Sunday, July 11, 2010

Getting Ready for the Fireworks: Hearing Thursday in the Casey Anthony Murder Trial


The defense team filed an Objection to Release Of Documents Related To Intended Defense Review of the Evidence. A quick read-through told me that the author was Cheney Mason and that there was not a single legal reference to bolster his arguments.

The motion will be heard at tomorrow's hearing.

As for his arguments in favor of the motion, they deal entirely with the media. He attacks the media in oh, so many ways. He even manages to take a swipe at the "talking head" lawyers who have neither the experience, knowledge, or predicates for their public comments..."

I recommend a quick trip over to WFTV to read their article. I've also included their most excellent links.

Mason Dr. Lee Baez
READ: Objection On Release Of Evidence
VIDEO REPORT: Experts Reviewing Evidence

I know that I won't be alone on Thursday, July 15 at 2 PM. There will be many people who follow the Casey Anthony trial hearing watching to see what will happen. Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. will presiding over what may well be one of the most contentious hearings we have witnessed.

The genesis of this hearing goes all the way back to the defense's May 6, 2010 Motion To Reconsider Strickland Rulings. One of the portions that was scheduled for that day was the motion to make all the Texas EquuSearch records available to the defense. Unfortunately, when setting the date for the hearing, defense attorney Cheney Mason did not confer with TES attorney Mark NeJame, who was unavailable for that date. The hearing for this issue was then scheduled for July 15. If you would like to review the content of this, read the article I posted on the topic. This motion is technically not a "second bite of the apple" since the Baez and Mason claim that it was impossible to review all the documents properly. Baez even stated in open Court during the May 6 budget hearing that he wanted all the names so that he could research all the volunteers.

To date, we haven't heard Mark NeJame's side of the story, but it will be very interesting to listen to. Do you think Judge Perry will buy the defense's claims? Somehow, I don't think so. Linda Drane Burdick had stated that it had taken her about six hours to go over the forms and had found no more to flag. Also, I hope the judge puts an end to the whole issue for once and for all.

In addition, we have Cheney Mason's odd comments about the searchers after his solo hearing on June 16 after the status hearing.
In the middle of discussing the 911 calls and what Cindy Anthony had made in her deposition which was released last summer, Mason made a sharp seque to say

... the depositions where they searched and did not search, it turns out that they did not search the exact area where the body was found.

Kathy Belich then steered the conversation back to the 911 calls. The discussion then went back to the searchers. Mason said,

... the public has been made to believe that these people searched the exact area where the body was, or tried to, and couldn't. The fact is, they didn't try to, they didn't. They weren't there. It was impassable at the time. So, there's a lot of people who've mistaken what happened back in the summer of 2008, the winter of 2008.

He then went on to discuss that the defense wants to establish reasonable doubt as to when the body was put there. This is the same story that we've heard for quite a while, that the body was placed in that location when Casey was in jail.

Here's the problem with the "when Casey was in jail" part. Casey was in and out of jail between July 16, 2008 and October 14, 2009 when she was indicted by the grand jury. I would see that they would have a problem saying the body was put on Suburban drive after October 14, due to scientific evidence. Are they really going to try for a summer date when Casey was in and out of jail on bond?

Mason went on to state that the defense would have to establish "who, how, and when". He also mentioned that various people had given different information about the condition of the area. He said that some stated that they couldn't search the area because it was under water. He also said that someone said the area wasn't under water.

His statement concerning the searches ended with the statement concerning June 16, 2008,

That's when Caylee was missing. We don't know when she disappeared.

Listen HERE for yourself and see if what he says makes any sense to you!

The second issue on the agenda will be the admissibility of Cindy Anthony's 911 calls. On March 8, 2010, the defense filed the Motion to Exclude Heresay, Evidence, Gossip and Innuendo. The motion was pretty much put on the back burner, the State replied on June 9 with a motion outlining the reasons that the calls should be admitted. As I discussed in this article, the prosecution does not want to have the calls admitted as an excited utterance, they want them admitted because they show the developing story Casey made as the evening wore on.

Thanks to Richard Hornsby, we have a copy of the motion filed by Cheney Mason on June 22, Defense Reply to State Motion to Admit 911 Calls. In it, Mason goes through June 15, 2008 from Cindy Anthony's perspective to show that it was a "plan" of sorts based on her learning that the car was impounded and all the actions she took that day. He even mentioned that Cindy had explained her motivations for the call in the Good Morning America appearance.

He also gave a very complicated explanation in the presser he gave, which is already linked above.

The latest news broke last week that the prosecution has subpoenaed Cindy and Lee Anthony to testify at the hearing. I don't need to tell anyone who read here that this may be the most explosive part of the hearing. All over the Internet, people are asking, "What will Cindy say?" , "What will Lee say", "will George be there?". Even the family attorney, Brad Conway, made a statement to the OrlandoSentinel saying,

"She's going to tell the truth," Conway said today. "She made the phone calls. It's factual. She's going to testify truthfully."

Will she? That's why we'll all be watching.

For more news, check out Calls for Justice, donchais has a new article up today.


donchais said...

Thanks for breaking it all down!

For the life of me, Mason made no sense what-so-ever in the presser!

Thursday can't come soon enough.

Anonymous said...

You can't make this stuff up. This is already a case where all things bizarre is the norm.

Anonymous said...

A defense attorney likes to make things appear as complex as possible. The idea is to make the jurors think the evidence is "confusing" and therefore vote not guilty.

David From TN

vic said...

its really bad when your attny has to tell the public you plan on telling the truth this time

katfish said...

Ritanita,This will definitely be an interesting hearing....think we'll find out who's in charge of strategy for the defense? There seems to be some disagreement among the ranks.

I say good for the state to subpoena Cindy and Lee for this hearing. get them locked in on some "truths" before this goes to trial. Will LDB be able to use any of their prior statements to impeach them if necessary ?

ritanita said...

Katfish, I'm still having flashbacks to the Morgan & Morgan depositions where they challenged what she was saying with her videotapes. I'm sure the prosecution could do this as well.

However, since the prosecution isn't asking for the calls to come in as an excited utterance, I rally don't think there will be that sort of situation.

Cindy has her reasons for making the call down pat, but I sincerely doubt that Linda Drane Burdick will ask questions about that at all.

She is interested in the development of Casey's story, and that's what she'll as Lee and Cindy.

Cindy may find herself answering questions she didn't anticipate.

FRG said...

Thank you for the article!
CM makes no sense to me. If what he is saying now is that the area where Caylee's remains were found was impassible, what's the point in getting 4,000 TES searchers records? Unless TES searched that area when KC was in jail then this would make sense. Maybe defense's goal is to pin the murder on one of the searchers or raise suspicion on one of them. Who knows. With all of the evidence State has it will be hard.
I can't wait for this hearing to watch Cindy and Lee on the hot seat. I guess we will be hearing decomposition smell turning into either rotten pizza or dead crawling squirrel. It will be a curious hearing, I would like to see KC's reactions to Cindy and Lee being questioned which we pretty much know she has been coached not to show emotions, not that she has a broad range of them. It will be a preview to the trial, I believe.
I could be wrong but the Anthony's clan will be there and also Mallory Parker. Mallory might bring the rubber band so KC could give her blessings. *wink wink*

ritanita said...

FRG posted a comment I accidentally deleted. So, I managed to get it back!


I am sure you have followed the news and know about the list of items to be inspected today and tomorrow by defense experts want to keep secret, did you read the Motion:
It's quite entertaining, to say the least. When Cheney Mason offered his analyis to Tony Pipitone it was okay. When JB and his team went on National Media to "twist the truth" about the case it was also okay. I just don't get it now. What's all the fuss about this list of items to be released? We have seen every piece of evidence that was turned over to the defense anyway. We know the experts analyzing the item recovered from the crime scene.
It's just nonsense to me. JB & CM just love the attention.

ritanita said...

FRG, I just came to write an update to the blog now that I have the motion. I agree with what you have to say!

FRG said...

Thanks for the update!!!
Yep, blame the media, it's the media's fault! Talking head lawyers? Was CM referring to himself when he wrote that or just thinking about JB? Take your pick. LOL
BTW, Kathi got under CM's skin today. I guess that Dr. Lee is very sensitive issue.
I won't be missing miss this hearing. I will bring the popcorn.

BChand said...

Great update Ritanita, thanks.

What I don't get is that since Mason is supposed to be such an experienced attorney, why is he wasting the courts time with yet another motion complaining about the media?

Judge Perry specifically said at the last hearing that the court has no control over what the news media considers newsworthy or not newsworthy.

I'm hoping he lets them have it on Thursday. Maybe his client should not have committed this crime in a state with a sunshine law.

Ronni said...

They should welcome the Talking Head analysis...methinks they need all the help they can get!