From the division of 'a Selasphorus rufus spoke to me'

I know there’s quite a buzz making the rounds on the Internet pertaining to Tony Pipitone’s exclusive story last night on WKMG, the CBS affiliate in Orlando. I must say, it was a great report, but of course, there’s always that element of hype that goes with virtually every story from every media outlet no matter what news is on the verge of breaking. Certainly, Tony deserves accolades for what he dug up and put together. It is true, no other TV station had the story. I’ve always recognized him as an excellent investigative reporter, and one of the reasons why he can shine like that is because he’s not a beat reporter; he’s not a man (or woman) on the street who puts together daily bits and bytes. This allows him more time to piece together a well choreographed production.

I know a lot of people are questioning whether it was the prosecution or the defense that met with him all clandestine-like to give up the goods on Dr. Jan Garavaglia’s deposition. Well, I’m not going to explain the story that aired last night. If you don’t know it by now, please go to Click Orlando, read it, and mosey on back. There’s also a video link to last night’s 11 o’clock broadcast. As Cheney Mason said at one point of the deposition while addressing the medical examiner, “this is not my first rodeo.” It wasn’t Dr. G’s, either. Nor was it Mr. Pipitone’s.

I went to the courthouse this morning and afterward, I asked some of Orlando’s finest journalists how he managed to get that information. Did someone spill the beans? No, most likely not. He had time to go to the Clerk of Courts office and peruse all sorts of documents, including “previously unreleased depositions of Garavaglia and others,” as their site explains. No back alley meetings wearing trench coats. No 007 guitar riffs playing in the background. It was there waiting to be found.

On another note, congratulations are in order for Kathi Belich for inking a long term contract with WFTV. Speaking of which, WFTV offered an on-air correction. It also appears on the Website. On a February 2 newscast, Kathi reported that some person had filed a grievance with the Florida Bar against Jose Baez for misrepresenting his facts to the court, and in particular, Judge Belvin Perry Jr. In fact, the complaint dealt with “ethics violations,” a spokesperson for the Bar stated. The person also confirmed that the defense attorney had been informed of the complaint, but refused to say who filed it.

Several of us wondered if Jose Baez threatened to take legal action against WFTV and, specifically, Kathi Belich, if a retraction wasn’t forthcoming. The thought had certainly crossed my mind because I am aware of what this defense can do, and it’s common knowledge that Kathi is the biggest thorn in the defense team’s side. They would love to send her out in the Atlantic in a canoe, sans paddle. To be honest, it’s not every day that a major media outlet retracts anything, so this came as a surprise.

Next Wednesday will be the start of a two-day status hearing. Casey Anthony must attend because several motions will also be heard, including:

• Motion to Suppress Statements (Jail Interviews)
• Motion in Limine to Supress Jail Video Footage
• Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence to Canine Searches & Alerts
• Notice to Suppress Statements of LEO
• State’s Motion to Strike Defense Supplemental Witness List
• Rule to Show Cause
• Frye: Motion to Strike Defense Motion to Exclude Unreliable Evidence (Plant or Root growth) and Motion to Exclude Unreliable Evidence (Chloroform)

Late this afternoon, the judge announced that the State’s Motion to Show Cause will be argued next week. That’s the big one the prosecution wants to hold Jose accountable for - contempt! Also, Judge Perry approved two more defense motions - one for out-of-state video conferencing costs and the other for $4,500 for a mental health expert for the penalty phase if Casey is convicted. The cost of video conferencing will run about $140 per hour, but Perry believes it’s still a good deal since the cost of travel and accommodations for the defense experts would be much higher.

Well, there you have it. A little more to add to the ongoing Chronicles of Casey. One more thing… the title is just the Latin name for a particular breed of small bird - a rufus hummingbird. In other words, from the department of ‘a little bird told me.’

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?

From the FRYE pan into the FYRE? Part I

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

PART I - The Frye Pan

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

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

and

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

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

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

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

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

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

FACTS

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

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

FACTS PART II: UNCOVERING THE FRAUD

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

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

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

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

COMPUTER SEARCHES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

PART II - The FYRE

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

The 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?

Shocking!

While writing my new post, I took a break and checked my e-mails. This one came in as a link from a friend. It’s just amazing what’s out there in the weird world of nooz.