Arresting Development?

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

§

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

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

 

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

The Strange Tale of the Missing Deadlines

…OR, WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE

Last month, Jose Baez was sanctioned and fined $583.73 for not complying with a court order. The Court had granted the State’s request for additional defense discovery on December 3, 2010 nunc pro tunc (retroactive to) November 29, 2010. The order specified what information the defense was to provide regarding expert witnesses they planned to have testify during the trial. What the defense gave the State fell far short of the order and the prosecution filed the motion for sanctions. Ultimately, Judge Perry wrote, “The Court finds that defense counsel Jose Baez has committed a willful violation of the Order to provide additional discovery…¹”

COMES NOW, a new motion was filed by the State requesting the judge to hold Jose in contempt of court for missing yet another deadline. Titled the MOTION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE, it accuses him of failing to comply with paragraph five of the Court’s February 7 order:

Frye Hearings: The motions addressing Frye issues pertaining to scientific evidence shall be held on March 23, 24, and 25, 2011. The court will provide a schedule to counsel as to the order in which each motion will be heard. By February 17, 2011 at 4:00 p.m., defense counsel shall submit to the Court and State in writing, the specific issues that will be objected to in accordance with Frye, including, but not limited to, those objections previously addressed in the motions.

What happened? While there’s no doubt in my mind the defense has been rather flippant about orders and deadlines, why would Jose & Co. ignore this one and plead bewilderment as he did in his e-mail to the judge’s judicial assistant? After all, the order is very clear, isn’t it?

As I mentioned in my last article pertaining to Frye and chloroform evidence, I wrote that I would discuss the scientific and legal aspects of the motion the defense filed and a subsequent rebuttal motion filed by the prosecution, the MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO FYRE [sic] (CHLOROFORM). This new motion filed by the State takes precedent at the moment, but in essence, there were two separate Frye motions filed by defense. The second one pertains to plant and root growth evidence, and that includes another rebuttal by the State, the MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE (PLANT OR ROOT GROWTH). To keep confusion to a minimum, this post will strictly address the contempt motion and the what, the whys and the hows. How and why did the defense let another deadline slip by? My God, what were they thinking?

A LITTLE BACKGROUND

To say that Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton is hot-headed and impatient is sometimes an understatement. He’s also a stickler for detail. Trust me, I’ve had plenty of opportunities to observe him in the courtroom. However, my intent is not to denigrate him in the least, because, at the same time, it’s his convictions and close attention to detail that make him so good at what he does; and every defense attorney who’s ever crossed his path should be well aware of the fact, especially the likes of Cheney Mason, with many years of criminal defense experience under his belt. Ashton is just not going to let things slip by. He’s sharper than a knife. Besides, it’s the job of the prosecution to slam dunk any defense whenever it can in order to achieve justice for the people; especially in this case because of the here and now, the age and innocence of the victim, and the nature of the crime. They don’t charge people unless they think there’s enough evidence to convict. Of course, all crimes are worth fighting and this one is no different, but a prosecutor’s objective is quite clear; JUSTICE, JUSTICE, JUSTICE. A courtroom is a battleground, and it’s up to both sides to keep the opposition on its toes. So far, the State has done an excellent job. The Defense? Well, that’s another story.

By now, most of us would acknowledge that Jose Baez came to this case quite green and wet behind the ears. Cheney Mason, on the other hand, had been around. His Website states that he began his private practice in 1971 after admission to the Florida Bar. That’s 40 years ago. He’s been in Orlando all this time, so he should recognize most of the quirks and traits of district court judges and assistant state prosecutors. He’s no novice in the courtroom, in other words, but from what I have seen and heard thus far from several powerful attorneys and my own careful observations, he is more of a legend in his own mind than he is for real. That’s not to say he hasn’t had his moments, but as much of a leader as he is supposed to be, I haven’t seen it factor in quite yet. To make clear his role in this case, and Jose should understand this because of his naval background, Mason is the seasoned admiral and Baez is at the helm. Just because an admiral boards a ship doesn’t mean he takes control of the vessel, in this case the SS Casey. Baez is the commander until he’s relieved of duty, and that’s not going to happen.

I think it’s safe to say that, from the onset, the defense has had a rough go of things and it goes way deeper than many of the superfluous motions that have been filed and other errors in judgment. Let’s face it, whoever took the mantle was going to be the target of attacks from a hungry public hell-bent on justice. It’s the nature of the beast, and we all know the natives were restless from day 1 and still are. There will be no let-up until Casey is convicted. That’s a given, so no matter what the defense team does, they’re forever wrong. Since Jose is always the fall guy, I’m going to look into the contempt motion through as neutral a stance as I possibly can and let you decide.

CONTEMPT! CONTEMPT! CONTEMPT!

Both of the defense motions requesting Frye hearings were filed on December 30, 2010 - seven weeks before the contempt motion. To be succinct, they have been firmly in the hands of the Ninth Circuit Court since that date. Now, if I filed motions, I reckon it should be a safe bet that unless I make changes, those motions might stand. Stet is the Latin word for it. If I am given an opportunity to make changes and I don’t, why would I ever have to refile the same, meaning identical, motions? In his query to the court after the deadline passed and Ashton called him on the carpet, Baez wrote:

Jill:

Can you please ask the Judge the following:

We are a bit confused.  Mr. Ashton just asked me about my objections to Frye. When I read the order from the status hearing. I understood it to mean that if we were objecting to anything not in our motion that it should be in writing, that was also my understanding as to what was discussed at the status hearing.  I have also discussed the matter with Mr. Mason and he is just as confused if not more.  Our objections are clearly laid out in our motions.  If I had any other objections I would raise them after reading the State’s response but they have not filed one yet.  If the Court is requesting that we do something additional we would like to be heard in chambers to clear up the matter.  Otherwise I think the logical choice would be to wait until the State files their response, so that we can be even more specific as to the issues to be heard.

Sincerely,

Jose Baez

For sure, this is a major failure to communicate, but if we extrapolate, meaning to infer from what we know to be true, there’s an obvious snafu - we are left with a badly confused, ridiculously muddled, situation. BOINK!

Once again, the defense should realize by now that the prosecution is going to jump at the chance of a legal mistake. We have seen it time and time again, and in his contempt motion, Ashton strongly reiterated what the judge said in his order; “… including, but not limited to, those objections previously addressed in the motions.” That’s as clear as day.

Here is where the defense failed to grasp the wording and follow the judge’s edict. Do I understand what went wrong? Of course I do. The bottom line was that the defense interpreted paragraph five as meaning, if there are no changes in the first motions we filed, why file them again? Why not wait until the State files its rebuttal motions and then refile them? Clearly, the defense noted its intent in the original motions, including ISSUES UNDER FRYE and LEGAL ARGUMENTS. To send the same thing over again would be redundant. I concur. However, and that’s a big however, that doesn’t mean the defense is blameless and should be let off the hook. At the same time, should the judge hold the defense in contempt of court? There are a lot of things involved here. The prosecutor is quick on the draw. The defense must know this. The judge is getting sick of the mistakes, too.

Judge Perry made it quite clear in his order, but I believe it could have been written more concisely, given the propensity of this defense to become addled and not follow directions to the letter of the law. When I read and reread the paragraph time and time again, I could see where the defense misinterpreted it, but the following are my words:

If we are going to make any changes to the original motions, then we must rewrite the entire motions and not just attach addenda to the first ones as separate documents. We should wait until the State files its rebuttals, too, then rewrite the entire thing.

Unfortunately, that’s not at all what the judge asked for, and what it tells me, once again, is that the defense is not following up; it’s not paying attention to detail and here’s why - Had I not completely understood what the judge wrote, and I can see where it could be a problem, I would contact his assistant right away for clarification. That’s the first and right thing to do. Hey, Judge, do you mean to file them again even if we have no changes? I mean, after all, we aren’t going to make any changes until we hear from the State.

The only thing is, the State DID file rebuttal motions on February 15 and I said so in my very own paragraph number five. They are the MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO FYRE (CHLOROFORM) and the MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE (PLANT OR ROOT GROWTH). That gave the defense two days to reply or to call the SAO or the judicial assistant for direction. Was that enough time? The judge will decide, and he will have to weigh this new MOTION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE because, in my opinion, it could go either way. Judge Perry must be getting tired of the Mickey Mouse antics of the defense, but he also knows the team is up to its ears in complications, and when the more experienced attorney is more confused than the lesser, well, what more needs to be said?

The Teflon Judge

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

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

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

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

I finished the article with:

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

In his ruling, the judge wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Turning a bad joke into a happy ending

A young friend associated with the Casey Anthony case has been out of commission for some time now. That’s because she had been “with child” and wanted a lengthy break, which is still ongoing. She lives in Mississippi with her husband and two children. Check that… three children now. The closest I ever got to her was in June of 2009, when my lifelong best friend and I took a scenic road trip through Enterprise, Alabama en route to Natchez, Mississippi. I wrote about our adventure, but to be honest, Natchez is 180 miles from where she lives, and Stew and I were in no mood to hang around screaming children. Besides, I didn’t know her then. Heck, I didn’t go to my first hearing on the Anthony case until four months later, in October of that year, when the most Honorable Judge Stan Strickland called me up to the bench, six full months before the defense filed that senseless motion against him. What a crying shame.

Speaking of crying shames, screaming children and newborn babies, someone (singular or plural) decided to play a dirty little trick on me. There are two people who come to mind and I’m sure they are the guilty party, but instead of getting angry, well, let’s just say I didn’t. A lot of you are aware of certain blogs run by narcissistic, angry, convoluted and egotistical women who seem to hate men and have a strong penchant and predisposition toward spreading lies. Trust me, I’m not their first target, nor will I be their last. In any event, a chubby little thing with no brains who lives in Texas started spreading a dumb rumor that I was the father of the little papoose-to-be in Mississippi. Wow, methinks she gave my manhood way too much credit. All the way from Orlando to north Mississippi. That’s quite a S - T - R - E - T - C - H, but thank you very much.

Some of you may not know that I am 58-years-old and my baby days are long gone unless I make my way to Hollywood and marry a young starlet, but that’s not going to happen. As much as I love children, acting grandfatherly is more like it, the key element being grand, not just fatherly. At my age, raising children, among other things, would prove problematic, but we won’t go there.

On December 15, I received an e-mail from the Cord Blood Registry. Cord blood collection is a great thing. After the birth of a child, blood is extracted from the umbilical cord. It’s loaded with stem cells, including hematopoietic cells, which can be used to treat blood and genetic disorders. The placenta is a better source of stem cells for other treatments because it contains up to ten times more than cord blood, but cord blood could help your child later on in life. Why someone would want to play a cruel and stupid trick on something good is a bad thing, but as soon as that e-mail arrived, I called the toll-free number. That’s all it took. Problem solved, but if you think it ended there, guess again. Suddenly, all sorts of e-mails arrived, including one from American Baby magazine. Well, I declare! Someone was gracious enough to sign me up for a subscription, and darn if I didn’t call them, too. Only this time, I transferred the subscription to my friend in Mississippi, free of charge and compliments of her chubby ex-friend in Texas. Thank you, chubby little ex-friend in Texas! And American Baby, of course.

Since mid-December, I have received e-mails from Gerber, Fisher-Price, Upromise, Enfamil, Parenting magazine, and Similac. Most names are probably familiar except, perhaps, Upromise, which its Web site states, “is a free service that helps you get money for college bills and student loans from the things you do all the time: buy groceries, shop online, fill your gas tank and much more.” It sounds like a great idea and I’m glad to help.

This morning, I got a heavy package in the mail. It was a whole case of Similac Advance Complete Nutrition formula, perfect for the first year! Just what I needed! Here’s why… It’s just the same as all of the calls I’ve had to make, only more. With the e-mails and snail-mail I’m receiving, I call the companies and explain the situation. I tell them there are some very spiteful women out there, only a handful, mind you, but since Casey Anthony is a narcissist, the case attracts narcissists just like her. Birds of a feather. Peas in a pod sort of thing. Oh yeah. I tell them I am a writer and ask them if they want to see my Web site. YES! Of course, they do, so I tell them. Today, I called Similac and told them it was mean and nasty what was done. The woman on the other end told me to donate the formula, so guess what I did? I called a nearby church and took it down there, compliments of Marinade Dave, but with only one small stipulation. Would they make sure all of those young mothers get my blog address? Sure thing. It’s also 24 new people who will learn about my blog if they haven’t already. Visit marinadedave.com. If I receive more junk in the mail, I will do the same thing; turn a bad joke into a very good thing. Fortunately, that’s how my mind works. I find good in everything, and now a lot of nice, young, mothers and customer service reps will be stopping by my blog. A little “self-promotionalization taken to the fullest extent” as P.T. Barnum might have said.

Thanks, ladies, although calling you that is even more of a S - T - R - E - T - C - H! Keep up the good work and, thanks to you, I may be able to finagle a free college education for my friend’s newborn.

The Tale of Laura and the Barbarian Princess

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

New Discovery Today

Casey Journal ink
Journal part 2
Phone call-threat to Amy H
Map Photos
TES images
Bone Analysis of Caylee Anthony
Computer Evidence Inventory Doc
Adhesive Tape Analysis
Property form-TES
Subpoena TES Laura Buchanan
Transcript of Phone call to Laura Buchanan
Transcript of Laura Buchanan
Transcript Kasper Jordan
Emails Mark NeJames-Laura Buchanan
More Emails

Cindy’s Letters to Casey
April 2010
July 2010
August 2010
Oct 2010

Laura Buchanan-Interview Aug 2010 Part 1
Laura Buchanan-Interview Aug 2010 Part 2
Miscellaneous Interview Transcripts

Robyn Adams Interview, Part 1 | Part 2

Thank you, Jonathan!

“I saw her eyes and they looked evil.”

- Laura Buchanan (hearsay)

This is what Buchanan’s friend, Anne W. Pham, told OCSO Corporal Yuri Melich in a lengthy transcript released today. Dated October 10, 2010, she said  that she and Buchanan searched Blanchard Park in September 2008. Buchanan claims she saw Casey after her release from jail on bond. Pham also remembered Buchanan telling her that searches off Suburban Drive were called off because “the water levels are really high.”

Pham told Melich that Buchanan told her Jose Baez only called her one time. Later, she claimed Buchanan said, “After all this [CENSORED] that I’ve heard after I wrote that statement…I could care less what they do to her…You know? All I did was tell the truth. Did not mean I was on her side… I simply feel sorry for, for George and Cindy.”

Pham also told Melich that she found it a little odd that Buchanan “was so interested in being a part of, you know, being on CNN and, um, the Nancy Grace show or whatever.” She described her as being a sensationalist. Buchanan had told the defense that she searched the area off Suburban Drive where Caylee was found. This was contrary to what Tim Miller of TES told searchers; that the water level was too high and to leave it alone. So far, everyone else who searched the woods also said the precise spot was too flooded to look, and Buchanan may have changed her tune when the State Attorney’s Office questioned her in a deposition.

“We would signal to each other, talk to each other, through hand gestures.”

- Robyn Adams

Adams figures prominently in today’s release in the form of audio recordings of a February 10, 2010 interview with an FDLE investigator. If you recall, she is the wife of a former Altamonte Springs police officer. In 2008, they were arrested after they were discovered to be operating a marajuana growing operation in Chuluota, a small community east of Orlando. Transcripts of her interviews were made public earlier. She was sentenced to 10 years inside a federal prison in Tallahassee.

In a series of recorded jail conversations between Adams and a friend, the friend asked her if she was still rooming with Casey and wondered how she was doing. Adams told her she didn’t seem good.

From the Orlando Sentinel:

Adams said Anthony didn’t seem good.

“I’m praying for her every day,” she said.

The friend asked if Anthony is a basket case. “Pretty much,” Adams said.

The woman told Adams authorities found a body and believe it to be Caylee.

“I had a feeling that it might be, but nevertheless, it’s not my place to judge her,” Adams said.

“I’ve had a complete change of heart Mel since I’ve been here.”

In another conversation with her dad, Adams asked her father to pray for Anthony and her parents.

“They really need it,” Adams said.

 

Many of the released photos show shots taken from a helicopter over search areas after the toddler’s disappearance. Some of the other photos show TES ground searches.

 

A threatening phone call was made to Casey’s former friend, Amy Huizenga. Most of the call is inaudible.

“You need to listen and listen good,” a male voice threatens. “Those charges need to get dropped.” This was in reference to the check fraud charges she brought against Casey.

UPDATES THROUGHOUT THE DAY AS INFORMATION COMES IN

State calls defense motions "in limine" lemons

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Overruled.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ARGUMENT REGARDING DEFENSE MOTION TO EXCLUDE IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE OF TATTOO

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

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

and

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

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

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

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

A wealth of misconduct

Time and a Word by Yes

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

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

- Jon Anderson & David Foster

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

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

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

When…

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

§

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

§

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

Thank you for your patience.

Big Day in O'do

The Trial of the Century?

January 2011 marks the official countdown to Casey’s May trial, which will absolutely be the trial of the year, if not the decade or century. Century, I guess, because it’s still very young, and unless another one comes along with all the trappings of OJ, it may retain that ignoble title.

It should prove to be a pretty heavy hearing in the courtroom today. The defense wants Judge Perry to hear 22 motions, but the judge has the final word. Will all 22 be heard? I seriously doubt it. In any event, I plan on attending. I will bring something to eat, just in case my sugar drops. I might try to sneak my spare laptop in. If I do, I will be able to comment on this post directly from the courtroom. Call it an interactive experiment.

By the way, O’do is a slang term for what city? Yup, you got it.

Feel free to comment here about what transpires. If I can answer questions online, I will do my best, but remember, I will be taking lots of notes, so don’t feel snubbed if I don’t get back to you right away. You should be somewhat used to that by now, what with all my family’s health issues and all.

Also, please visit Snoopy’s blog post about today…

Will it be a Catch 22?

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.

Friday Happy Hour with the Bar

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

- Jose Baez

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

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

There were two main points in the motion Ashton filed:

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

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

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

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

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

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

the expert’s curriculum vitae, qualifications of experts,

the expert’s field of expertise or medical specialty,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I Swear

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

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

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

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

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

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

The motion addressed six key points:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Watch Bob Kealing

Bob Kealing has a BIG story on WESH. Watch it if you can!!!

Online and live on WESH-TV.

Here is his report: http://www.wesh.com/caseyanthony/25951506/detail.html

...To Judge Perry's Court We Go

Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy by Aiobhan

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

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

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

§

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

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

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

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

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

§

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Ballad of Casey

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lizzie Borden took an axe

And gave her mother forty whacks.

When she saw what she had done

She gave her father forty-one.

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

THE BALLAD OF CASEY

For the rest of her life

Her name will be Mudd

For taking the life

Of her own flesh and blood.

For what lies ahead

Is a brewing storm.

Her daughter now dead

Was fed chloroform.

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

Judge nods in approval

A teleconference hearing was held today in Judge Perry’s chambers over a motion the defense filed to conduct DNA tests on two items,  a pair of Caylee Anthony’s shorts and a bag. Both items were found at the scene where Roy Kronk discovered her remains in December of 2008.

The judge granted the defense team’s monetary request for $2,084 over objections from the Judicial Administration Commission. The JAC argued that an in-state laboratory could check DNA on the items in question, while the defense wanted an out-of-state lab. 

During a recent hearing I attended, the judge made it clear the lab needed to be certified by the American Society of Crime Lab Directors (ASCLAD). The defense originally wanted the evidence sent to a lab in Holland, but Judge Perry, in all his wisdom, made it quite clear that nothing would leave the country, where the court has no jurisdiction. Brad Bischoff, the JAC attorney, could not confirm that any of the labs listed as vendors in Florida were confirmed by ASCLAD. Jose Baez, on the other hand, argued that none of the state labs were certified. He cited a lab in Pennsylvania and the judge agreed that’s where the items will go.

It is a small battle won for Jose Baez & Co., but I would surmise that ultimately, it’s only a win if the lab finds something that will incriminate someone else, or it could somehow benefit Casey if nothing is found that points directly to her. Otherwise, I don’t see it helping her one bit, and in the overall scheme of things, if it does, it’s just one tiny piece from the vast army of incriminating evidence the state has accumulated to wage this war against her. In the end, the good guys will win. Choose sides wisely.

In another matter, Bob Kealing’s report on dead bugs must have the defense worming around right now. Watch his exclusive video HERE. He deserves an award for this one.

Nunc pro tunc no slam dunk

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

MOTION ONE

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

Private Investigator

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

Psychiatrist or Psychologist

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

Copying Costs

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

Mitigation Specialist

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

Attorney Travel Expenses

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

Travel Expenses for Investigator or Mitigation Specialist

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

Attorney Travel Expenses for Trial

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

MOTION TWO

Motion for Additional Hours of Investigation (guilt phase)

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

MOTION THREE

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Jury consultant (denied with prejudice)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Revolving Doors

In a case of what goes around, comes around, I wrote a post about James Thompson and Walmart last year, on October 8. Titled Does Not Compute, it focused on his description of running into Casey and Caylee at the Casselberry Walmart store on June 16, 2008, while on his lunch break. Normally, I would jump at the chance to find evidence proving that Caylee did not die sometime during the night of June 15, which has been the theory of many, but my goal was to just validate some things he claimed in his police report.

In my post from last year, I wrote this about Casey and Caylee:

If you recall, Thompson wrote in his statement to the Maitland Police Department that the two of them came into TechBay, his computer store, around June 9 of last year. He also wrote that he ran into them at the Casselberry Walmart store on June 16, the day after Father’s Day. This was the last day Caylee was seen alive according to law enforcement and state prosecutors. How fascinating, I thought. I live in Casselberry and shop at that particular Walmart. Not only that, but his computer store is in Maitland, right down the street from me on US 17-92. This was well worth looking into.

One thing immediately puzzled me. In his report, Thompson wrote that Casey was exiting Walmart around lunchtime, with Caylee lagging behind, while he was entering; yet Casey’s cell phone was nowhere near there at that time according to pings. She was at her parents’ house or very, very close by. Something was not computing in my head. The Casselberry store is 15 miles away,¹ while the closest one is less than half that distance from her house.² Both are on Semoran Blvd. Why would anyone go out of their way at lunchtime, especially when cell phone pings prove otherwise? Initially, I thought that, perhaps, her battery was dead, there were none available at the nearer Walmart, and an employee sent her up to the other store. But then, I went back and scrutinized her cell phone records and concluded that she chattered throughout the day except for about an hour, and it wasn’t until after 4:00 pm that she began driving north from Hopespring Drive.

So far, his story could be questionable because cell phone pings absolutely proved otherwise. There was no way Casey was in that vicinity at lunchtime, but lunchtime can be vague. In his police report, he wrote:

“Casey Anthony was coming out one of the interior Walmart doors as I was coming in. I recognized her immediately from the week before because she was the pretty girl who came into my store… At first I didn’t see Caley [sic] with Casey. I was going to ask Casey if she bought a monitor yet, but then I saw Caley in the background walking by herself about 10 feet behind Casey and having to open the big Walmart door by herself. The little girl looked angry and had a determined ‘I can take care of myself’ look on her face. I specifically remember feeling sorry for the little girl having to open the door by herself and wondered why her mom wasn’t helping her…”

Remember now, this is copied verbatim from James Thompson’s sworn police statement. I continued on my October post, after I had the opportunity to speak to him:

I asked him if he was sure he saw them on June 16. He was absolutely positive. I mentioned that on his written statement to police, he stated he saw Casey and Caylee at lunchtime, but on his interview with Bob Kealing on WESH, he said it was around 4:00 pm. That’s a big difference. He shot right back, though. He said when you own a store, lunchtime could be 4 o’clock. OK, I guess, maybe, in a stretch, but what about the doors that open outward? I told him I was over there last week shooting video and those doors slide sideways. He said this happened a year and a half ago. Actually, it was a year and four months ago, but I didn’t correct him. I asked him if the doors had been changed since then. He said, yes, there was a lawsuit over the old doors.

True, there was a lawsuit, but it wasn’t at that store. It took place years ago and it’s one of the reasons why Walmart changed their doors everywhere. To make a long story short, I proved that Walmart had sliding doors in place before June of 2008 from solid research on my part, and backed that up after one of my commenters supplied a link to a video of a gentleman walking to that precise store. No internal doors, either, and it seemed to have debunked his story. No cell phone pings registered near that store until 6:32 PM on the 16th, well after lunch, whether it was a noon lunchtime or 2:00 PM or 4:00 PM, which was conveniently changed in his rebuttal comments as I produced more information.

On October 10, James Thompson filed a lengthy comment on my blog. It was a privilege to publish his response and I must give him credit for that. He wrote, “Remember, I was an Officer in the Military and completed over 185 JAG investigations myself so I have an excellent memory and attention to detail better than most. My vision is 20/20 or better and I am smart so I know what I saw no doubt,” only there were too many discrepancies. You really should go read his response, but one thing he made very clear was that, “I only shop at the Casselberry Walmart so it couldn’t have been anywhere else.”

This leads me to a piece of evidence that was released in the latest discovery, and it’s rather intriguing. Someone I know felt it was important enough to e-mail me news that Casey did, in fact, write a check at Walmart on June 16, 2008. HUH?! You bet that’s important, and sure enough, I saw it for myself, but unfortunately, there’s no time stamp. All we get to see is Cindy’s bank statement showing that a check was written at store number 3782. In early June, one was also written at store number 1084.

Here’s the problem with store number 3782. It’s not the Casselberry store where James Thompson insisted he saw her. That’s store number 943 and it’s much farther north. Store number 3782 is located on Goldenrod Road, near Lee Vista Blvd., and very close to the Anthony home, where Casey’s cell phone WAS pinging until late in the afternoon. Based on my research, Casey could have easily “killed” time there while allegedly waiting for her father to leave the house. I have no proof of anything else other than cell phone pings. Of course, there is one other possibility - that it was Cindy who wrote the check.

My job is to bring you the truth, however it turns out. I have every right to investigate and question anyone I please in this case. I would never accuse James Thompson of lying because I didn’t get the impression he was. Instead, I feel he may have gotten his facts confused, and I pretty much settled it. To his credit, James wants justice for Caylee as much as any of us, but I would much rather the state have a credible witness on their side; one that the defense couldn’t rip to shreds over inconsistencies. If Caylee was seen alive at 4:00 PM or later on the afternoon of June 16, the state’s case will be on shaky ground. That means she was alive and alert, and she would have to have been killed around dinner time and in a very populated area. Rush hour. It would also prove that cell towers are liars.

♦

I urge you to read the two posts about James Thompson. I would strongly recommend that you read the comments, too. Below are two videos; one I shot of the store and the other one an unsuspecting young man’s video that proves no interior doors existed when Thompson claims they were there. No doors to push, either. Below those two are parts 1 & 2 of the drive time from Sutton Place, where Anthony Lazzaro lived, and the Casselberry store.

One final thought… In the latest dump, you see a lot of checks written to Target. Someone asked me why Target would cash checks like that. I called the Casselberry store because, like the Casselberry Walmart, that’s the Target where I shop. I told the nice person on the other end why I wanted to know and she promptly asked for my autograph. Just kidding. She told me it’s company policy to not ask for IDs unless the individual clerk finds a reason to. As long as the check is clean and it clears, the store accepts it without asking for identification.

The following video was shot in January 2008:

Two more to watch:

A lot of lawyering, a lot of frustration

I arrived at the courthouse about a half hour early, early enough to breeze through security and go up to the 23rd floor. That afforded me ample time to have a good conversation with one of the senior reporters covering this story before others arrived. We talked about several issues related to the case, and one of the topics dealt with journalists and bloggers. There are a lot of crazy nuts out there, this person said, and because of where he and other media people work, be it a newspaper, network or local TV, cable or radio, there is a shield that protects them from harassment and stalking. Not so with bloggers. Bloggers are out in the open and ripe for attack, especially if they identify themselves like I have. In this, there’s no envy; instead, it’s more like a bit of empathy and compassion. Earlier this week, a letter was received by the court via U.S. Mail that attacked this blogger and the media folks were aware of it; some, but not all. It’s safe to say it went absolutely nowhere except the file that holds all correspondence related to this case, such as the letter from Joy Wray sent to Judge Stan Strickland before the nut jobs came out en masse. Fortunately, media people recognize when something is newsworthy, when it’s junk, and when to never give psychos their day in the sun. That letter came straight from a psycho; too cowardly to sign a name, let alone a real one, as if it would have mattered in the least. This is the type of correspondence that never makes its way to a judge. Instead, it collects dust in perpetuity.

Red Huber walked in and sat down in a chair. There are sofas and chairs outside the courtroom, more so on the 23rd floor, for people to relax before or after court proceedings. Sometimes, attorneys are interviewed there. I asked Red about cameras in the courtroom. He said he was the official photographer in the media pool, meaning that he is the only person who has a hand-held still camera. It’s quite a fancy one, I might add, but he is an incredible professional. I asked him about cell phones. He told me he caught an unnamed TV journalist holding up an iPhone (or something similar) while a hearing was in progress. He called on a deputy and the deputy warned the person that if something like that ever happened again, they would be barred from the courthouse. Red Huber is very proud of his work, and rightfully so. Imagine a low-res cell phone image plastered on a station’s Web site. That would have gotten the network affiliate in a bit of hot water because it’s not something Red would ever take credit for.

The media folks were called to file into the courtroom and as we did, the reporter said blogs are becoming more interesting and pertinent, and he makes it a point to read them, including mine. It’s part of the job now. That was encouraging.

We entered the courtroom before any of the attorneys, so when they meandered in, all at once, we said our hellos to both the prosecution and defense. I had a good feeling that Ann Finnell would make her debut and she did. I think it’s important to remember that the opposing sides seem to only be that way in the courtroom, not that they do an awful lot of socializing together outside, but I sensed a more relaxed attitude and an almost warmth that dissolved once the sides took to their stations and donned their battle gear, which was nothing more than notebooks and pens. Oh yes, this is the 21st century and I know Jose has an iPad. One of the first things I noticed was that video monitors all around the courtroom were turned on for a change. That was great because it afforded us a good view of the proceedings. In some of the video footage you got to view, you probably saw some of us looking up. That’s why. They were hung above us. We could actually see the faces for a change.

When Casey walked in, flanked by officers of the court, she was noticeably thinner. Her hair was pulled back tightly in a bun and she seemed to have a sad, blank stare, from what I could see before she sat down and faced forward. Within a minute, George and Cindy shuffled in and took their seats in the second row. Their attorney, Mark Lippman, sat directly in front of me. Cindy wore a burgundy colored blouse that complemented George’s lavender colored shirt.

Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. arrived on schedule, although I was a bit disappointed he was 4 minutes early. Oh well, my late Grandfather Landis was always punctual, and like him, sometimes early. God knows, I’d rather be early than late.

The judge wasted no time getting the hearing under way. The first order of business was the MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. Jose stood and walked to the podium. This is a motion Casey’s defense has fought for more than once, and it’s been shot down each time. Today was no exception, but I sensed a little more desperation in Jose’s voice. It was either that or a combination of frustration and exasperation. Personally, I don’t care what Casey eats from the commissary. I don’t fret over her personal mail and phone records, but inquisitive minds want to know, and because it’s the law, there’s no bending it - or in this case, Bent, as in Bent v. Sun Sentinel. Jail records are under the control of the legislative branch, not judicial. This time, Jose spent the brunt of his argument on mail from family, friends and strangers. He cited the case of the city of Clearwater (City of Clearwater, 863 So. 2d at 154) where it was deemed that private e-mails stored on a government computer are not automatically public record. In other words, private documents are not necessarily public record by virtue of their placement on an agency-owned computer.

OK, fine, but there’s more to it. When the attorney for Orange County Corrections got up to speak, she stated that she was merely there looking for clarification; that the county had no real dog in the fight, but she saw a problem. Here is where I have seen the defense go in the past, and it’s one of the reasons why some of the motions are lost, in my opinion. The county objected to the mail issue because the motion didn’t request it.

The Orlando Sentinel attorney then took center stage. One of the questions I posed to Red Huber before the hearing began was about this motion. I asked him if this was pooled, too, so all media outlets would share in the costs of any and all proceedings. He said, no, this is solely the Sentinel’s job. The attorney reminded the Honorable Judge of his ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL JAIL VISITATION LOG RECORDS, back on June 7. There, the judge wrote:

The Court agrees with the County that a criminal defendant’s desire to “maintain the confidentiality of visitors” in a high profile case does not qualify as a lawful exemption. As mentioned supra, the Defendant’s Motion does not provide any statutory exemption or legal authority for the Court to “seal” documents that constitute public records.

Instead, the counsel for the defense entreats the Court to judicially create an exemption in this case. The Court is unable to acquiesce. Any exemption from the Florida Public Records Act must originate in the legislature and not by judicial decision.

Friday, Judge Perry took the Bent decision into consideration, but he only denied the Motion for Reconsideration at this time, and those were his precise words, which leads me to think the door is not completely closed. There is no doubt the Bent issue will be argued for years to come, but he did settle the matter of audio recordings. He said he will treat Bent as if it is final. In other words, audio recordings will remain under wraps. All other jail correspondence will be accessible to the public. So it shall be written, so it shall be done.

§

The judge brought up the JAC motion and Ann Finnell stood up and walked over to the podium. She is a rather stately woman, but not statuesque by any means. In my opinion, she appeared to be a quintessential professional, and she was. She had a certain elegance and a homey warmth about her, if that makes any sense. She looked like she would be a wonderful mother, aunt and grandmother, although I know nothing about her personal life. Well, hardly anything.

It was during this back and forth the judge became most animated, although he didn’t direct it at Finnell, in particular. It was the entire defense, but that’s because the course of the conversation really opened up into other areas, such as TES, which had nothing to do with her. Jose and Cheney piped in and it seemed to frustrate her a little. She made it clear she was not involved at all in TES documents at one point, but prior to the confusion, Judge Perry asked her about the 384 hours the court approved for Jeanene Barrett. She said that at least a half to a third of those hours had been exhausted. She said she needed at least another 100 hours. The judge said he wants to first see how the hours had been utilized before giving her more.

He asked her about the 300 hours given for private investigators. This is when Jose responded. He said he needed an additional 300 hours. The judge said he realized some of those hours will remain under seal, but where did they go? Jose said that many TES searchers didn’t want to get involved. The judge was pretty clear about all those searchers. The defense is not to go on some sort of fishing expedition. “You’re not to go drilling for oil when there’s no sign of oil anywhere.”

The majority of searchers were nowhere near the remains. He said he had provided them a special master. They were given the right to read the records and take notes. Jose said the defense had made over 1,000 phone calls and talked to 150 who were in the area. The “area” was confusing because there was no clear definition of what constituted the Suburban Drive vicinity. Cheney Mason said a lot of searchers looked on their own; that they had uncovered people from leads and some people who did not report everything to TES. Even so, some TES records were not clear. He questioned whether Texas EquuSearch kept bad records or whether they hid info on purpose? Here is where the judge made his succinct statement du jour:

“I am not going to write an open check. I am just not.”

Ann may have been rightly frustrated because it was at this point she said her motion was not about TES. It was about mitigation, such as medical history and school records. The judge interjected. “Miss Finnell, I’ve done a few capital cases.”

He turned to Cheney and asked him if he was planning on sticking around for the penalty phase, if Casey’s convicted. Cheney nodded and said yes.

Throughout this exchange, I looked up at the monitor to see the looks on the attorneys faces and that of Casey. Quite clearly, she was shaken. This was, shall I say, a bit more vibrant and enlightening and here she was in the thick of it. Sticking around for the penalty phase. Oh my. She seemed distressed to a certain degree. We’re coming to the end of the year and May is on its way. Time is running out.

When the dust settled, the new attorney continued. She made more requests, and in the end, Judge Perry approved some things and denied others. Her travel expenses from Jacksonville will not be covered. If she wants to send an investigator to Ohio, try phone calls first. There are investigators in that state that will work at JAC rates and not have to fly from Orlando or anywhere else. For each request, he wants to know the reason why he needs to spend taxpayers’ money. He said he’d be happy to take ex parte material into consideration and under seal. (Ex parte is generally a judge meeting with one party and not the adversary.)

The JAC attorney got up and rebutted. He said that the penalty phase funds may be premature at this time, but the judge disagreed. In the matter of capital cases, the cart comes before the horse, he said. With regard to psychiatric evaluation, he awarded $2,500 at this time. He said the standard exam may not be enough at the JAC rate. He approved $500 for copies and an additional 60 hours, or$2,400, for a private investigator. Most of all, he said he remains open for more expenditures, but he needs to know where all the money is going now and where it’s been going.

In several instances, I noticed that the defense does not come prepared. The judge asked how much money was spent on public records, for instance, and Jose didn’t know. At some point, he said something that caused a stir in the gallery. Sitting on the other side, someone roared in laughter. Jose turned to look, but the person was quickly silent and lost in the crowd. In my opinion, this was very rude. This is a murder case and not a joke, no matter what that narcissistic person thought of him. No one should ever laugh in a courtroom unless the judge prompts it. The murder of a child is a very serious matter. To be honest, I felt a little for Baez. The day wasn’t going his way and he told the court of the endless, almost thankless, hours the entire defense has been working. It was their life, and he was emotional about it. It did lighten up, though, however brief.

Judge Perry granted Linda Kenney Baden’s request to withdraw from the case, but not before he asked if there were any objections.

“I liked working with her,” Jeff Ashton exclaimed.

“Pardon?” Judge Perry asked.

“I liked working with her,” Ashton repeated. That brought out a few light chuckles, but here it was a lighthearted statement and the laughter was not made out of ridicule.

“Mr. Baez, it sounds like Mr. Ashton has objected,” the judge retorted.

“Yes, it does,” Baez joked.

§

Linda Drane Burdick asked for and received a 30-day extension on depositions. Some of the witnesses are difficult to track down. The defense is having the same problem. One of the things I’ve noticed about Judge Perry is his flexibility. As stern as he is, he’s very giving and in some cases, willing to bend.

The judge then reminded Ann Finnell that the deadline for listing all penalty phase witnesses is November 30, a mere month away. All of the state’s experts have not been deposed yet and that deadline is November 19. A Frye hearing was brought up. Jeff Ashton said he wants to sit down with the defense and go over what is new and what is old science. A Frye hearing is used to determine if novel scientific evidence is reliable enough to be permitted in court. It can also apply to testimony from psychologists and psychiatrists, not just forensic experts.

There was a brief exchange between Cheney Mason and Linda Drane Burdick that became somewhat heated. It was over some of the TES records still being held by law enforcement. Burdick explained that the defense had ample opportunity to look it over when their experts were in town back in July. Of course, the defense said they had never received property forms or receipts and Burdick begged to differ. Oh, the frustration of it all! The judge gave the defense two weeks to settle the matter. He then asked the state if all evidence had been disclosed. If not, everything must be disclosed by January. This means that there will be no surprises weeks before the trial is underway. The defense should have everything in its hands by the first month of 2011.

Before the judge gave the attorneys a rather stark speech, I must say that this was the first hearing I’ve attended where Linda Drane Burdick came across loud and clear. It was my observation that she seemed more agitated and direct, and certainly, more animated than I had ever seen her before. With that, the judge stated that if the depositions are not done on time, the court will set dates and he will make sure they are not convenient for either side. He said he will start running the case at his pace, so everything had better be ready come January.

“All the posturing has been nice, but come January, it will be according to my schedule.” And that means the schedule could be at midnight. If there are people unwilling to be deposed, by golly, the court will make them comply. Judge Perry means business.

§

A somewhat odd thing occurred near the end. The gentleman next to me started to breathe deeply. When I glanced his way, he was sound asleep. To me, this had been an exciting day, one filled with many highs and lows. Just like in church, the judge gave a great sermon, but I guess there’s always a chance that someone will be napping in the crowd. The hearing lasted two hours, as I expected, but I’m used to them by now. He wasn’t, obviously.

As we got up to leave, an attorney was loudly castigating one of Orlando’s best known journalists about dumb questions. It wasn’t pretty. I gravitated toward Ann Finnell. I had a message for her from her niece or cousin, but darn if I didn’t write it down. Instead, I had a senior moment and I asked her if she would be attending the next hearing. She said she would, and I said I would remember next time. She asked me how I knew it was really a relative and I said because I know her real name and she told me you would recognize it. She was more than friendly and open. She’s every bit a class act and you could tell that she’s a very caring person. Who better to handle a penalty phase? If Casey is found guilty, she’s in good hands. Anyway, it’s her cousin, and I’m sorry. I’ll make sure I get it right next time, and that will be on November 29, at 1:30 PM. I’ll be there. I need to set the record straight.