Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Casey Anthony hearing’

 

As the killer looked into her face, maybe her killer even saw her eyes  as the tape was applied,” prosecutor Jeff Aston said during the hearing, which ended at 11:45 a.m. “First one piece, then two, then three so no breath was possible.Could Caylee have understood what was happening to her? Did she try to resist? Could her killer see the fear in her eyes as the tape was applied? These are questions only the jurors will be able to answer in this case. One thing we do know this is this. If we have gotten to this stage, those same jurors have already decided that the face that Caylee Anthony saw in those final moments of her mother — of her life was her mother`s face. “

Casey Anthony crying in court on December 11, 2009.                                                    Casey Anthony crying in court on December 11, 2009.                                           Casey Anthony at a court hearing on October 16, 2009.                                 

 

Those were the chilling words that brought Casey Anthony to tears. Or did they? What I saw was seething anger as Jeff Ashton described what could have been Caylees last moments on this earth. There were no tears until Casey’s attorney whispered something to her. Then the tears (or the show) began. However if you watched closely there was body movement similar to one sobbing, there was wiping of the eyes, yet there also was Casey looking at the tissue with every dab of her eyes.

I don’t buy the sudden breakdown of Casey. Baez accused the prosecution of playing to the cameras, yet I believe that is exactly what Casey was instructed to do in that whispered moment. She was her usual disconnected self until the whisper and then had the break down.Andrea Lyons own words keep coming back to me: HUMANIZE YOUR CLIENT…  Casey is also heard saying ” Tell him to stop” with Lyons respondng “I cant, he’s almost done”. I am sure she wanted it to stop, but then I am sure she never thought she would be here. According to Richard Hornsby when asked about the comment made by Baez he responded: “Jeff Ashton was saying we don’t have anything to hide. Come and get us,”

Andrea Lyons argued that the state has no grounds to seek the death penalty and that they are doing so in an effort to obtain a more biased jury. Yet Ashton pointed out that any case in the state of Florida in which the defendant is charged with first degree murder is eligible for the death penalty. He went on to say that it is not the state who decides if the defendant will be sentenced to death but a jury and ultimately a judge. Lyons went on to argue that there is no evidence that the duct tape had anything to do with the childs murder. Really? Well I guess in all honesty can we say Caylees murder was a result of duct tape? No, but the fact that there was not one, not two but three pieces of duct tape applied to this baby’s mouth and nose shows that whoever (imo Casey) wanted to make sure that it would be impossible for the tape to be removed.  Now a while back I speculated that perhaps the tape was applied after her death in order to make it look like the child was kidnapped, but either way it is there, it is cruel and it only points to one person.

I was wondering when the words of Andrea Lyons would come back to haunt her and they did today as Ashton described what was said in her own words regarding her thoughts on a jury and judge. She did not of course defend this but how could she?  

While the motion was of course not ruled on, I do believe the state will win this one. The defense continues to try and make it as though there is a personal vendetta against Casey Anthony and should spend more time figuring out how in fact they are going to get her out of this one. With each motion filed and each hearing they attend, they look like a bunch of bumbling idiots and not the schooled lawyers I would expect to see.

(**NOTE:These links are to the main index and there are alot of videos to see there)

VIDEOS OF HEARING 12/11/2009:    http://www.wftv.com/video/21930011/index.html

                                                                                  

VIDEO OF CASEY CRYING IN COURT:  http://www.wftv.com/video/21930011/index.html

George and Cindy Anthony were seen leaving the court room after the description given by Ashton and  according to their attorney Brad Conway they were in shock and did not expect to hear this. Have they waivered a little in their thinking though? Brad Conways statement to an  In Session reporter said alot to me:

VINNIE POLITAN, “IN SESSION”: As we sit here today, are they convinced that their daughter is not responsible for this?

BRAD CONWAY, ATTORNEY FOR GEORGE AND CINDY ANTHONY: You know, honestly, they don`t know. There are so many questions that they wanted answers to for the longest time, and they don`t know what happened. They simply don`t know.

I am sure it was not easy to sit and listen to a scenario of how their grand daughter was possibly  killed. There are other blogs that are ripping Cindy apart for being dramatic as she leaned against the wall waiting for the elevator. I didn’t see that at all. I saw her trying to escape the cameras and trying to hold it all in so as not to break down in front of them and be all over the 6oclock news. People commented on how haggard she looks. Frankly, that is just hateful and bashing her for no other reason than to bash her. So I ask you? Would you look haggard if this had been your life for the last year and a half? As I have stated I think they did alot of things wrong throuh out this entire case yet again, walk the mile and then talk to me. They had to hear some pretty awful things about their grand daughter and the daughter who is accused of murdering her.  However, we are only in the pre trial phases and I think there will be much more gruesome accounts, speculations and facts that are going to be addressed once the trial starts. Unfortunately and quite possibly fortunately I think the Anthony’s are going to have to realize that perhaps their daughter is not the person they thought she was. It will be a harsh reality and one that may take quite a toll on them. That is unless of course they continue to deny that she is incapable of doing this crime. As I continue to state I have never walked their mile and maybe they truly cannot begin to fathom any part of this horrific crime could have been committed by their own daughter. Maybe to have to realize this is something that could cause them severe mental  anguish and so it is better to continue believing in her.

VIDEO OF GEORGE AND CINDY LEAVING COURT: http://www.wftv.com/video/21930011/index.html

Jose Baez gave a short press conference after court, and was his usual self. He bit at Kathy Belich as usual and showed his complete dislike for her. At one point he told her she was living in fairyland.

How difficult it was on your client to have to sit there and listen to — how difficult was it for your client to listen to that being portrayed? Played out?

JOSE BAEZ, ATTORNEY FOR CASEY ANTHONY: It`s extremely difficult, and it would be difficult for anybody, whether it`s your child or even — even a stranger`s child. Everyone knows that the death of a child is obviously a horrible thing, and it would be difficult for anybody to listen to.

BELICH: Even if she was there when it happened?

BAEZ: I`m sorry. She wasn`t there, so you`re — again, I guess in fairyland.

He refused to answer questions about Andrea Lyons leaked video that has shown her in a very different light. Claiming that she is superior and a genious and that the other court officers are basically beneath her. Jose Baez walked off refusing to answer the question and in true Kathy fashion she didn’t let up and continued to follow them. At one point Andrea Lyons apparently elbowed her and she made reference to it on camera.

VIDEO OF BAEZ AFTER COURT: http://www.wftv.com/video/21930011/index.html

Jane Velez Mitchell covered the hearing and the aftermath surrounding it. Dr. Dale Archer is a psychiatrist that has no affiliation with Casey Anthony, yet had this to say regarding her sobbing in court.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Dr. Dale Archer, you`re the psychiatrist. Casey Anthony has made many, many court appearances. Why burst into hysterical sobs and shudders at this hearing?

DR. DALE ARCHER, PSYCHIATRIST: Well, first of all, we`re looking at an anniversary reaction, because it was one year ago today, and oftentimes an anniversary can bring the emotions back very fresh.

But to me, from looking at this, I think this is a case of a guilty conscious, I really do. And I think it is hitting home to her right now what has happened and what she has done, and is just — she is just distraught about that.

I think that this was one of the more emotional hearings thus far as it brought more than evidence. Today the court was actually introduced to Caylee Anthony, the little 2 year old girl who is what this trial is supposed to be about. Ashtons words were chilling and if you didn’t get emotional listening to them then you are stronger than I am. For over a year now we have wanted Caylee to be the focus of this trial and with all the evidence, reports,testimony and so on, not once did I feel like Caylee was being brought front and center. Until today…
 

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

    The hearing that is latest in the multiple motions that have been filed in this case has concluded today.

     Casey Anthony was led into the court room and after not having seen her in months, I must say she looks drawn. Her face seems to me to be sunken in some and she looks as though she has not had much sleep. George and Cindy Anthony were in attendance. Both of them really look as if they have been through hell.

     The motions that were filed were argued, argued and then argued. Mark NeJame was in attendance representing Tim Miller of Equisearch. He is really an act of class. I think he is truly saddened by this case and after the exchange with George Anthony yesterday at a press conference, it is easy to see the compassion he has for these people.

     Jose Baez was of course inserting little jabs at the State as he does at every hearing, but we are used to him and if he all of a sudden became completely professional we wouldn’t know how to act.

     The motions ruled on and the results of those motions are as follows:

TO CERTIFY TIM MILLER AS A MATERIAL WITNESS:

     In this motion the defense asks to have access to the records of searchers who volunteered with Equisearch. The defense sites that they have valid information that the area in which Caseys remains were found were thoroughly searched and therefor they believe that the body of Caylee Anthony was placed there by someone else after Casey Anthony was incarcerated.

     Judge Strickland has held off ruling on this case for a week.

Some of the key points of the arguments given are:

Arguments by the Defense:

                              ~ There is substantial evidence that Caylee Anthony was placed there after Casey Anthony was incarcerated.

                           ~ Proves that someone else put her body there.

                          ~ The searchers are potential witnesses to say there was no body there.

                          ~ Casey Anthony has the right to a full investigation of all volunteers due to this being a capital murder case.

                        ~ Has evidence that the area was extensively searched.

                      ~ The defense has a right to review all the documents. The fact that they have been reviewed by NeJame and Conway does not prove who else viewed them.

                          ~Just because they determined that they have found 32 people who are worth looking into who is to say that there is no other volunteer that we feel relevant.

      ~ Our intent is not to harass or embarrass anyone, should we find a volunteer that we feel will add something of worth to this case then and only then will the information be released.

ARGUMENTS BY MARK NEJAME:

         ~ Texas Equisearch has thousands of searchers who were a part of this case. So do we tell all four thousand that they must give their information? The motion is too broad. We are willing to give the information of the searchers in the area and within 200 yards of the place where Caylee was found.

     ~ We are willing to allow the judge to review the four thousand people behind closed doors and rule as to what he sees fit.

     ~Out of sympathy and concern for Mr and Mrs Anthony, we allowed their attorney Brad Conway to review the documents first. Even prior to our reviewing and he was unable to find even 32 people who he felt had a valid reason for the defense to inquire about.

     ~No Tim Miller will not be allowed by me to give a deposition until the defense narrows down what it is they are looking for. If at that time we can agree then by all means he will be more than willing to testify.

     ~ When asked why it would be Tim Miller to give the information as to who was there and why Nejames response: If Tim Miller doesn’t know if a specific volunteer was in the area, how would anyone else?

     ~We have no issue if the defense is willing to pay up front for the costs that will be incurred by theirreviewing all of this information. Texas Equisearch is a donation only charity and does not have themeans to pay for the man hours it will take. They will need to pay for the people who will be needed to gather all of the information, Pay an independent withness to monitor them and ensure it is being done correctly. If they want to come in and not be able to take anything with them and review the people associated within 200 yards then yes there is no issue.

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

MOTION TO QUASH SUBPEONA OF ANTHONY LAZARRO:

     This was addressed previously and the outcome was that the defense had to narrow its motion. The subpeona was narrowed and they are asking for records for the dates of June 1st of 08 through July 15th of 08, and July 23rd of 08 through January 09.

     Judge Strickland has ruled that the defense may have access to the phone records from June of 08 through December 0f 08. He stated that he will allow access of the phone records up until two weeks after the discovery of Caylees remains. He stated that his reasoning for this is that if he takes into account the defenses claim that someone else placed Caylee there, then there could possibly be a flurry of panicky phone calls during the time the remains were found. He denied them needing the text messages and said should they be deemed necessary after receiving the phone records they can then come back and ask. As far as the cell phone pings he stated he does not know much about them but if they are in the report with the phone records then they can have them, otherwise they need to ask the court after reviewing the phone records.

ARGUMENTS MADE BY ATTORNEY JAY: (atty. for Tony Lazarro)

     ~Under case law the defense has to show relevancy. Most of what they want pertains to their client Casey Anthony and all contact with her was severed after July 15th.

     ~The defense states as example of relevancy that they searched Mr. Lazarros car . In fact his car was searched due to the fact that Casey Anthony was driving his car for more than a week.

     ~Subpeona filed by the defense is too broad. It does not meet the criteria for materiality, they need to state what it is they actually want. The reason they cannot narrow the subpeona is because they have no facts.

     ~ In the event the motion is granted, it should be the court who receives the records and reviews them under camera.

  ARGUMENTS BY THE DEFENSE:

     ~The time frames are based on many things that have been turned over to us. ie: State submitted information that he was used as an informant for a secret meeting with Lee Anthony.

     ~ The relevancy of the records from September to January are : 1) Because Caylee Anthony’s remains were not found until December 2) We want the cell phone pings in order to see whether or not he was in that area past September. 3) He is a material witness and spent a significant amount of time with my client and will offer testimony against my client.

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

MOTION TO BAR LEONARD PADILLA AND AFFILIATES FROM TESTIFYING:

     This motion was filed to stop Leonard Padilla and his entourage from testifying against Casey Anthony. In the motion it states that it is in violation of Attorney/ Client priviledge. Baez states that Leonard Padilla was hired as part of the defense team, yet his actions and instructions to Casey Anthony and her family members show otherwise.

     Judge Strickland ruled that he wil not rule on this case as he was given three hours of video tape by the State to review in order to determine if the motion has relevancy.

     George Anthony was called to testify by Jose Baez, and then cross examined by the State. He seemed to be conflicted, it’s as if he wants to know the truth but doesn’t want to give the State anything further to implicate his daughter. Casey Anthony’s eyes filled with tears when her father took the stand. When he left the stand he blew his daughter a kiss.

Here are some of the main questions posed to George Anthony and his responses:

QUESTIONS FROM JOSE BAEZ:

Q: MR. ANTHONY CAN YOU TELL ME HOW LEONARD PADILLA AND HIS AFFILIATES WERE INTRODUCED TO YOU?       

A: YES, BY YOU

Q: WHEN YOU SAY THEY PERFORMED SECURITY DUTIES WHAT DO YOU MEAN?

A: THEY STAYED AT OUR HOUSE, IN THE BACKYARD, OUTSIDE THE HOME, AND TRACY STAYED INSIDE THE HOME.

Q: WHAT PERIOD OF TIME WERE THEY PRESENT IN YOUR HOME?

A: LATE AUGUST EARLY SEPTEMBER, I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME PERIOD.

Q: CAN YOU TELL ME HOW THE PERSON FROM THE BACKYARD COMMUNICATED WITH THE OTHERS?

A: I GUESS BY CELL PHONE OR FACE TO FACE. I SAW ROBERT DICK HAVE A KIND OF PORTABLE RADIO ONE TIME.

Q: WAS THE MOBILE HOME OUTSIDE THE HOUSE A SORT OF COMMAND CENTER?

A: YES

Q: HOW DID CASEY ANTHONY GET FROM THE JAIL TO YOUR HOME WHERE SHE SERVED HER HOME CONFINEMENT?

A: SHE WAS TRANSPORTED BY LEONARD PADILLA AND HIS GROUP.

Q: WAS YOUR DAUGHTERS SAFETY AN ISSUE?

A: NOT REALLY, SHE HAD FOUR TO FIVE PEOPLE AROUND HER AT ALL TIMES.

Q: MR ANTHONY, WERE THERE PROTESTERS AT YOUR HOME?

A: YES, FROM THE TIME CASEY CAME HOME

Q? WERE YOU THREATENED BY THE PROTESTERS?

A: YES ALL OF US WERE THREATENED.

Q: DO YOU FEEL THAT MR PADILLA USED THIS AS A PUBLICITY STUNT? IF SO DID YOU FIND IT UNNECESSARY?

A: YES

CROSS EXAMINATION BY THE STATE TO GEORGE ANTHONY

Q: WAS MR. PADILLA INVOLVEMENT BROUGHT ON BY MR BAEZ?

A: YES, HE WAS CONTRACTED TO ASSIST MR BAEZ IN AN EFFORT TO LOCATE CAYLEE.

Q: MR ANTHONY YOU ARE AWARE THAT MR PADILLA PUT UP THE HALF A MILLION DOLLAR BOND FOR YOUR DAUGHTER CORRECT?

A: I DO NOT KNOW WHERE THE MONEY CAME FROM, I THOUGHT HIS NEPHEW OR SOMETHING.

Q: MR ANTHONY DIDN’T YOU MEET WITH MR PADILLA WHEN HE CAME INTO TOWN?

A: I MET WITH HIM AT A LOCATION.

Q: WHERE WAS THE LOCATION?

A: A WAREHOUSE

Q: AND DIDN’T YOU MEET WITH HIM TO DISCUSS YOUR DAUGHTER’S BOND?

A: YES

Q: WAS MR BAEZ PRESENT AT THIS MEETING?

A: NO HE WAS NOT

Q: THAT WAS SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO YOUR DAUGHTER BEING RELEASED CORRECT?

A: YES

Q: DURING THE MEETING WITH MR PADILLA WAS IT DISCUSSED THAT THOSE INDIVIDUALS NEEDED TO SECURE THEIR RISK. THAT BEING CASEY ANTHONY AS THEY WERE PUTTING UP A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS FOR HER BAIL?

A: YES TO PROVIDE SECURITY

Q: WAS IT TO PROTECT BOTH THE HOME AND THEIR ASSET?

A: I CAN’T RECALL

Q: MR ANTHONY CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT LEGAL SERVICES THAT MR PADILLA AND HIS TEAM PROVIDED?

A: LEGAL SERVICES? NO THEY WERE THERE TO SECURE OUR HOUSE,THEY WERE PROVIDING SECURITY.

Q: SO YOU ARE CATEGORIZING THEM AS SECURITY?

A: YES

Q: YOU HAVE A FRIEND JIM, IM SORRY I CAN’T RECALL HIS LAST NAME.

A: I DON’T SEE THE RELEVANCY

** STRICKLAND INTERJECTS AND SAYS SIR SHE IS ASKING YOU FOR HIS LAST NAME

A: CAMPBELL

Q: OKAY YOU WERE IN SECURITY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AS WAS MR CAMPBELL CORRECT. IS MR CAMPBELL STILL IN LAW ENFORCEMENT?

A: NO HE IS NOT AND AGAIN I DON’T SEE THE RELEVANCY

Q: WELL I AM ASKING WHY YOU ALLOWED LEONARD PADILLA TO PROVIDE SECURITY IF JIM CAMPBELL WAS THERE FOR THAT?

A: THEY WERE ALREADY THERE

Q: DO YOU RECALL A CONVERSATION THAT TOOK PLACE IN WHICH IT WAS SAID THAT MR PADILLA AND HIS GROUP WERE NOT ALLOWED TO TALK TO CASEY WITHOUT MR BAEZ PRESENT?

A: YES MA’AM

Q: OTHERWISE IT WAS FURTHER UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY WERE NOT ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT CAYLEE?

A: YES

Q:TRACY WAS STAYING INSIDE THE HOME CORRECT?

A: YES MA’AM

Q: WERE YOU AWARE OF THE PRIVACY AGREEMENT THAT WAS MADE BETWEEN MR BAEZ AND MR PADILLA?

A: NO I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT, I WAS NOT PRESENT FOR THE TERMS.

Q:MR ANTHONY WERE YOU WORKING DURING THE TIME MR PADILLA WAS PRESENT?

A: YES,A LITTLE

Q: WAS YOUR WIFE WORKING? AND WAS YOUR SON LEE WORKING?

A: NO

Q: ALL THE MEMBERS OF YOUR FAMILY HAVE VEHICLES TO TRANSPORT CASEY TO HER LAWYERS OFFICE CORRECT?

A: I NEVER TRANSPORTED HER, MY WIFE NEVER TRANSPORTED HER AND MY SON DID ONE TIME.

Q: RIGH, BUT WHAT I AM ASKING IS: YOU EACH HAD VEHICLES SHOUDL THERE BE THE NEED TO TRANSPORT CASEY TO THE LAWYERS OFFICE CORRECT?

A: YES, BUT WE WERE NOT ALLOWED. ONLY THE SECURITY TEAM WAS ALLOWED TO.

Q:MR ANTHONY WERE YOU PRESENT CONTINUOUSLY IN THE HOME WHILE YOUR DAUGHTER WAS THERE?

A: YES

Q: SO YOU COULD HEAR DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN CASEY AND TRACY TAKING PLACE?

A: NO, I DON’T EAVESDROP

Q: HAVE YOU EVER SEEN CASEY AND TRACY GO BEHIND CLOSED DOORS?

A: THEY COULD HAVE

Q: MR ANTHONY HOW MANY SQUARE FEET IS YOUR HOME?

A: ABOUT 1700

THANK YOU I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

*** there were many arguments posed by both sides and it was mostly going back and forth as to why it is relevant, what is relevant and who is protected under the atty/client priviledge.

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

MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CHECK FRAUD TRIAL:

     This motion was filed by the state to move ahead with the check fraud trial brought against Casey Anthony regarding her forging checks of her good friend Amy Huzeinga. The state is asking to set a date for the trial and the defense is asking to not set a date until after the capital murder trial.

     Judge Strickland again refrained from ruling on this case until he reviews it. This again was mostly a pissing match and even though there is no ruling I’d say the State won this one. They had very valid  points and completely squashed the theory that the defense is entirely too busy to deal with this.

ARGUMENTS FROM THE STATE:

~The state is ready for the trial and would like to proceed. This case has been going on a year and going nowhere. We are talking about a small time frame of one week.

~ I realize there are overlapping witnesses in this case yet I feel that we will be able to seperate the two.

~ The defense claims that they are too busy preparing for the death penalty trial and yet they cannot argue the following facts:

  • Only one attorney on record is involved with both cases. That being Mr. Baez.
  • Mr Baez has 20 other pending cases that he took on after the death penalty was announced. So to say that he is wholly cosumed in this case only is false.
  • Ms. Lyons as of now is not involved on record in this case and yet she has said she will be participating in both. Should she decide to get involved I think she could give one day to this case.
  • The defense states that there is no way they can get a jury. We would like to think that the utmost concern would be given when questioning a jury pool.

~ In a sworn affidavit Amy Huzeinga staes that this case has been going on over a year causing her great mental stress. Her name is all overthe internet, and it is hindering her from getting a job.

~ We are not demanding a speedy trial, we are asking to have a date on the docket.

~We are ready for the trial, have 15 witnesses and only need one day for trial. Aside from jury selection we can be done in a day.

ARGUMENTS BY THE DEFENSE:

~ We are not complaining that we are to busy We are trying to prepare to save Ms. Anthony’s life.

~We will be filing a change in venue

~ Even though the state claims it will only take a day it will divert attention and resources.

~ Our suggestion would be to set a trial date 60 days after the murder trial…

At that point the state rebutted with: We don’t even know when we are going to have a murder trial…

One thing is for sure, it is never dull when something happens with this case!

 

Read Full Post »