Saturday, January 1, 2011

Casey Anthony's Attorneys File A Blizzard Of Motions: Hearing Monday, January 3: Part 1

When I wrote of the motions in limine filed on December 21 (Oceans of Motions), I made a comment that I wouldn't be surprised if there were more to be filed. The defense didn't let us down. On the 29 and 30, the defense managed to file a whole blizzard of motions! The State of Florida even chipped in a single motion in limine.

After the initial six motions were filed, Judge Perry scheduled a hearing for January 3. Then, the State filed it's "bombshell" motion for sanctions against the defense concerning discovery.

Here's where everything becomes monumentally confusing. On December 30, Cheney Mason submitted a Notice of Hearing to the court, asking Judge Perry to hear all the motions listed. His list includes 23 motions. I will say, he left one of the motions in limine out, I won't say which one. He also included two motions which haven't been filed yet, they aren't listed with the Clerk of the Court.

One is a Motion to Compel Judicial Administrative Commission to Pay for Transcripts of Oak Ridge National Laboratory Depositions. The other is entitled Motion to Exclude - Root Growth (Frye). The first motion is easy to understand, were it filed, the defense would ask the judge to override the JAC decision not to pay the excess $800+, a debt Cheney Mason incurred due to a lack of written contract.

The second sent me to do a bit of research since we do have Dr. Bock saying that Dr. Hall, the State's forensic botanist cannot predict the rate of growth of the roots. She omitted to discuss Dr. Hall's conclusion that the bones and plastic bag through which the roots grew had to be stabilized in the location and had time to erode prior to any plant growth through them. Personally, once the motion is filed, it would not need a Frye hearing. It would be just another "battle of the experts" where the jury would have to decide which to believe. However, we know for sure motions not yet filed will not be heard.

Cheney Mason also played a little sleight of hand and slipped in the Request Court Determine Prior Bad Acts of Mr. Kronk based on Motion Papers filed.

Once I saw this one, I went back to my previous articles to refresh my memory. On November 29, I wrote,

The discovery motion settled for the time being, the judge began the status hearing. He first brought up the Roy Kronk motion (which has been sitting in my motions pending file since November 19, 2009. The judge asked Jose Baez if he wanted it heard or if he should just deny it since he had no interest in calling that motion up. Baez got to his feet, buttoned his jacket, and informed he would probably withdraw the motion and file it closer to trial. (Hmm... could it be that with the latest deposition of Brandon Sparks, the motion is falling apart some more?)"Please bear in mind" speeches about those pesky deadlines! The judge clearly stated that if Baez set that motion beyond the deadline, he definitely would not hear it, especially since it was already known to the court. Baez backed off with a few mumbled words about speaking with his team.

Watch the VIDEO of this exchange beginning at 5:52.

Then, at the December 20 hearing, Judge Perry brought the motion up yet again. Where Baez had said on November 29 that he would let the judge know right away, apparently, he didn't. In my article for that day, Baez indicated to the judge that he had until December 31 to have the motion heard. Judge Perry "went off" in a very polite way, telling Baez that if it weren't heard by December 23, it wouldn't be heard. Wait past that date, and there would be no pre-trial ruling.

Personally, this is one of my favorite Baez moments. Watch the VIDEO of this dialogue between the judge and Baez beginning at 20:06.

My thoughts are that on Monday, Baez will argue that it should be heard since the judge was on vacation! It wasn't his fault that he hasn't been prepared to present this motion since it was submitted on November 19, 2009!

I don't believe Judge Perry will hear all these motions on Monday. Some of them are complex and will need to be set for Frye hearings.

Monday will be a true grab-bag. Will the judge just hear the first six motions and the State's Motion for Sanctions? Perhaps he will hear a few of the newer ones. We'll have to wait and see.

As for the newly filed motions, I am in the process of reading them all and doing a lot of hard thinking. I will have a summary of them up in a separate article tomorrow.


ritanita said...


I lost your post! I'm so sorry. But you asked how I knew the motions weren't filed with the Clerk of the Court.

That's because I keep track of the records at the clerk's office. I regularly copy and past them and color-code (yes, I do color code) so it's easier to check.

I'm old-fashioned and actually print out the motions and check them off as well.