Casey Anthony's attorney said Friday that Florida authorities are trying to recoup the money spent investigating her 2-year-old daughter's disappearance only because of "sour grapes" over the woman's acquittal on a murder charge.
Judge Belvin Perry said after hearing arguments on the issue that he would not issue a ruling until at least Sept.
22. He could extend that date but said he hopes to rule by then.
Anthony was acquitted in July on charges of murdering her daughter, Caylee. But the 25-year-old was convicted of four counts of lying to authorities. She told officers a baby sitter had the child. Authorities later learned the baby sitter never existed, but the investigation drained manpower.
Anthony has appealed her convictions.
Several agencies, including the sheriff's office and Florida Department of Law Enforcement, filed expenses of more than $517,000.
Anthony was not in court Friday and is serving probation in an undisclosed location in Florida. After the hearing, defense attorney Cheney Mason said she was progressing well.
"She's fine," Mason said as he walked out of the courthouse. "She's getting help and she's being taken care of and protected. That's all I can tell you."
Asked about Anthony's financial outlook, Mason said that it is unchanged.
"I know of no deals with anybody and of nobody making any money," Mason said. "Casey has no money. She's indigent -- period. So why are we doing this? Why are we wasting more and more taxpayers' money chasing a ghost?"
Mason called the state's attempt to make his client pay such high investigative costs unfair.
"What you have in essence is the state claiming 100 percent of the costs for a case they lost. ... That to me has nothing to do with justice. It has to do with sour grapes," he said.
Prosecutors spent the morning calling a handful of witnesses representing the four agencies seeking reimbursement. State attorney Linda Drane Burdick said though the totals seem high, all the costs arose from four lies Anthony was convicted of telling. -- The sheriff's office has asked for $293,123; the state attorney's office has asked for $141,362; the FDLE is seeking $71,939; and the Metropolitan Bureau of Investigation is asking for $10,362.
She said it was unfair for taxpayers to cover those costs.
"But for Mrs. Anthony's lying at the beginning of this case, there would no investigative costs," Drane Burdick said. "... It would not have occurred if Mrs. Anthony had it in her to tell the truth."
The state is not seeking to get back money spent helping Anthony's defense or the money spent to sequester the jury during trial.
Anthony's lead defense attorney, Jose Baez, was not in court Friday.
Instead, Mason attacked the state's assertions, saying it was trying recoup all of its costs for the investigation and not just those related to what prosecutors say were Anthony's lies.
Mason pointed to dates well after the October 2008 murder indictment and December 2008 discovery of Caylee Anthony's remains that were included in the agency tallies. He also argued against court reporter invoices that didn't take place until 2010 and 2011, well after the investigative phase of the case.
"I think it's time (Florida state attorney) Lawson Lamar's office accepts the fact they lost this case," Mason said.
Casey Anthony's lawyers cited significant concerns regarding the safety of their client in the arguments against Casey returning to Florida to serve out her year of supervised probation. It has been reported that Anthony has received death threats since being acquitted in the death of her daughter Caylee, 2, and has been in hiding.
However, having received the dubious title of "the most hated person in America," her safety in any state could be brought into question. The level of contempt directed at Anthony has not been exclusive to Floridians. But, is there a legitimate threat to her safety?
Is this an overreaction on the part of Casey Anthony's legal team? A way to garner the sympathy of the court or the country as a whole?
Another section of society highly despised both inside and outside the bars of a prison cell are child molesters. Pedophiles frequently face angry and threatening community protests upon their release when their location is made public. Some could say that the threat to their safety could be equally assumed.
In the case of Casey Anthony however, Judge Belvin Perry has authorized the Department of Corrections to keep her address confidential while she serves probation. Can this authorization be considered special treatment? Is there a legitimate threat to her safety?
On Monday Casey Anthony To Fight Probation was a top story. Here is the recap: (TMZ) Casey Anthony's legal team tells TMZ they will fight the judge who just rejected their claim that Casey served her probation for check fraud while she sat in jail during her murder trial ... and if they lose Casey will have to return to Florida
in 11 days.
Anthony was sentenced to 1 year's probation for her 2010 check fraud conviction. The judge who sentenced her said in court the time Casey spent in jail would not count toward completing probation, but the order the judge signed mistakenly allowed Casey's probation to run concurrently with her time in the pokey.
A judge ruled on Friday that the judge who sentenced Casey clearly made an innocent mistake, and it wouldn't make sense to allow Casey to get credit for the time she was in jail. After all, the point of probation is to test how a person behaves when they are in the real world, not while they're locked up with few opportunities to misbehave.
But now her lawyers tell TMZ they will appeal Friday's ruling. If they win, it would mean Casey would get a huge break -- her probation would already be completed -- because of a technical error.
Casey's lawyers say if they lose their appeal .... they want her to serve her probation in a state other than Florida.
Arguing that the Casey Anthony trial in Florida exposed a dangerous new order in TV coverage of high-profile cases, lawyers for Michael Jackson's doctor have demanded a sequestered jury for his upcoming trial.
In court papers filed Thursday, the attorneys for Dr. Conrad Murray wrote that bombastic, opinionated
commentary from cable personalities like Nancy Grace "demonstrated the danger that is created to a fair trial when basic information is managed for the purpose of entertainment and television ratings."
The judge for Murray's manslaughter trial, which is set for next month, has said previously that he does not believe around-the-clock isolation of jurors is necessary.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor has also said the cash-strapped court system cannot afford the expense of hotel accommodations for the jury.
But in their filing, defense lawyers urged him to reconsider, writing that in the Anthony case, in which sequestered jurors delivered a verdict at odds with much of the television analysis, underscored the need for the panelists to be kept away from media coverage. Anthony was found not guilty of killing her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee.
"Would [the Anthony jurors] have been so sure of the facts if the 'experts' had informed them on a nightly basis that they were wrong?" defense lawyers Nareg Gourjian and Edward Chernoff wrote.
Murray is accused of causing Jackson's 2009 death from an overdose of surgical anesthetic. He maintains that Jackson administered the fatal dose himself.
If convicted of involuntary manslaughter, Murray faces a maximum of four years in prison.
In their filing, Murray's lawyers predicted that viewership of the trial on the Internet and television would exceed that for Anthony's trial, given Jackson's global fame.
"There is reasonable expectation that Dr. Murray's trial will be the most publicized trial in history," they wrote.
The attorneys noted that in an aborted attempt at jury selection this spring, a process scuttled by unrelated delays, only one potential panelist said she had never heard of the case.
"And she could not speak English," they added in a footnote.
Representatives for Grace did not return a message seeking comment, and her network, HLN, declined to comment.
A spokeswoman for the district attorney's office declined to comment. A hearing is set for Aug. 25.
The trials of Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson have drawn comparisons for their notoriety, their shocking acquittals, extraordinary media attention and public abomination.
They shared one other link. The lead investigator working to bolster their defense was Pat McKenna.
McKenna was the man who unearthed the racist rant tapes of Los Angeles cop Mark Fuhrman that undermined the prosecution of Simpson. He also helped Kennedy scion William Kennedy Smith beat rape charges in another high profile case.
But the Casey Anthony trial is special for McKenna.
"This case was the sweetest victory of all the cases I have ever worked because there was so much hatred toward Casey and her lawyers. We had no money, no resources and we were working against a firestorm of bad press," McKenna said.
Anthony's lawyer, Jose Baez, told ABC News that she is facing a tougher "uphill battle" than OJ. Simpson had.
"Casey's current fight is a lonelier one too," he said.
Although Simpson spent several years after his acquittal largely golfing, in 2008 he was convicted of robbery and sentenced to 33 years in prison.
Baez says Anthony has been passing the time since her release from jail reading and is committed to getting well. He says she is still grieving from the more than three years of traumatic events since her daughter Caylee died.
Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson Shared the Same Investigator
She was acquitted of charges she murdered Caylee, but spent three years in jail waiting for a trial that tore apart her family. Since her acquittal Casey Anthony has received death threats and been ordered to return to Florida to serve a year's probation.
"Casey is at a much bigger disadvantage than OJ because he had money, a support system and he was a significant part of the African-American population who believed he was innocent. There was no division beyond racial lines with Casey," Baez said.
McKenna reflected on both verdicts saying, "I was more surprised by Casey's acquittal than OJ's because I had more confidence in OJ's jury. There was just more science to back up his case than Casey's."
McKenna, who is still in touch with Simpson, said the former football great and star of the "Naked Gun" movies, was an excellent witness for himself, which was another bonus for him. Casey Anthony didn't testify at her trial.
While Simpson had a fan following, Anthony was an unknown single mother reviled for not telling police for a month that her child was missing.
"The media attention and absolute conviction by the public that Casey and OJ were guilty early on, without any consideration of the evidence, was so intense in both cases," McKenna said.
"But they had stark contrasts too. Casey had absolutely no money, and OJ had millions of dollars. Casey's lawyer, Jose Baez, was a young, fairly new lawyer compared to OJ's high profile lawyer, Johnnie Cochran. Baez was an underdog," he said.
For the first year of Casey Anthony's case, McKenna admits he did not follow the press reports and knew few details. He got a phone call from Casey's defense team the day Caylee Anthony's remains were found.
OJ Simpson's Investigator Says Casey Anthony Acquittal Was 'Sweetest'
Still knowing little about the case, McKenna's first move was a visit to the Anthony house where he met Casey's parents, George and Cindy Anthony, and spent time in the bedroom Casey and Caylee shared.
"The room was a shrine of pictures to Caylee, hundreds of loving photographs. I was stunned by the neatness and organization of the room and all the photos. It was this lovely room, like a young kid that has a baby she loves. It was the opposite of what was being portrayed in the media," he said.
His first impressions of George and Cindy Anthony were not as favorable.
"I walked out of that house and thought to myself, 'I don't think this kid committed first degree murder. There is something really disturbing about this family. I was shocked by their lack of emotion. There was no sense of loss or despondency. Their granddaughter's remains had just been found and they're sitting around booking television interviews and talking about how much money their foundation is making," McKenna recalls.
He also says George and Cindy Anthony were not cooperative with him at first, even though he was there to help their daughter.
"George was bizarre. He would go around and around for hours and he wouldn't answer a question directly. And he is a former detective, so he knows the drill. There was something off with this guy," McKenna said.
He shared his instincts with Baez and suggested looking into the family dynamics - and any dark secrets -- of the Anthony family.
Some of the alleged family secrets famously unfolded at trial, with Baez accusing George Anthony of molesting Casey Anthony and having an affair during the search for Caylee.
"After I read the discovery and George's interviews, I thought, "This guy is way too eager to throw his daughter under the bus."
McKenna's theory of what happened to Caylee Anthony mirrors Baez's court defense of Casey Anthony.
"It was an accident that spun out of control and George disposed of the body, but I can't say exactly how," McKenna said. "If Casey wanted to be free, she would have dropped Caylee in the pool, called 911 and been a grieving mother."
ORLANDO, Fla. — Casey Anthony attorneys appeared at the Orange County Courthouse late Tuesday to block an attempt to put the young woman on probation for her old check-fraud case.
Defense attorney Cheney Mason filed an emergency motion for a hearing "to quash, vacate and set aside"
Judge Stan Strickland’s recent amended order regarding Anthony’s probation.
The motion says Strickland’s amended order was "made with a reckless disregard for Ms. Anthony’s due process and civil rights."
The attorneys reacted after Strickland signed amended court documents Monday requiring Anthony to serve one year of supervised probation — as he originally intended when he sentenced her in a check-fraud case in January 2010.
The emergency motion argues Strickland lost jurisdiction in this case because the amended order was made more than 60 days after his original.
"Additionally, the order was fraudulently entered," Mason’s motion states. "There was no attempt to notice the defendant or her counsel (however, the media had ample notice), the defendant has not signed the order as required, and the statement on the order was not filed during any proceedings in open court, as stated in the order."
The motion goes on to say: "Ms. Anthony actually did serve probation, as evidence(d) by her record with the Florida Department of Corrections. Any second sentence for probation imposed will be in violation of Ms. Anthony’s rights of protection against double jeopardy under both the Florida state and United States Constitution."
The pleading accuses Strickland of "unbridled prejudice" due to statements he made on television following Anthony’s acquittal in the more serious murder case last month.
Anthony, 25, left the Orange County Jail on July 17 after her acquittal at trial on charges of killing her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee Marie, in 2008.
Officials put Anthony on probation while she was in the Orange County Jail. But after Anthony was released from jail, Strickland stated that he intended her to serve her probation on check-fraud and related convictions after her release from jail.
That sentence was not spelled out clearly in some court documents, but it was stated by Strickland during Anthony’s sentencing in open court on Jan. 25, 2010, according to video and printed transcripts of that proceeding.
If Strickland’s order is not vacated and set aside, Mason asks for "administrative probation" because anything requiring Anthony to return to Orange County will "put her in great peril, as well as impose a significant cost to taxpayers in securing her safety."
The motion says Anthony has received several threats to her life. Mason included one of the threats as an exhibit. It has a picture of Anthony with a mark in the center of her forehead. Beneath the picture read the words: "Keep Smiling (expletive) With a forehead that big, the headshot will be easier."
Court administration spokeswoman Karen Levey said no hearing has been set yet on the probation matter. In addition, Strickland is out of the office this week, so it was not immediately clear who would hear the motion. Before leaving, however, Strickland said future issues in the case would be taken up by Chief Judge Belvin Perry.
Controversial defense lawyer Cheney Mason said he always believed in Casey Anthony’s story ever since he met her. Appearing on NBC’s “Today” show on Monday, the attorney told Savannah Guthrie, “I do believe her story. I
believed it from the first time I met her which was several weeks before I was formally on the team. I went to her home, her room where all the photographs are, and talked with her. “I have never for one minute had any doubt at all. She did not kill her child. Period.” While Mason and his team of defense lawyers, including lead attorney Jose Baez who has notably garnered much fame after the trial, buy Casey’s story, little is known about what really happened to 2-year-old Caylee, whose remains were found in December 2008, nearly six months after she was last seen. However, as much as the defense has tried to portray their defendant’s innocence, the prosecution and the public have remain unconvinced. Though she was found not guilty of first-degree murder, manslaughter, and child abuse, polls indicate that many still believe Casey Anthony had something to do with her daughter’s death. Throughout the trial, prosecutors hoped to present evidence to the jury that showed that Casey did in fact murder Caylee. They accused her of suffocating the 2-year-old with chloroform, placing duct tape over her mouth, putting her deceased body in the trunk of her car, and dumping the body in the nearby woods. Like us on Facebook But the high levels of chloroform in the trunk of Casey’s car, the smell of “human decomposition,” and the unaffected behavior of Casey following the death of her daughter were not enough evidence for the jury, or at least beyond a reasonable doubt. Even all of the lies that the defendant told her family and her friends after her daughter went missing left jurors still grappling for more solid evidence. During the brief interview, Guthrie asked Mason, “If this trial proved anything beyond a reasonable doubt it’s that she is an accomplished liar. You’re a veteran defense attorney, why do you think she’s suddenly telling the truth?” “Well I don’t know that it’s sudden,” he responded. “I don’t think her story, her position has changed from the very beginning. People’s awareness of her is certainly greater than it used to be.” Mason continued to defend his client and stated that though there was no question she told a lot of stories to a lot of people, it was from a protective mechanism and not out of guilt of murder. He also clarified why the defense team had asked the judge to determine whether Casey was competent to stand trial towards the end of the trial. “She’s under a lot of pressure. Not only [was] she on trial for her life, but when she [was] not in the trial then she [was] back in lockdown. And just imagine 23 hours a day for 3 years, most people would be drooling. She’s tough, but we needed to find out if she was okay.” “She’s not mentally ill now.” Asked if the defense’s accusation of molestation by George Anthony was a “brilliant defense strategy or a dirty trick,” the attorney revealed that it was not the latter. “The allegation wasn’t new in trial. It had been made in the public eye from letters written in the jail sometime before that. Sometimes evidence or testimony in trial doesn’t turn out to be what you expected it to be.” And in other unexpected turns, Casey had also decided at the last minute to not testify during the trial. Mason said that it wasn’t because she was afraid to take the stand, however. She had just chosen not to, and was the only person who would ever know why. Perhaps it was for the best, however, since throughout the trial much of the public had criticized Casey’s demeanor and expressions, which were cold one second and crying the next. Many felt she was putting on an act. Though nobody coached her on her mannerisms before the court, Mason did say that he and his lawyers did try to keep her emotions down, which he explained was “pretty hard to do when family [testified] against her and people [were] calling for [her] blood like a lynch mob.” Prosecutors tried to use testimony from her mother and father against her in court, with both Cindy and George denying the defense’s claims that they were involved in the death of their granddaughter. Casey’s parents also purportedly told the family lawyer that they did not believe in her innocence. With obvious strains in their family, Mason told Guthrie that Casey’s relationship with Cindy and George is “pretty well burned,” though he thought that his client may one day have a relationship with her brother. Speculation on where Casey will go after her release from prison on July 17 – less than a week away – is buzzing, with some saying that she will flee the country because of the negative reaction from the public. In a recent Gallup poll, about two-thirds of Americans believed Casey is still guilty of murder. She, as well as Mason and her parents, have already received death threats following the jury’s not guilty verdict. But Mason believes she won’t leave the country. “She just needs to have some time, counseling, and be reintroduced to society,” he revealed. “She’s been in lockdown for 23 hours a day, for 3 years.”
Being retired, I was able to watch or listen to every minute of Casey Anthony’s trial. Many people have been convicted via circumstantial evidence, a classic case being the Delaware attorney Thomas Capano, convicted in 1996 for murdering his lover Anne Marie Fahey. Her body was never found.
It’s my opinion that had they never found Caylee Anthony’s body, it would have been much easier to convict her mother based on her actions during those 31 days (in which she failed to report Caylee missing) and how she lied to the authorities. What disturbs me most is that the jury never asked to review any of the evidence and didn’t ask any questions after they deliberated. Do I believe she’s guilty? I believe she acted suspiciously. I believe she acted like someone who did something wrong and didn’t want anyone else to know about it. I believe she is concerned about Casey Anthony and Casey Anthony only. I believe that everyone in that house knows more than they admit. Again, do I believe she’s guilty? I want to believe that I would have voted to convict her. I want to believe that I would have sat there and not been swayed by any of the other jurors. I want to believe that the facts presented would have convinced me that she was guilty. What I don’t believe is that Casey Anthony is “innocent.” She was found “not guilty” by the preponderance of evidence. Do I believe that Casey Anthony killed her daughter? I believe that Casey Anthony was involved in the death of her daughter. Could I have convicted her based on the State of Florida’s presentation? I hope so. I believe she is guilty of killing her daughter, but I also believe it doesn’t matter what I, the jury, or anyone else on Earth believes. I believe that it doesn’t matter what we decide is Casey Anthony’s fate. Her final fate and the ultimate decision will be left up to the higher power. What that fate is, no one knows. One day, we will all find out. The right verdict will be made.
Casey Anthony was sentenced Thursday in a Florida court to four one-year terms for lying to police after being acquitted in her toddler daughter's death, but the 25-year-old is expected to be freed in 10 days due to time already served.
Earlier in the day, an official with the Orlando court who emerged after a meeting between Chief Judge Belvin Perry Jr. and others involved in the case said Anthony will be released July 13. But later Thursday, authorities in Florida said Anthony will be freed July 17 as a result of a recalculation of the time she has served. Perry told the court Anthony would get one year in jail and a fine of $1,000 US on each of the four misdemeanour counts. The judge said she has 30 days to file any notice of appeal. The hearing followed the woman's acquittal Tuesday on the three most serious charges against her — the first-degree murder of daughter Caylee Anthony, aggravated child abuse and manslaughter. Wearing a silvery blue sweater and her long chestnut brown hair down, Anthony sat stone-faced, often looking down and fidgeting with her hair, until hearing her sentence. She was found guilty by a jury of four misdemeanour counts, based on an interview with a detective on July 16, 2008. Anthony, in jail for nearly three years, could have served a maximum of one year in jail for each count, but received credit for time already served. The sentencing hearing opened with defender Holly Hughes asking that Anthony only be sentenced on one count since the lies — including that she was working at Universal Studios after it was discovered Caylee was missing and that the child was with a nanny when investigators were trying to locate her — were told during a single interview with an officer, and therefore didn't have time to "pause and reflect between lies." A lawyer for the state of Florida responded that each lie should be taken into account separately, even though they all occurred on the same day, because each was intended to mislead law enforcement and send them "on a wild goose chase." Anthony refuses to speak Perry took time to read the defence's case law backing its claim that it would contravene Anthony's constitutional rights to sentence her on four counts instead of one. However, he said, law enforcement expended a great deal of time and energy — from July through December 2008 — looking for Caylee as a result of the lies, so discounted the defence's argument. He also asked Anthony's lawyer if she wished to say anything before her sentencing, to which he responded no. Hundreds of people began lining up outside the courthouse hours before the 9 a.m. ET sentencing — the six-week trial typically attracted crowds of people jockeying to get into the courtroom — and dozens carried signs protesting her acquittal. Anthony has been in the Orange County Jail since Caylee's body was found in July 2008. On Wednesday, jail staff met to prepare for her possible release, and officials emphasized the need to ensure it would be done carefully. "Due to the high-profile nature of this case and intense, emotional interest by the public, appropriate measures will be taken to release the individual into the community in such a manner so as to preserve the safety of the individual and the public," a release said. One jail official told the media that most likely no one would know exactly where and when she would be released to protect her. Criticized for lies The Anthony case has transfixed America since Caylee went missing – a disappearance that took Casey Anthony more than a month to report. Following her acquittal Tuesday, hundreds outside the courtroom expressed outrage about the verdict, and legal analysts said Anthony would be found guilty in the court of public opinion for the foreseeable future. Prosecutors had contended the single mother, who was living with her parents — painted during the trial as head of a highly dysfunctional family — suffocated Caylee with duct tape because she wanted to be free to party and spend time with her boyfriend. They also nailed Anthony for the lies she told after Caylee went missing. She told her parents that she couldn't produce Caylee because the child was with a nanny named Zanny — a woman who never existed — and that she and her daughter were spending time with a rich boyfriend, who also never existed. The defence argued Caylee accidentally drowned in the family swimming pool, and that Anthony panicked and she and her father hid the body. There were also allegations made by the defence that Anthony was suffering from the traumatic effects of being sexually abused by her father, George Anthony. All the allegations were intensely denied. In the end, Anthony was acquitted largely because the cause of Caylee’s death wasn’t determined, and there was no clear-cut evidence that her mother committed the murder. Whether Casey Anthony will return to the home of George Anthony and his wife Cindy wasn't clear following her sentencing hearing. But a lawyer for the family told U.S. reporters Wednesday that Anthony's family received death threats ahead of the 25-year-old's possible release. Anthony's attorney, Jose Baez, also said Wednesday that he feared for his client's safety given the high-profile nature of the case.
Jose Angel Baez, the workhorse lawyer who won acquittals for Casey Anthony at the most-watched murder trial in years, may be either the best criminal defense attorney in America -- or the luckiest. It took him eight years to convince the Florida Supreme Court to let him practice law, and he'd been trying cases for just three years when the Anthony case came along. Many observers of the seven-week murder trial said he was in over his head and predicted doom. The judge
scolded him so often he became the bad boy of Courtroom 23. Bloggers and trial watchers took to calling him "Bozo." In the end, none of the digs mattered because Baez got results. Convicted and pilloried in the court of public opinion, Anthony was cleared of all murder-related charges in a court of law. Whether by luck or by skill, Baez suddenly is looking less like a clown and more like the Hispanic version of late legal legend Johnnie Cochran. They're calling him "Juani Cochran." In a lengthy interview with "In Session" in April, the 42-year-old Baez recalled being in law school and ducking out of class to watch O.J. Simpson's televised murder trial. Cochran became one of his heroes. "I could win this case and I could win several more, and I still couldn't accomplish what Johnnie did in his time practicing law," Baez said. "I don't like the comparison, because I don't deserve it." Baez entered the Anthony case as an unknown, but his status skyrocketed overnight after her acquittal. Now, he has an agent to field calls from Barbara Walters and invitations to sail on Geraldo Rivera's yacht. The new darling of the cable chat circuit is remarkably ordinary, the type of low-budget, constantly hustling defense attorney found in courthouses everywhere -- working the calendar calls, the jails, the bail bondsmen in a constant search for clients. That's how he came to meet Casey Anthony. "Apparently there were a couple of people in the jail that gave her my name, referred me to her," he said. "I've built up a hard reputation of fighting for my clients. 100% of my business comes from referrals. I don't advertise, I don't have television ads or billboards or anything like that and I never have." Anthony recalled her decision during a recorded jailhouse visit with her parents. The recording was played at the trial: "It kind of happened at random in booking," she said. "I heard a couple of people talking about attorneys. His name came up and I said, 'If he's good, can you do me a favor and pass my name along?'" Baez had to listen in court as the parents expressed their doubts about him in another recorded visit. "I just hope that the compassion that he says he has is genuine," said George Anthony, an ex-cop. "I hope he's not building a reputation for himself." Here's how Baez bills himself on his law firm's web site: "Aggressive, Experienced, Trusted Criminal Defense." But the site doesn't let visitors read his biography or the cases it highlights: "High profile murder trial;" "Taking on the mayor;" "Mother accused of kidnapping;" and "State trooper cleared." Click on any of them, and you are returned to the top of the home page. "I relate to people," he said in the "In Session" interview, conducted before the trial began. "People make mistakes. We all have erasers on our pencils. We've all done some stupid things in life that should not define us." Like his clients, Baez has acquired a few scuffs and dings. He was born in Puerto Rico in 1969 and raised by a single mother in Miami and the Bronx. He dropped out of Miami's Homestead High School his freshman year and married at 17 when he learned he would be a father. "When I found out I was going to be a father, I decided I had to man up and accept responsibility and take care of my child. So at 17, I joined the Navy," he said. "It's amazing what a child does to you." He earned his GED and later attended Miami-Dade Community College and Florida State University. Law school was almost an afterthought. Asked why he decided to go law school at St. Thomas University, he responded, "a girl." He had to wait eight years for admission to The Florida Bar, according to public records. A Florida Supreme Court ruling in 2000 highlights the Bar's concerns about "JAB's" character and finances, citing his failure to pay child support and other debts and expenditures such as signing up for a gym membership he couldn't afford. (All Bar matters refer to the candidates by their initials, and Baez's struggle with The Florida Bar has been widely reported. He declined to discuss the incident in detail with "In Session.") While he waited for admission to the bar, he worked as an intern for the Miami-Dade Public Defender's Office, taught lawyers to conduct research and launched four companies, including two that sold bathing suits; Brazilian Bikinis and Bon Bon Bikinis. "There's no better place for a young lawyer to learn how to be a lawyer than the Miami-Dade Public Defender's Office," he said. "I was surrounded by great lawyers ... There is a culture there of really learning how to fight for your client and if you're not a fighter, then you don't belong there." He finally was admitted to the bar in 2005, and began to practice in Orlando and nearby Kissimmee, where he lives in a gated community overlooking a golf course and a lake. Before the Anthony case, Baez said, he tried more than 45 cases, including four alleging murder. None of his clients had been convicted of first-degree murder, he boasted. He is most confident about his ability to outwork the opposition. "If I can do that, then I stand a chance and that is my goal," he said during the "In Session" interview. Though he has been criticized for the celebratory nature of the defense team's gathering after the verdict -- cameras caught members dancing and drinking champagne -- Baez has mostly avoided the white light of fame. When he first took on the Anthony case and camera crews began staking out his office, he made them park across the street. He said he doesn't watch news reports about his cases anymore. "You're one day practicing law and you're occasionally on the 11 o'clock news. The next day you're in the middle of this blood sport," he said . "And you become a story." A lot of times, he added, that story is exaggerated or simply not true. "I had a stomachache once," he recalled. "I went to the hospital, and it was on the national news the next day that I was freaking out or something along those lines. I think (the reports said) I was caving under pressure and I might be quitting and things like that, and it really was just bad Mexican food." It is not clear how much he has been paid to represent Anthony, although he could be in line for a percentage of any book or movie deals stemming from the case. Suffice it to say that given the time he has put into the case, his hourly rate dips well below the minimum wage. But he can't put a price on the satisfaction he felt after Casey Anthony was acquitted of murdering her daughter. "When I get home tonight and my daughter asked what I did today, I can say I saved a life," Baez told reporters after the verdict. "My driving force the last three years has been to make sure there has been justice for Caylee and Casey, because Casey did not murder Caylee. It's that simple."
A juror in the Casey Anthony trial has broken her silence and said the jury was emotionally shattered by its own verdict of not guilty. The juror, Jennifer Ford, 32, a nursing student, said that jurors were "sick to their stomachs" after acquitting Anthony of murdering her two-year-old daughter, Caylee, ABC News reported. "I did not say she was innocent," said Ford, who was juror No.3.
"I just said there was not enough evidence. If you cannot prove what the crime was, you cannot determine what the punishment should be. "I'm still confused," she added. "I have no idea what happened to that child." After issuing the verdict, jurors felt so overwhelmed that they could not speak to reporters, Ms Ford said. "We were crying, and not just the women," she added. "It was emotional, and we weren't ready. We wanted to do it with integrity and not contribute to the sensationalism of the trial." Ms Ford described the other six women and five men on the panel as a "great bunch of people". The jurors, from Pinellas County, spent nearly six weeks living out their own brand of isolation in a hotel in Orlando, in Orange County.
Publicity in the city had been so pervasive that the judge felt compelled to import a jury from another county. Jurors' rooms were watched by guards. But, Ms Ford said: "There was high morale," adding: "We all joked. We are like a big group of cousins." The interview with Ms Ford came as the television networks jousted on Wednesday for interviews with jurors and lawyers in the case, emphasising that they would not pay for the interviews.
Networks are known to license photos and videos to woo guests to their shows, a practice that some say amounts to de facto payments for interviews. Sometimes the licensing deals are lined up through brokers or other representatives. In an interview at her home Wednesday night, Lynn Ford, Jennifer Ford's mother, said ABC News did not pay her daughter but treated her and four others to a trip to Disney World. ABC is a unit of the Walt Disney Co.
Earlier on Wednesday, a representative of another juror contacted each of the broadcast news networks, offering an interview contingent on a mid-five-figure fee. The networks reported being approached by Rick French, a publicist from North Carolina. One network executive said the fee being asked was $US50,000. French did not return phone calls on Wednesday afternoon.
NBC's Today show and ABC's The View each interviewed Jeff Ashton, the 30-year veteran prosecutor in the case. He said on The View that he was "shocked" by the not-guilty verdict because jury deliberations were so swift and seamless. "I think ultimately it came down to the evidence," he said. "I think ultimately it came down to cause of death." Anthony, 25, who was also found not guilty of aggravated manslaughter and felony child abuse, will be sentenced on Thursday morning US time for lesser crimes. The jury found her guilty of four counts of lying to police investigators, which carries a maximum of a one-year prison sentence for each count. But because Anthony has served more than 2 1/2 years in jail, mostly in isolation, she will most likely be sentenced to time served by Judge Belvin Perry jnr and walk free from the Orlando courthouse. Where Anthony will go next and whether she will ultimately publish her own account are the next big questions occupying those who had closely watched the three-year case. Prosecutors argued that Anthony killed her child to be free of the obligations of motherhood, preferring instead a carefree life of boyfriends and bars. They said she dosed Caylee with chloroform, suffocated her with duct tape and dumped her body in the woods. But medical examiners could never determine how and when Caylee died because her remains were nothing but bones when she was found. Prosecutors also had no solid physical evidence or witnesses tying Anthony to the crime. Instead, they portrayed Anthony as a liar - a point her lawyer, Jose Baez, conceded - and a callous mother who partied after Caylee's disappearance.
the start and has led to at least one public courtroom apology to Ashton from Baez. Outside the presence of the jury Sunday, Baez complained to Chief Judge Belvin Perry about Ashton's facial expressions during the defense attorney's closing argument. Then, later in the day, during a heated portion of his closing argument, Baez referred to Ashton as that "laughing guy." Ashton immediately objected — in a rare move for closings, Perry called a sidebar and then sent the jury out. There was concern among all the parties that the judge would find them in contempt or level some other sanction. Perry called a recess and watched video from the courtroom — footage the lawyers also reviewed. Ashton, who also reviewed the tape, told the judge he appeared to be smiling behind his hand and apologized. Baez asked that Ashton not be held in contempt but said the prosecutor's behavior needed to stop. Baez also apologized for his remark. Perry said he accepted their apologies — for now.
Anthony Defense: Prosecution Evidence a Fantasy "If it happens again, the remedy will be exclusion of that attorney from further representation at these proceedings," Perry said. "Enough is enough." Perry last week issued an order outlining what prosecutors and defense attorneys cannot say during closing arguments, which began Sunday and will continue today. Among his edicts: "Counsel shall avoid using derogatory terms or characterizations when referring to Defendant, a witness, or opposing counsel and shall not make any disparaging comments about counsel's occupation or performance in court."
After more than 33 days of testimony and 400 pieces of evidence, the Casey Anthony trial is finally coming to a close. On Sunday, closing arguments will begin and the lawyers will have their last chance to try to persuade the jury before they deliberate. With each side's case deficient in definitive evidence, Florida A&M; professor Karin Moore said jurors might lean on the most glaring thing presented to them.
That could mean judging Casey Anthony's actions during the month Caylee was missing, Moore said. "If she knew her child had died or was missing, she was not acting like a grieving mother," Moore said. "It may be enough for a jury." Casey Anthony is charged with first-degree murder (which would mean a possible death sentence or life in prison if convicted), aggravated child abuse (a 30-year prison term), aggravated manslaughter of a child (a 30-year prison term), and four counts of providing false information to law enforcement. What do you think the jury will decide?
Closing arguments for the Casey Anthony murder trial are set to begin 9 A.M. EST. Sunday and last all day long. The jury is expected to begin deliberating as early as Sunday evening and work together throughout the Fourth of July holiday. The end is near for a trial that has lasted over 30 days and left jury members completely secluded from the outside world.
The trial has quickly become a summer obsession for Americans. CNN’s Headline News has dedicated every weekday entirely to the Casey Anthony Trial and their ratings have drastically increased. They are expected to have live coverage throughout the weekend, including the closing arguments, and have even listed a countdown clock for how long until closing arguments begin. The case has brought plenty of shock and awe according to legal analysts. The state of Florida believes Casey Anthony murdered her own two-year-old daughter, Caylee, using chloroform. They portrayed Casey as a mom who wanted to party instead of parent. Casey didn’t report her daughter missing for thirty-one days and surveillance videos at various establishments in Florida show her partying, shopping, and even getting a tattoo days after her child’s disappearance. Once Caylee’s body was discovered, just a few miles from the Anthony home, authorities discovered duct tape on the body which was the same tape found at the house. On the other hand, the defense shocked trial watchers in opening statements claiming the death of Caylee was an accident. Instead of being murdered, Caylee accidently drowned in the family swimming pool. Grandfather George Anthony, a former cop, saw Caylee dead, panicked, and hid the body in the nearby woods. In addition, the defense claims Casey was sexually abused by her dad, George, and brother, Lee Anthony. George adamantly denies such claims and Lee was never asked when on the stand. The abuse is why Casey never told anyone about her daughter’s disappearance. She was emotionally scarred and was used to keeping secrets, according to the defense. Many in the media including CNN’s Nancy Grace and TruTV’s Vinnie Politan, believe the prosecution did enough to win their case. There were some high points when the defense presented their side. However, once the prosecution proved that defense witness Cindy Anthony was lying about doing the controversial Google searches including “chloroform,” “neck breaking,” and “shovel,” the state was looking stronger than ever. Caylee Anthony (August 9, 2005 - June 16, 2008) was a young, two-year-old girl known for her contagious smile and brown hair with bangs. Many believe Grandmother Cindy Anthony was her primary care-giver who absolutely loved and adored her Granddaughter. Many trial watchers, especially, in Florida, have developed an emotional attachment to the young girl. Casey Anthony is accused of first degree murder. If convicted, she could be sentenced to death.
Closing arguments are expected to begin Sunday in the Florida murder trial of Casey Anthony, the woman charged in the death of her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee. Prosecutors contended at trial that Anthony killed her daughter in June 2008 by covering the child's mouth with duct tape. Prosecutors told jurors the woman dumped the girl's body in woods near her parents' home and then resumed her life of partying and shopping.
Defense attorneys, without offering firm proof of how Caylee died, countered at trial that the toddler accidently drowned in the family swimming pool. A medical examiner never determined precisely how Caylee died. Casey Anthony has pleaded not guilty to a charge of first-degree murder. She could face a possible death sentence or life in prison if convicted of that charge.
The prosecution indirectly stated Wednesday afternoon in court that Casey Anthony deliberately killed her 2-year-old child, Caylee, during the cross-examination of an expert witness. After Judge Belvin Perry admitted Dr. Sally Karioth, a certified traumatologist, as an expert in grief and trauma despite objections from the state, the defense sought to use several hypothetical situations in attempt to justify Casey’s actions during the month when Caylee reportedly first went missing.
Casey allegedly took her daughter out of the Anthony family home on June 16, 2008, when the toddler was last seen, and would tell her mother, Cindy Anthony, several lies about the whereabouts of Caylee during that month. Caylee was not reported missing until July 15, 2008, after Cindy and George found their daughter’s car in a tow yard, which smelled like human decomposition, according to George. Defense attorney Dorothy Clay Sims asked Karioth during her testimony how a 22-year-old “loving and great mother” would respond to losing her 2-year-old child. The witness stated that young adults would often exhibit denial, risky behavior including drinking and partying. Sims then specifically outlined in a hypothetical situation a grieving mother who went shopping, rented movies, went out drinking, got a tattoo – which was exactly what Casey did – and was asked if those were normal behaviors. Karioth called it reluctant grieving, saying that people would act like nothing happened in order to deal with their loss. The defense also added more details to the situation including families who displayed a history of denial and non-communication, which purportedly furthered those same actions. During an intense and heated cross-examination, prosecutor Jeff Ashton wondered if there were any behaviors at all that were inconsistent with grieving, since the professor seemed to imply that every behavior from happy to sad was consistent with grief. She responded, saying there were healthy responses versus pathological responses, but could not give Ashton any definite behavior that was inconsistent with grief. Ashton also asked Karioth if she could look at a set of actions, not assuming there was a loss, and determine if it was grief or not. She could not unless she had certain facts of the case, which the prosecution pointed out she did not know, excluding generalities about a mother losing her daughter. Karioth was also further questioned about denial, and confirmed that it could be a common coping mechanism for guilt as well. Using the same tactics as the defense, Ashton illustrated a series of hypothetical’s, which were exactly the actions of Casey during the month of June. He outlined all of the lies that Casey had told her mother, including Caylee being with an imaginary babysitter or being at Universal Studios, going away to Tampa for work, and etc. when the entire time Casey was in Orlando, and asked the witness if those behaviors were consistent to grief. Karioth agreed that she would not exactly call those behaviors consistent with grief, and commented that the hypothetical person needed help. She also called the actions “magical thinking.” When Ashton went even further and added the hypothetical, “what if the mother deliberately killed the child,” objections were raised and sustained. The prosecution then pointed out that when someone deliberately committed a horrible act, they could compartmentalize the event and continue on with life as if nothing happened, which they claim is what Casey did after she purportedly killed her daughter by suffocating her with duct tape. In earlier testimony on Wednesday, the son of meter reader Roy Kronk, who found the remains of Caylee Anthony in December 2008, testified that his father told him on the phone around November 2008 that he knew where Caylee’s remains were. The defense is trying to prove that Kronk deliberately moved Caylee’s remains to the wooded area near the Anthony family home in order to obtain a reward. Kronk had told the court on Tuesday, however, that he never had a conversation of that nature with his son, Brandon Sparks, in November 2008. The defense also accused Kronk of telling his son he would be rich and famous, which the meter reader denied as well. Sparks stated that he had been estranged from his father since he was 8 years old, but had developed a relationship with him again in 2008. During that time it was established that he spoke to his father three to four times a week. The witness confirmed that Kronk told him around Thanksgiving of 2008 that he knew where Caylee’s remains were. But he had dismissed his father’s statement as far-fetched and didn’t believe him until it was revealed on December 11, 2008, that Kronk had actually discovered the body. During cross-examination, prosecutor Linda Drane Burdick pointed out that Sparks did not remember the conversation he had with his father until Kronk’s ex-wife, Sparks’ mother, and his wife reminded him. Burdick continued to stress that the witness did not recall the conversation himself and also emphasized that he could not identify the specific call on his cellphone records. He also agreed with Burdick that Kronk did not tell him in November 2008 that he had taken the skull from the scene, had it at home or his car, or done anything else to it. Kronk simply told him that he located the skull, contacted law enforcement, and that since he hadn’t seen him to look for him on television. Baez concluded by asking Sparks if his father told him he was going to be rich and famous. He responded yes. Roy Kronk also took the stand once again in the afternoon, going over his statements made to investigators and law enforcement. Baez tried to point out the inconsistencies in what he said previously, including omitting the fact that he had put his meter reader stick in the eye socket of Caylee’s skull and changing his testimony about the skull rolling or falling out of the trash bag. The witness continued to state that he was overwhelmed that day when he found the skull and needed time to get his head straight. Kronk acknowledged telling the first officer at the scene on December 11, 2008, about calling CrimeLine in August where he initially reported seeing the remains. He stated that the officer allegedly told him not to mention that fact. But Deputy Edward Turso, the said officer, denied ever hearing from Kronk about the call to CrimeLine and also confirmed that he did not tell the meter reader not to mention anything. Baez asked lead investigator Yuri Melich if Kronk mentioned anything about previously calling the authorities in August when he first met Kronk at the crime scene on Dec. 11, 2008. Melich responded no and confirmed that he first heard of the calls about a week after Kronk’s initial statement. Judge Perry announced that the defense may rest their case Thursday and told the state to have witnesses available for Thursday just in case that happened. Closing statements could be made as early as Saturday and the jury could possibly begin deliberating on Sunday.
The great mystery of the Casey Anthony trial: Who fathered the 2-year-old she’s accused of murdering? Diane Dimond reveals the person whose DNA may finally solve the riddle.
The man below is Caylee Anthony’s father… if you believe Michael Duggan’s mother, who is “100 percent certain” she is the dead 2-year-old’s paternal grandmother, and is willing to submit to lie-detector and DNA tests to prove it. Casey Anthony, according to testimony and first-person accounts,
often told her family and friends that Caylee’s biological father—whose identity remains one of the great mysteries of the first-degree murder trial—died in a car accident in 2007. Grandma Cindy Anthony recently repeated that assertion in court, under oath. Meanwhile, Michael Patrick Duggan, a young man with a perpetual smile, died in a one-car accident in Falmouth, Massachusetts, in October 2007. That isn’t a coincidence, says Duggan’s mother, 47-year-old Donna MacLean of Rutland, Massachusetts, who gave a series of interviews, her first, to The Daily Beast. Like Anthony, Duggan had a colorful family history. His parents divorced and his father had a sex-change operation, according to various records, transforming from Wilfred to Wendy—she is now in jail in Florida for serious DUI violations. Duggan (pronounced DUGG-an) wandered South after high school, first to an uncle’s home in North Carolina, and then on his own. “He was living in Tennessee, working for a moving company [when Caylee was conceived],” says MacLean. “He was traveling all over the region moving households of furniture.” It had become “routine for him to visit Florida,” according to his mother. His paternal grandparents had regularly taken him to visit friends who lived near Disney World in Orlando. MacLean says she and her son always stayed in touch. In late summer of 2007 during a telephone call, “we were talking about the upcoming birth of my other son’s baby boy,” says MacLean. “I said I had really hoped for a baby girl grandchild, and that’s when Michael told me that he already had one.” At this point in time Caylee Anthony would have been close to 2 years old. “I asked him about the circumstances… who is the family? He said the parents were George and Cindy Anthony. I asked who she was and he said her name is Casey. He told me her dad was a cop and I said, ‘Oh, Mike! Does she want child support?’” At this point, Duggan was working as a low-paid waiter in Passaic, New Jersey. According to Donna MacLean, her 24-year-old son told her the young woman he’d impregnated came from a family with a nice, big home and she was not pressing him for support. In fact, he said, she was talking about possibly putting the child up for adoption. He never mentioned the city in which the child and her mother lived. Testimony at Casey Anthony’s murder trial has revealed she talked to others about the possibility of putting Caylee up for adoption. MacLean says she learned little more about the circumstances surrounding what would have been her first grandchild because within weeks Michael was dead. A stepsister riding in the car with him during a trip home to Massachusetts also perished. Crippled by grief, MacLean says she forgot about the conversation about a granddaughter. In May 2011, When Casey Anthony went on trial for murdering Caylee, this Massachusetts housewife became riveted to photographs of the little girl. Like much of the nation she has followed the capital-murder case closely. “She looked so much like my family, like I did when I was little. The big eyes … I just kept staring into those big brown eyes.” MacLean, who also has brown eyes like her son Mike, says she didn’t realize what intrigued her so about the pictures of Caylee until recently, when she says began to remember details of that long ago phone call with her son. She is wracked with frustration that she hadn’t asked more questions, including the name of the moving company her son worked for or the city in which the child lived. “I remembered Mike had said Casey offered that if he came back to town they could all ‘crash at a friend’s house.’ Michael thought it was cool.” During testimony at Casey Anthony’s murder trial there has been much said about the nights she spent out—with and without her child—crashing at the homes of various friends. MacLean’s account is complicated, of course, by the fact that so much of the Casey Anthony drama is based on the tales of a proven liar. Anthony has told numerous stories about who the biological father of her child might be, reportedly saying that the 2007 car-accident victim was named Eric Baker or a man named Josh from Georgia with whom she worked at Universal Studios. Another crash victim named Jesus Ortiz has been mentioned as a possible father. Many people in Casey Anthony’s sphere, including her parents, believed for a time that a preacher’s son named Jesse Grund was the child’s dad. And, of course, Anthony’s defense team has fed the suspicion that Casey’s brother, Lee, or her father George, was responsible. DNA tests have excluded Grund, Lee, and George as a possible parent to the murdered child. The difference between all those other potential possibilities is that they all deny it—the Ortiz family has expressly rejected the idea. Only Donna MacLean has come forward. Admittedly, the only proof that MacLean has is her word and the circumstantial coincidence that her son died in a car crash in 2007. Given that she says her son told her that he had a daughter, she confided that bombshell with surprisingly few people who can back up her story contemporaneously—citing just her son from a different marriage, Josh Van Kleef. When reached by The Daily Beast, Van Kleef, a car salesman in Massachusetts, says he remembers his mother talking to him about a conversation she had with stepbrother Mike right around the time his son was born (September 2007). "At first when she told me he could possibly be a father, we wondered if he was just saying that to be in competition with me," says Van Kleef, citing his son’s impending arrival. He also says he vaguely remembers some talk about a cop in her family. MacLean, homebound with a back and hip disability, says she is willing to take a lie-detector test, submit DNA for grandparent’s testing and reached out to George and Cindy Anthony almost two weeks ago. “She contacted me and told me the whole story,” the Anthonys’ attorney, Mark Lippman, confirms. He declined to relay his clients’ reaction was to MacLean’s account. “I don’t want to have additional pressure on my clients at this time,” says Lippman. “Certainly she has the right to pursue the truth but I don’t understand to what end, the child is clearly dead.” He suggested McLean hire a lawyer to petition the court for a DNA test, but is adamant that any action wait until after the trial. Lippman also expressed concern that MacLean might be trying to insert herself into a notorious case, either for attention or monetary gain. Donna MacLean insists she wants nothing but information. “I can’t just walk away. I’m trying to do this peacefully without raising a ruckus,” she says. “I would never in a million years bring something like this forward if I wasn’t 100 percent positive. My son wouldn’t lie to me.” “All I want is to know the truth,” MacLean adds. “I’ve grieved for my son and now I want to grieve for my grandchild.”
The trial of a Florida mother charged with killing her 2-year-old daughter resumes in an Orlando courtroom, a day after her attorneys sought a mistrial and a judge ruled that she was competent to continue the trial. Testimony resumes Tuesday morning, a day after Casey Anthony's attorneys asked the judge to select a new jury. The attorneys sought the mistrial based on a ruling by a federal judge in Miami last week. It declared Florida's death penalty unconstitutional.
Anthony has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder and could face the death penalty if convicted of that charge. The trial judge ruled Anthony is competent after her attorneys asked that she get a mental evaluation.
The Casey Anthony trial abruptly went into recess on Saturday over legal issues, but it remains unknown over what exactly. Judge Belvin Perry Jr. cancelled the nearly 7 hours of hearings scheduled for Saturday and said the court would resume on Monday, the Orlando Sentinel reported. Attorneys on both sides declined to comment on the unexpected recess.
Perry recessed the court after meeting with defense attorneys on Saturday morning. The court was scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. and end at 3:30 p.m., longer than normal for Saturday hearings. Casey Anthony, 25, is accused of first-degree murder of her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee, in June 2008. If convicted, she could face the death penalty. Anthony’s attorneys claim Caylee died from drowning in her grandparents’ swimming pool and that Casey’s father, George, was involved in covering up the death and disposing the body. George has denied involvement in the death of his granddaughter. Meanwhile, the state maintains that the defendant suffocated Caylee with duct tape, stored her in the back of her trunk for days, and then dumped her body in the woods nearby the Anthony’s home. The toddler was last seen on June 16, 2008, reported missing on July 15, 2008, and the remains of her tiny body was found in December 2008. On Friday, the court heard the testimonies of Casey’s mother, Cindy, and her older brother, Lee. Lee gave an emotional testimony, claiming that the family ignored Casey’s pregnancy with Caylee until just days before she gave birth. He claimed no one acknowledged Casey’s pregnancy until nearly when Caylee was born and broke down in tears during his testimony. The defense is thought to be trying to illustrate the Anthonys as a dysfunctional family. The prosecution, however, questions the accuracy of Lee’s testimony, which appears to differ from his 2009 deposition. When questioned by the prosecution earlier this month, Lee often responded that he didn’t remember his deposition and expressed little emotion. In the deposition, Lee had said his parents were excited about news of a granddaughter and prepared a nursery for her as well as a baby shower. On Friday, the defense also called back several investigators, including Orange County deputy Ryan Eberlin. Eberlin explained that he handcuffed Casey on the night of July 16, 2008, because her mother, Cindy, had accused Casey of stealing her credit cards. Judge Perry told the jury to not consider Casey’s fraudulent use of credit cards in the case because it was unrelated to her current charge of murder. A video of a happy 2-year-old Caylee and her mom, Casey, was also shown in the court room yesterday. Perhaps the biggest shocker this week was the revelation by Cindy Anthony that she searched for the words chloroform and chlorophyll on the family’s computer. The prosecution had called computer experts to the stand earlier in the trial who gave damaging testimonies that there were Google searches for chloroform that were later deleted from the Internet search history. There was also a search for how to make chloroform, but Cindy said she did not remember if she made that search. Cindy’s chloroform testimony shakes up the prosecution’s argument that Casey Anthony made searches for chloroform. The prosecution maintains that Casey used chloroform to knock Caylee out before using duct tape on her. There was also high level of chloroform found in the trunk of Casey’s car.
Defense attorneys for Casey Anthony are seeking to put the prosecution on trial, alleging an at times incompetent investigation into Caylee's death. The tactic could be working with some jurors. The defense in the Casey Anthony murder trial is seeking to turn the tables on the prosecution, attempting to put the state itself on trial for conducting what defense lawyers suggest was a lackluster and, at times, incompetent investigation into the death of Ms. Anthony’s two-year-old daughter, Caylee.
Although Chief Judge Belvin Perry is trying to head off the tactic by sustaining frequent prosecution objections at the trial, defense attorney Jose Baez is managing to raise substantial questions that could trouble at least some members of the jury. The jurors have heard testimony that a “shoddy” autopsy was performed by the county medical examiner, that an FBI lab technician’s own DNA contaminated a piece of duct tape that the state alleges is the murder weapon, and that a crime scene investigator placed a bag of wet trash with live maggots from Ms. Anthony’s car into a drier to preserve the contents for long-term storage. They have heard about heart-shaped residue that mysteriously disappeared from the surface of the duct tape/alleged murder weapon before it could be photographed. They also heard that investigators waited 3-1/2 months after tests showed the possible presence of chloroform in Anthony’s car before obtaining a warrant to search the Anthony home for evidence of chemicals, mixing instructions, chemistry equipment, or store receipts related to chloroform. Nothing was found. In addition, the defense is suggesting that the state missed opportunities to conduct DNA testing on the maggots found in the trash bag in Anthony’s car. Two entomologists and a DNA expert have testified that such testing would have been possible. It was apparently not done. The defense has also suggested that after the FBI discovered a second partial but inconclusive DNA profile on the duct tape/alleged murder weapon, the state could have had the item retested using more sophisticated technology. It did not. Defense gambit not unique Mr. Baez’s gambit is not unique. The defense tactic of attacking detectives and prosecutors as sloppy or worse is a standard feature of many trials. But this is no ordinary case. The state has charged Anthony with first-degree murder and is seeking the death penalty. In addition, the saga of Anthony and her daughter, Caylee, has attracted a national following of self-appointed detectives, moral arbiters, and others who are parsing every utterance in Judge Perry’s Orlando, Fla., courtroom. Interest in the trial is so high that fistfights have broken out among those waiting in long lines outside the courthouse for a chance to witness the unfolding drama inside. Although the state’s case moved forward quickly and efficiently for nearly three weeks, the defense side of the trial during the past five days has been slowed by a high number of prosecution objections and resulting sidebar conferences outside earshot of the jury. The in-court tension arises against a backdrop of an increasingly bitter struggle between the two camps behind the scenes. At several points Perry has condemned what he termed “gamesmanship” and rivalry among the lawyers during the trial. When a potential witness from a DNA laboratory in the Netherlands, Richard Eikelenboom, presented himself at the state attorney’s office last weekend for a possible deposition in advance of his expected testimony this week, Assistant State Attorney Jeffrey Ashton refused to see him. He told him to go away. Mr. Ashton has sought to block portions of Mr. Eikelenboom’s testimony because he says the defense did not comply with a court order in December to fully disclose all opinions that each expert witness would offer at the trial. Baez says he sought to comply with the order but that a trial is a dynamic process and he is trying to respond to unexpected issues. The judge said his order was clear and that Baez had willfully violated it. The judge's unusual punishment
As punishment, immediately before Eikelenboom began his testimony on Tuesday, Perry gave a special instruction to the jury that certain reports outlining the witness’s testimony had not been delivered prior to a court-imposed deadline and that as a result the jury “may consider this in considering the credibility of the witness.” Such an instruction is highly unusual, particularly in a death-penalty case. A witness’s credibility usually speaks for itself without any pretestimony demerits assigned by a trial judge seeking to punish a defense attorney. The punishment did not stop there. The judge also barred Baez from questioning Eikelenboom about the possibility of obtaining DNA profiles from a stain in the trunk of Anthony’s car. Prosecutors have suggested that the stain is from fluid that leaked from Caylee’s decomposing body onto the carpet lining the trunk. FBI tests found no DNA. And the state did not seek to perform more sophisticated tests. Eikelenboom was expected to say that using the more advanced techniques in his lab, such testing might be possible. That testimony could be important to the defense because it would suggest the state has been less than diligent in using available science to help prove its case. At the same time it would highlight the circumstantial and speculative nature of some of the state’s evidence against Anthony. Despite that pending issue, Eikelenboom was permitted to testify in general about DNA testing. He told the jury that even though the duct tape found with Caylee’s remains was severely weathered, with his techniques “you could expect to still find DNA.” Pioneer of 'touch DNA' Eikelenboom is best known in the DNA community as a pioneer in the detection of “touch DNA” – skin cells left behind by an assailant or criminal as a result of rough-handling during criminal activity. In 2006, Mr. Eikelenboom helped free an innocent man serving a life sentence in Colorado for a murder he didn’t commit. After re-creating precisely how the victim was dragged into a field by her killer, Eikelenboom and his laboratory were able to identify “touch DNA” on the victim’s shirt 20 years after the crime. The innocent man, Timothy Masters, was a 15-year-old sophomore in high school at the time of the killing. He told police that he had seen the dead body in the field on his way to school but did not report it to police because he wasn’t sure it was real, according to a report in the Denver Post. Police considered him a murder suspect in part because he did not call 911 and he seemed emotionless, according to the Post report. He was convicted in a circumstantial case with no physical evidence. Eikelenboom identified three full DNA profiles from the victim’s shirt. It eliminated Mr. Masters and pointed, instead, to someone else on the detectives’ list of suspects. In 2008, prosecutors moved to vacate Master’s conviction and he was released after serving nearly 10 years of his life sentence. Work in JonBenet Ramsey case Eikelenboom was also asked by police in Colorado to investigate the unsolved murder of JonBenet Ramsey. Again, he identified DNA profiles by examining the precise points where the assailant grabbed the little girl’s clothing. The resulting DNA profile eliminated JonBenet’s parents as suspects in the killing. During cross-examination, Ashton belittled Eikelenboom and his Dutch-based laboratory. He compared the company to a “mom and pop operation," and suggested he was working in a “barn.” Eikelenboom said he and his wife converted a farm into a high-tech crime laboratory. Ashton insisted that any DNA that might have been on the duct tape with Caylee’s remains would have long since degraded and been unusable in the hot, wet Florida weather. “We only need a small amount of cells to get a DNA profile,” Eikelenboom said. At the conclusion of his cross-examination Ashton asked Eikelenboom whether the defense team had asked him to retest the duct tape containing the as-yet unidentified DNA remnant. "We mentioned that we could investigate this piece of tape,” Eikelenboom said. Ashton shot back: “Are you aware if items at the defense’s request were sent for additional DNA testing?” “No,” Eikelenboom answered. The exchange was important because it potentially suggested to the jury that the defense did not want to retest the duct tape even though Baez was arguing that it should have been retested by the state. “You were willing and able to test items from this case and you were willing and able to do it pro bono,” Baez asked during his redirect examination. “Correct,” Eikelenboom said. “The only reason you didn’t do it in this case is because the prosecution objected to you taking it,” Baez said. The comment drew an immediate objection from Ashton before Eikelenboom could answer. The judge sustained the objection. What the jury does not yet know is that a defense request to submit “items” to the Dutch laboratory was rejected by Perry. Instead, the defense team was directed to use a lab in Pennsylvania. Baez apparently submitted for testing a pair of shorts and a laundry bag recovered with Caylee’s remains. But, according to Ashton, the defense never asked that the duct tape/murder weapon or carpet samples from the trunk of the car be retested for possible DNA.
