Casey Anthony TRIAL THREAD #1

[happygirl]

I think she going to have to testify, if the defense is going to use the whole pity party I was abused by my dad/brother

 

[joviroxx]

I think "Cross Examining Pathological Liars" is all part of the course "How to Lead Your Client to a Create a Ridiculous Defense and Pretend You Believe it".

I think we will all be able to teach this course after this trial!

 

[Dee77]

People scheduled to testify are normally not allowed to be in the courtroom, however the difference with George, Cindy and now Lee is that their attorney argued that they are also there to represent the victim Caylee as her next of kin.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I think she wants to testify but not sure if they will let her. And I agree 100% with the perjury part.

As far as I know--council can advise whatever they want, but they cannot make a client do anything.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

Misinformation makes me crazy. Nancy Grace said tonight that the duct tape was place on Caylee PRE-MORTEM. But that's not necessarily true (I personally believe it IS tho). The only thing they know is that it was placed there before decomposition.

Am I right or am I right?

 

[Kurby]

how long is this trial expected to be?

i'm having this baby in little under 2 months and just wondering if i'm going to be watching this while nursing

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Misinformation makes me crazy. Nancy Grace said tonight that the duct tape was place on Caylee PRE-MORTEM. But that's not necessarily true (I personally believe it IS tho). The only thing they know is that it was placed there before decomposition.

Am I right or am I right?

I think she is going with prosecutions claim that it was to kill Caylee, which would make it pre-mortem.

Since COD is not known, it is not know if the tape was placed pre or post mortem.

So NG is likely sharing her (very strong and opinionated) opinion. Something that is a zillion times more plausible than the drowning theory (as it was presented by Baez).

NG shares many opinions as a former prosecutor. She does a lot of side line analysis and when they do not know something for certain, I think she goes with her gut.

I missed the comment though. But I think she is in the camp that "you wouldn't duct tape a victim after they are dead."

So I don't think it is misinformation so much as just her belief of why it was placed.

 

[hellokitty86]

Misinformation makes me crazy. Nancy Grace said tonight that the duct tape was place on Caylee PRE-MORTEM. But that's not necessarily true (I personally believe it IS tho). The only thing they know is that it was placed there before decomposition.

Am I right or am I right?

I thought I had heard it was placed pre-mortem, it must've been Nancy that I heard that from.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

how long is this trial expected to be?

i'm having this baby in little under 2 months and just wondering if i'm going to be watching this while nursing

The jury is still out on that.







It was estimated at 8 weeks.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

OK, I think its because, when they are scheduled to testify, they have to be in the courtroom, all day, if needed. This happened to Lee when he accompanied Mallory. He had to sit outside the entire time. Since George hasn't been released and they don't know when they might call him back, he would have to be "on call" in the witness holding room, therefore, not be able to watch the trial. Does that make sense? That's the only thing I can figure. I always asked myself the same thing.. uh, can't they just watch a livestream?

I'm not sure. LOL They would still be able to watch all those other days in this two month trial.

I think she wants to testify but not sure if they will let her. And I agree 100% with the perjury part.

I'm torn about whether or not Baez would want her to. But I think no one TELLS Casey anything.

People scheduled to testify are normally not allowed to be in the courtroom, however the difference with George, Cindy and now Lee is that their attorney argued that they are also there to represent the victim Caylee as her next of kin.

I know, but the reason is so that their testimony isn't tainted, isn't it? But most trials aren't televised, so it seems that even if they're not physically allowed in, they can see the whole thing on TV. So I just wonder what the specific reason is that they're not allowed in the courtroom, and have to file motions to be allowed.

 

[joviroxx]

As far as I know--council can advise whatever they want, but they cannot make a client do anything.

yeah, but I can see Baez telling her she's acting like a 2yr old and shutting her up. But then again, who knows with her.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

yeah, but I can see Baez telling her she's acting like a 2yr old and shutting her up. But then again, who knows with her.

Well that doesn't count.

How insensitive that if her daughter died such a horrific accidental death that her daddy made her cover up, that he would call her a 2 year old.

I'm sure they had a lover's spat over that one.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

how long is this trial expected to be?

i'm having this baby in little under 2 months and just wondering if i'm going to be watching this while nursing

Oh dear...I hope they don't announce the verdict during labor...that could be traumatic!

I think she is going with prosecutions claim that it was to kill Caylee, which would make it pre-mortem.

Since COD is not known, it is not know if the tape was placed pre or post mortem.

So NG is likely sharing her (very strong and opinionated) opinion. Something that is a zillion times more plausible than the drowning theory (as it was presented by Baez).

NG shares many opinions as a former prosecutor. She does a lot of side line analysis and when they do not know something for certain, I think she goes with her gut.

I missed the comment though. But I think she is in the camp that "you wouldn't duct tape a victim after they are dead."

So I don't think it is misinformation so much as just her belief of why it was placed.

What she said was, and I quote "The state says that they can show that duct tape WAS the murder weapon, that the duct tape was applied PRE-MORTEM (NG's emphasis)...while Caylee was still alive." That's just not true. I understand strong opinions...but she is NOT saying what you've said above, and what most of us have said...that you wouldn't duct tape a person's mouth after death. The state CAN'T show that, because the autopsy didn't show that as fact; absolutely, that's all part of the very good circumstantial case against Casey. But Nancy's statement is very incorrect and very misleading.

 

[Kurby]

exactly how can the PROVE it was placed there pre death? all that was left was her bones - you can't prove anything from them.

i know one report said there was some tissue on the tape but that wouldn't tell them pre or post - it woudl only be the top layer of skin which is all dead anyways - even on you and me.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Oh dear...I hope they don't announce the verdict during labor...that could be traumatic!
What she said was, and I quote "The state says that they can show that duct tape WAS the murder weapon, that the duct tape was applied PRE-MORTEM (NG's emphasis)...while Caylee was still alive." That's just not true. I understand strong opinions...but she is NOT saying what you've said above, and what most of us have said...that you wouldn't duct tape a person's mouth after death. The state CAN'T show that, because the autopsy didn't show that as fact; absolutely, that's all part of the very good circumstantial case against Casey. But Nancy's statement is very incorrect and very misleading.

I think we are getting into semantics.

I think they can show that that was likely the case giving the surrounding circumstances and evidence.

Jury just needs to believe they are showing that.

What you are saying is the can't "Prove" it.

But the State, in their opening very much implied that they could show it. I think that is what NG is going on.

It's wordplay. Not quite accurate, but not quite inaccurate, either.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

exactly how can the PROVE it was placed there pre death? all that was left was her bones - you can't prove anything from them.

i know one report said there was some tissue on the tape but that wouldn't tell them pre or post - it woudl only be the top layer of skin which is all dead anyways - even on you and me.

They didn't say they could prove it....

What they said was that they could "show it". And by the way they weave the evidence with witness accounts, they can certainly paint that picture that shows the jurors that is what happened.

It would be up to Baez to properly cross examine that it was not proven.

The word games lawyers play....

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

exactly how can the PROVE it was placed there pre death? all that was left was her bones - you can't prove anything from them.

i know one report said there was some tissue on the tape but that wouldn't tell them pre or post - it woudl only be the top layer of skin which is all dead anyways - even on you and me.

They can't prove it was there before death; they can suggest as part of their prosecution that it was tho.

From the autopsy report:
http://www.wesh.com/download/2009/0619/19802034.pdf

Several overlapping pieces of duct tape, over the anterior portion of the lower skull, including mandible and a portion of the maxilla

1. duct tape still attached to scalp hairs
2. duct tape still in approximate anatomic position with no visible attached soft tissue beneath the duct tape

 

[Mlissa88]

They can't prove it was there before death; they can suggest as part of their prosecution that it was tho.

From the autopsy report:
http://www.wesh.com/download/2009/0619/19802034.pdf

ugh..that poor little girl.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

I think we are getting into semantics.

I think they can show that that was likely the case giving the surrounding circumstances and evidence.

Jury just needs to believe they are showing that.

What you are saying is the can't "Prove" it.

But the State, in their opening very much implied that they could show it. I think that is what NG is going on.

It's wordplay. Not quite accurate, but not quite inaccurate, either.

OK. I agree 100% with the bolded statement above. But I still believe that that is NOT what Nancy said, and that she's putting out misinformation...making it more dramatic by stating it as FACT, rather than "pre-decomposition, and quite possibly pre-mortem." I don't see it as wordplay...I see it as created drama. I get a kick out of her, and I believe there are some good aspects to her show and her commitment to missing and murdered children and women. But I prefer factual presentations; I've seen her go for the drama with "wordplay" time and time again, and it's just one of those things that bugs me.

My DH has been in and out of the house today doing yardwork, and apparently let in a slew of mosquitoes (I could kill him! ), and I am a major mosquito magnet, so I need to deal with this now before I go insane scratching. And The Bachelorette is on (don't like her, don't like most of the guys, but it's a brainless show, and this trial is so intense, I need some brainless). I'll see you peoples in the morning, if not sooner.

 

[richmond282]

Can anybody explain the timeline with Casey's car? I've tried reading several timelines. I can't figure out when the "smell" was there and when exactly it was ditched/ refound within the 31 days.

Any theories on when exactly she put the body in it's final resting place? I'm just confused.