For those watching the Casey A. trial.....

[DammitJanet]

The problem therein lies that he told them the whole story about George and Lee and the drowning and I believe that if they have no proof or no evidence of that story, at least that attorney can be held for some sort of sanctions. He actually said that he had proof. Not that it was a what if. Like someone just said, trickery is one thing being ethical is another.

He really hasnt even attempted to get these experts of his to prove drowning so that leaves him hanging in the wind. Only Casey is left.

 

[HaoZi]

I've owned or lived with a number of dogs (think well into double digits), and while I've had my share of diggers, not one of those dogs ever actually put something in the hole and backfilled it. Not one. They would dig things up. They would drag things out the woods (like that skunk - urk!). They would make the entire yard a minefield of holes, bones, and bone shards, but not one every buried anything.
I won't say no dog ever does, just that none of my diggers ever did.

Do they have an forensic anthropologist on the expert list that can identity the toothmarks on the bones? I'd be curious to see what "small animals" covers in this case. C'mon, it's Florida - gators and panthers and bears, oh my! Of course a gator would stick it in the water, so there goes that idea. If a panther decided it was food there wouldn't be as much left as there is.
Yeah, I'm feeling snarky towards the defense, I know the smaller critters are more likely, like coons, coyotes (yes, plenty of those in FL), bobcats, foxes, feral dogs, wild pigs (okay, those aren't always that small, some of those weigh as much as black bear and ten times as mean).

 

[DammitJanet]

My theory on small animals in that woods there would be either small dogs, cats or even rats.

My dogs have also not buried things...they bring them back! Mine have brought back skulls of dead animals so if a dog had really found that baby in the woods, I am more apt to think that it might have dragged it out of the woods and taken it away to some where away from those immediate grounds.

 

[1905]

I'm hoping those jury members will disregard everything she said, I would, c'mon she didn't even know how many years she taught- she said "(big pause where she looks at ceiling) "Uh...30 or 40 years" You would know that answer! The whole testimony was strange. And the comment about the dog-even stranger.

The thing that worries me is that River Cruz woman, George Anthony's mistress, supposedly she will testify George told her all about the "accidental drowning" before the body was even found. I googled that. She may make something up just to feel important, or maybe she's mad at George.

 

[klmno]

Those are good points, DDD, and one commentator addressed them by saying he (Baez) could and should have approached the defense theory exactly as you suggested, however, he bcaked himself in a corner with running with the story about abuse (as you and DJ pointed out), so now what's he going to do? If he switches approaches/theories now, it does Casey in because the jury would never buy that she didn't kill Caylee, I don't think.

A commentator also mentioned something I find very interesting- apparently Casey was evaluation'd by at least one psychiatric but if the defense called the psychiatric who evaluation'd her to the stand, the judge said Ashton would be allowed to question the psychiatric about other things the psychiatric found out or determined about Casey, and after learning that, Baez withdrew the psychiatric from his witness list. That to me, says a WHOLE lot, but unfortunately it's another factor the jury won't know until after trial.

I was trying to read up on what was testified to today and read that an expert said three pairs of shoes from the home had silt or dirt on them similar to that found around Caylee's remains- who did these shoes belong to?

 

[donna723]

I looked up their address on Google Earth. The area where they live is in a subdivision surrounded by other subdivisions with a few wooded patches and what look like several very small man-made lakes. It's not a rural area where there would be a lot of wildlife and while there are still alligators in some of the bigger lakes, I doubt if there are any in those shallow little man-made "ponds". Any wildlife that might have disturbed the body would be more like dogs or maybe foxes or raccoons. And there ARE coyotes in Florida, or at least there are near Gainesville where my brother lived.

And I doubt too if they will ever put Casey on the stand. That prosecutor would make mincemeat out of her! They replayed Baez' opening statements today and his whole premise was that she lies because she was sexually abused and that Caylee drown in the pool. And now they have seemed forgotten about all of that because they would have to back that up, which they can't. They're grabbing at straws.

 

[DammitJanet]

Baez said you will hear stories about it. Now who can tell those stories unless its Casey, George, Lee or a therapist? I did hear that about the psychiatrist having seen Casey too and danged if I dont wish they had put him/her on! The defense wants to put on some nurse who is a grief counselor or something or other who is supposed to testify as to how young mothers deal with or show grief when their young children die. The problem as I have heard is that I dont think this woman has ever interviewed Casey in person so...uhhh...it is a moot point and even if she has, Casey lies! Also...its another spur of the moment witness that is sprung on the prosecution with no time to depose! That should make the judge so happy.

 

[klmno]

I'm thinking Ashton can bring enough out from the grief counselor to show that a lot of other things are possible, too. I'm thinking some of the defense's experts are there but not necessarily there to try to get Casey off scot free if she's guilty and any type of MH prof worth his/her salt would be that way.

I just wish the defense would get finished with the "expert" and move on to other types of witnessess.

I don't know about this supposed mistress of George- on the surface it does appear like he had an affair, told the woman all this was a horrible accident, then had suicidal ideations because of all that. on the other hand, if it's true that he became physically aggressive with Casey (as the woman says he told her) and demanded that Casey tell him what happened to Caylee, that proves that George wasn't in on it and was just going by what Casey told him at that point in time, and the suicidal ideation may have been a result of all that going on plus finding himself caught up in a relationship with this woman when he really didn't want to be unfaithful or leave Cindy. I don't put much into his statement (if true) that he'd already lost one girl and didn't want to lose another. I've said that I don't want to lose my son, even when I know he's guilty and even when I have turned him in and not tried to get him off. It's an honest, heart-felt statement by a parent, in my humble opinion.

But what flippin' juror is sitting there now telling the judge she thinks she can't "judge" a person?? Shouldn't that sort of thing be found out at jury selection? Don't they ask those sort of questions in Fl or is this woman just trying to go home because they've been sequestered for so long?

 

[donna723]

If I remember right, that same woman was saying during jury selection that she didn't want to judge anyone but both sides picked her for the jury anyway! Is she objecting now to being on the jury? I guess if she ends up off the jury, one of the alternates will just take over for her.

And didn't they say that they found almost every single bone from the body right there in the same area? I've always heard that when animals disturb a body, they scatter the pieces all around over a wide area. Must have been very small animals, too small to carry anything off like maybe rats. I've never been really clear on that part - they kept going on about the shovel. Do you think she actually buried her or just left the plastic bags on the ground? They said that whole wooded area was under water during the storms.

 

[klmno]

I have no clue about most of what you're referring to- I just have no knowledge of it because I wasn't watching during jury selection and don't understand the issue or question about the bones being scattered- I don't know who in the courtroom made issue of it. But, as far as the shovel, it was my impression that the prosecution's point was that Casey borrowed a shovel from a neighbor, or something like that, and they think she intended to bury Caylee in George and Cindy's backyard but the ground was too hard so she ended up dumping her like trash in the wooded area. They are using the fact that dogs hit on the backyard to support that. As far as the remains in the wooded area, I haven't heard much else from the prosecution other than that Casey just dumped the body there; the defense wants to place doubt on the basis that the meter reader dumped the body there after holding it hidden somewhere for months, then it appears by the witnesses, that they are saying animals buried some of the bones or scattered them or something, but that the remains were only there a matter of weeks, not months.

As far as that juror- I'd rather see her step down and let an alternate take over than to see this end in a hung jury due to someone just not being "able to point the finger in judgement", whether she thinks Casey is guilty or not. It's unfathomable that someone who believes that way is chosen for a jury- not that the woman can't choose that position, but she shouldn't be on a jury if that's her conviction.

 

[HaoZi]

Considering how intact the body was, I'd expect it was in the bag and buried in the bag.
A reluctance to judge can be something both sides look for in a juror, or it could be both had already run out of their freebies when they can kick a potential juror without having to give a reason.

How could Baez not know Ashton would get to cross? Sounds like he was playing dumb. Unless I misunderstand the posts here (haven't watched today or read the updates).

 

[klmno]

If you are referring to Ashotn's right to cross on the psychiatric, the way the commentator said it lead me to think that the issue wasn't that a cross-examination wouldn't be allowed, but that the cross could include "other relavent facts uncovered or determined by the psychiatric" that Ashton would be allowed to bring out on cross if the psychiatric was put on the stand by the defense. IOW, the judge wouldn't limit Ashton's cross to only the subject of possible grief reactions by a sexual abuse victim. This is why, I speculate, that the defense canned that idea and now says it will call a grief counselor who never met with Casey personally.

Think about it, the psychiatric who interviewed Casey could have possibly said "yes, grief might be exhibited this way or disassociated from an abuse survivor, however, Casey exhibits more as a sociopath, or Casey revealed this to me, or Casey doesn't appear to exhibit any other documented symptom of an abuse survivor". Whatever it is, the defense obviously knew that Ashton could get something from the psychiatric that they didn't want revealed. And the only difference is that they want a psychiatric who never interviewed Casey personally. If it's a psychiatric hired by the defense that comes up with something that damaging about Casey's personality or affect, that says a lot to me. For all we know, Casey could have admitted what she did to the psychiatric, although I find that hard to believe given that I'm not so sure Casey will ever tell the truth.

 

[DammitJanet]

From what I understood the people to say about the shrink the defense hired, Baez thought he could put on his so called expert shrink and that opinion would be law. The prosecution couldnt dig to find out if Casey had anything else wrong with her other than what the defense wanted to be told. Such as if I wanted Baez to put me on the stand and have my shrink say I only have anxiety. Well...there is quite a bit more to that little story...lol.

 

[HaoZi]

I would think the entire psychiatric report would be open for questioning. Baez should have known that, too. I believe that's basic rules of procedure. Is Baez that green?

 

[klmno]

DJ, that's my understanding, too.

Some people on tv are saying he actually is that green. I don't know if these people are jealous attnys or if they really know what they're talking about. I teeter between the idea that he's clearly incompetent and that he's in a no-win situation given Casey's determination to tell some bogus story. Either way, I'm becoming more and more convinced that he must have some incompetence but more importantly, Casey is going to have an appeal just due to this attny and the defense approach.

Does anyone here have any ideas why the defense is still insistent on putting on Vasco about supposed phone calls with George when he apparently has evidence that he didn't even have that phone number back then?? That one completely baffles me.

 

[Marcie Mac]

Interesting - would any of us let a psychiatric doctor testify about one of our difficult child's without benefit of actually seeing and talking to them?

DDD, I "think" the defense wants to put him on just because it would throw dirt on George even if it wasn't true just on the off chance that in one of the jury's heads Vasco would be connected with George.

Marcie

 

[DammitJanet]

Im thinking that if the prosecution had even KNOWN ahead of time that she had had a psychiatric done on her that they would have been allowed to have had their own psychiatric conduct a neuropsychologist exam on her. Especially if the defense planned on putting their expert on...you know...battle of the experts?

 

[Nancy]

Well if the defense does put this cell phone guy on the stand Ashton will tear that story apart and the jury will have one more reason to disregard their theory. It would be an awful mistake to do that. I saw this guy interviewed last week and he is very upset that he is in the middle of this case. Baez cannot think he could help them in any way.

Nancy

 

[HaoZi]

Turn on ABC now - PrimeTime is on the case right now.

 

[1905]

I missed all this. But, what's with that juror? Is that juror number 4? The reporters were talking about juror number 4, that she seems sypathetic to the defense and yes, at jury selection she said she didn't judge anyone. She needs to go, I'm jumping way, way ahead...I don't want a hung jury. Are you even referring to her? What happened?