Thursday, March 17, 2011

Was Casey read her Miranda warning?

In open court two weeks ago, Cheney Mason bluntly said that Casey Anthony was not read her Miranda warning until October 14, when she was indicted on a first-degree murder charge by an Orange County jury. Interestingly, no one from the State Attorney's Office questioned his statement. No one objected. As a matter of fact, none of the law enforcement officials, including Cpl. Yuri Melich, Sgt. John Allen, and Cpl. Eric Edwards, testified that Mason was wrong. Why?
Today, I present Casey's version. I realize her words cannot be trusted and nothing should be taken seriously, but why would she say something about being read her rights if it did not take place?
In a court of law, what is testified to is what stands. No one said a word negating October 14.
Many thanks to nan11 for the remarkable find, and to SnoopySleuth for bringing it to my attention.

To watch and listen to the video


Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Without Prejudice

Casey Anthony's defense team has filed a lot of motions; too many to some, but plenty of them have been denied without prejudiceby the presiding judge. With prejudice and without are fairly cut and dry. With prejudice means that once a judge rules, that's the end of it; dead in the water, leave it alone and give it a rest. In other words, it's a final disposition. Without prejudice means that the present form is not good enough to rule positively on, but the motion can certainly be filed again after tweaking and rewriting it. In other words, similar, but not identical. It leaves a party free to litigate the matter in a subsequent action. That's not to say the latter outcome would be any different, but it leaves the door open for further explanation and review. A lot of the motions ruled against the defense by Judge Stan Strickland were ordered without prejudice. In my opinion, one of the reasons why Jose & Co. wanted him off the bench was made clear after Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. took over. Many of those motions turned down by Judge Strickland were refiled. They expected the new judge to be more favorable in his rulings. Unfortunately for Casey, Judge Perry didn't overturn a single one of them, so they did nothing to help her cause.

In light of Judge Strickland's rulings, I want to discuss something that's been weighing on my mind - without prejudice, of course. Actually, there are two things, the other one being George and Cindy and where they sit in the courtroom; but first, I come to Judge Strickland's defense - not that he needs it or anything.


Sunday, March 13, 2011


Simon & Jan Barrett will return to the Internet airwaves today as they bring back their ever popular blogtalkradio show. Today's subject?

Casey Anthony - Killer Mother?

Please tune in at 4:00 PM EST.

Join Simon, Jan and their panel of guests on air to look at this case and several others. Some are well known, some are not.

(Click the logo)

To read Simon's blog post, CLICK HERE

Friday, March 11, 2011

An interesting day of discovery

More documents were released today concerning the investigation into the death of Caylee Marie Anthony. Some of the discovery is not very revealing, while other documents are. For instance, several TES volunteers described receiving phone calls from private investigators stating they were "calling from the Orange County Courthouse." While misleading, they were not illegal. Cpl. Yuri Melich wrote in his incident report that an "investigation was conducted in order to determine if a private investigator working for the Casey Anthony defense violated State Statute by falsely impersonating an officer as per Florida State Statute 843.08." He added that "there is insufficient evidence to prove anyone violated this statute." Yes, several people complained the callers had misrepresented themselves, but by merely saying they were calling "from" the Orange County Courthouse failed to constitute probable cause that a crime was committed. I have to agree. I've made phone calls from the courthouse and by merely telling the other person I am calling from that location reveals nothing. I could be there for a hearing or something else.
What I did find interesting is that, while a lot of people believe Jerry Lyons is working alone, or that Mort Smith is still somehow involved, two new names surfaced. AHA! We can now add Katie Delaney, Gil Colon and Scott McKenna to the list. What would be intriguing would be if the SAO decided to seek the cell phone records from all of the PIs to see if they really did call from the courthouse as they claimed.


Wednesday, March 09, 2011

A Sneaking Suspicion

On Monday, I attended a hearing designed to give the defense and prosecution one final shot at summarizing the two motions discussed last Wednesday and Thursday regarding statements Casey gave law enforcement back in mid-July of 2008, and the statements she gave her parents and brother while she was sitting in jail. Were they unwitting agents of the state? If the judge agrees with the defense, it will be a damaging, but far from fatal blow, to the State of Florida. If the judge sides with the State, it will be business as usual - on with the show!
One of the things we must keep in mind is that if evidence is tossed, there's still plenty more the State will use against her. For instance, Casey's car is not in her name. The owner gave permission to have it examined. That's a nice chunk of evidence. Caylee's remains changed the playing field, too. When she was charged with first-degree murder on 14 October 2008, there was no death penalty. That came the following April, and of utmost importance was that her little bones and what surrounded them gave plenty of credibility to the old saying, "she's speaking from the grave."


Sunday, March 06, 2011

Either Way

While attending court on Wednesday, I noticed a big difference in how Casey's defense presented itself as opposed to past hearings. It was a dramatic improvement. It was also the first time I saw Dorothy Clay Sims, the Ocala attorney who specializes in aggressive cross-examinations of medical experts. She joined Casey's team in September of last year. We will be hearing much more from her as we approach the trial, I'm sure.
On Thursday, Judge Perry opened the hearing by admonishing the gallery. He reminded everyone he does not want to see any smirking or hear any snickering. This includes moans, sighs and any sort of reaction that deviates from quietly sitting still and behaving ourselves. One thing I admire about him is the manner in which he handles issues on the surface. He seems to be rather uncomfortable with singling any person or group out. I would imagine if and when it ever reaches that point, the person(s) on the receiving end won't be happy.


Wednesday, March 02, 2011

Arresting Development?

There are two basic Miranda Warnings. One is quite minimal and the other is more verbose:
  • You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.
  • You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions. Do you understand? Anything you do say may be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand? You have the right to consult an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during questioning now or in the future. Do you understand? If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish. Do you understand? If you decide to answer questions now without an attorney present you will still have the right to stop answering at any time until you talk to an attorney. Do you understand? Knowing and understanding your rights as I have explained them to you, are you willing to answer my questions without an attorney present?
The general rule is that the first one is just an announcement of your rights, whether under arrest or not, and the second one is primarily to cover all bases a detainee might encounter while in police custody.


Tuesday, March 01, 2011

What a difference a sentence makes

In January of 2009, U.S. District Judge John Antoon II accepted Robyn Ann Adams plea agreement and sentenced her to 10 years in prison. Her husband, Clay, was sentenced to 17. He had been an Altamonte Springs police officer. He pleaded guilty in October of 2008 to multiple weapons charges and one count, along with his wife, of conspiring to grow more than 2,000 lbs. of marijuana.
Yesterday, Robyn was booked back into the Orange County Jail in order to testify at the hearings this week. I seriously doubt she and Casey will see one another until they look into each others eyes in the courtroom.

Booked Monday, February 28th, 2011 - Return Per Court Order from State Facility