Hello again my unfaithful readers!
In part one of this two-part expose on Casey Anthony’s Check Fraud case, we discussed why the State wants to try the Check Fraud case before the First Degree Murder case.
In part deux, we will discuss why the Defense will likely try to postpone the Check Fraud case in some manner.
But before we discuss the how and why the defense will try to delay the Check Fraud case, I think it is best that we discuss what I would be doing.
Because there is nothing more enjoyable than second guessing another person’s strategy by playing Monday Morning Quarterback.
What Would Hornsby Do?
Now we know that the real prize to the State is the thirteen felony fraud convictions for use as impeachment in the Murder case. Thus we know that the defense wants to avoid trying the Check Fraud case before the Murder case at all costs.
However, with Judge Strickland having granted the State’s Motion to Set a Trial Date in the Check Fraud case, it seems likely that the Check Fraud case would be tried first.
And when the ship is sinking, Richard Hornsby asks, why go down with the ship?
A Lifeline…
Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.151 allows a defendant to consolidate “related” cases and charges.
Rule 3.151. Consolidation of Related Offenses
(a) Related Offenses. For purposes of these rules, 2 or more offenses are related offenses if they are triable in the same court and are based on thesame act or transaction or on 2 or more connected acts or transactions.
(b) Consolidation of Indictments or Informations. Two or more indictments or informations charging related offenses shall be consolidated for trial on a timely motion by a defendant or by the state. The procedure thereafter shall be the same as if the prosecution were under a single indictment or information. Failure to timely move for consolidation constitutes a waiver of the right to consolidation.
A casual reading shows that in order to consolidate offenses, there must be two or more offenses (meaning charged with at least two crimes – duh!) and they must be based upon “two or more connected acts or transactions.”
And this relationship has been further defined by the Florida Supreme Court in Spencer v. State, 645 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1994), which held that for consolidation purposes, the two incidents need only be “causally related,” meaning they “stem from the same underlying dispute and involve the same parties.”
So coming full circle, we know that Amy Huizenga will be required to testify in both cases. We also know the underlying conduct that makes up the Check Fraud case will be relied upon by the State to convict Casey in the murder case.
So the real question is – what is the defense thinking?
Wishful Thinking
There is only one possible explanation for the defense team’s failure to move for consolidation (Okay, other than they didn’t know they could – but really?)
They believe they will be able to exclude the Check Fraud conduct from admitted into evidence in the Murder case – arguing it is nothing more than character evidence used solely to show propensity to commit crimes (which we all remember is an inadmissible purpose).
Nevertheless unfaithful ones, if this is the defense team’s thinking, it is nothing more than wishful thinking… Why?
There are two types of evidence of uncharged crimes that is admissible against a defendant: “similar fact evidence” and “dissimilar fact evidence.”
We have previously discussed “similar fact evidence” and how it can be introduced to show show modus operandi or absence of mistake. (See In Defense of the Casey Anthony Defense.) This type of evidence is governed by Section 90.404, Florida Statutes.
On the other hand, “dissimilar fact evidence” is governed by the general rule of relevancy set forth in Section 90.402, Florida Statutes. And under Florida law, dissimilar fact evidence of uncharged misconduct is admissible to establish the relevant context in which the criminal acts occurred so that the State can paint an accurate picture of the events surrounding them.
As a result, evidence of misconduct not charged in the Murder Indictment (i.e. the Check Fraud charges) is relevant and admissible when it is necessary to adequately describe the events leading up to the commission of the offenses charged in the Murder case. See Victorino v. State SC06-2090 (Fla. November 23, 2009).
Moreover, such evidence is “admissible as relevant evidence even though it might otherwise be objectionable as prior bad act evidence because it is ‘inextricably intertwined‘ with the underlying crime.” See Shively v. State, 752 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). This is especially true if the evidence of other crimes, wrongs, and acts is probative on a material issue and not being offered just to show the bad character or propensity of an individual. See Hunter v. State, 660 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 1995).
And looking at Ms. Anthony’s case in context, it seems undeniable that the State would be entitled to present evidence of her fraudulent activity to establish a time-line, show her absence of mistake, show her false statements to police, show her lack of remorse, show she purchased nothing for Caylee with the stolen funds, show …
But again, what would Hornsby do, or better yet – what would Sun-Tzu do?
The Art of War
In chapter two of the Art of War, Sun-Tzu says:
One who cannot be victorious assumes a defensive posture; one who can be victorious attacks.
In these circumstances by assuming a defensive posture, strength will be more than adequate, whereas in offensive actions it would be inadequate.
What this stanza means is that you should only fight when victory can be secured; otherwise you should assume a defensive posture. This allows you to both minimize your losses when attacked, and live to fight another day.
And considering that Casey Anthony’s guilt is evident in the Check Fraud case, it would seem obvious they cannot obtain an acquittal – so why try the case first and provide the State with additional ammunition in the Murder case?
Rather, they should wisely choose a defensive posture and move to consolidate the cases, which is the safest option and minimizes negative exposure to the jury in the Murder case.
And importantly, from a defense perspective, if the motion to consolidate was denied, it would create one additional appellate issue that could be raised in either case.
However, her defense team seems to be pursuing a more precarious option – delay the inevitable.
Delay is the Deadliest Form of Denial
By choosing to delay the Check Fraud case, Casey Anthony’s defense team only has three options available:
- Motion to Continue,
- Plea to the Bench, or
- Conduct a Trial.
So let’s discuss each of these options.
Some Other Day Please: Motion to Continue
While Judge Strickland granted the State’s Motion for Determination of New Trial Date, it must be realized that his order only instructed the Clerk to docket the Check Fraud case for “pretrial and trial” – a standard couplet of court dates that are scheduled in all criminal cases. And as any practitioner will tell you, most Motions to Continue are made at the pretrial.
Additionally, many people have equated Judge Strickland’s consideration of Amy Huizenga’s affidavit with her having exercised her speedy trial rights afforded to victims in Florida.
Unfortunately though, Ms. Huizenga’s speedy trial rights have yet to mature. Because under Florida law, a victim’s Demand for a Speedy Trial cannot be made until the court has granted at least three continuances upon the request of the defendant and over the objection of the state attorney. (See Section 960.0015, Florida Statutes.)
And not only does Judge Strickland’s Order specifically state that the Check Fraud case has only “technically” been continued one time, it must be remembered that that continuance was not opposed by the State. Thus the defense could still be able to continue the case three times before the state could file a Demand for Speedy Trial on behalf of Ms. Huizenga.
Consequently, it is still possible that the defense could move to continue the case at the upcoming pretrial if they can show good cause for the continuance as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(g).
When moving to continue, defense attorneys usually state one of two reasons: (1) they are trying to locate additional witnesses or (2) they need additional time to prepare. In Ms. Anthony’s case, it would seem additional time to prepare is the only good faith reason they could raise.
And when alleging additional time needed to prepare, a judge must consider the following factors to determine if the continuance should be granted. See Trocola v. State, 867 So.2d 1229 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).
- The time actually available for preparation;
- The likelihood of prejudice to the defendant from the denial;
- The defendant’s role in shortening the preparation time;
- The complexity of the case;
- The availability of discovery;
- The adequacy of counsel actually provided; and
- The skill and experience of the attorneys considering their pre-retention experience with the defendant or the alleged crime.
A cursory review of these factors mitigates against Judge Strickland being required to grant the defense another continuance. But in addition to the factors outlined in Trocola, Rule 3.190(g)(5) is also working against the defense:
The party applying for a continuance may file affidavits in support of the motion, and the adverse party may file counter-affidavits in opposition to the motion.
Considering the defense has not filed any supporting affidavits and the State has filed Ms. Huizenga’s, it seems obvious that Judge Strickland is entitled to deny any Motion to Continue made by the defense. But this is especially so considering how much weight Judge Strickland gave to Ms. Huizenga’s affidavit and the very pointed language he used to describe how simple the case would be to try – thus preempting any future attempt to request additional time to prepare.
To Plea or not to Plea, for that is the Question: Plea to the Bench
Of the three options available, I believe this is the most likely to occur – with one caveat.
While I think the defense will plea to the bench to avoid a trial, I nonetheless think they will wait until the last minute to do so – meaning until the jury is literally waiting outside the courtroom to be picked.
So the question then turns to why would they plea to the bench, rather than roll the dice at trial.
Two Words: Strategery!
The truth is that no matter how much “duh” the Casey Anthony team puts into the term defense, even they have to know they would lose the Check Fraud trial given the overwhelming direct evidence.
But more importantly, the State Attorney’s Office would get a free test run against Mr. Baez, Ms. Lyon, and Ms. Kenney-Baden.
This would allow the State to prepare for each attorney’s particular style, to obtain a psychological insight on how the attorney thinks, and allow the State to prepare limiting motions to prevent the defense from engaging in certain conduct or argument during the Murder trial that they attempted in the Check Fraud trial.
Additionally, considering the State Attorney is not offering the defense any plea bargains in the Check Fraud case – the defense would have to know that their only hope in any type of leniency would be to appeal to Judge Strickland.
However, it is highly unlikely Judge Strickland would show them much sympathy if they wasted the court’s time and resources. And, as I will discuss at the end of this post, the ultimate sentence will be up to Judge Strickland if she pleads guilty or is found guilty. And as the saying goes, don’t bite the hand that feeds you. (This of course assumes Casey Anthony is not acquitted of the Check Fraud charges,)
A Final Wrinkle
Even if Casey Anthony pleads to the bench, it is interesting to note that a judge is not required to accept any plea other than a Guilty plea – meaning that Judge Strickland could refuse to accept a Nolo Contendere (No Contest) plea.
The reasoning is that a person who admits their guilt has less issues available to appeal; whereas a person who pleads Nolo Contendere can not only claim actual innocence on appeal, but can appeal such trivial claims like the denial of a motion to continue.
And while there are many judges that will only accept a Guilty plea, Judge Strickland is not one of them. My experience is that he routinely accepts Nolo Contendere pleas. So, for me, it will be interesting to see whether he would in this case.
My personal suspicion is that if push came to shove, he would allow a nolo contendere plea if it would avoid the necessity of a trial.
And from the State’s perspective, so long as she pleads and is “convicted,” they could still use the convictions as impeachment evidence even if she is appealing the underlying convictions while the Murder case is ongoing.
The pendency of an appeal … relating to such crime does not render evidence of the conviction from which the appeal was taken … inadmissible. Evidence of the pendency of the appeal is admissible. – Section 90.610(2), Florida Statutes.
A Slow Plea: Conduct a Trial
As any defense attorney worth his salt will tell you, there are certain clients who are oblivious to the evidence against them and want their day in court because they have rights! And sure enough, they do:
Sixth Amendment – Rights of Accused in Criminal Prosecutions
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
And while many defendants call this their constitutional right to a trial, evidence be dammed – we defense attorneys call this a slow plea.
Because after all of the evidence is presented, the jury decides whether the crime occurred – nobody else. And if the evidence is as overwhelming as it appears, the jury should have little trouble returning a guilty verdict as charged.
So even though we went through all of that constitutionally mandated “hassle,” we still end up back where we started – at the mercy of the court. Thus the term “slow plea.”
May the Court Have Mercy on Casey’s Soul
And whether by an open plea to the bench or by a long drawn out trial, Casey Anthony will most likely find herself at the mercy of Judge Strickland. And here is where things get interesting…
You see Casey Anthony is a First Time Offender, and Judge Strickland is prohibited by rule from immediately sentencing her to jail or prison if she is convicted. Rather, he is required to order that a Presentence Investigation be conducted before imposing sentence.
Ruled 3.710(a) – Presentence Report
In all cases in which the court has discretion as to what sentence may be imposed, the court may refer the case to the Department of Corrections for investigation and recommendation. No sentence or sentences other than probation shall be imposed on any defendant found guilty of a first felony offense or found guilty of a felony while under the age of 18 years, until after such investigation has first been made and the recommendations of the Department of Corrections received and considered by the sentencing judge.
Important for the defense, this Presentence Report can take up to three months to complete – and as you might guess, that could be just long enough to allow the Murder case to be started without Casey being formally convicted of the crimes.
But there is a catch, this rule does not apply if Judge Strickland sentences Casey to probation. See Cloutier v. State, 930 So. 2d 841 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (Rule 3.710(a) clearly mandates that the trial court first order a PSI before sentencing a first felony offender to more than probation… Thus, the trial court erred when it sentenced the appellant without first ordering a PSI.)
At this point many of you are likely cursing my name for saying such blasphemy as probation – and this is because you not only assume Judge Strickland will sentence Casey to prison but you believe he is required to sentence her to prison.
If only you knew (and you will).
Florida’s Criminal Punishment Code
In Florida all persons charged with felony offense are sentenced pursuant to a scoring system known as the Criminal Punishment Code (CPC). See Section 921.002, Florida Statutes.
In layman’s terms, the CPC assigns a numeric value to each criminal offense that a person has been convicted of and the resulting sum of those convictions dictates the judge’s sentencing options: (See Florida CPC Manual)
- If the total points equal or exceed 44 points, the judge is required to sentence the person to prison.
- If the total points are less than 44 points, the judge is not required to sentence a person to prison, but may still do so.
Now the 44 points also carries another magical consequence, any person sentenced to prison must be adjudicated guilty. On the other hand, a person sentenced to probation can, at the court’s discretion, receive a withhold of adjudication of guilt. And we all know why that is important – don’t we?
Nevertheless, at this point you are probably asking: “well what does Casey Anthony score already?” and it just so happens that I took the time to complete a sample CPC scoresheet (Download PDF) and she scores ….
43.6 points
Can you believe it? She scores 0.4 points less than the magical number of 44. And they say god doesn’t have a sense of humor!
So it appears that all is not lost for Casey Anthony, because Judge Strickland is not required to sentence her to prison – he is allowed, by law, to sentence her to probation…
(Note: A reader brought up the possibility of a juvenile record, which is something I had not considered. But to be accurate, a juvenile record is taken into consideration for scoring purposes. It would only take one felony or two misdemeanor juvenile delinquency convictions to cause her to score over 44 points.)
And the Plot Thickens
Now here is where things get dicey for me – because, as Blaise on WebSleuths would say, I am not Judge Strickland and he is not me, for I am the Walrus. Meaning that Judge Strickland has options at this point and only he knows what he will do.
On one hand, Judge Strickland is known as one of the fairest judges around and he might see the unfairness (from Casey Anthony’s perspective) of a first time offender being burdened with 13 felony convictions that are inextricably intertwined with the same murder case the State wants the convictions for in the first place. In which case he could throw Casey Anthony a lifeline by placing her on probation and withholding the adjudication of guilt.
On the other hand, this is, after all, the same judge who said:
The truth and Ms. Anthony are strangers.
56 responses to “Casey Anthony: Insufficient Funds Part Deux”
Very will put Mr. Hornsby. I do believe Judge strickland will give her time just by his statement way back in the beginning as you said “The truth and Ms Anthony are strangers. That spoke volumes! Congrats on you wedding. May you have a lifetime full of happiness.
Thank you.
Richard:
YOU ARE AWESOME! I would put u up against any Defense Atty. in Florida. It doesn’t hurt that you have a great sense of humor too! Oh, I’ve been a little pizzed at you a couple of times, but never have I questioned your brillance as an atty.
Hope u will answer this question. If Casey receives the DP, will she be housed on death row while all appeals are heard, or will she go to general pop.?
p.s. Your readers are not unfaithful….just the opposite! WE LOVE YA BOY!
I believe she would be housed on death row pending her appeal.
IMO it doesn’t matter to me if she is sentenced to probation on the check fraud charges. Big deal. She will do her time on the murder charge.
The reason that the possibility of probation is significant is that it allows Judge Strickland to Withhold the Adjudication of Guilt if he was inclined to do so – thus denying the State Attorney the ability to impeach her in the Murder case with the same convictions.
On the other hand, if she had scored mandatory prison, the judge would have no option but to adjudicate her guilty.
I loveeeeeeeeeeeee reading your articles! 🙂
Mr. Hornsby,
This was very interesting. The subjectivity of the punishment is surprising. If the judge places her on probation and withholds the adjudication of guilt, when does he have to make the final judgment? What if the murder trial is postponed for another year? Can he put off the ruling indefinitely?
Excellent article. You’ve covered all the bases here. Now I’m left wondering which strategy the defense will decide on.
If I read this correctly there is a possibility that due to the CPC score of under 44, Judge Strickland could sentence her to probation but it would have the same impact during the murder trial that a jail sentence would have because she has been convicted. Did I get that right?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and insights into the possible defense strategies, as well as related laws and procedures. It’s complicated for a layperson, but you explain it well.
Now I’ll go back and reread the article and will likely have more questions as I try to comprehend, or at least have a basic understanding of the case laws you cited and how they may effect Casey’s case.
I’d also like to join everyone else in offering my congratulations on your recent marriage!
I read the above comments that were posted while I was commenting. Now I’m confused. Why would the judge want to hold adjucating her guilty until after her murder trial? I’ll go back and reread the article.
Well, the judge may not want to wait to impose convictions, but the defense would sure like him to. And the point I was trying to make is that Judge Strickland may deem 13 felony convictions and unfair advantage for the State to obtain by trying the check fraud case first.
And because he has discretion over what sentence he can impose, he could circumvent the strategic value of trying the check fraud case first by withholding adjudication of guilt. While a likely unpopular decision, it is within his discretion to do so.
Richard, most excellent legal mind! You have answered all my questions about the FRAUD case, I had many!
I have a question that is driving me crazy! KC will most likely scream “ineffective counsel” as soon as she is convicted. jmo. It would seem that due to Baez’s “lack of experience,” he made many mis-steps at the beginning of this case, ultimately, resulting in Casey’s DP Verdict or Life In Prisionment.
While I certainly believe Casey should get the maximum penalty for murdering Caylee, I have to wonder if Baez told Casey “all we have to prove is Reasonable Doubt.” The Anthony’s were working full time on their “Reasonable Doubt Tour with Caylee sightings. While Reasonable Doubt seemed a lot more plausible BEFORE Caylee was found, thus far, nothing has been forthcoming that is REASONABLE from this defense.
Shouldn’t BAEZ have PLEAD Casey out before Caylee was found? “Is he GUILTY” of an “inexperienced attorney” that believed his client? Thanks
Well, the answer to your questions depends on whether Casey is in fact found guilty 🙂
With that said, it is my understanding that she was offered 8 years for everything prior to the body being discovered. In hindsight, that seems like a great deal.
However, when it was made to Baez, he may have realistically believed Casey. So it is hard to judge whether he made a mistake there. My gut feeling is probably, but then again, he may have recommended she take the offer, but she declined.
Not sure if it answers your questions, but is the best I can do.
Thank you for writing clear, understandable articles on the check fraud case. 43.6….oh well, her probation will be spent in prison, I’m sure. (but I can hope you are not good at math? 😛 )
Your site looks quite sharp! Did Mrs. Hornsby help in the layout? j/k
Richard, thanks for clearing that up to me. I have heard some of the Legal Analyst indicate that they thought Casey LIED to Baez & he believed her early on. Perhaps Casey lied to Baez until she was forced to be more honest with him. We know from Hoover depositions, that Dominic Casey & Hoover ONLY did computer searches for Zenaida G. Apparently, her family nor investigator, or Baez, believed the story about the nanny EXCEPT to claim there were 17 of them, none in which the PI’s interviewed.
It is unfortunate, imo, that Terrance L. left the case so early, you just have to wonder if the DEFENSE would be in this spot had better decisions been made.
Thank you, Mr. Hornsby, for putting together such a top-notch site/blog while at the same time, taking personal time to answer questions from those of us that are wrapped up in this case.
I do have one question though, that has bothered me for a long time.
In light of what we have seen and heard of Casey’s past. with stealing and passing checks, etc; I have been curious is Casey doesn’t have a juvi record buried in her past.
And, if she did/does, even though it is my understanding that most juvi records are expunged once they reach their legal age and have abided by all rules of any probation, restitution, public service and etc.
However, in light of the recent charges that she is facing, IF she did have past record, would these charges be able to be brought forth before the court and put in the open for her fraud trial, or, even for that matter, the upcoming murder trial?
Because, obviously, if she is sitting on a “silent previous record”, given that here she sits a few years later, it would show that she is indeed a repeat offender, on many levels.
I just find it difficult to believe that given what we have seen and heard from people that knew her, that she wasn’t stealing and had gotton caught before all of this.
We know that her Grandmother didn’t press charges, we know that her parents didn’t press charges in regards to the forged $4400 false deposit slip. {though I can’t imagine a bank letting that large of an amount slide even if her parents did make it good}
She had no active checking account and had utilize check cashing services, so, that would lead one to believe that she had a history of writing bad checks a LONG time ago.
At any rate – sorry for the rambling.
I’m just real curious if a past juvi record could be put forth to the court to show prior history of her being on a first name basis with the court and a probation officer.
Part of my other reasoning for having this thought, is because early on when they were in court for her bond hearing, {?} there was a woman on the stand that Casey had to report to weekly while she was out.
The judge asked her if Casey had a previous record, and the woman hesitated before having the judge clarify.
Thanks again for your time.
MysteryReader
Well, you raise an interesting issue that I had not considered. It is true that juvenile record delinquency convictions would be scored as prior record. And I am unsure if she was ever actually convicted of a juvenile offense – as opposed to being arrested for one. If she was, it would only take one felony or two misdemeanors to put her over the magical number of 44 – which triggers the mandatory prison sentence.
On the flip side, juvenile delinquency convictions cannot be used to impeach a person.
But thank you for raising this issue, as I had not considered the possibility of juvenile record.
Thanks for the reply Mr. Hornsby.
I was hoping that my inquiry wouldn’t be completely out there, whereby kicking me to the proverbial curb ~
I honestly believe that she has something in her past, just given what we have been privy to so far, and, given how her parents are so hell-bent on covering up everything that happens in that family – regardless of whom the bell tolled for.
So, this could put possibly put a tighter twist in their knickers……..
Richard,
Today’s the day! I hope that you will be there! I’m sure most attys. would enjoy the experience.
Nope, will be sitting at my computer watching it stream.
Great explanation of what can happen with these charges. After today’s hearing I smell a plea coming….soon! What say you?
Strickland also said there would be jail time for the fraud charges!
I agree with Judge Strickland. And was glad to hear him say the fruad trial will go before the murder trial and she will be given the same treatment and sentence as any other person in his court. And Aston was wonderful. Justice for Caylee.
I agree with you Yankee…..Justice for Caylee!
Thanks for making my day. And when you said you were “at a wedding in Key West,” your drollness reigned. In addition to a virtual Here! Here! I wanted to say that your blog reads like Dave Barry meets Stephen Hawking at the Court of St. James as told to James Thurber. Next, you need to write a book, if you haven’t entertained that idea already.
What’s your take on the “In Your Face” reporting from Kathy Belich? I must say it’s part of her job and she does it well. From a defense lawyer point of view….What would Hornsby do?
Kathi asked the tough questions…one’s begging to be answered. IMO, she is a lot like Richard….a dog with a bone….LOL.
I have no problem with in your face reporting, so long as the actual reports are substantiated by facts or applicable law. With that said, I did not see Ms. Belich’s report – but from what I have read, she is aiming to be the next the next Geraldo Rivera circa opening Al Capone’s vault.
I appreciate the answer. I asked you this out of reference to WFTV raw footage of Jose and Crew after trial. I forget you may have allegiance of sorts to networks. I was looking for how with Kathy and others persistance of questions could become a nuisance to the message you want to achieve as defense attorney for Casey Anthony. How did Conway do on TruTv today answering for George and Cindy? It intriques me to know how defense attorneys handle reporters who know as much if not more about a case than they may.
Mr. Hornsby… I really hope you are ‘busy busy busy’ writing your next article all about todays hearing. I’m ready to hear what you have to say.
I couldn’t believe my ears when I heard Casey tell Mrs. Lyons “Make it stop.” Does she think this is a playground?? That Mrs. Lyons is her bodyguard and Ashton and Drane are playground bullies?!?!? This girl is delusional!! I am still waiting for her “light” to come on and realize This Is NO Game.
I have a feeling that is what happened today, I interpreted her tears more as someone who realized that the jig is up.
I agree 100% Richard. And the state has filed a motion for KRonk’s ex-wifes. You know they want to Depo them and you can bet they won’t tell the same story as baez has. They do not want to go to jail for perjury for this guy or his client!
Mr. Hornsby, thank you for the information regarding FL criminal law as it applies to this case. Your writing is excellent and coherent. I found your outline of the various “strategeries” available to the defense very enlightening.
I would like you to consider one thing regarding Casey’s tears at Friday’s hearing; if you watch her right before she turns on the waterworks, she looks enraged, not scared, not upset, not worried… she’s pissed. Personally, I was unmoved by her crying. She’s a homicidal narcissist, incapable of compassion or guilt.
Morning Richard,
I agree with your “the gig is up” comment. I also got the impression, just a gut feeling, that Geo. and Cindy are finally coming out of denial, and are finally facing the truth about Casey being the killer. They appeared to sort of wither after listening to the Prosecutor describe the horrid slaughter of little Caylee. I think it hit them pretty hard, and the reality slapped them in the face. Perhaps now, the healing process can take place.
Andrea Lyons appears to have lost her fire. She should stick to her “inner city thugs” from Chicago. She did not impress me at all. I think the “gig is up” for her too.
All in all, it was a fairly predictable hearing. Bet u weren’t surprised at all…you nailed it before hand. I’ve read several polls about Casey and the DP…I am amazed at the number of people that want her to get the DP.
I can’t quote Judge Strickland verbatim, but for the most part he stated that KC sits at this time innocent until proven guilty, and if found guilty, she would be a first time offender. And she would be treated the same as anyone that is tried in his court, fairly.
You know more of Judge Stickland than any of us arm chair “attorneys”. What do you make of this statement?
Also, I noticed most of the motions and arguments gear at a guilty verdict in the capital case, is it because they are looking at the worst possible out come(for appeals purposes?)? Or do they know something we don’t?
I am working on a debriefing blog as I sit here and it will be up tomorrow.
But in a nutshell – he said that if she were found guilty he would sentence her to no more than jail, with sentences to be run concurrently. Because that is how he would sentence any first time offender.
Now under Florida law, the most a Judge can sentence a person to serve in jail is 1 year, any more and the judge is required to order the person serve their sentence in prison.
So considering Casey Anthony has already served more than 1 year in jail on the Check Fraud charges awaiting trial. It seems pretty clear that Judge Strickland would Adjudicate her Guilty and sentence her to “time served” on the Check Fraud case.
Thus the State gets its 13 felony convictions.
Also, did you notice that when the state started to speak regarding how a jury “might” find how Caylee died, KC first got her angry on, THEN broke down?
Glad someone else noticed that besides me! IMO.. She got mad because there WAS NO CHLOROFORM USED.. simple as that. THEN she got direction from Jose… now remember Jose DID tell her to cry but NOT to hide behind her hands and hair.. that my friend was guilt.. 100%! Guilt because the tape part is TRUE.
Agree– I noticed that immediately and I wasn’t even that close to the computer screen! It was SO obvious, especially since we’ve seen it before. Teeth gritting flash of rage, Ms. Lyon has been dealing with her client’s ability to handle this better. But real flash of rage.
My apologies if this has already been addressed, but I read in the Orlando Sentinel where the jail spokesman stated that all Mr. Baez has to do is request a room without cameras. It is really that simple? :/
LOL – Yes 🙂
Which proves Mr. Baez is really that “simple”
Is it then likely that Judge Strickland will mention that in his order, or would that be inappropriate since the issue at hand is actually the law and not Baez’s knowledge (or lack thereof) of the law and jail policy? (The Judge has to be silently shaking his head over some of this stuff).
Today as I was driving thru town there was Santa with a box collecting toys for the needy. I have no small children any longer and no grandchildren yet. I went into the store and purchased some toys. I asked the clerk could she staple the bags and may I borrow a sharpie. I wrote on them in memory of Caylee Marie Anthony. I then went back to santa and donated the toys in memory of Caylee Marie Anthony. And I do not live in FL. I bet her grandparents won’t even do that! There to busy spending blood money on their face lifts, tans and trips. I hope that the wrath of God comes upon this entire family. This baby should be home getting excited about Santa. Instead she is in a necklace on Spindy’s neck. So sad.
May I ask your opinion of Andrea Lyons performance yesterday? After all this hype of what a great Professor she is I was expecting a more professional arguement from her. I was really surprised of the amount of ahhhh, hmmmmm & ands she used. Seems to me she also talked down to Judge Strickland a few times. Another thing that bothered me is when she had her hand on Casey. Isnt that odd for a defense atty to do? It leads me to speculate on the reason she felt she needed to do that. Was it to restrain Casey in someway or was she offering comfort, which would suggest to me their relationship has went beyond professional to personal as well (Isnt that a big no-no?)
Richard,
Just awhile ago I was reading a blog where several people commented on the fact that if Casey is put into general pop. that one of the inmates will kill her. (like Jeffrey Dahmer).. What is your take on this?
I think it’s time the Defense to pull out all stops. They should begin with what a horrid mother Cindy was. Besides choking Casey, she called her awful names, threatened her, tried to control everything she did, phoned her constantly telling her to get home etc….she was a bitch, and I think it should be brought out. What do u think?
I do not condone killing, even if it is of a convicted killer – which Casey Anthony is not yet. But for what it is worth, I doubt a women’s prison can be compared to a men’s prison.
As for making Cindy the fall-person, I suspect that this will happen in the penalty phase (if we get there).
For crying out loud, how can everybody be blaming Cindy Anthony for Casey’s murder of Caylee???? However defective and deficient Cindy may be as a mother, she’s an amateur in comparison to her daughter. Casey Anthony, with her narcissism and sloth, has terrorized her family for years. She’s stolen money from them all, lied her ass off about everything (including accusing her brother of incestuous advances), went out partying all the time doing drugs & drinking, constantly left her child in the care of her parents and used that child as a weapon against them, slept with every man she ever met, and broke the hearts of everyone who has ever loved her and her child— and NOW she’s killed that angelic baby!
Cindy, on the other hand, has been a taxpaying, contributing member of society, or at least she was until Caylee was murdered. She raised her children in a well-kept home, saw to it that they were healthy and well fed, educated, protected from harm, helped provide for them and her husband, saw to it that they lived decent lives and did her best to be a good wife. She even took on the responsibility for raising her granddaughter. Is she demanding, difficult, even shrewish? Yes. Has she responded badly to the murder of Caylee? Yes. But who knows how any one of us would cope with this horror? I see Cindy, and George, as flawed parents who, nonetheless, worked hard and tried. They are broken, pitiful creatures who have lost their beloved granddaughter. They get my respect for that.
And they loved that child, they are not responsible for Casey’s actions, no matter how lacking their parenting may have been. Their family is destroyed, their lives will never be the same, they will have to live with the heinous crime their own daughter committed, for the rest of their lives. I’d say they have much to be angry about.
Richard, explain to this dummy please, if the adjucation of guilt in the check fraud charges gets delayed does that mean everything casey did while committing the check fraud (which is important to the timeline of caylee’s murder, it all ties in) won’t be allowed to be brought up at the murder trial? it is impossible to seperate her actions leading up to the murder, but if the adjucation of guilt is delayed……..
not sure i even made sense here but i’m sure you get my point
thanks so much !
disregard my previous question, i read through the comments and you already answered it. thanks 🙂
Well gee Yankee, give yourself a good pat on the back and tell yourself how wonderful you are while you are kicking people while they are down.
While I dont agree with some of C&Gs decisions in handling this matter, I dont think they are responsible for everything wrong in the world. May I point out that you have NO idea of the state of C&G’s finances. Can you prove that they have had facelifts? I doubt that they did. And yes they took a short cruise, I cant imagine anyone who needs a break more…
I hope in your debriefing you will comment on Ms. Lyons rebuttal to Mr Ashtons argument.
I thought it was weak, and I didn’t think the comment during rebuttal regarding the duct tape was appropriate during a motion hearing.
(I could be, and often am wrong.)
Mary Beth,
You’ve got it. That will be the Defense’s strategy and they actually think they can win or lessen the punishment on their client. Baez has sleazly alluded to this in a number of interviews. He can’t stand Cindy, either. But a Jury won’t buy it.
I served on a Grand Jury murder case. The woman had been abused by her husband and she killed him.
GJ didn’t cut her a break (I tried) and neither did the Jury.
I actually wonder if this murder case will go to trial. Will she plead? She won’t want to, of course, but if Lyon leaves and the Defense softens, it’s going to be inevitable.
Just to be a wise guy, did you intentionally name the title part one “uno” (spanish)
and part two “deux” (french)
Un (french)
Dos (Spanish)
LOL – You’re trilingual
Do you think Jose practices that “Jerk Smirk” in front of the mirror at home?
I think the reason for Lyon’s lackluster performance on Friday’s closing statements, was that she and Baez were not all prepared to see J Ashton go up to the dias and give his statement.
After all of the hoopla about the recent Lyon-Gate Tape, I bet they had their money on seeing more of LDB, and, had prepared themselves to that regard.
When Ashton went up, Baez, Lyon and Casey were “ash-white” ~
The state took them off guard, and they didn’t have anything prepared for that, and, Lyon lacked in her comeback.
She made a point to try to clean up, in regards to her thoughts about juries, but, she fell short and hard.
They had the wind whipped right out of their sails, and, it was painfully obvious in their short, tempered press conderance immediatly following court.
They should have played their Monopoly game better on Friday.
Their client is going straight to jail.