It was recently announced that Judge Strickland will address four of the Casey Anthony Defense Team’s motions at a hearing on December 11, 2009. They are:
- Motion to Preclude the Death Penalty Procedures
- Motion for a Protective Order Directing Orange County Jail to Destroy Videos of Family Visits
- Motion for a Protective Order Prohibiting Orange County Jail from Videotaping Attorney Visits
- Motion to Dismiss for Violation of Double Jeopardy Clause
The scheduling of the hearing on these motions provides not only a timely interlude in the progression of her Murder case, but also a timely and brief interlude from my two part series on her Check Fraud case (Casey Anthony: Insufficient Funds).
Unfortunately though, I think that this interlude will not provide Ms. Anthony with any early Christmas cheer, as it appears that Santa will not be giving her anything on her Christmas wish list – she must have been a naughty girl this year, tsk tsk…
Oh Casey, just what have your attorneys done?
Motion to Preclude the Death Penalty Procedures
This motion (while well intentioned) is your classic example of putting the cart before the horse.
Under Florida’s death penalty scheme, if a person is found guilty of a capital crime and a jury subsequently recommends a sentence of death, the court must first find that “sufficient aggravating circumstances exist” before it can actually impose the death penalty.
Section Section 921.141, Florida Statutes, states in pertinent part:
921.141 Sentence of death or life imprisonment for capital felonies; further proceedings to determine sentence.–
(1) SEPARATE PROCEEDINGS ON ISSUE OF PENALTY.–Upon conviction or adjudication of guilt of a defendant of a capital felony, the court shall conduct a separate sentencing proceeding to determine whether the defendant should be sentenced to death or life imprisonment
So as you can see, a condition precedent to seeking the death penalty is that the State first obtain a conviction for a Capital Offense. If they do not obtain a conviction for a capital offense, but rather a lesser included offense such as manslaughter, there will be no death penalty sentencing phase under Section 921.141.
Nevertheless, the defense is seeking to proactively prohibit the State from prosecuting this case as a death penalty case at all – and thus seeking the death penalty – because they believe the State would be unable to prove sufficient aggravating factors required to impose the death penalty.
As you might have guessed by now, we have not actually had a trial yet – thus we do not know if Casey Anthony will even be convicted of a Capital Felony. And even if the State does obtain conviction for a Capital Felony, we do not know what aggravating factors the State is able to prove – thus we have no way of knowing whether a death penalty would imposed be by the judge.
So until such time as the trial is held and the death penalty imposed, this motion is moot.
Prediction – Motion Denied.
Motion for a Protective Order Directing Jail to Destroy Videos of Family Visits
I can only scratch my head in disbelief at this motion – because Jose Baez is trying to argue with a straight face that videotaping Casey Anthony’s jailhouse visits with her friends and family somehow infringes on her constitutional rights.
The primary problem with this belief is that it is contrary to ALL established legal precedent.
And wouldn’t you know, the Florida Supreme Court just issued Jackson v. State, No. SC07-2008 (Fla. 2009), a case that dealt with an inmate who complained of the jail recording his “personal” calls.
Well the Florida Supreme Court was not very sympathetic, and held:
The Fourth Amendment right to privacy is measured by a two-part test:
- The person must have a subjective expectation of privacy; and
- That expectation must be one that society recognizes as reasonable.
A prisoner’s right of privacy fails both prongs because a prisoner’s privacy interest is severely limited by the status of being a prisoner and by being in an area of confinement that “shares none of the attributes of privacy of a home, an automobile, an office, or a hotel room.”
The court went on to state “society would insist that the prisoner’s expectation of privacy always yield to what must be considered the paramount interest in institutional security.”
Thus, “the Fourth Amendment proscription against unreasonable searches does not apply within the confines of the prison cell.”
So in a nutshell, the Florida Supreme Court said “too bad, so sad” to any privacy objections an inmate may have about a correctional facility recording their jail visits.
Prediction – Motion Denied.
Motion for a Protective Order Prohibiting Jail from Videotaping Attorney Visits
Now this motion is one that I think has some merit, but little traction – and here is why.
To begin, unlike her family visitations, Casey Anthony does have a subjective expectation of privacy in her meetings with Jose Baez based upon the Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of Counsel. And this is an expectation that society recognizes as reasonable. So the previously cited case law is not analogous.
Moreover, as a practicing criminal defense lawyer I can understand Mr. Baez’s concerns that his interaction with Casey Anthony is being videotaped IF the interaction involves her explaining or recreating certain aspects of the case – say explaining location, movements, distances, etc. Because viewing her actions is a violation of the attorney-client privilege.
And I understand his concerns based on first hand experience. As I too have had to make physical contact with a client in the preparation of a trial so that I could understand the clients physical point-of-view, prepare myself to cross-examine witnesses, and determine how to explain the client’s physical standpoint to a jury.
With that said, I have also been reprimanded by jail officials for that very same conduct – so I do not think they are singling out Mr. Baez, rather I think they are uniformly enforcing jail policy.
But from a legal perspective – I only think I would be entitled to object to the video taping if that video was being made available to the opposing prosecutor. At that point I think I would have an extremely strong argument that the jail’s act of allowing the prosecutor to view the video violates the attorney-client privilege.
And, as a matter of fact, a strikingly similar scenario recently played out in Broward County, where a prosecutor obtained and listened to jailhouse telephone conversation of an inmate and his defense attorney. (See Sun-Sentinel: Murder suspect seeks freedom after prosecutors snooped on calls to lawyer.)
Once made aware of this intrusion, the defense attorney moved to disqualify the entire State Attorney’s office because they had violated the attorney-client privilege and the trial court granted this request. The State appealed and the trial court’s order finding the State Attorney has violated the attorney-client privilege was upheld. See State v. Martinez, 4 So. 3d 712 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009).
However, I think Mr. Baez’s complaints are entirely different.
He has no proof – nor do I even believe he has alleged – that the State Attorney’s Office has reviewed the silent videotapes the jail maintains for security purposes. Rather, his complaint is that he is being videotaped in general.
But more importantly, he became aware of the jailhouse security videos not because they were released to the media, but because he was reprimanded after they saw him on the security video touching Casey Anthony – in violation of jail policy.
Thus he is complaining because he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar – naughty, naughty.
So, here is where I stand with this motion. I understand his concern, but absent any proof the State Attorney’s office is viewing the videotape, I do not believe he is legally entitled to any relief.
Prediction – Motion Denied.
Motion to Dismiss for Violation of Double Jeopardy Clause
The final motion to be heard involves the Check Fraud case, which you may remember charges Casey Anthony with 13 counts of either Uttering a Forged Document (Forging Checks), Grand Theft, or Fraudulent use of Personal Identification Information (Identity Theft).
Their primary argument is that Casey Anthony is being charged with three separate crimes for each singular act – thus a violation of the United States and Florida constitutions prohibition on being twice placed in jeopardy for the same offense. And under their theory, for each check of Amy Huizenga’s she forged and cashed, she should only be charged with one crime.
Unfortunately for Casey Anthony, nearly twenty years of established case law says her double jeopardy motion is untimely – and without legal merit. Let’s Discuss.
Untimeliness of Motion
Under Florida law, the appropriate time to raise a Double Jeopardy claim is after you have been found guilty – not before. The reason for this was best discussed in State v. Sholl, 1D08-4826 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), which held”
The trial court should not have considered the double jeopardy claim until sentencing. When an information contains two or more charges which amount to the same offense, “[d]ouble jeopardy concerns require only that the trial judge filter out multiple punishments at the end of the trial, not at the beginning.”
To this end, double jeopardy protections may not be extended to an earlier stage of the proceeding, such as the filing of the information or jury selection. Otherwise, the trial court would be “usurping the State’s discretion to make strategic decisions about charging alleged criminal activity.” Consequently, Sholl’s double jeopardy argument was premature and an improper basis for dismissal.
So without even getting into whether the double jeopardy motion is meritorious, it is clearly premature.
Legal Merit of the Motion
Even assuming the double jeopardy motion was timely, it seems clear the motion is contrary to established legal precedent.
Remember, their primary double jeopardy argument is that Casey is being charged with three crimes for every one act. Unfortunately for Casey though, the courts have a different take on her alleged conduct – meaning they see her as having committed three individual crimes each time she cashed a check of Amy Huizenga.
For example, in Sibley v. State, 955 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) the court ruled that convictions for organized fraud, fraudulent use of personal identification information and uttering forged instruments do not violate double jeopardy. Interestingly, the court did find that organized fraud and grand theft violated the double jeopardy clause.
And that is important to Casey Anthony’s case, because while she is not charged with Organized Fraud, she is charged with Grand Theft. Thus under Sibley, convictions for grand theft (since it is the same as organized fraud), fraudulent use of personal identification information and uttering forged instruments do not violate double jeopardy either.
Another case with a similar holding is found in Henderson v. State, 572 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) where the defendant was convicted of 14 counts of uttering forged instruments and 1 count of grand theft, which was based on the money she obtained by means of the same forged instruments (sound familiar). Henderson v. State is also cited with agreement by Sinclair v. State, 645 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)
The court rejected the defendant’s double jeopardy claims and held that separate acts were committed by uttering the forged instruments and by obtaining the funds because each had different elements.
Know Your Judge
Now before we go on any further, it is worth noting an important fact about both Sipley v. State and Sinclair v. State – and what is the fact you ask? Well they were both decided by the Fifth District Court of Appeals in Florida.
And, as you might have guessed, the Fifth District Court of Appeals is the appellate court that Casey Anthony would have to appeal to if she were ever convicted on the Check Fraud case. Gee, I wonder how they might rule?
Prediction – Motion Doubly Denied
Final Prediction: An Un-Merry Christmas
So something tells me the that Casey Anthony is going to have a very un-merry experience on December 11 and will head into 2010 with a lump of coal in her cell and a lot of soul searching to do.
127 responses to “How the Grinch Stole Casey Anthony’s Christmas”
Hmmm, still pondering all this!
What concerns me about “tiger’s” unseemly situation is this: IF it was a case of domestic violence and the police choose not to pursue that , how will the police feel if it happens again and Tiger is found dead?
If I wereTiger I would be very afraid.
Hell hath no fury like an elf-sized woman scorned.
@Jagstop
Hahaha…..I hope she beats the shit outta him with those clubs!
@texasgirl
Just please behave yourself this time around, I don’t want to have to put you in time out again 😉
Pinky swear, I will be good! I can hope Mrs. Tiger beats him with the clubs can’t I?????
All righty, here’s the question — as I understand it, the defense was funded by the family selling pictures & videos. I’ve seen no new pictures & videos for months now. I understand the $20K for the recent show, but the attorney got $3K, and taxes took another hit. I assume that market is dried up. Can we assume the money has run out? And, if Baez took this case thinking it was gonna be a cash cow and he was gonna be the next Joe Tacopina (I had to google ‘Melonie to cut up her husband’ to find the spelling, is he now sitting there, losing money with every one of these motions?
Blaise
You reckon she used a nine iron?
Blaise (I don’t play golf. If I wanted to whomp my husband with a golf club, I wouldn’t know what club to use. This bothers me . . . )
@Blaise
Oh, honey any club will do!
Does Baez’s motion include wanting ALL videos destroyed between him & Casey up to now AND prevent any from now on? If so, I’m wondering if he had indeed passed notes/letters to and from Casey’s family… and that could be why he’s filed this?
Thanks for toning down your sarcasm, RH – you are now coming across in a much more professional manner!
@Just Me
Well, if you noticed WJS was much more toned down today and ACCURATE on the law. So I feel I had a positive effect on WJS. So as long as he behaves – I’ll behave 🙂
@texasgirl
Well, if I were to do such a dastardly deed, I’d want to do it . . . competently.
Blaise
@Blaise
His television time is invaluable advertising, otherwise I have no information/knowledge/opinion about where he gets his money or how he is getting paid/staying in business.
but what about my first question, lol
@Just Me
I think he is asking for all video to be destroyed. But I am not sure. As for letter passing, I don’t think that is why he is asking.
OH my gosh..
I have not read your post yet.. as you know.. loves2shop – loves2talk.. LOL
I just had to say that I am rolling over here!! You put up the Grinch video !!
Your really getting a sense of humor Richard.. : )
Based on the youtube video, is it safe to assume George is the little dog with the tree branch antlers?
I predict Judge Strickland will throw the defense a few bones. He seems to have a pattern of giving a little to both sides. So if this is the case again, what issue will he be most lenient on? I just can’t see him denying all defense motions, it would surprise me.
Oh, you are in so much trouble with Cindy, Mr. Hornsby. Too funny. On a serious note, do you think that Mr. Casey will be able to get out of his deposition next week?
Interesting article..
What the hell? Okay Mr. Hornsby you now owe me a new keyboard!!! I just spit my coffee all over the damn thing. Thank you for the insightful blog and that hysterical video.
MOTION DENIED : )
I think the videos should be sealed. That way the state can use them at trial without the grandstanding.
Where is the soil report? It was released weeks ago to defense. Baez seemed so preocupied after seeing them.
Excellent breakdown of the motions. Thank you for providing us with an unbiased, easy to understand explanations of Florida laws. I’m confident that Judge Strickland will rule fairly throughout the trial. Some decisions we won’t understand because we don’t know the law. Your taking the time to explain how laws are applied is invaluable.
BTW did you post part two of the fraud case or is that still to come?
RH, Enjoyed you column today, insightful/informative. I enjoyed all the JAIL HOUSE Videos, they showed Casey consistently LIED to LE as well as her parent’s long after Caylee was missing and showed us who she really is, a self absorbed spoiled brat trying to get away with murder.
What part of the JAIL HOUSE Videos will the STATE use in Casey’s murder trial? These tapes are all over youtube. , why in hell does BOZO think he could get them sealed? LOL!
Good, understandable article as usual. It doesn’t look like Casey will have much to cheer her when these motions are ruled on. I especially liked reading about the double jeapardy motion because it was explained just as many in blogdom had speculated was the case. It was nice to have an expert confirm it and give examples of why the motion won’t fly. I suppose if the motion concerning the stopping of attorney/client videotaping were granted you and your collegues would like that. I don’t know why those meetings would be taped-couldn’t a jailor just watch over them (in an area where they can’t hear the exchange)?
Loved the sense of humor, too!
@nora
No, I think he will have to testify.
@NosyParker
Part two of the check fraud series will probably come out Monday.
@Blaise
I have wondered the same thing about whether Baez is actually losing money. Just paying for all of these “experts” not only to examine evidence now, but to fly them out for trial and pay them for their time & testimony.
How much does something like that cost????
Dominic Casey, from what I understand was NEVER even paid by Baez when he worked for him, which makes the assertion of “attorney client privilege” ridiculous, but that seems to point to money issues early on.
I have thought perhaps Baez had Casey sign something agreeing to pay him later after, say, writing a book and Cindy testified Casey left the home with pics and videos. If that was Baez’s agreement then he is crazy cuz that means he has to pay everything up front? And if he loses he’ll never be paid???
Would love your input on this Hornsby. What kind of arrangement would you make with a unemployed, yet high-profile client like Casey? How much do you estimate all of the experts and such will cost and who pays them?
@Richard Hornsby
I would think you would have better things to do than to harp on Mr. Shaeffer and go to message boards. This blog should be your media room …period. I do believe you are a smart young attorney who really could make a difference. Your sarcasm is not very professional. JMO and I could be your mother young man..so no smart remarks. Stick to the law.
Just an “off the top of my head question”…Could Baez be aiming to declare those tapes Casey’s property and then later on down the yellow brick road use them for financial gain?…as in just fixing to get his $$$$$ versus his come-uppance!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8wU_vattxg&feature=channel ( VIEW FULL SCREEN)
Hey Richard..
I can’t believe you found that “CINDY-SEPARATED-AT BIRTH-VIDEO”!….When it first came out , I emailed it to the law offices of M AND M ; they deserved to laugh their a$$es off…
If you liked that video , you will LOVE this one of CINDY ,GEORGETTE, LE-EVIL, and MALL-HO-Y on their cruise…
P.S…Take special note of GEORGETTE LAP DANCING!!
violette
hey Richard…
1) Will you please discuss further why DOMINIC CASEY will be ordered to testify?.(Of course we all know he is buried in a pile of perjury.I am so looking forward to hearing “diana-who-doesn’t -bother-to-read-the-discovery-tennis” try to “splain” her way out of his infinite lies..
thanks , violette
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RymcMEqpEg&feature=channel (VIEW FULL SCREEN)
MORE HOLIDAY CHEER FOR CASEY ANTHONY!
Oops, Richard , I think you got punked by being immortalized in this video after you got into that “MEOW-CATFIGHT” with WJS…Don’t shoot the messenger……
P.S….I loved your article and I am glad that have a good sense of humour…..sincerely, violette
Hi Richard~~you mentioned that trying to get the DP off the table would be like trying to put the cart before the horse. Terenence Lenamon was brought in to get the DP off. Didn’t he know that his efforts were premature?
Richard~~BTW, excellent write-up and I like the way you state the facts.
With the DP off the table, would that not mean that a death penalty jury would not have to be picked? They could just go for a non-death penalty jury. This, I assume, would favor the defense tremendously. TIA for your response.
Richard~~this is your lucky day. It’s me again.
When a person is charged with Murder 1, isn’t the DP and LWOP automatically on the table? The state took the DP off the table just prior to the remains being found in Dec/08. In order for them to take it off, didn’t it have to be on there to begin with?
I am just an armchair detective wanna be. Can you explain this in layman’s/laylady’s terms for me.
Mr. Hornsby. I’m a new reader here. I really appreciate the time and effort you’ve put into these blogs. Thank you so much!
@Sammy
Well, obviously I don’t have anything better to do; and personally I enjoy harping on Mr. Sheaffer. I especially loved how scared he was to say anything negative in his most recent raw video commentary. Don’t fool yourself, he knows he was in the wrong and he is watching what he says.
As for being my mother, I doubt it; my father would be 84 right now (then again, he only dated women half his age).
@snoopysleuth
That is correct, if the State Attorney’s intention was not to seek the death penalty upon conviction, then a death qualified jury would not need to be picked.
Generally, the State Attorney indicates their intention to seek, or not to seek, the death penalty by filing a notice indicating their intention – as was done TWICE in Ms. Anthony’s case.
@violette
I resent any implication that I am handsome or ethically challenged! Now smarmy, I think I could live with that….
Richard~~thanks so much, I really appreciate you finally clearing that up for me.
Obviously you don’t have anything better to do….so sad. I would hope you had some interesting cases you could share with us. BTW I didn’t detect any fear in Mr. Shaeffer’s demeanor. I never FOOL myself my dear 😉 I think we shall have to agree to disagree in who was wrong.
Now, are you able to get the latest accounting on Casey’s financial account? Many of us are interested as to whether her parents are contributing or is most of the monies still coming from strangers.
Richard~~just out of curiosity, what personal contact would an attorney have to make with his client at the jail? Arm wrestling to see if he/she was strong enough to commit a crime. I cannot see why Baez would not want to be on video when he is with his client. I doubt if the guards who are observing from the outside can lip read.
If a client decided to attack his/her attorney, inside their conference room and the guard’s head was turned, wouldn’t video surveillance be classed as a measure of security. Maybe you are concerned that the body language between attorney/client may be revealing?
What is the difference in these DP attorneys’ roles? Lennamon sent a letter to the State to take the DP off the table (or was it to keep it from being put on the table?) and Lyon’s role is to remove the DP altogether. There was the intent to seek the DP twice but was the DP on the table the first time? Sorry, I’m a bit confused about these two DP incidents. 🙁
@snoopysleuth
And Terrence did it the correct way – by writing a letter outlining the reasons they would not be able to obtain the death penalty even if she was convicted. The State Attorney is free to reject his “opinion” and try anyway.
On the other hand, what this motion is trying to preclude is the State from even trying to seek the death penalty even if she is convicted by arguing that the State could never meet its burden.
However, the state is entitled to first try and meet its burden and THEN the defense can argue they can’t even meet the legal threshold for the imposition of the death penalty.
@snoopysleuth
I discussed this in my blog, but what if a person was on trial for getting in a fight during an arm wrestling match. Wouldn’t it be important to explain and show how the fight broke out?
As for you other point, I think this video sums up the importance of your answer.
Sherry~~Well it’s an ‘intention’ versus the real thing. No wonder lawyers make good politicians. I am going back to apples and oranges. Lenamon sent the state a letter to take the orange off the table. Someone had to put that orange on there to begin with. If the state had only intended to put it on there, why the hoot would Lenamon want to get something off that he didn’t know if the state was going to put it there to begin with.
I am gonna go and make some apple sauce or orange dip.
Richard~~ a family member was with Corrections Canada for 22yrs. A female guard in an all male prison. She was also mediator in a few hostage takings. One being a nurse who worked at the prison, taken hostage by an inmate, raped and held for hours. The big house is no picnic and I have heard alot of horror stories, all held in confidence, of course.
Richard~~thank God for your patience. Your great info is starting to sink in to his noggin’.
Thanks for being here and interacting with your commenters. It is a welcome change from another blog that I seldom visit any more. Have a great night.
oops *this noggin’
Thanks! Your answer to Snoopy cleared my confusion up.
By golly! I think I’ve “got it”! lol
My comment, #26-
I suppose if the motion concerning the stopping of attorney/client videotaping were granted you and your collegues would like that. I don’t know why those meetings would be taped-couldn’t a jailor just watch over them (in an area where they can’t hear the exchange)?
Ugh. After watching that inmate attack video I guess you and your collegues would NOT want to see the video security banned. I hope that you are never attacked by a client. Scary.
Sherry~~when you have video camera surveillance stationed in different sections of the jail, I thought they all can be viewed from one station. Let’s say you have a dozen lawyers visiting their clients at a certain time. You have to get 12 guards stationed outside each one of those conference rooms. That’s alot of manpower that the state has to pay for. One guard can monitor those dozen cameras fixed on the lawyers and their clients from one base station. It is the same as a television station monitoring all the different channels.
The Not Guilty plea was to the charge of First Degree Murder, it matters not which sentence the State later decides to seek (since she presumably knew the death penalty was a possibility).
Insanity is technically an affirmative defense that admits to the crime, but says she is legally excused from the consequences of her conduct. She could “basically” raise it at any time prior to trial (I am simplifying the procedural requirements).
Frosty~~forgive me for stepping in here but I think Jose Baez advised his client to plead ‘not guilty’ as this is the norm.
Terry Lenamon and Baez differed on the ‘insanity’ plea and Terry made his exit from the case. I am sure that Baez must have advised Casey that the ‘intention of the DP’ was on the table when she pled ‘not guilty.’ Baez made a huge blunder when he did not ask Casey to take a plea bargain over a year ago. JMO
Richard will correct me.
I really appreciate the legal analysis of the motions.
While I understand the “fun” aspect of the Grinch clip, it seems to me a bit of a cheap shot. I know Cindy has chosen the confrontational approach, and I can’t understand it any better than the average bear, but anyone could pick stills from a confrontational video and make someone look foolish. It may be entertaining, but it’s ultimately not productive.
Anyway, thanks very much for helping the general public to follow along with the legal proceedings. The guidance is very valuable to people not so knowledgeable about the protocol, FL law, and the law generally.
Frosty~~I cannot see Casey taking an insanity plea, even temporary insanity. It appears she has all the traits of a sociopath which does not fall under an insane category. It is too bad that Casey’s parents didn’t see she had some ‘temper management’ therapy. Living with such a controlling mother must have been he** for Casey. I think she was like a walking time bomb which eventually exploded. A house with two sociopaths holds one too many.
Mr. Hornsby.. not only are you very intelligent and helpful, but entertaining too.. This piece is hilarious!! But I love your PREDICTIONS… Dont tell us you are a pyschic too? LOL… NO seriously what you have stated does make a lot of good sense and I can see why you are as successful as a lawyer as you are…
I have a question, Why would Judge Strickland even entertain these motions with a hearing?
Wanna do a bombshell blog?? Let’s talk about the funding of this fleet of attorneys and how it works for someone who can’t afford a can of Gas…… Talk about some hits on your website, a serious factual discusssion of this I promise……
Please? I dare you…..lol
hey Richard….
I think it would be better if you moved your CUTE HEAD icon to the right side of the page ( like it was before) …That way , anyone who wants to read only YOUR comments does not have to weed through all the other comments..pretty please?..thanks , violette
Hey Richard..
Based on the law, why do you feel that DOMINIC-SLEAZE-BALL-CASEY will not be ordered to testify?…Enquiring minds need to know…violette..
Hi Violette. I hope you don’t mind me clarifying in regards to Dominic Casey testifying, Richard replied to another commenter’s same question:
“No, I think he will have to testify”.
I’ve noticed that other experts are saying the same thing. It should be interesting.
Didn’t the court decide that Mr. Casey WILL be deposed, just that his deposition was moved ahead to December 16th? Or is this another decision to be argued at the coming hearing, and thus the subpoena’s for George and his wife and their lawyer? If I recall correctly, there was some statement regarding Mr. Casey’s deposition, that moving the date from November to December, would give Mr. Casey time to prepare. Why would he need this time to prepare for this specific date, if the 16th is not confirmed? There must be an order filed with the court, or would the judge just warn Mr. Casey via Ms. Tennis, that he needs to be prepared for the 16th ‘just in case’?
she’s gonna have to search for her soul before she can do soul searching.
She definately needs to see the Wizard, maybe he can give her a heart and a brain…
Hi Richard~~Do you think that Judge Strickland will have a jury picked in another county and then bring them to Orlando and sequester them there for the murder trial? This will save alot of tax dollars for the state.
When Casey gets sentenced in the check/fraud, will she be tranferred to a prison or remain at the Orange County jail to await the murder trial?
This is just an assumption, if she is transferred to a prison, she would be put in with general population? This sentence does not warrant being put in protective custody as the murder 1, no doubt will, as it involved the murder of a child.
I have previously stated that I believe that the jury will be picked in another county and then sequestered in Orange County for the trial. The reason being is that there are over 275 witnesses in the case, it would be cost prohibitive to house them in another county.
If convicted of the check fraud charges before the murder case, she would stay in the Orange County Jail until the murder trial is concluded.
Richard~~thank you once again sir! You are so very kind to take time out of your busy schedule for us. It does not go unnoticed.
Richard, if I keep coming here, I will have to put you on retainer.. LOL
The state attorney got Judge Strickland to unseal George Anthony’s testimony at the grand jury, due to possible inconsistencies in George’s prior depostion etc. Will we, the public, even be privy to the GJ testimony?
Okay….at least 2wise Baez was asked to refrain from touching his client. There was no reenactment of a crime to be done. She was never attacked by the phantom Nanny. Therefore would be no need to touch Casey Anthony.
Lets not forget that he also brought clothing to the jail early on that had, what he knew, was illegal items in the pockets or socks. It is his JOB to check the items before turning them over. And a bracelet in the pocket or stuffed in a pair of socks could be felt with a simple swipe of the hand. He passed that off on Cindy Anthony. But ultimately it was his JOB to check the clothing.
It is his JOB to know the regulations of the jail. Its 101 basic knowledge and written on every corner….. DO NOT TOUCH THE INMATES….. once I could understand…. needed a little feel. But after being told and the fact he had might be able to read….. well it goes to reason that he feels that he is above the law and regulations of the Orange County Jail.
His past actions have shown he cannot be trusted to abide by the rules of the Jail.
IMO He has a lot of nerve to even ask them to bend the rules for him or his client. If he does not like the rules then he is in the wrong business. I hear there is a job opening at Taco Bell….. with a little name badge with his name on it. Pays good….
If Baez is such an up and up lawyer he would have no need to ask that the tapes be destroyed.
If there is no crime – no foul – why would he even need to ask?
A special Master needs to be appointed to go over every tape…..
Baez is surely wanting something destroyed…. that will bite him in the butt.
Richard,
You are brillant! Love this blog! Bet ‘ol Andrea Lyons doess’t “skeer” you one bit!
Personally, I think they shoud get the Anthony case moving…far too much time has passed in my opinion.
I have seen Shaeffer/Belich on television more than once. I think you should be next, don’t you?
Hope u r considering writing a legal thriller. You’ve got what it takes to be a great writer.
I’m hoping to unleash the lawyers, to weigh in on this breaking news regarding Tot Mom’s parents and their attorney being subpoenaed for the hearing on Dec. 11th!! In your expert opinion, which side has subpoenaed them and in regards to which motion? Okay, I’ve watched too much Nancy Grace but I am serious about my question.
I’ve racked my brain and guess that maybe it relates to the hardship they’re suffering from not being able to visit their daughter without video being immediately released in the media. But then why include Brad Conway in the subpoena?
I don’t see a motion that relates to Dominic Casey on the docket, but thought maybe it relates to who he is legitimately working for and when he was retained. It’s my understanding that a PI does not have any privilege other then attorney client work product, so he would have to be working for an attorney not just George and Cindy to be covered. Was he retained by Brad Conway prior to Dec. 11th which I thought was the day Conway was retained by the Anthonys. I really don’t think so. Care to share your thoughts?
Well, the clerk’s docket does not show courtesy copies of the subpoenas having been filed, so I question whether they were actually subpoenaed to testify.
The reason being is that a subpoena is not a prerequisite to being allowed to testify; rather, a subpoena is only required to compel a reluctant or uncooperative witness to testify.
This means that Jose Baez could verbally request their agreement to testify – and they say yes.
So, the reports of George, Cindy, and Brad being subpoenaed could actually just be reporters inferring they must have been subpoenaed because Baez said they would be testifying.
I suspect Baez wants them to testify about how humiliating/traumatic their interviews being shown is on them, etc.
Interesting! No sign of subpoenas, hmmm, I wonder if the state recollects all the set up questions the parents were using those same videos to help their kidnap/threats/fearful Casey who would lie, steal, do anything to get her child back, scenario along. Thanks for checking for us!!
Great question Nosy! Can’t wait to hear Mr. Hornsby’s take on these subpoenas.
Subpoenaed by State of Defense?
Richard~~I read your bio, very impressive. Actually I was being nosey and wanted to find out your age and your marital status. I figured, if you have a bethrothed, she is dragging you around the malls Christmas shopping and you will be too busy to come in here and answer our very pertinent questions. Now do you believe that is the real reason I was being a snoopysleuth?
We do have some hungry grizzly bears up here in the north. Well they are in hiberation now but in the spring, I would love to see you wrestle one of those.
Dec 11th is going to be a busy day for Stan Strickland. I can already see his arms flailing like he would like to fly out of there. I hope you can pop in and give us your take on why George, Cindy and Conway has to testify to whatever. Maybe you can shed some light on the ‘whatever.’ TIA
Richard I hope you are right.
On another subject I would have more respect and you would have more credibility with many if you would offer Bill Sheaffer an honest sincere public apology. It seems as though you have no respect for your elders and at the very least it makes you look desperate and tacky. I think it would earn you a lot of Boy Scout points if you would do so.
Like almost everyone I am glad to have heard the real Andrea Lyon. I had heard about her before but it’s not the same as hearing it for yourself. What a shame. I weep for America.
Do you think that Judge Strickland is aware that “the Florida Supreme Court just issued Jackson v. State, No. SC07-2008 (Fla. 2009)?” I ask this because he has made a few decisions that many thought he would not make and I’m starting to wonder if he stays current on the laws. He needs to grab this case by the balls and establish at least the semblance of a respected judiciary proceedings. I mean, good grief! Act like the judge and reign this thing in. Please? Doesn’t he realize we, the taxpayers of Florida have heard and seen enough?
And then to see Georgette prancing in with a beach t-shirt on and sunglasses with Cindy chomping on her gum, some psychotic blogger asking to meet the Judge after court? What next? Maybe they’ll set up a cappachino bar near the back of the room and schedule in some coffee breaks and a nice meet & greet? Everyone loves Judge Strickland but that’s not the point. The point is the defense has turned this into a horse & pony show and the Judge needs to find a way to stop it.
I would be more than happy to offer Bill Sheaffer a sincere and honest apology when he admits he lied and deceived to obtain the seminar audio, when he admits he has misstated the law on more than one occasion (or he can just admit he doesn’t know the law), and when he admits he lied in his “response” to the sentinel TV guy about how he is a professional and has been truthful to his viewers….
I mean, I am not asking for a lot in exchange for a sincere and honest apology – just the truth.
Richard,
I hope that you, and Andrea Lyon, Baez and other defense attys. are enjoying your moments of “sweet revenge.” As you know, Mr. Shaeffer is not responding to his blog at this time, nor is he in the media. Actually, you and Ms. Lyons are very similar in many ways, IMO.
Personally, I think the Casey Anthony trial is dragging on far too long. The FACTS are all in place, as far as I know. I think this case should get moving, despite Lyon’s desire for self promotion, and the fact that she wants to sell her “sef-serving” book.
Frankly, I think we will be hearing more from Mr. Shaeffer fairly soon. I also think that he is not above apologizing…just not on demand.
Andrea Lyons GREATLY underestimates the people of Orlando! I have NEVER heard of a reasonable person brag on themselves like she does. (I mean quoating her IQ, and being a “Pioneer” etc…) I find her very distasteful, and feel that she is going to fall on her a$$ when this case goes to trial. JMO She strikes me as the type of atty. that would try to get pedophiles, and serial killers paroled. Her type scares the hell out of me!
You should attend some continuing legal education seminars more often, basically all they are is a bunch of lawyers talking about how good they are, how much smarter they are than their opponent, and how right they are.
As for Sheaffer, he dug his own hole. It’s not my fault I called him out AND was right.
Iseeyou the fact that you felt the need to call George Anthony Georgette would also be considered tacky to many. You aren’t the first and you won’t be the last to resort to name calling to get your point across. I’ve done it myself as I’ve followed tis case. It does however, undermine your credibility, especially when you’re chastising someone else for showing a lack of respect to others.
That being said, I’m interested in your opinions on the Jackson vs State case and in what ways it relates to the Casey Anthony case. I did google it but wasn’t sure exactly what you’re referring to. Would you care to elaborate for those of us who are interested, but have limited criminal law knowledge?
NoseyParker, you’re right. I am a real jerk. Not only was I rude, I lied about the psychotic blogger. I know for a fact by listening to the raw footage of the hearing that it was clear the judge asked to see him, not the other way around. Now, I want to take that greased gavel home with me. All alone. Me & the gavel. Oh boy.
Sorry, I was the jerk.
Mr. Hornsby, with all due respect, tearing down one person to make yourself appear better is not very becoming. IMO It gives out the impression that the one doing the tearing down, either has a self esteem problem or a narcissistic problem. Again JMO.
I am hard pressed to understand how a good and busy attorney has the time to post on the internet all day long and into the late night. But alas again, JMO.
My personal opinion on the Anthony case is to let it play out in court not on internet blogs. The defense will throw out tons of motions, to delay and try to confuse everyone. It is basically standard procedure, especially when they are dealing with a guilty client.
The defense, despite all their lip service will never get around the waiting 31 days before admitting to Casey’s mother that Caylee was missing. They will never get around the death smell in the car that both George and Cindy both admitted to people on numerous occasions at the onset, before they devised the rotting pizza story, which quickly became a laughable theory.
One thing is for certain, despite all the sleuthing and blogging from many sources, ie “so called experts”, nothing can truly be 100 per cent predicted until the case actually begins. It really doesn’t matter what anyone second guesses before the fact, what will matter in the end run is what the 12 jurors think and how they perceive the evidence presented during trial .
The entire Anthony family are very unlikeable people and no one person will be able to change that, ie the old saying “You can’t make a silk purse out of a sows ear” and clearly the entire Anthony family give the appearance of being the sows ear.
Just one unimportant persons opinion. (mine) Thank you for letting me vent.
Can’t find any direct reference to the subpoena’s for the Anthony’s and for Brad Conway. Second hand sources, except for some news sites, anyone have a source? Docstoc does not have anything uploaded for this yet.
Has the family done right by their daughter Casey, by taking solid and seemingly unmoveable position that ‘she is innocent’? After reading what appears to be a post by Cindy Anthony on wdbo board, they will fight this if it means ‘bankrupting the State of Florida’. They will sue the likes of Nancy Grace, for her contribution to a poisoned jury pool (for every penny they have).
It will never change, it seems, even if Casey pleads to the child’s demise, because it will only be a plea to save her from being strapped down and poisoned by the state. No one will ever take responsibility, never Casey– will this young girl be Cindy’s girl martyr, the 21st Century’s Joan of Arc? That’s the impression that ‘whiteknight’ (whomever that Casey supporter is) gives.
Innocent or nothing, even if a plea, she will do it to save her parents from her death. (or better yet, be the new age Joan– just that her pole is a stripper pole)
KI:
IMO the Anthonys have made a huge mistake by continueing to “insist that Casey is innocent.” Since they first smelled the decomp in the car I think they have known the truth, and that’s when they first started protecting her. They did the best they could to clean out the car, washed the slacks that Casey left in the back seat, gave LE the wrong brush, and pretended to believe the Zanny story even to the point of saying “they had her phone number.” The lies are going to come back and slap them in te face. Had they stayed away from the media, and just kept quiet, they would have saved themselves alot of unneccessary pain and suffering. I think that’s why Casey got away with so many things that she did, the lying and stealing, going to wild parties etc…they chose to “look the other way.” I feel that they loved little Caylee; but they loved Casey more. They knew they ccouldn’t bring Caylee back so they chose to protect and try to save Casey. No matter what they say or do, or who they try to shift the blame to (Kronk, Jesse Grund etc…) it not going to work. They, and the great Lyons, Bozo, and the dream team, have all UNDERESTIMATED the people of Florida! Justice for little Caylee WILL BE SERVED!
Doesn’t it seem as if the defense already assumes Casey as tried and convicted, with so much public emphasis on the DP, this might work against them. (of course they need to prepare for mitigation, but this much emphasis almost works against mitigation– it’s all talk as if she’s already convicted, so who is really making the jury pool think she actually may be guilty, it could be Casey’s own defense, and own ‘whiteknight’ making so much of the anti-DP argument, that one might think this is the best they can do– get the whole state to reverse it’s laws. That will come a bit late for the ‘innocent Ms. Casey’.
KI: Remember Dec.11 the Defense is going to try and have the DP taken off the table for “lack of evidence.” That’s why they are throwing Roy Kronk, and anyone else they can ome up with, under the bus. They are desperately trying to plant that “seed of doubt” in the juror’s mind, no matter who it hurts! IMO Kronk’s ex-wives are shameful. Guess it’s true, “MONEY TALKS.” The Anthonys are a prime example. Little Caylee has become nothing more than a meal ticket for them. This tiny little child was brutally slaughtered and duct taped while looking into the eyes of her vicious murderer! How quickly the Anthonys appear to have forgotten! How can they say they “loved Caylee” when their actions clearly say otherwise??
Mr Hornsby, I’m going to guess, if it’s true the anthony’s are going to testify on the 11th, that Baez is the one asking for the testimony.
I’m almost certain he will claim, along with conway, that it is a hardship, embarassing, and an invasion of their privacy to have calls, and visits monitored and released to the public.
I can’t think of anything else they can testify to at this point.
What do you think?
Thanks
I agree with your assessment.
ps were is part 2 of the fraud blog?
The state wants them there. D. Casey and his lawyer as well. I think that state will want to lay the foundation for their depo on the 16th with all the players in the room and putting theAnthony’s under oath! Baez has nothing to do with it!
I Don’t think the state asked them to testify. I think Baez did. No one reported that subpoenas were ever really issued.
I doubt the state needs their testimony at this point.
I hope Mr. Hornsby will clarify.
I’m talking about Friday’s motion hearing.
But the double jeopardy isn’t taken into account until sentencing.
to quote Mr. Hornsby “So without even getting into whether the double jeopardy motion is meritorious, it is clearly premature”.
And that doesn’t involve George or Cindy. The Judge determines that. Their testimony wouldn’t have any affect on it.
I think Baez asked them to testify, for the reasons stated above.
Frosty:
I’m impressed with your well informed answers. Perhaps you can answer this for me: Why are we not hearing more from Bill Shaeffer and Cathy Belich? I miss them, and hope it is not a “legal issue.”
Since lying is a way of life for the Anthonys, I hope they try to lie while under oath to Judge Strickland. His response will be interesting to see. It’ time for the shameful people to cut the crap, and learn that they can’t go through life lying! They are disgraceful.
I’m very curious what Conway would be testifying about, if he has actually been subpoenaed. He is their attorney, not their shrink, so who cares what his opinion is on how the release of videos effects the Anthony’s mental health or well being.
Frosty, Casey is not being charged with any crimes related to stealing from her family. At least nothing has been released so far indicating that she is. I can see the state calling the Anthony’s as witnesses during the trial, but not now. Of course like you, I’m not an expert. Hopefully Mr. Hornsby will respond and straighten us all out.
Is the court going to address the motion regarding Dominic Casey on Friday? If so, maybe that is where Conway’s testimony would come in. For attorney client privilege, there has to be an attorney involved. Mind you, at the time of the searches (November15th) Mark Nejames was still representing the Anthony’s, not Conway.
I recall a motion to exclude prior bad acts in the fraud trial, but it was my understanding that would be dealt with in an evidentiary hearing. It’s too confusing for me. Hopefully this will be answered in part two of the fraud post.
Richard, the natives are getting restless. Part dos, please.
Part Deux tomorrow night, got married over the weekend 🙂
That is grand news!
Be happy
and remember
men are bas#ards
women a bi#ches
SO GET OVER IT AND LEARN TO WORK WITH WHAT YOU HAVE…. NOT FOR WHAT YOU EXPECT.
Because if you don’t counting on someone else… you will not be disappointed when they let you down. And it will be a joy when they come though.
Married for 30 years and I can honestly say I love my spouse more today than I did the day we married.
Congrats!!
You didn’t run off with Elin did you? J/K…..Congrats!
Frosty,
Yes, your answer helped alot, and I appreciate it. I am truly surprised that Mr. Shaeffer was not aware of this. I think he is a good, honorable man, and I hope he returns soon. I wish him well. Thanks again!
MB
12/11/2009 Hearing (9:30 AM) ()
for Protective Order Motion to Strike Notice of Deposition and Motion
—————–
The above is from the orange county web site.
The Anthony’s and Conway will have to testify regarding D. Casey NOT wanting to be depoed….
That’s exactly what I said this morning! I reas it on Blink!
Seems that the date a week from now is firm for Mr. Casey to finally be deposed. It makes sense that Baez will call one or more of the Anthony’s just as he did in the hearing to object to the release of the autopsy report with George pleading with the judge for Caylee’s memory and his family’s feelings.
Aww congrats Mr. Hornsby!!
Richard,
I wish you and your new bride a lifetime of happiness! Congrats! (maybe she will mellow u abit! lol)
Hadley
LOL, that would be a detriment to his clients, and us!
Comment…
Yesterday I read the transcripts of Annie Downing (Casey’s BFF) interview with Yuri Mellich. Now I clearly understand why Casey hated Cindy. No matter where Casey went, (even the mall) Cindy would phone her over and over. She especially did that when Casey was on a date, or at a party. She never left her alone! Over and over she would call to check on her, and tell her to get back home. Cindy repeatedy embarassed her in front of her friends, saying mean things to her. Cindy was truly awful, and I believe she now realizes this, and feels guilty. It must have been HELL having Cindy for a mother!
I agree with you! But also keep in mind that when looking at her cell phone records there were a fair amount of calls between Cindy and casey…..
But I wonder how many of those calls were from other lovers and Casey just told her friends that it was her mother.
Congratulations~~ Richard !!! What a lucky girl. She get free legal advice while cuddling with you. We wait patiently for you to come back to us with your words of wisdom and some answers to our many questions…
Congrats, Richard!
Love the Orange County Reply
Why indeed should they change the rules for Casey/Baez.
Mr. Hornsby, sir, Could you clarify why Linda Kenny-Baden is not the main lawyer for Casey? Why do the defense need two Death penalty lawyers?
Who sits first Chair on this case?
Linda Kenny-Baden is not death penalty qualified. She will attack the forensics, her husband, Dr. Baden was on Fox recently, saying that it takes months for a body to decompose, and during that time, there would be signs of insects, flies. Of course, was he talking about an adult or a small child, and was he talking about a body sealed in three bags and underwater at the time no flies, insects reported.
Dr. Baden admitted first off he was husband of one of the defense team, but said ‘we have a Chinese wall between us’. What are Chinese walls made of and how thick? Could be paper thin and fragile! He did not say ‘Wall of China’ between them.
I thought Linda Kenny-Baden was the attorney who would try and tear the forensics apart.
yes she is…. and in her bio it states she is death penalty qualified…..
makes you wonder why bring in another lawyer?
Where is her bio posted?
mymom~~thanks for that info. Yes, it makes one wonder, why have 2 DP attorneys on this case? Well they both are probably working pro bono for the fame.
It appears that Lyon likes a good challenge. It will be interesting to see if her ploys/motions work in her favor.
Interesting that Baden is DP qualified. I thought prior to Lyon being retained, the state filed a motion asking Baez to name a DP qualified lawyer and it took him a few months to name Lyon.
Whoever is footing the bill, IMO media sources, wants the best of the best in specific areas. We’ll exclude Baez of course. Even when Baez required the services of an attorney for his bar complaints, his lawyer was a renowned law professor who specializes in ethics. I can’t think of his name.
Baden – self proclaimed forensic expert
Lyon – self proclaimed “angel of death row” who’s real agenda is to abolish the DP
Macaluso – self proclaimed expert at cross-examining expert witnesses
I say self proclaimed, but it appears that they are also recognized by their peers and have a proven track record of success.
Her team also includes renowned experts like Henry Lee, Reich, etc. It’s very interesting to say the least.
What I find interesting about some of the specialist like Kathy Reich is that Baez calls their specialized science “junk Science”. Why would these experts even want to be part of a team when the Defense atty goes on national and local TV claiming they are not reliable…..
very interesting listen to this interview with Baez and LKB
http://www.wesh.com/video/18750365/index.html
12/08/2009 Motion
for Court’s Permission to be Seated Forward of the Bar
—————
Mr. Hornsby is this a media motion to place camera in front of the Lawyers?
Used to translate from Voice to text.
Neither was Miss Lyon until this case came along.
She filed a request and it was granted. LKB could have done the same thing.
The reports show the water levels going up and down thoughout Aug. anywhere from 6″ to 2 feet at the spot the bones where found.
So Kronk Could have seen a bag… then 2 days later water levels went up and no bag to be seen. Or better yet as the water began to lower – a not so little – critter fetched the bag from the water and deposited it under the tree for dinner. dragging the bag causing it to spill its contents. Sorry so gaphic but Casey’s pole dancing, while her daughter is missing, is harder on the tummy than the above.
Thank you dear sweet person for getting that info…..
I can’t help to question the real reason for the Defenses requesting a motion for a protective order prohibiting Orange Co Jail from video/audio taping during jail visits. I recall on, or shortly after the day Baez learned of little Caylee’s body being found, Baez met with Casey in jail to discuss this with her, and they were videotaped. Baez was caught on tape crying and getting all emotional with Casey. Is it possible Baez doesn’t want this tape coming back to haunt him, possible even other jail tapings?
Just my thought
What was the reason for the Judge Perry to order finger prints in the court room? When surley they were printed when she was booked?