Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Casey Anthony trial...

That's what I was thinking...that the tattoo could be viewed as a memorial. I didn't realize she had a pizza party afterwards?!? This girl is really dumb. Not to mention heartless.
 
Did you know that there is NO psychologist or psychiatrist on the defense list? There is going to be no expert testimony as to why she lies so prolifically and easily. :nono:
 
The defense and the prosecution are trying two different cases. The prosecution is trying Casey, the defense is trying George. It's so wrong.

The defense has NO case. None. I can't say that enough. You cannot argue with fact, but you can grasp at straws. Anyone heard that they are trying to pin George to a convicted felon...a kidnapper, nonetheless. Talk about dirty pool. Speculation is flying...but, the innocent version is that the felons' phone number is very close to the number of George's new work number. Which, I mean, seems like a reasonable "sorry wrong number" IMO. But the defense is fussing over the fact that it happened four times. He is a convicted kidnapper.
 
Italiahaircolor|1308106009|2946226 said:
I would feel more confident in the juries ability to see the facts, that it was clear and dry, if they could prove, without doubt, that Casey did the searches.
Click to expand...

I didn't see any testimony on it, maybe missed it, but the prosecution did put into evidence (while they waited for the tattoo guy to get there) the employment logs for both George & Cindy Anthony. These must show they were at work while at least some of the searches were done (there were what, 84 of them?) or the prosecutors would not have used them.

NO psychiatrists??? I'm stunned! So how will they get the "abuse" into evidence without putting Casey on the stand? You can't just pull accusations out of thin air. You have to back it up with some kind of evidence or testimony. Don't they need to proffer evidence before they can use allegations for defense in a trial? Or did they have an offer of proof hearing at the beginning?
 
Yeah, I heard the interview with the Anthonys' lawyer. Apparently George made 4 phone calls to this guy (the convict) the day before Cindy called 911 to report Caylee missing and the lawyer said "I don't know what the length of the calls was" which sounds fishy to me. Of course he knows. I hope there's no connection. Hopefully the judge will not admit a last minute witness. As the Anthonys' lawyer said, they have had 3 years to compile witnesses and they are just now coming up with this one. But they said they will probably allow it so that there is not another plea for a mistrial.

Can't wait for tomorrow! My bet is that they don't put Casey on the stand until the very end.

I just started watching Nancy Grace's take, even though she bugs the daylights out of me. She kept mouthing the words "I love you" in reference to the whisper from Cindy, and my guess is that it will show up on The Soup! I also hate the way she pronounces Caylee.
 
Yeah, I heard the interview with the Anthonys' lawyer. Apparently George made 4 phone calls to this guy (the convict) the day before Cindy called 911 to report Caylee missing and the lawyer said "I don't know what the length of the calls was" which sounds fishy to me. Of course he knows. I hope there's no connection. Hopefully the judge will not admit a last minute witness. As the Anthonys' lawyer said, they have had 3 years to compile witnesses and they are just now coming up with this one. But they said they will probably allow it so that there is not another plea for a mistrial.

Can't wait for tomorrow! My bet is that they don't put Casey on the stand until the very end.

I just started watching Nancy Grace's take, even though she bugs the daylights out of me. She kept mouthing the words "I love you" in reference to the whisper from Cindy, and my guess is that it will show up on The Soup! I also hate the way she pronounces Caylee.
 
JewelFreak|1308182278|2947033 said:
Italiahaircolor|1308106009|2946226 said:
I would feel more confident in the juries ability to see the facts, that it was clear and dry, if they could prove, without doubt, that Casey did the searches.
Click to expand...

I didn't see any testimony on it, maybe missed it, but the prosecution did put into evidence (while they waited for the tattoo guy to get there) the employment logs for both George & Cindy Anthony. These must show they were at work while at least some of the searches were done (there were what, 84 of them?) or the prosecutors would not have used them.

NO psychiatrists??? I'm stunned! So how will they get the "abuse" into evidence without putting Casey on the stand? You can't just pull accusations out of thin air. You have to back it up with some kind of evidence or testimony. Don't they need to proffer evidence before they can use allegations for defense in a trial? Or did they have an offer of proof hearing at the beginning?
Click to expand...

I there was some talk about timelines when it came to the searches. But, I wasn't clear on how they were going to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that Casey did the searches...

I don't think the defense needs to put on any case if they choose not too. They say or claim whatever, but, if the defense opted not to even present a case, that's within their right. Mason and JP actually got into an argument over that...JP had told the jury that the defense would be putting on their case, and Mason flipped out saying that "they didn't have to present anything and saying so was prejudice". So, I think that Baez can say she was molested and leave it at that.
 
Lanie|1308183591|2947055 said:
the lawyer said "I don't know what the length of the calls was" which sounds fishy to me. Of course he knows. I hope there's no connection.
Click to expand...

I know...I'd hate to think, even for a minute that it was anything more than an honest mistake.
 
No, the Defense doesn't have to prove anything. They can rest right now, but the Judge will instruct the jury that opening statements are not evidence and their theory about the accidental death will fall flat.

The Defense wanted to have a psychiatrist testify but by doing so they would open the door to having Casey evaluated by a prosecution expert, and they are afraid to go there.

Jose Baez simply does not have a grasp on the rules of evidence.
 
Lanie|1308183591|2947055 said:
I just started watching Nancy Grace's take, even though she bugs the daylights out of me. She kept mouthing the words "I love you" in reference to the whisper from Cindy, and my guess is that it will show up on The Soup! I also hate the way she pronounces Caylee.
Click to expand...
I am bugged by Nancy Grace's constantly calling Casey "Tot Mom." Dumb. It also sounds like a cutsie name & cute is the LAST thing Casey is.

There is no requirement that the defense put on a case. They can rest without calling a single witness. Good way to lose, though. One thing I'd expect is a parade of people saying what a great mother Casey was -- at the very least. If you were on a jury & the defendant said she'd been abused, but hadn't presented a smidgen of evidence, what would you think? "Nice try but where's any proof?" Doctors? Friends she may have told through the years? "Well, gee, I remember one morning in 8th grade when she was really quiet." Not gonna cut it. At that rate they could say the grocer did it or the local traffic cop -- just pull some bull out of the air. Hope the jury agrees!

I wasn't clear on how they were going to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that Casey did the searches...
Click to expand...
They don't have to. Only beyond a reasonable doubt. Showing the parents were out even some of the times the searches were done makes it logical that Casey did them all -- and the judge can so instruct the jury.

The Defense wanted to have a psychiatrist testify but by doing so they would open the door to having Casey evaluated by a prosecution expert, and they are afraid to go there.
Click to expand...

Yeah, good point. I thought of that last night. Was Casey given any psychiatric exams?
 
I am pretty positive they gave Casey psych exams, which is how they know she isn't "crazy" or "certifiably insane" and competent to stand trial.
 
Baez seems so disorganized and flustered this morning. I'm curious to see where he's going with Bloise.
 
I agree with Jewel on Nancy Grace's overuse of "Tot Mom"...it's so annoying! I saw her on the Joy Behar show and she aske why she used that term and Grace got very defensive saying it doesn't matter what she terms her, it's about the trial,etc. A bit odd.

I think Casey will look for a re-trial based on inadqequate representation - that may be why the defense is doing such a crap job. Still it's hard to defend her no matter how sharp the lawyer. I hope the jury comes back with a firm quick conviction so Casey Anthony can get out of the limelight already.
 
She had a psych exam for her bail hearing which is typical and perfunctory. The penalty phase will be a parade of psychiatrists.
 
Upgradable|1308175029|2946932 said:
Did you know that there is NO psychologist or psychiatrist on the defense list? There is going to be no expert testimony as to why she lies so prolifically and easily. :nono:
Click to expand...

Did the prosecution have any psych experts on their list?
 
Defense would not allow any psychological exams of Casey. Since they didn't do a psych, they could deny prosecution from doing one.

Now, if the defense decides to enter Casey's state of mind into the record, or any psycological motive, that opens the door for the prosecution to examine her!


Oh, and I wanted to add that Baez's questioning reminds me a lot of My Cousin Vinny!! All he needs is the maroon velvet prom tux! :errrr:
 
I wonder if the father agreed to be the defense's Plan B in a desperate attempt to save his daughter. "Plan B" was the defense strategy the law firm in the tv show "The Practice" used when they had no defense. The strategy was simply to create reasonable doubt by introducing another person who could have committed the crime.

Of course, they wouldn't need his consent to be Plan B, but it is odd that the mother still seems to support her, given the accustations being lodged against her husband (well, as if it weren't odd enough that the mother still supports her even though she killed her beautiful granddaughter.) Are the father and mother still together?
 
Let's confuse the jury more.....
 
I Am just so disgusted by the whole thing. :nono:
 
I'm missing everything! Our cable went out early this morning and our Internet is through our cable so I'm on my iPhone! Can anyone give a brief update of what's going on? Witnesses today? Sounds like Baez is flustered from all of your comments!
 
They've been talking to the DNA/lab expert all day.
 
And I wouldn't be surprised if the jury is asleep. Baez seems to just be tossing up unrelated info. There is no thread tying it together. The jury is not taking notes. Not a good sign in my eyes.
 
Interesting about the FBI expert who didn't find the trace of the heart sticker on the duct tape. She also contaminated the evidence.
 
I remember the CSI examiner who saw the heart residue had her supervisor come look at it too, and she saw it. But this supervisor hasn't been called to corroborate.
 
JewelFreak|1308220334|2947344 said:
There is no requirement that the defense put on a case. They can rest without calling a single witness. Good way to lose, though. One thing I'd expect is a parade of people saying what a great mother Casey was -- at the very least. If you were on a jury & the defendant said she'd been abused, but hadn't presented a smidgen of evidence, what would you think? "Nice try but where's any proof?" Doctors? Friends she may have told through the years? "Well, gee, I remember one morning in 8th grade when she was really quiet." Not gonna cut it. At that rate they could say the grocer did it or the local traffic cop -- just pull some bull out of the air. Hope the jury agrees!
Click to expand...
Sometimes, the best way for the defense to win is to not put on any evidence and hold the prosecution to their burden of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt. (A reasonable doubt is defined as a doubt that would cause reasonable people to hesitate to act in a matter of importance to themselves.)

As far as evidence saying what a good mom Casey was, this is not permissible under the Rules of Evidence. It would likely be considered improper character evidence. If it were allowed, that would also "open the door" to the prosecution presenting any character evidence they want to refute what the good character witnesses said, which would be a disaster.

Someone who responded previously expressed their annoyance with the defense attorney consistently requesting mistrials. While this can get old, it's an important way to preserve the record for appeal. If you don't object and move for a mistrial when you should have, your client can be deemed to have waived the issue for appeal, meaning that an appellate court can deny your appeal and "Too bad for you--you don't get to argue or appeal this issue of law because you didn't make that record at trial." Preserving the record during trial is an incredibly important part of a good defense attorney's representation of their client (especially when things aren't going all that well at trial!).
 
I'll be honest in admitting that I haven't read this thread in its entirety because this case is so disturbing, but I had to chime in about Nancy Grace. I can't stand that woman. I know she's in show business essentially, but I find her use of the phrase "tot mom" appalling. Use the girl's name, for cryin' out loud! Her show is so sensationalized, it's ridiculous. I could go on and on but I'll stop there.
 
Entimology 101. I'm so bored I want to stick a fork in my eye! :knockout:

Oh, oh!! The defense expert just said the best studies are done at the Body Farm in Tennessee! That's who the Prosecution had as an expert. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!
 
I'm almost convinced at this point that the defense is bringing in professors..I mean experts....to confuse...I mean testify like this so the jury gets all turned around and can't remember the facts of the case. Then they'll swoop in during closing arguments and reiterate the "facts" and correct all mistakes Baiez has made in how he's presented the case.
 
Baez is such a bumbling fool! Doesn't even know procedure about what a witness can testify to and what they can't. :rolleyes:

Were I a juror, I'd vote for conviction just because he's wasted so much of my life that I can never get back!
 
Judge is pi$$ed now too!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top