Thursday, July 1, 2010


It has just been announced that an emergency hearing will be held tomorrow, July 2 at 1:30 PM.

According to ClickOrlando:

Casey Anthony's defense team wants the judge to appoint a magistrate to oversee expert witness inspection of evidence in the case. The defense filed the emergency motion Thursday and Judge Belvin Perry scheduled a hearing for 1:30 p.m. Friday.

The defense said it is flying in a team from across the county to inspect documents and evidence in the murder case which are in the possession of the Orange County Sheriff's Office. "Counsel believes that allowing the officials from the Sheriff's Office to be present while counsel and expert witnesses inspect the items of evidence would unfairly subject statements made between counsel and the expert witnesses to discovery, creating an unfair prejudice against the defendant in her preparation for trial," the motion said. The defense wants the inspection to take place on July 13 and 14.

Casey Anthony will be attending the hearing.


FRG said...

Thanks for the article!
I am curious to see how KC is going to behave in the courtroom tomorrow.
How did you feel about AL exiting the team? My opinion is that she wanted to keep her records untarnished. It can't be money. She has released her book and got the publicity she wanted so now she came up with a lame excuse.
What secret defense wants to keep from the State I have no idea... JB is hilarious, we all knew their experts witness list because they were all over the Media.
Are you going to watch the hearing? I am sure you are.

ritanita said...

FRG, I don't know exactly why Lyon quit, but I'm sure money was an issue as none of her expenses would be paid. I'm thinking she has other reasons, Casey Anthony, Jose Baez, and Cheney Mason. I'm being a bit flippant here. There are so many differing opinions as to why she left, other than the financial issues. Your guess is as good as, or better than mine!

What the defense wants is a Special Master (non-involved person who has the background to properly supervise the examinations) who would preserve the chain of evidence. Otherwise, LE personnel would do that job.

The defense is afraid that LE personnel would learn something during the investigation and tell the prosecution.

I am sure that the experts (who were on the recently submitted defense witness list) have already examined photographs of the evidence and have formed their opinions. Now, they need to see the actual evidence to confirm their opinions.

Remember, these experts will be deposed shortly after examining the evidence.

As I've been reading around about this procedure, I have noticed that some people think the examination of the evidence should have been done earlier. However, I'm sure the reason for the close timing has to do with the expense of flying the experts in and putting them up at hotels. Two trips could easily blow the budget that Judge Perry is going over with a fine-toothed comb.

Considering the short notice, I'm sure I have something wrong here, so don't count on my opinions 100%!

Of course I'll be watching and reporting on the hearing!

Sprocket said...

This same situation occurred in the Spector trial. The defense did NOT want the prosecution's experts, supervising the examination of the evidence. Judge Fidler granted the request to not have LE or LE's experts who would be testifying, there, while the defense examined the evidence.

I believe Dr. Lynne Herold told me something to the effect that she had to train someone ~a third party~ in the handling/supervision of the evidence.

katfish said...

Personally, I'm going to cut the defense some slack on this one. If they didn't protect the integrity (and I use the term loosely)of their case they would not be doing their jobs.
I heard Casey has her tooth fixed good as new :#)
bandaid on her booboo

ritanita said...

I remember that well, Sprocket. These two cases do seem to intersect!

Katfish, I agree with you 100%.

I have no problem with a special master. I am wondering if more than one will be needed.

kellygreen said...

Look, I may be way off base here—if the evidence is in the possession of the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, under the US Constitution—specifically the Separation of Powers—does Judge Perry have the authority to order the sheriff to cede responsibility for the evidence and it’s chain of custody? Under the Separation of Powers, does Judge Perry have the authority to assign a disinterested third party to supervise the evidence and it’s chain of custody?

IIRC, after citing the Constitution’s Separation of Powers, didn’t Judge Perry deny a prior defense request because he didn’t have the authority to tell the Sheriff how to operate his jail?

In addition, has the Florida court system ever ordered a sheriff to cede his/her responsibility for the evidence and it’s chain of custody? Has a Florida judge ever ordered a sheriff to cede the evidence, and it’s chain of custody, to a disinterested third party? As I see it, if Judge Perry does appoint a disinterested third party to oversee the evidence and it’s chain of custody, he’s opening the Florida floodgates. How many attorneys will be beating on the courthouse door demanding the same special treatment that was afforded to Casey Anthony? And who will pay these disinterested third parties? The taxpayer?

Liz said...

This case does seem to intersect with PS1 - I wonder if LKB will be the one to say "the science will prove ..... " Why else would she be on the team?

Anonymous said...

henry leed has had an "epithany" and like his show of blood spatter (not spLatter), in oj's trial he will have again have his "moment" in the sun. assuming he hasn't "tucked something away" that he accidentally found in favor of the prosecution! I wouldn't put anything pass this guy! BTW, should AL be necessary after the verdict is in, assuming there is a trial, she'll be called back for the mitigation.

ritanita said...


Wish I knew more about Florida law! I will guess that a special master appointed to supervise would be someone who could legally maintain chain of custody.

It's done in other states and I'm sure it would be at taxpayer's expense!

ritanita said...


Henry Lee certainly does have a bunch of tricks up his sleeve. They say that his "blood spitting" episode in the Michael Peterson trial did the defendant no good at all. Neither did the "missing nail" help the case of Phil Spector!

I wish I had a crystal ball, but I have a feeling that Andrea Lyon is gone from the case for good. Cheney Mason is qualified to argue the DP. Of course, with this case, ANYTHING is possible!

Sprocket said...


In California, the County Sheriff's is a different entity than the LA Co. Crime lab. They are independent of each other. It may or may not be the same in Fla.

Sprocket said...

In the Spector case, the defense attorney's and their experts examined the evidence at the LA Co. Crime Lab. They did not take it off premises. If I recall correctly, they were given an area, and no one was allowed to observe them or take photographs.

Anonymous said...

ritanita, thanks for your acknowledgement. I agree with you all the way! cheney mason is qualified. His problem appears to be with time, he seems to have lost his "edge." He doesn't come across as charasmatic (sp)as he once was. I still am hard pressed to believe this fiasco, led by kc and baez, will find its way to trial. Like everyone else here on the blogs, I so look forward to it "playing out" before our eyes. do you think the trial date will change because AL is no longer on the team, and in deference to her daughter graduating the judge accomodated her request that stands today?

ritanita said...


There is only one person who will decide it this case actually goes to trial... Casey Anthony.

As for the trial date, that's up to the judge. Personally, I'd like to see it start a week earlier than presently scheduled.

Anonymous said...

my opinion on your comment ritanita is that, kc will take it to the "edge" as someone, I think george once said, that she's "known to take it to the edge" and maybe within a week of voidoir (sp) pull back, call it off, agree to admit, however you want to say this, and she will finally be resolved to proclaim her guilt in open court. she will take it to the max!!

katfish said...

When I said I want to cut the defense some slack here it was as far as filing the motion, they do have an obligation in a DP case to vigorously defend their client.

kellygreen,I don't think you were off base at all. There is a separation of powers, but there is a caveat, the judge has the power to control what evidence comes into the courtroom, so if the OCSO and the SAO want the evidence in, I guess in this case they will transport the evidence to an air conditioned space to be inspected even though he has no power to order them to do so.

I don't disagree with the judges ruling at all, but I don't fault the defense for asking. ;)

Have a Happy 4th of July everyone!

kellygreen said...

Sprocket, throughout the USA, I always assumed all evidence used in criminal trials remained in the custody of county sheriff’s departments.

Am I the only person who believes the “un-air-conditioned space” was a set-up? Please tell me there are others who question LDB’s statement to Judge Perry that the defense team had to examine the State’s evidence in an un-air-conditioned space. Honestly, I believe the threat of un-air-conditioned space was deliberate a set-up by the State—LDB had to believe Judge Perry would not force the defense to examine the evidence under such conditions. She had to realize Judge Perry wouldn’t sentence the defense to such conditions—it’s almost as though the State “set it up” so the defense would have at least a partial victory. With Judge Perry’s order requiring the OCSD to transport the evidence to an appropriately comfortable space, the defense did get a partial victory. I also agree with Judge Perry’s order allowing the State to record the defense team as they examine the evidence. I am, however, surprised the defense didn’t make a request to record the examination process, too. If both the State and the defense record the examination of evidence, neither side can come back later and claim the other side did something inappropriate during the examination process.

I don’t necessarily believe this is the last time we’ll hear from Andrea Lyon. When it’s time to appeal Casey’s conviction and death sentence, I believe AL will be called upon to vehemently argue against the death penalty; consequently, AL will ask the court to weigh the mitigating factors in Casey’s life.

ritanita said...

kellygreen, I like your analysis of the judge's decision! I think it's obvious that the discussions between Baez and Drane Burdick would never have an agreement. The air-conditioning was probably the deal maker for her. Apparently it wasn't so for Baez. The judge did well.

I was way too tired yesterday to write with a clear head, my ideas are still swirling around. I should have something up today when they settle down.

katfish,don't you think that Baez's inability to find Florida case law to back his decision also hampered the judge? If anybody should have been there today, it was Linda Kenney-Baden. She could have explained to the judge exactly what procedures she had followed in another case in another state.

Anon., I've thought of that. Just as with the forgery charges, she could do just that.

There will be more from me later!

Thanks for the wonderful insights, everyone!

katfish said...

I think the offer of the space to examine the evidence in a location without air conditioning was a result of Baez telling LDB when she asked him what evidence that the defense wanted to examine that they want "all of it". That statement alone shows where the animosity stems from....Baez.

Linda Kenney-Baden really should have been there yesterday. I thought she was working with Jeff Ashton about the forensic evidence? Even when she can't appear in court the defense may want to stick with the strategy of her dealing with the state regarding the forensics.
Baez is obviously just too "mad" to negotiate appropriately, IMO.