Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Casey Anthony Hearing Friday! A Look Into Her Mind

Update #2!
Thursday, April 13

The State has filed two new motions.

Yesterday they filed the State of Florida's Motion In Limine which states that

During the depositions of Drs. Danziger and Weitz certain statements were attributed to the Defendant as to events which are remote in time to the events surrounding the death of Caylee Anthony.

Citing a "substantial issue as to the admissibility of these matters..., should the matters be ultimately found to be inadmissible," the State asks that the court prohibit any mention of these statements until the trial, at which time the defense would have to make a proffer outside the presence of the jury.

In a motion filed today, the State has asked permission from Judge Perry to be allowed to show the sealed depositions to their own expert for the purpose of giving them an expert's view of the comments made.

In the motion, we also learn that Dr. Jeffrey Danziger has been withdrawn as a witness by the defense. The State never finished his deposition.

Well, there's more to scratch one's head over! This adds to the topics that will be discussed tomorrow!

Thanks to Muzikman for posting these motions.

(10:23 AM)

WESH just published a Defendant's Response To Motion For Examination By Mental Health Expert.

There is going to be a status hearing on Friday, April 15 at 1:30 PM.

There will also be a motion argued concerning Casey Anthony's state of mind during the 31 days she went on her merry way minus her "kidnapped" daughter, Caylee Marie.

You see, the defense is saying that they sent two well-known experts, Dr. Jeffrey Danziger and Dr. William Weitz to have a "chat" with the defendant. While they didn't find her to be suffering from any mental disorders or diseases, the defense wants them to testify as to Casey's state of mind. They outlined this in their March 22 Motion Clarifying Motion For Leave To File Additional Witnesses.

Yesterday, the state filed a Motion In Limine As To Testimony Of Mental Health Experts. Prior to that, on the 8th, they also filed a Motion for Exam by Mental Health Expert.

According to Jeff Ashton, the state received the reports on March 25 and have been deposing these two expert witnesses. The depositions will be completed today.

Most importantly, Ashton argues that

3. Both the above reports and motion reveal that the testimony does not relate to a legal defense to any of the charges...
4. The reports indicate that the opinions of the experts are based entirely upon statements made to them by the Defendant.

And Casey always tells the truth! It's like a telephone game to keep Casey off the stand. Casey tells the experts and the experts tell the court. Isn't that called heresay?

Do you remember that at the hearing on March 24 when this defense was suggested by Ann Finnel? She said it wasn't going to be a mental defense and Casey shook her head to silently say no. She pretty much stammered her way through the explanation to the Court on this.

5. The reports do not diagnose the defendant as suffering from any clinical or personality disorders as recognized by the American Psychiatric Association.

Notice here that Ashton indicated that the reports have no diagnosis, not that the doctors haven't diagnosed her. I would bet the farm that should we have a mitigation phase, those diagnoses would be out there, front and center. I don't believe Casey or her family would want to have to admit to a personality disorder unless it were to save her life. We know that Casey has not mounted a "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense.

Ashton hits his home run in his summation of his argument.

It will be impossible for this court to fully litigate the issue of the admissibility of the proffered testimony pre-trial. The admissibility of those opinions will be wholly dependent upon the testimony of the Defendant. Their exist substantial issues as to the admissibility of the opinion even if the Defendant does choose to testify. The potential prejudice that would result from the premature discussion of these opinions could not be overcome by any instruction by this court, should the opinions be ultimately found to be inadmissible. (bold mine)
Based on comments during the last hearing, Ann Finnel will be arguing this motion for the defense. I wish her luck.

As to the status portion of the hearing, I would assume there will be more discussion about jury selection.

Of course, there could be some surprises at the end when Judge Perry asks if there is anythin else!

Casey Anthony trial: Prosecution wants mental health reports about Casey kept out

Prosecutors: Casey’s Defense Strategy Not Legal


katfish said...

Woah, THE Defense RESPONSE to the State's MOTION FOR EXAMINATION BY MENTAL HEALTH EXPERT is so convoluted I had trouble reading part that did stand out was the request for the defense and state to be present during the examination if the court allows the exam. WTH?

The defense opened this can of worms themselves.Perhaps they should have just planned from the start to use an expert who hadn't examined the defendant, but could opine on whatever theory they plan to use to rebut the "consciousness of guilt" theory they say the state will present to explain the 31 days (and lies?).

Baez signed the response, but it also bears Mason and Finnell's names. A collaberation? Does that mean any of the 3 can argue the response to the court? If you know...

ritanita said...

Katfish, notice I didn't even try to figure out all the intricacies of the defense's latest! :)

I sense that the motion was put together by Ann Finnel. She's had so much experience with psychiatric testimony in her long career, mostly as a prosecutor.

I've been reading the rules for mental health defenses and, indeed, the defense can be present at the examination, should it occur.

Let's remember, though, that this is purported NOT to be a mental health defense, just having mental health experts who have "chatted" with the Defendant to report her latest story about what was going on in her mind during those 31 days.

All I can say about the whole issue is that I hope the State's motion in limine is the first thing argued.

Oh, and I did learn that expert witnesses CAN relay what the Defendant says, it's apparently an exception to the heresay rule.

Should any of this come in at trial, at least the jury will be well educated on Casey's ability to lie!

I think we are all in for an education on Friday!

Anonymous said...

It is upsetting to me that all this forensics and new witness on mental health is coming so late in the day. Why hasn't this been handled early on? Now the defense and prosecution will be working late in the night at the last Hour on these issues instead of preparing for trial. I'M SICK OF ALL THIS!

ritanita said...

I have to agree that some things came a tad on the late side. However, it's not unusual, especially in large, complicated cases, to have motions this late.

Depending on how things go at trial, it's even possible there will be motions filed as we go along.

Every motion settled pre-trial means less time spent on them at trial when the jury would have to wait and wait.

FRG said...


Thank you for the article!

My head is spinning! The mental expert motions are driving me nuts! LOL

It seems to me defense wants to explain there is no nanny, KC lied through her teeth and somebody else killed Caylee. KC partied like there was no tomorrow, spent Amy's money because... ??? can you think of anything plausible? I certainly can't.

Blame on George, blame on Cindy, the squirrel, the heat in Florida, Zam's turtle, blah, blah, blah, the nanny, oh no cross that one!! Are these people serious?


No further questions! LOL

FRG said...

Another one bites the dust!

Nobody could make this up ritanita! Wow!

See you tomorrow in court!