Since this writing, the defense team has decided against filing a new motion for a bond hearing at this time. See: Update For Motion On Bond]

Until the hearing comes, George and his defense team will need to do some serious head banging. He profoundly impacted his credibility with the judge. To those who disagree, listen to O’Mara’s own words. “There is a credibility question that now needs to be rehabilitated by explaining in a way what they were thinking, when they did what they did, and we’ll address it… I think that explanation or apology, if it is, should go directly to the person who deserves it. In this case, that is Judge Lester.” (See: George Zimmerman returns to Seminole County Jail)

Take a look, too, at what the Orlando Sentinel put together from their own reporting and research. This is something a jury will not ignore.

Zimmerman’s untrue statements

• The night he shot Trayvon Martin to death, police say Zimmerman told them his record was squeaky-clean. In fact, he had been charged in 2005 with resisting arrest without violence during an altercation with a state alcohol officer. Zimmerman wound up in a pretrial-diversion program, a scaled-down version of probation offered to nonviolent first-time offenders.
• When he was booked into the Seminole County Jail on April 23, he told the booking officer that he never had been in a pretrial-diversion program before, documents show.
• At his April 20 bond hearing, while making a surprise apology to Trayvon’s family, Zimmerman said he didn’t realize Trayvon was so young. In his call to police moments before the shooting, however, he described Trayvon — who was 17 — as in his “late teens.”

These things, plus the money deception, will not bode well for the defense. The judge will give George an opportunity to explain himself, but what does O’Mara think? “My understanding was that Judge Lester seemed to indicate that he wanted testimony. That is a very complex decision to make about what effect that would have, not only at the hearing itself, but any future testimony, so we haven’t made that decision yet.”

I don’t think I’m even close to going out on a limb when I say that George can kiss the old stand your ground defense good bye. Since it will be Judge Lester’s decision to make, wasn’t it really stupid of George to lie to him, of all people? Wasn’t that a blatant lack of common sense and honesty? Or was it stupidity? Couldn’t the night of February 26 have been the same thing? A blatant lack of common sense and honesty?

Because I am so sure this case will go to trial unless a plea deal is made — which I strongly doubt, George is going to have to do something to regain his credibility, but I don’t know what. His defense team is doing its best at damage control, but how much good will it do?

From the George Zimmerman Legal Defense Website, Details Regarding The Request For A Second Bond Hearing For George Zimmerman:

(Edited for content)

While Mr. Zimmerman acknowledges that he allowed his financial situation to be misstated in court, the defense will emphasize that in all other regards, Mr. Zimmerman has been forthright and cooperative. He gave several voluntary statements to the police, re-enacted the events for them, gave voice exemplars for comparison and stayed in ongoing contact with the Department of Law Enforcement during his initial stage of being in hiding. He has twice surrendered himself to law enforcement when asked to do so, and this should demonstrate that Mr. Zimmerman is not a flight risk. He has also complied with all conditions of his release, including curfew, keeping in touch with his supervising officers, and maintaining his GPS monitoring, without violation.

Why did George stay “in ongoing contact with the Department of Law Enforcement” when he first went into hiding? Because he thought of himself as one of them? A cop’s cop? Among his peers? The first thing a defense attorney worth his weight in salt would say to a new client is to shut up. That’s why this statement is meaningless. Of course it was his initial contact because, on advice of counsel, he stopped talking after that.

He has twice surrendered himself to law enforcement when asked to do so, and this should demonstrate that Mr. Zimmerman is not a flight risk. He has also complied with all conditions of his release, including curfew, keeping in touch with his supervising officers, and maintaining his GPS monitoring, without violation.

This, too, goes without saying. Isn’t that a given? This is what he was supposed to do, and most people comply with the law. Besides, once the cash was out of his hands, where was he supposed to hide? With what? Once the defense learned of the money, it was transferred into a trust fund where George couldn’t touch it. Neither could his wife.

The audio recordings of Mr. Zimmerman’s phone conversations while in jail make it clear that Mr. Zimmerman knew a significant sum had been raised by his original fundraising website. We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion. The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair.

“We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion.” This is damage control at its finest. This is why exemplary defense counsel deserves to make the big bucks, and I’ve got to hand it to Mr. O’Mara, who I totally respect and admire. That sentence says it all, but it’s a classic contortion of relativity and relevance. It’s pointing the finger one way while speaking in another direction. Why? While focusing on George’s innate fear, mistrust and confusion, which we can all relate to, its actual intent is to confuse us and take the heat off him.

If George was really fearful, mistrusting and confused, why did he lie to the court? If he did nothing wrong, what was he fearful of there, of all places? The court was the first place he should have trusted. After all, the truth shall set him free. Right?

Bond, Revoke Bond

Sanford Police release Zimmerman timeline

The Orlando Sentinel published a precise timeline of events leading up to Trayvon Martin’s death. Released with the document dump last week, it shows what George Zimmerman doing just prior to the shooting. In less than two minutes from the time Zimmerman ended his call with the dispatcher, Trayvon was shot dead.

1911:12 - Call received from George Zimmerman reporting suspicious person

1913:19 - Zimmerman relays that suspicious person is running from him

1913:36 - Dispatcher asks Zimmerman if he is following suspicious person

1913:36 - Dispatcher advises Zimmerman “Okay; we don’t need you to do that”

1915:23 - Approximate time call with Zimmerman ends

1916:43 - 911 call placed by (blacked out name) where Zimmerman is heard screaming for help

1917:20 - Shot fired; screams from Zimmerman cease

1917:40 - Officer T. Smith arrives on scene

1919:43 - Officer T. Smith locates and places Zimmerman in custody.

Source: Orlando Sentinel, Rene Stutzman

Welcome to the Hood

I thought I’d show you around the neighborhood where George Zimmerman will be spending a good part of his time until — or unless — things change. He does have a bond hearing on Friday.

Orange County is run differently than Seminole. In Orange, the sheriff’s office is responsible for maintaining peace at the courthouse, just like in Seminole. In Seminole, the office also maintains the jail. Not so in Orange, which is one of the few counties in Florida that has its own force. The jail is about 5-miles away and defendants must travel to and fro when ordered to appear in court.

The Orange County Courthouse is conveniently located in downtown Orlando, where there’s lots of parking and nearby restaurants — many within walking distance. The Seminole County Courthouse is a mere 4.5 miles from me, straight up US 17-92. The jail is in its backyard, on the same property.

Unfortunately, the courthouse and jail are not within walking distance of any restaurants, and even driving to nearby spots is somewhat of a pain. My guess is that whenever the big show comes to town, meaning the trial, there will be a battery of catering trucks available. If there’s a trial. 

The Seminole County Courthouse is not nearly as large as its sister in Orange county, but it has a somewhat majestic appearance in its simple elegance. It sits alone, in scale, at least, because there are no other tall structures nearby, like in downtown Orlando. Seminole County is very small compared to Orange.

CLICK PHOTOS TO ENLARGE

To the right of the courthouse, Bush Blvd. winds around the back to the jail.

On the other side of boulevard is the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office building.

To the jail…

You can see the back of the courthouse:

This is the visitation center:

The Intake facility. You don’t want to go through those doors…

The back end of the jail:

Hopefully, my 50 cent tour gives you a halfway decent idea of what we will most likely get used to seeing for the time being. I don’t think this case will take three years to run its course like Casey’s arrest and trial, but most importantly, I don’t believe that George Zimmerman will be sitting in jail the whole time like she did, either. Why? The fact remains, he did turn himself in to authorities voluntarily, and he did so before the charges were formally laid out. That should give him a decent chance at bonding out by the end of this week. Since his arrest, the furor has died down and I no longer feel his life is in grave danger. Well, for the most part, anyway, but I guess it will mostly hinge on whether the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) still has a $10,000 bounty on his head. A lot of people could use the extra money these days, and it stretches well beyond the barriers of ethnicity. I sure would hate to see him turn into a martyr.

My Trip to Gainesville, Part 3

 CROSS CREEK

Cross Creek was home to Pulitzer Prize winning author Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings for 25 years, from 1928 until her death in 1953. It’s an enchanting little hamlet you could easily picture in your head; a picturesque place with a babbling brook and quaint bridge that spans it. There’s none of the clutter you’d expect from a large town — no traffic lights, no horns blaring, and nothing to hear other than the faint sounds of birds cheerfully chirping in nearby trees. Yes, that would be a very good description. It’s a secluded community that epitomizes Old Florida. This year, though, there’s no babble in the brook that separates Orange Lake from Little Lochloosa Lake. A dry winter is to blame. Not long ago, down at th’ crick, you could catch a cooter wit a cane pole.

Of her adopted town, Rawlings often wrote of the harmony between the wind and rain, the sun and seasons, the seeds and, above all else, time. Once you enter Cross Creek, you become a part of its mystique. There’s a feeling of calm that fills the heart and you’re beckoned back to an era of bygone years, listening to Bing Crosby on an RCA Gramophone instead of Kanye West on an iPod; when the country doctor still made house calls and he’d gladly take a freshly baked pecan pie as payment. Those were the days…

Most of Rawlings’ work centered around rural central and north Florida, including Cross Creek, and in 1938, she found immense success with The Yearling, the story of a boy, his pet deer and his relationship with his father. Until it was published, most literary critics considered her to be a regional writer, but she disagreed. There’s more to writing than that. “Don’t make a novel about them unless they have a larger meaning than just quaintness.”

Rawlings grew up in the Brookland section of Washington, DC, and attended the University of Wisconsin, but years of living in Cross Creek transformed her. She felt a profound connection to the area and the land. While the locals were wary at first, they soon warmed up and told stories of their own experiences, which she diligently wrote down in notebook after notebook, along with descriptions of plants and animals, recipes, and examples of southern dialects.

The following 2 pictures are of Rawling’s house.

While doing research for The Yearling, Rawlings went into nearby scrub forests and spent several weeks with a Florida Cracker, hunting, fishing, and going on a couple of bear hunts. She convinced him that she was interested in the old customs, which was the truth. Trust me, you will never win over a Cracker by lying, and you cannot be a cracker unless you was born in the state. Crackers either accept you or they don’t and there ain’t no in between.

According to Elizabeth Silverthorne, who wrote Rawlings’ biography Sojourner at Cross Creek, Rawlings received the acceptance of her neighbors because she learned quickly about their system of morals and values. For instance, neighbors helped pick pecans from her trees in exchange for enough of the crop to last them through the winter. She became interweaved with local folks.

In every small town, you’ll find neighbors who gaze out front windows through cracks in the curtains to see what others in the community are doing. Cross Creek was no different during Rawlings’ time. Interestingly, she based a lot of her fictional characters on people who lived in the town and surrounding areas, and because of it, resentments arose, despite the fact that she never once used anyone’s full name.

Zelma Cason was, at one time, a very close friend of the author’s and her first in Cross Creek.  She was, that is, until she felt the sting of Rawlings’ pen in a portrayal of her in the book Cross Creek:

“Zelma is an ageless spinster resembling an angry and efficient canary. She manages her orange grove and as much of the village a county as needs management or will submit to it. I cannot decide whether she should have been a man or a mother. She combines the more violent characteristics of both and those who ask for or accept her ministrations think nothing at being cursed loudly at the very instant of being tenderly fed, clothed, nursed, or guided through their troubles.”

Cason took offense, so in 1943 she sued Rawlings for $100,000 for invasion of privacy. The trial became a spectacle as the struggle between the right of privacy and free speech ensued in open court, with Cason arguing that Rawlings did not have the right to publish a description of her without permission, and Rawlings countering with free speech. Interestingly, no Florida court had ever heard an invasion of privacy case prior to this one, and laws on libel were too ambiguous in those days. (Florida started its tradition of openness back in 1909 with the passage of Chapter 119 of the Florida Statutes or the Public Records Law.) 

Cason’s attorney, Kate Walton, was one of the first females to represent a client during a time when women weren’t allowed to serve on juries in the state. Sigsby Scruggs was a well-known, crafty, cracker attorney hired by Rawlings, along with Jacksonville attorney Philip May. As much as we watched the Casey Anthony trial unfold during the course of three years, the world’s eyes were on the little Florida town of Cross Creek while WWII raged on. Rawlings’ husband at the time and until her death was Norton Baskin. “I haven’t seen people around here so stirred up about anything since that two-headed calf was born over to Island Grove,” he said. [1]

From The St. Augustine Record, Monday, April 19, 2010:

The trial, held in Gainesville, drew state reporters and noisy crowds. The original trial and the appeals that followed took several years.

In the end it was a “bloody stalemate,” writes Townsend. [Billy Townsend’s great-aunt is the late Kate Walton.]

The jury in Alachua County stood by Rawlings and “laughed Zelma and Aunt Katie and J.V. out of court. It took them 28 minutes to find for Marjorie.”

But in 1947 the Florida Supreme Court overturned the verdict. It “both established the right of privacy exists in Florida and proved that Marjorie invaded Zelma’s privacy in ‘Cross Creek,’” he writes.

But the court limited damages to $1 plus attorney fees. Zelma had been “wronged, but not harmed.”

Cason couldn’t prove she’d suffered mental anguish or that Rawlings acted with malice. Rawlings failed to convince the judges that they were harming an author’s ability to write.

“They both thought they had lost,” Townsend said.

Before they died, Cason and Rawlings became friends of sorts once again.

Cason claimed that the lawyers made her do it. Townsend thinks Cason came to Kate Walton to start the suit rather than lawyers approaching her. But, now, all the people who knew for sure are gone.

As we looked over part of Rawlings’ property, Nika1 informed me that she was supposed to be buried in a different cemetery when she died, but in a twist of irony, there was a mix up and she ended up in the same cemetery as her one-time friend, Zelma, who had bought plots there earlier. When Cason died in 1963, she was buried 50 feet away from Rawlings. Quite literally, they followed each other to their graves. 

It was now after 5:00 pm in Cross Creek, and as the lesson in history wound down and the sun edged closer to the horizon, Nika1 and I realized it was time to eat, and reservations had already been made at The Yearling Restaurant, a stone’s throw from Rawlings’ house. From the outside, the restaurant isn’t anything fancy to look at. As a matter of fact, there’s nothing at all pretentious about it. Looking at it from the front, it doesn’t look very big, either, but once you get inside, it’s almost cavernous. Our host led us to a good-sized back room where, later, two musicians sang and played their instruments. Our waitress for the evening was a delightful young lady named Leslie. You haven’t lived until you’ve eaten fried green tomatoes, and there are none finer than what we were served. For entrees, Nika1 ordered fried fish and I got fried gator tail. Yes, you heard that right. I had eaten it before, but none was as tender as this go around.

When you’re inside the restaurant, it’s really a cozy, homey kind of place. It’s precisely what you’d expect in Cross Creek — comfort food, and I must say, the sour orange pie for dessert was fantastic!

While we sat waiting for our food, we talked about the area; not just Cross Creek, but also about Alachua County, including where Nika1 resides. It’s amazing how many people know each other even when they live 20 miles apart. It’s a close-knit community, so when she told me the story about the history of the restaurant and one of the area’s most colorful gentlemen, I found myself captivated by what she was saying. One of her close neighbors was characterized in The Yearling. In the book, he was the crippled boy. In real life, his name is J.T. Glisson, but once you know him, his name is Jake. When the original owners opened the restaurant in 1952, they commissioned Jake to paint a picture of a yearling — one that could have been the one portrayed in the book. He did, and there it hung for 40 years. The original owners closed the restaurant in 1992 and it reopened in 2002 under new ownership. When it closed in 1992, Jake asked if he could get his painting back. The owner honored his request, and today, it proudly hangs in Nika1’s house.

Jake is in his 80s now, but he’s not just a painter, he’s an author; a writer of books. I think there’s something in the air up there in Alachua County. I sense it’s where a lot of creative juices flow, and they once babbled through Cross Creek. The world is a wonderful place, and the legacy of Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings lives on. Why? Because she didn’t just write The Yearling, she lived it…

“Enchantment lies in different things for each of us. For me, it is in this: to step out of the bright sunlight into the shade of orange trees; to walk under the arched canopy of their jade like leaves; to see the long aisles of lichened trunks stretch ahead in a geometric rhythm; to feel the mystery of a seclusion that yet has shafts of light striking through it. This is the essence of an ancient and secret magic.”

— Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings

(See: The Yearling, a 1946 movie starring Gergory Peck and Jane Wyman)

Next: My Trip to Gainesville, Part 4 — Micanopy, the oldest inland town in Florida.

From the Court House...

I attended the hearing yesterday — the one pertaining to the release of the video deposition of a tricked out defendant in camouflage that the Morgan & Morgan law firm took on October 8. She continuously invoked her 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination, so, in essence, no reliable information came out of the deposition. Morgan & Morgan represents Zenaida Gonzalez in the civil suit against the mother of Caylee Anthony, accused of her murder and acquitted on July 5 of all charges except lying to law enforcement. She has been in hiding since her release from the Orange County Jail on July 17, and for good reason. She is one of the most hated persons in the world.

John Morgan argued that the defendant has no special rights that should prevent the video from being released under Florida’s liberal open government in the sunshine law. For the defense, Andrew Chmelir argued that there was absolutely no reason for releasing the information, and that if it were to become public, it would open his client up to greater scrutiny and hinder her right to a fair trial. Circuit Judge Lisa T. Munyon is presiding over the civil case and, after listening to both sides, she said she has 10-days to decide and will issue an order within that time frame.

Initially, I was against the lawsuit for a number of reasons. One was that Zenaida is only one of a dozen or so people in the immediate area who share the same name as the fictitious nanny named back in July of 2008 as Caylee’s kidnapper. The Zenaida represented by Morgan is the only one suing for defamation. She cites that her good name was ruined and she has been unable to work ever since. Personally, I think it is time for her to move on with her life, but at the same time, I am in agreement with the plaintiff to a certain extent. John Morgan told her from the start that there would most likely be no money forthcoming if she wins the suit because the defendant would not make money off the death of her daughter. Of course, that was prior to the verdict, when most people, including Morgan, felt she would be spending the rest of her life behind bars or sentenced to death. Since her acquittal, she has yet to capitalize on her story, and rightfully so. Public outrage is so strong, for any media outlet to touch it would surely be toxic. Besides, as Judge Stan Strickland once said, the truth and Ms. Anthony are strangers. You can’t believe a word she says. Why would any entity pay for lies?

Today, I do think that Zenaida Gonzalez deserves to have her good name back, but is it necessary to win the lawsuit in order to achieve it? I don’t know, but it wouldn’t hurt. For sure, Ms. Anthony should have been more forthright about this particular Zenaida, so in that regard, especially since Jose Baez admitted in his opening statement that Caylee was dead all along, his client could have readily dispatched this particular Zenaida and no harm would have been done.

Which way am I leaning about the release of the deposition video? Although I do not think it will hurt Ms. Anthony, I’m not sure why it should be. For one thing, I disagree with her defense’s argument that it would impede her right to a fair trial, where the case would be litigated in a courtroom, not in front of the media and under public scrutiny. After all, she can’t receive any more damage than she’s already brought upon herself, right? But on the other hand, I’m not sure one of Morgan’s arguments is all that valid. Does a law firm’s video deposition fall under the same rule of discovery as the state? In my humble opinion, I don’t think so, so how will the judge rule? I don’t have a clue, but it will be very interesting to find out. How many of us really want to see her? Be honest.

§

Why did I decide to attend the hearing? Oh, I guess it was for old time’s sake. I expected to run into some of the same people I mingled with throughout the hearings and, of course, the trial. I felt it would be very good to let everyone know about my health, too, and I was right. There were days during the trial when I looked like death warmed over. One of the deputies told me, “And then you had to run home and write about the day, only to return in the morning.” He was right, and I told him it was more than just that. I had a very disciplined and demanding editor who yelled more than Great Caesar’s ghost! at some of the things I wrote. I will admit that the experience taught me a lot about writing, thanks to him.

It was a very good day to mingle and reminisce. It was also good to re-acquaint myself with John Morgan from years ago, and he was curious about me, meaning he certainly knew who I was. To be honest, he is a very friendly and approachable sort, and extremely polite. When his son, Matt, saw us talking, he made it a point to introduce himself, too. There was no huge ego. Obviously, his mother and father brought him up right, and no doubt, he’s got a tremendous future ahead and I wish him all the best.

Finally, allow me to put one rumor to bed. According to an extremely reliable source, who shall remain nameless, Judge Strickland is relinquishing his bench for exactly the reason he stated. After 16 years, he wants out. He wants to help his wife with her business. This has absolutely nothing to do with any sort of investigation into how he handled the issue with the “blogger” named Marinade Dave or his statements made after the trial on Nancy Grace. Yes, WFTV hinted that there may just be an investigation, but my source was quick to point out that Channel 9 is the first and biggest one to sensationalize the news. Anything for ratings.

Rest assured, there is no investigation and Judge Strickland had every right to say anything he wanted after the trial ended. Besides, he already knew by then that he was going to retire. The decision was something he gave much thought to. This is a judge who so richly deserves a huge round of applause from all of us. I am honored to know him.

I will be away from my computer for several hours today. If you get caught in moderation, I will let you out when I can - later today.

Of Biblical Proportions

SOLOMON, PART I

On January 27, 2010, I wrote a post titled, “The Wisdom of Solomon”. It was two days after The Honorable Judge Stan Strickland listened to Amy Huizenga’s thieving friend plead guilty to thirteen counts of fraud. Here is part of what I wrote that day:

State Attorney Frank George stood up at his respective podium and began to speak. On July 8, 2008, Casey wrote a check in the amount of $111.01 that accounted for charges 2, 3, and 4. She wrote this check at Target.  On July 10, she passed a check at Target in the amount of $137.77 that accounted for charges 5, 6, and 7. Also on July 10, she passed a third check at Target for $155.47 and that took care of counts 8, 9, and 10. Counts 11, 12, and 13 took place on July 15 when she wrote a check for $250 at the Bank of America. He then brought up count 1 which referred to a deliberate scheme of conduct overall. She planned on writing checks until they bounced off the walls, I would guess. Good thing we live in the information age, where account balances are instantaneous almost everywhere we go.

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

In closing, he added what he felt was the right thing to do:

“There was not an even number of offenses, so I withheld in seven, I adjudicated in six. If that seems Solomon-like, it is.”

Of particular interest now is the Solomon-like decision Judge Perry faces regarding the recent clarification of Casey’s probation period set by Judge Strickland. I find it ironic that good old Solomon once again rears his head at the now acquitted and much detested convicted felon.

MOSES, PART I

That brings me to another biblical figure - Moses. He was the guy who cast ten plagues on the people of Egypt. He also parted the Red Sea after he turned the Nile into blood. The pharoah was none too happy with that, so he let Moses and his people go out of Egypt to be slaves no more.

My reason for bringing up Moses has little to do with him, actually. It’s more about the pharaoh at the time, and what his edict was while Moses was packing up the Israelites to wander in the desert for forty years. Every mention of his name and every word etched in stone was struck from the official records. (Historical records actually show that Ramses II was not in charge at the time, but Hollywood disagrees.)

As Ramses II, Yul Brynner exclaimed in Cecil B. de Mille’s film The Ten Commandments, “So it shall be written, so it shall be done.” In this same light, I proclaim that the name Casey Anthony will no longer be permitted on this blog. It is now stricken from the record. However, I do have an appropriate replacement. We know that Caylee called Cindy Ci Ci, and George was Jo Jo. What did she call her mother? How about Ca Ca? From now on, Caylee’s mother will only be known as Ca Ca. Yes, you know how it’s pronounced.

SOLOMON, PART II

Back to the problem Judge Perry called “a legal maze” and “a legal morass”. What sort of decision should he make? According to the Department of Corrections, Ca Ca served her probation while incarcerated and was duly discharged a year later; free from all restrictions. According to what Judge Strickland said in open court on January 25, 2010, her probation was supposed to begin AFTER her release from jail, not while she was sitting in a cell, and he made it clear last week, on August 1, when he issued a corrected Order of Probation and corrected Court Minutes, nunc pro tunc to January 25, 2010. Nunc pro tunc, of course, means now for then; whatever the action is, it has a retroactive legal effect.

Here’s the dilemma. Ca Ca’s defense argues that she has served her probation while incarcerated and they have a letter from DOC to prove it. On the other hand, Judge Strickland made it abundantly clear that Ca Ca did not serve her probation as per his instructions, and his order stated that it was to begin after her release, only there was a mix-up on the first order, as written by the court. But that was not Judge Strickland’s fault. Meanwhile, Cheney Mason filed a motion on his client’s behalf, the EMERGENCY MOTION FOR HEARING TO QUASH, VACATE, AND SET ASIDE COURT’S ORDER. 

Judge Perry said (at the August 5 hearing on the matter) that what Strickland stated in court should trump all - not what the defense claimed. At the same time, Perry acknowledged that she DID serve out her probation in jail according to the Orange County Corrections Department. What a quagmire. “If anything could go wrong,” he said, “it went wrong here.”

Perry is quite aware of safety concerns, meaning keeping Ca Ca safe from harm. To openly serve probation now opens up a can of worms since her address would be made public due to Florida’s sunshine laws. You know, what with all those death threats and whatever.

Phooey. Ask OCSO how many real death threats they’ve received since her release from incarceration. From my own experience with trolls and the “vengenance is mine” crap - yes, that’s the way one idiot spelled it, insinuating harm on me - almost every one of them lives far enough away to be a real threat, although I wouldn’t trust any of them face-to-face, and that leads me back to Ca Ca. Personally, I feel she should be more afraid the farther away from home she is, as she enters uncharted territory. There are more crazies out there in the world than there are in Orlando. Believe me, I thank God for the Atlantic ocean, but that’s another story.

Ahum.

Moving on, I am left with prior motions the defense filed before the trial which asked the court to seal jail records, including visitation logs, telephone conversations and commissary purchases. They were filed and denied while Strickland was on the bench, and they were refiled, along with new ones, after Judge Perry took over. Both judges made it very clear that the judicial branch holds no legal sway over the legislative branch; the one that controls jails and prisons. Consequently, neither judge ruled in favor of the defense because they had no authority to do so.

That leads me to what I think the judge should do. Since he has no power over the jail because it’s a completely separate governmental branch from the court, his decision should be based on those prior rulings. The court does not have to honor the administrative decisions the jail makes in its day-to-day operations. What both judges have been saying all along is that they have no control over the executive branch, and at the same time, the jail has no power over the judicial. There you have it - a very simple solution to a complex problem. Ca Ca did not serve a day of probation while incarcerated because she did not satisfy the court’s order. The heck with what the jail says.

MOSES, PART II

As Ramses said about Moses, let Judge Perry say the same thing about Ca Ca. So it shall be written, so it shall be done. While he wanders through what must be at least 40 years worth of court cases, let’s see how he rules. Personally, I think the answer should be a year of supervised probation. Afterward, she can find her Promised Land. By then, she should be old news and TMZ won’t pay her another dime.

Have a Happy Heavenly Birthday!

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.

Fly Robyn Fly, Lie Casey Lie

No Pie in the Sky

“One of the biggest things that truly cuts me when I hear them talk about me as a mother – I was a great mom! And I love my daughter with everything that I have. I would give my life to have her back even for five minutes.”

- Casey Anthony, in a letter to Robyn Adams

Today’s discovery release includes letters Casey wrote to fellow inmate Robyn Adams, who was later transferred to a federal penitentiary. She was convicted of selling drugs. In one of the letters, Casey told Robyn about paternity tests that were taken to determine who Caylee’s father was. Jesse Grund took a test and he was ruled out. She never reveals who she thinks fathered her child. She also said she miscarried in 2007 and told her brother, Lee, about it. He told Cindy about the miscarriage on Casey’s 21st birthday.

Jail Letters

Transcripts and LE documents

Casey repeats over her version of what happened to her daughter - that she left Caylee with a nanny named Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez and - POOF! - she and Zanny were gone, never to be seen again. Of course, law enforcement debunked that story.

She also wrote about having periodic seizures while in jail.

Most of the letters were published months ago, and their content was already discussed, but it doesn’t hurt to refresh what we learned then.

In her conversations with investigators, Adams claimed that Casey made two references to the nanny. One was that there was no Zenaida, and the other one claimed that she and Zenaida were childhood friends. I must make clear that jailhouse snitches are not credible, so this will probably never see a courtroom. Adams told authorities that Casey gave her daughter “stuff” to make her sleep. They discussed chloroform, and Casey said she would give Caylee “antihistamines or something” because she had problems getting her to take naps.

Casey said she asked Zanny to watch Caylee so she could prepare to move out of the Anthony home completely. She had saved up money. “Unfortunately, my plans got beyond tangled when Zanny wouldn’t tell me where she and Caylee were.”

She claimed she was an emotional wreck and was sexually abused by her brother. “I woke up night after night with my sports bra lifted over my chest or if I had a regular bra, it would be unhooked.” Lee would walk into her room at night and feel her breasts.

“When I told my mom about it two years ago, she made excuses, saying that he was sleepwalking. Not only did she say I was lying, but when I explained everything, her reaction was literally like a knife in my chest: ‘So that’s why you’re a whore?’”

It’s interesting to note that Casey also claimed she thought her father did the same thing when she was much older and that she sought help from a doctor when she was 18. It’s also interesting to note that no doctor (that we know of) has stepped forward to back her accusations.

Liz Brown works for the DePaul Center for Justice in Capital Cases. She was listed as the contact for the defense team after Andrea Lyon left. Yes, the center still fights the death penalty. She issued a statement that said the letters “reflect the natural desire for companionship when isolated for 23 hours a day, and clearly demonstrate Casey’s unconditional love for her daughter, Caylee. Despite these intentions, it is obvious in the letters authored by Robyn Adams that her sole purpose and only goal in corresponding with Casey Anthony was to create ‘leverage to get out of prison early.’ Furthermore, despite numerous inaccurate media reports, the letters written by Casey Anthony do not contain a single reference to chloroform or any admissions of guilt. Casey Anthony maintains her innocence and looks forward to her day in court.”

Pictured above are River Cruz (Krystal Holloway) and George Anthony. River claimed that she and George became intimate after Caylee disappeared. George emphatically denied that. She said her cell phone showed images and text messages that backed up her contention of an affair. She said that George told her that the death of his granddaughter was “an accident that snowballed out of control.”

At the time, Brad Conway was the family attorney and he stated the affair never took place.

Today’s discovery contains photos, text messages and contact information that OCSO took from a Samsung phone in March of this year. Whose phone was it? You can guess, but the above photo was taken from it, and one of the text messages listed in the “Contacts” was George saying on December 19, 2008, that he was, “Just thinking about you! I need you in my life.”

Linda Drane Burdick audio interview with Joe Jordan

Yuri Melich voicemail from Maya Derkovic

Deputy Whitmore audio interview

LE audio interview with Lori Cree

(Transcript of Lori Cree interview)

LE audio interview with Maya Derkovic

I will continue updating and adding links as they are released.

...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.

Get Bent

Dura lex sed lex. That’s Latin for “the law is hard, but it is the law.” Such will be a lesson learned by the defense in the courtroom today, I’m afraid.

What was scheduled to be a status hearing has turned into one of greater magnitude, and one that Casey must attend. She hasn’t appeared in court since the July, when her mother and brother took the stand over the admission of Cindy’s 911 calls.

While the status of the case will still be discussed, two defense motions will also be heard, and that will include counter motions filed by the JAC and the Orlando Sentinel. Defense attorney Ann Finnell recently filed a motion that asked Judge Perry to set a cautionary budget for costs she expects to incur to properly represent Casey prior to a sentencing phase; to be prepared if she is convicted of capital murder. The next motion will once again ask the judge to reconsider prior rulings over the public’s right to see Casey’s jail records, including phone calls, visitor logs and commissary purchases.

I don’t want to venture a guess about the money issue. The defense is requesting an additional $12,000 for investigative work on top of the money their mitigation specialist is asking for. This is too tough to guess, so I’ll focus on the issue over the disclosure of certain records.

First off, let’s make it clear that the defense is once again asking for more than the judge needs to give. In the MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION, the defense cited a recent ruling by the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Bent v. Sun Sentinel, which ruled that jail “audio recordings of the defendants’ phone calls are not public records subject to release.” What this did, in effect, is put a temporary end to releasing phone calls, which are recorded surreptitiously for security reasons. On the other hand, the ruling did not address any jail logs whatsoever. This means who called, when and how long they spoke, are not subject to the ruling.

Right now, Casey has “three Standing Objections of Abuse of Florida Statute Chapter 119.01 complaining of the release of public records,” according to the Orlando Sentinel’s motion. The Sentinel went on to suggest that this defense “essentially asks the Court to shut down the media and the public’s statutory and constitutional right to public information.”

The Sentinel continues to argue that neither the public nor the media “are required to show a legitimate interest or purpose in order to obtain public or judicial records.” Here, I have one slight qualm with the Sentinel’s mention of judicial records. The jail does not fall under the judicial branch, and for that reason alone, the judge cannot rule in favor of the defense. He has made it abundantly clear he holds no power over the legislative branch, which governs this sort of disclosure. Timoney v. Miami Civilian Investigative Panel, 917 So. 2d 885, 886 n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) stated that “generally, a person’s motive in seeking access to public records is irrelevant.”

Judge Perry has, on more than one occasion, stated that he was not going to reinvent the wheel, meaning he will not rewrite Florida’s Public Records Act, which we recognize as Florida’s Open Government in the Sunshine law. Today, he will rule the same way he has in the past. There is no doubt that jails and prisons in Florida will comply with the Bent v. Sun Sentinel ruling and keep recordings locked up for the time being, but I am certain it will work its way up to the Florida Supreme Court and beyond.

The defense believes that the disclosure of jail records will deny her the right to a fair trial. I disagree and so does the Sentinel. Although I don’t care about Casey and her orders of nachos, I find it hard to believe her phone log, visitor log and commissary purchases would prejudice a jury. Instead, perhaps the defense should halt all post-hearing press conferences and ask the court to place a gag order on this case. The judge might be willing to comply.

§

Veritas vos liberabit! See you in court.

Casey McDingles

HERE’S WHAT REAL WITNESS TAMPERING IS ALL ABOUT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A DATE WITH CASEY

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trial By Ambush

PART I

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

PART II

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here we go... over and over again

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Leaving on a jet plane

Cause I'm leavin' on a jet plane
Don't know when I'll be back again

- John Denver

We've all heard the philosophical riddle, "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" This sort of conundrum raises questions regarding observation and knowledge of reality, with knowledge being a key word, because, at the same time, we can ask how we know the tree fell if no one was around to witness it. Suddenly, the philosophical riddle becomes more of a perplexing puzzle. That's the way I look at the latest motion filed by Casey's defense, the OBJECTION TO RELEASE OF DOCUMENTS RELATED TO INTENDED DEFENSE REVIEW OF EVIDENCE. If the media doesn't get a chance to fully question the experts about yesterday and today, do we know for sure that the Field of Dreamers actually examined the evidence? Without further digression, if we take a look at the motion itself, on the surface it may look ordinary, but it's not. To explain, let's start by looking at some of the key points noted in the document.

Page 1

5. This case is a criminal case that carries on in its investigation stages.

Of course it does. So does every other criminal case throughout the land. An investigation can continue until the bitter end, when the state and defense rest. So what's the point? What does that statement tell us the court doesn't already know? Nothing.

Page 2

6. The reviewing of documents and/or tangible evidence related thereto by the defense should not be publicized and disseminated by the news media. This is a case of the state of Florida versus Casey Anthony; this is not a case of the news media and John Q. Public.

Aha! It didn't take long to get to the meat of the motion. What the defense is saying, as Mr. Mason has stated in the past, it is no one's business. This is a capital murder case and the public doesn't have the right to know. Basically, the defense wants to muzzle the media. It's called a gag order. If the defense wishes to put a wall up between the court and the media, why not just file a motion to suppress, restricting information or comments from being made public? That's not what this motion is asking.

8. Defense submits that at some point this Court must recognize the superior rights and entitlements under Constitutional Amendments other than the First Amendment. The news media can report on any and all evidence or proceedings that occur in court at the time of trial.

To be real, this is like sequestering the entire court - prosecution and defense included. Keep the media away from everything until the trial is underway. While I can sympathize with the defense, it's too far fetched and completely unrealistic. This would mean locking the courtroom doors to everyone, because nothing would stop John Q. Public from running to the media as soon as a hearing is over. When I said sympathize, I can understand the frustration the defense feels from some of the reports filed by media outlets. They're not always accurate and they never admit their mistakes. At the same time, we do have a Constitution that protects freedom of speech, and Casey's defense cannot undo that. We also have an open Government in the Sunshine law in the state of Florida, which means government meetings and proceedings are accessible to the public, and the last time I checked, the court system is still a part of the government.

Here's a list of the Constitutional Amendments. Do any of them apply in the motion's argument?

• Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression
• Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms
• Amendment 3 - Quartering of Soldiers
• Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure
• Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings

Amendment 5 states that "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury." Been there, done that.

• Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses

Casey's defense waived her Right to a Speedy Trial a long time ago.

• Amendment 7 - Trial by Jury in Civil Cases
• Amendment 8 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment
• Amendment 9 - Construction of Constitution
• Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People
• Amendment 11 - Judicial Limits

"The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State." This one means that federal courts have the authority to hear cases in law and equity brought by private citizens against states. It has no bearing on Casey.

• Amendment 12 - Choosing the President, Vice President
• Amendment 13 - Slavery Abolished
• Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights

"... 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." Again, the last time I checked, Casey is still living proof that due process of law has not been deprived.

• Amendment 15 - Race No Bar to Vote
• Amendment 16 - Status of Income Tax Clarified
• Amendment 17 - Senators Elected by Popular Vote
• Amendment 18 - Liquor Abolished
• Amendment 19 - Women's Suffrage
• Amendment 20 - Presidential, Congressional Terms
• Amendment 21 - Amendment 18 Repealed
• Amendment 22 - Presidential Term Limits
• Amendment 23 - Presidential Vote for District of Columbia
• Amendment 24 - Poll Taxes Barred
• Amendment 25 - Presidential Disability and Succession
• Amendment 26 - Voting Age Set to 18 Years
• Amendment 27 - Limiting Changes to Congressional Pay

There's a brief summary of the amendments that could be associated with the motion, but I see none that usurp the First Amendment, which mandates that no law can abridge "the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Let's continue on Page 2

9. To allow the news media to continue to have what has turned out to be, in many instances, "first look" at evidence, publicize otherwise uninformed speculation and conclusions about the evidence, utilizing "talking head" lawyers who have neither the experience, knowledge, or predicates for their public comments, promises to continue to infuse this case with public bias, prejudice, misunderstanding, and error.

This one is bothersome. If I recall, OJ Simpson went on trial and we, the public, learned an awful lot from the media. The nation was still split over his guilt, and legal pundits didn't do much to change the outcome, did they? I'm sure, if you look at the "talking head" attorneys the motion notes, and let's just stick with the local ones, Richard Hornsby, Bill Sheaffer and John Jay would strongly disagree. They are experienced, knowledgeable, and qualified to make assertions in this case. As a matter of fact, if I were an attorney, I'd be downright offended. On the public front, people like to study and learn, George Orwell died long ago, 1984 came and went, and no one has the right to tell any of us what we can read, write, listen to, and see. And we are still free to make our own assumptions.

10. The news media is not going to be allowed to view or see any of the evidence to be inspected; they are not going to be allowed to observe the inspection; at best, they will be able to see the arrival and departure of counsel and witnesses, thus, any reporting about the process would be nothing but imaginative speculation, and purportedly could have no reasonable journalistic value.

This is an arguable point. We, most likely, have seen images and documents of the evidence. We just don't have a concise and itemized list yet of what the defense asked to see. Will we get to see the list? That's what this motion is about. Will the video of the inspection be revealed? That, too, is a matter for the court to decide. Media outlets say yes; the defense says no. We shall see. As for journalistic value, this entire case has been a study in it, and it will continue until the very end.

Page 3

11. Your undersigned submits that at some point a balancing of the First Amendment Rights to report must be had against the eminently more important rights of the defense to effective assistance of counsel, due process, and equal protection. The media will be able to observe all phases of the trial that are on the record and do their reporting from then.

WHEREFORE, the Defendant prays this Court consider the foregoing, exercise its inherent supervisory powers, and deny the release of the documents by which the defense and prosecution have agreed to be an evidence inspection.

I am of the opinion that this motion is J. Cheney Mason's all the way. What I read is precisely the way I hear him in the courtroom; the same mannerisms, the same innuendos, the same language. In fact, his signature on the motion sits atop Jose Baez's, which generally means it came out of his office. I understand the frustration of the defense. After all, every defense attorney must cope with the media, and in this case, publishing the list could tip the hat regarding strategy, but the most important part of keeping strategy under wraps is to deny the prosecution this information, not the media. With this knowledge, the media will inform the public more uniformly and with greater accuracy.

Let's backtrack to page 2

7. The news media have, generally, spent nearly the past two years reaping benefits of their own imagination and reporting of matters both accurate and grossly inaccurate. All of such actions have resulted in causing this case to have to bear the extraordinary expense of a change of venue and bringing jurors from an undisclosed location in this state to be sequestered throughout the trial proceedings.

The defense would be better served if media outlets continue to have access to public records regarding this and all cases. To challenge it means that we would be less accurate, as I said, and in all honesty and practicality, no one is going to stop writing about Casey Anthony until the end, whenever it may be. This is part of the American psyche and it will remain a part of history for centuries to come. In the meantime, nothing can take away our inherent thirst for knowledge.

This defense would also be better served if it stopped holding impromptu press conferences at the end of each hearing for one reason and one reason alone: How can it shut the press up while it continues to inform them? This is no ordinary juxtaposition, this is hypocrisy. The left hand is doing one thing while the right hand is doing the opposite. It's perplexing, to say the least.

There is nothing in this motion that cites case law. There are no valid arguments. This is a matter of state law, and the law is abundantly clear as written in the Florida Constitution. By filing this motion with the judge instead of through the Clerk of Courts office while the judge was on vacation, Cheney Mason knew exactly what he was doing. Anyone could have predicted it. In my opinion, it was nothing more than a stall tactic. Does the defense really expect to win this one? I don't think so, but it was a smart maneuver. What the motion gains is this: It gives the experts time to leave on jet planes before the media can come after them with precise questions. They'll be long gone before the receipts are released to the public. Gone, yes, but not forgotten. Speaking of which, how ironic is it that exactly two years from the date of those 911 calls, July 15, 2008, those same calls will be argued in court? As Judge Strickland wrote in his dismissal order, "Indeed. The irony is rich."