This "dynamic duo" were to be the ones who were going to start the defense theory that Caylee's remains were not on Suburban Drive in November. Unfortunately, it didn't quite work out.
Neither Hoover nor D. Casey were able to definitively say where they were in the woods. Under direct examination by Jose Baez, James Hoover tried to circle a huge area to tell where they searched. He admitted that he didn't exactly know where Caylee's little remains were found. He couldn't get a straight sentence out of his mouth to the point that Linda Burdick had to keep asking questions. He wasn't polite with Ms. Burdick, either. It was a pitiful performance.
When Ann Finnel stepped up to the plate to question Dominic Casey, he wasn't much better. He also couldn't explain where he had been. Thanks to Frank George who provided a "clean slate" on which to doodle. As time went on, he moved his marks farther and farther from the remains site. Do you see the tiny, circled x at the upper left hand corner of the map?? That was Mr. Casey's final "guestimate" as to where he went into the woods the first. That Somehow, the three infamous pavers got lost in the shuffle.
As for Dr. Furton, all I can say is simpler is better. I believe if Jeff Ashton had asked him what color the sky was, he would have answered that it depended on weather conditions, prevailing winds, time of year, and, by the way, he'd need to read what somebody's research said or ask a student to do a PowerPoint presentation.
If it weren't for Caylee Marie, I wouldn't even bother with this bunch.
Down And Dirty Day For The Defense
Court began a bit early at about 8:54 this morning. Immediately, the attorneys joined Judge Perry at the side bar. The jury was brought into the courtroom a couple of minutes after 9:00.
Cheney Mason called the first defense witness to the stand. It was Joe Jordan, author of the infamous e-mail we heard about yesterday. If you’ve read his depositions you will be aware that he said that he had changed his mind after visiting the site and seeing where Caylee was found.
In the summer of 2008, Jordan began volunteering for TES. He was a team leader. He was one of the searchers who was assigned to Suburban Drive.
The weasel and map came out and Mr. Jordan was called down to mark where he had searched. Ms. Burdick again objected to the aerial map which had been marked and she handed Mason a fresh aerial view photograph.
Jordan was unable to recall how many times he searched Suburban Drive. He wasn’t always a team leader. Jordan marked on the map where he and his team searched the first day. He and about 3 other searchers went into the woods. They went about 5' into the woods and there was standing water, a pink baby blanket, and a water cooler which he marked for TES. He didn't know if the items were picked up. They searched another area the first day as well.
Later in the day, he had a dog handler bring a dog up to the Suburban Dr. site. He also said that, on another occasion, he brought a dog in. Jordan didn't know it they were cadaver dogs.
He did inform LE about the dog searches. It wasn't a search, he just had the police dog from Panama City sniff two of the items they had located.
Mason asked Jordan if he was ever taken out to the site to show him how far he was from the remains site. He said he brought Brent Churchill out and he showed him the area. Mason then laid out the tape measure on the floor. Jordan was asked to testify as to the distance. There were objections. Jordan couldn't answer because it wasn't a straight route into the woods.
Jordan didn't recall if he went to the area a third time. He did know that the remains were found in December. He also remembered writing an e-mail to Yuri Melich. Jordan said he didn't remember the contents of the e-mail and Cheney Mason had him read a copy. He conveyed that he believed he was in the area where the remains were located. He remembered he said he had two cadaver dogs there. He also remembered that he told Melich that he remembered saying he thought that the body had been moved.
Mason asked Jordan how many people searched the area. (objection/sustained) They then used the map. He showed the pathway and was asked for his best estimate as to the number of people. Jordan said the didn't see anyone else other than TES people search the area, just the 4 or 5 people on his team.
He was interviewed in November, 2009. Mason mentioned that Cpl. Edwards asked about 100 searchers in the area. It didn't refresh his memory. He said he only remembered his team searching the one pathway. Mason wanted to know how many people searched from there to the privacy fence. Jordan said there weren't 100 people.
Mason asked if he searched up Hopespring Drive. He said he saw a lot of people and the media trucks at the house as they drove by.
Mason asked if he knew what was done with his e-mail. Jordan didn't know.
Linda Burdick did cross examination. First, she moved the useless weasel out of the way.
Prior to searching with TES in August and September, Jordan sent e-mails to Allen and Melich with ideas.
TES required them to keep paperwork and document the individuals who went on the search. They had a place to mark where they searched and a place to mark if there was follow-up needed. He also needed to be debriefed by TES. Ms. Burdick then showed Jordan the TES paperwork he had turned in.
Burdick pointed out that he took very detailed notes on his forms. She then asked to use the documents as a demonstrative aid.
Jordan identified page 1 and Burdick pointed out the names of the searchers who went with him. The first place on Suburban they searched was down at the dead end behind the school. They had two dogs which were not fresh when they checked the articles. The areas they did not search were not highlighted on the map. The entry about "two humerus bones" was investigated and they were not human bones.
There was also a comment about the water being too deep to search when they entered the brush. He was concerned about snakes and stepping on remains. He said that the area needed to be re-searched when the water went down.
They then went to the last page and the highlighted areas were where they searched. The lines marked items they found for later investigation. He did not highlight some of the areas where he found some of the items were located because the area was not well searched.
When he e-mail he sent to Melich and Allen, Jordan did not know where the remains were found. He based his opinion on the media and speculation. He said he made a mistake.
Cheney Mason then conducted re-direct.
Mason brought up that Mr. Churchill showed him where the remains were found. When he went out there, the scene had been completely processed. When he saw the tents in the media, he thought it was an area where he searched. The water he saw was clear and he could see the bottom.
Mason then questioned his integrity. Mason asked if he was threatened with felony prosecution. Jordan started to take the Fifth, and Linda Burdick called for a side bar. Ms. Burdick argued that Jordan explained to Mason in deposition and to the jury that he made a mistake.
Judge Perry asked what Davis vs. Alaska said and Ms. Burdick cited it. There was a discussion of the statute of limitations. In this case it is three years. He then went on to say that the proper procedure would have been to proffer the question and then thy could have dealt with it out of the presence of the jury. It was proper to bring up the granting of use immunity. It would have been up to the state to go into the details as to what the immunity was given for.
He then asked Mason what his line of questioning was going to be. Mason said that with that response, he wouldn't go on.
Burdick asked that the question be stricken, but that Mr. Mason could question him on other issues of bias.
Judge Perry then reviewed the text of the interview in which he took the Fifth. Then, he ascertained that the defense had subpoenaed him to testify. Perry indicated that Mason's question did not require the taking of the Fifth and Mr. Jordan had a knee-jerk reaction and did so. Perry asked Mr. McClellan, Kronk's attorney about the situation and he said he was offered use immunity concerning the contents of the tape. (It should be pointed out that no charges were ever filed against Jordan.)
Perry said that he would instruct the jury to disregard the Fifth comment, but that Mason cannot ask him about why he was offered immunity, or about the surreptitious taping because he doesn't have immunity for possible prosecution.
Mr. McClellan was asked to speak with his client and then the judge called for a 15 minute recess.
After the break, the witness and Mr. McClellan were called back into the courtroom. Perry said that the response would be stricken because it was non-responsive to the question asked.
Mr. Mason then asked for a side bar.
Finally, we were underway. The jury was returned and the direct examination of Joseph Jordan continued.
Judge Perry instructed the jury to disregard the two questions that Mason asked. The questions had been withdrawn and they were not to take the answers into consideration.
Mason had no more questions.
Ms. Burdick had no questions at this time.
Apparently, she could call him later in the rebuttal case. Mason opened the door to the sealed tape recording. Should Ms. Burdick decide to do so, she could call him in the state’s rebuttal case and discuss why he made the tape. He could then testify to the fact that he didn’t trust the defense and the direction they were taking the conversation. He taped it for his own protection, not realizing if was a 3rd class felony.
Jose Baez then called George Anthony to the witness stand
Baez’ first question was if he knew a woman by the name of Krystal Holloway. George answered that he knew her as River Cruz. He considered her a friend and would help find his granddaughter by working at the command center. He considered her another volunteer.
Anthony denied having a romantic relationship or affair with her. He said the suggestion was “funny”. He never borrowed money from her. He went to her house on two or three occasions. George explained he went to her condominium and one has to go through a security gate. The first time he went there, it was because she told him she had a brain tumor and needed to comfort her. He became very connected to her and he felt it was the least he could do to offer compassion.
He visited her during the day. When Baez asked if he was supposed to be working, Jeff Ashton objected and there was a side bar. The objection was overruled. George said he'd just started a new job and his employer was lenient about his hours. George said she had told Cindy as well about her medical issues. Cindy knew he had visited her.
When asked if he told her “it was an accident that snowballed out of control,” George said he never confided anything about that to anyone but his immediate family. Baez asked if George, while being romantic with her, told her that. When he repeated the question, Baez left out the romantic part, George answered he hadn't. George also agreed he sent the text message to her and he left her a letter whose contents he didn't remember. It was to cheer her up and make her feel comfortable about her life.
Finally, Baez asked if he told her not to tell anyone about his affair with her. George reaffirmed he never had an affair with her and mentioned that she had a past and mentioned she had been arrested for fraud... (he was told to stop).
Baez asked how often he spoke to her on the phone from October to January, 2009. George said he didn't know.
Baez was finished.
Jeff Ashton asked when he met her. He answered it was sometime during mid-October, 2008. After Caylee's remains were found, the friendship ended. When asked if he ever told River Cruz that he threw Casey up against a wall and screamed, "where is Caylee?" George said it never happened.
The defense then called Cindy Anthony to the stand.
Baez asked if she ever instructed Dominic Casey and Jim Hoover to go to Suburban Drive to search for Caylee. Cindy replied that she hadn’t. She also said that she couldn't recall if she ever said she'd had "her people" in the area to Yuri Melich. She was upset that he was in her home on the 20th of December. Cindy did recall telling Melich that a blanket was missing.
She also claimed that the police did not leave a list of items seized on the 11th. They eventually got it. Cindy said they took 70 items on the 11th. She thought it had to do with the sticker.
Baez then asked if she ever told Lee that she had sent Casey and Hoover to Suburban Drive around November, 2008 and December, 2008. She said that her only knowledge of the search was after the remains were found.
There was no cross examination.
Next up was Lee Anthony. Baez asked if he had an argument with his mother about her having sent Casey and Hoover to Suburban Drive. Lee testified that Cindy told him that she sent Dominick into the woods because she had a psychic tip she wanted to follow up on. It was later in the year, before he went bact to work in October, 2008. (That’s unfortunate! The searches weren’t until November!) Lee also said that he was quite angry with his mother because it was the first time anyone in the family mentioned the possibility of a dead Caylee.
Frank George did the cross. Mr. George asked about the date when Cindy told him; Lee said the argument fueled his decision to go back to work. He understood that he had the argument before the events took place in November.
Baez asked on re-direct why he was angry. Lee said his parents had left him out of the loop and that they considered that Caylee was dead.
On re-cross, Mr. George asked him if he believed what his sister had told him. Lee answered "yes and no" and smiled.
Lee was excused.
The next defense witness was Yuri Melich (again!).
Baez asked Melich about the December 20, 2008 search warrant. Melich affirmed that Cindy Anthony had mentioned that she had her "people" walk the Suburban Drive area during. When he looked over his report, he affirmed his memory and said there was another officer with him there at the time.
Next up was Roy Kronk. Cheney Mason asked about Kronk's employment as a meter reader for Orange County. Kronk said he read water meters in 2008. He stated that they were assigned their routes the night before and that he worked all over Orange County.
On August 11, he was assigned to read meters out near Hopespring Dr. He said he was not familiar with the Anthony residence since it was his first time on that particular route. Kronk said that he started out on his own that day. Late in the afternoon, two of his co-workers joined him.
Mason asked him what he remembered about August 11, 2008. Kronk said he remembered seeing a rattlesnake. He went into the woods to relieve himself because there were no facilities on his route.
Mason asked if he knew the location of the nearest gas station!
Kronk recalled that he knew about the case and he discussed it with his roommate, but not very often.
Mason asked if Kronk knew where the Anthony house was. He said it was his first day on the route. He also said nothing unusual happened that day.
He said he relieved himself and walked straight out of the woods. As he walked out, he saw an object that looked a little odd to him. He said he didn't really see a bag. He didn't lift a bag. He said he was never closer than 20-30' from the object and thought it looked like something. Then, they saw the rattlesnake and got interested in that.
He did not tell his co-worker, Mr. Dean that he had seen a skull. Dean did get a shovel and pick up the rattlesnake. Kronk said that he told Dean that he saw an object that looked like a skull, but they were more interested in the snake. They went back to their office and showed everybody the dead rattlesnake and the went home.
He called Orange County and they told them to call Crime Line. Nobody ever responded to him, even though he'd told them he saw something that looked like a skull.
He worked August 12, but didn't remember which route he had. That day, he just went home.
On the 13th, he called the Sheriff's office again. He was told that an officer would meet him on Suburban Drive. Two officers came out, one was Officer Cain. Kronk said he never took them into the woods. He pointed to the area where he believed he had seen it.
Mason went over the scenario (probably with the records). According to Mason, he called 911. Kronk explained he lived in Osceola County. Ms. Burdick explained that Kronk had called the non-emergency number.
Mason mentioned that he had reported seeing "something white" and "a gray bag" and Kronk agreed. Kronk also mentioned it could be Caylee and told them the general areas where it was.
Mason went through the second call as well, in excruciating detail. In that call he mentioned a gray "pool cover" and mentioned a fallen tree...white board... At this point, Ms. Burdick objected to Mason reading from the call. It was sustained. He was reading from a document not in evidence.
Roy Kronk's lawyer prepared him well for this grilling. He answered the questions with yes/no or short, responsive answers. He maintained his composure.
Kronk said that he drew a map for the officer. He didn't remember if he drew in the privacy fence. Mason stepped up and showed him the map he drew. The map was drawn December 17, 2008. It was entered into evidence. When it was published, Kronk described the various items he observed. An x marked the spot where he thought he may have seen a skull. Kronk didn't know the distance from the street. On August 13, he never took the officers to the spot.
Kronk never smelled anything peculiar. He never lifted the bag. On August 11, Kronk never went into the woods and after that, he never went back into the woods. He also said he never told the deputies that he had found a bag with bones in it. (Especially Dep. Cain)
On August 11, 2008, he never went into the woods, he just saw the item he thought could be a skull through the veil of the trees. He said that where he went into the woods, it was dry. He was aware of the reward being offered for Caylee. It was $250,000.
Kronk said he was aware that, on August 11, there were media trucks on Hopespring Drive. He said that he DIDN'T find a bag of bones. He said he saw something that appeared to look like a skull. He never told anybody in the media trucks or in the area. He told his roommate. He had said that he had seen something white, that looked like a skull sticking out of a bag. Kronk had no idea if the bag he saw in August was the same as the one he saw in December.
Cheney Mason then went to his deposition to impeach the witness. When Kronk answered the question just asked, he answered in the affirmative. On August 11, he tried to point out the item to his co-workers, he said they were more interested in the snake. (In his deposition, he said essentially the same thing! Where was the impeachment?)
Judge Perry called the lunch recess until 1:30.
Cheney Mason continued with his direct. He started out by asking Kronk more about the phone calls he made. Mason asked if he'd told an operator that he'd stood over a bag and looked down at a skull.
Mason introduced Kronk's calls into testimony with stipulations. The first is a call to 911 on August 11, 2008. The second call was also made to 911. The third call, also to 911.
In the call on the 11th, he mentioned he was aware the Anthony home was in the area. He reported he saw something white and a gray bag. He accidentally said they lived on Good Hope road.
The second call, on the 12th, he reported what had happened the day before. He mentioned the fallen tree with a white board on it. He was advised to call the tip line, but he was concerned about remaining anonymous if the body were found.
The third call, on the 13th, Kronk now knew the name of the school. He reported that he was waiting for officers to join him at the site.
What totally confused me was that Mason had asked if he ever said he was standing OVER the bag. As I listened, Kronk never said it. As to the impeachment questions, they were going nowhere either!
After Kronk made the call on the 11th, he did nothing because he made it at 9:30 PM. On the 12th when he called, he watched a little TV and went to bed as it was made after 9:00 PM.
Mason then asked about a statement January 6, 2009, which was a recorded conversation with Yuri Melich. He was asked if he had ever been on the street before. Kronk said he had been there one day with his supervisor and on the 11th. By the end of the day, he realized that the Anthony's lived on Hopespring Drive.
Roy Kronk admitted he thought it was a good idea to search for a body. He was asked about a co-worker, Mr. Deen and if they had an argument about who had the idea about searching there for a body.
There were more quotes, from the statement, none of which went to impeach Mr. Kronk.)
Kronk stated that he did not have the same route the other days and he made his calls after work.
On the 13th, he talked to Dep. Cain and a female officer. Kronk explained that when he said he looked DOWN at a skull-like object, he meant that he was looking from a higher elevation. He also said that he never got 6-8 feet from the item to point it out to Dep. Cain. He said he never went that close to the skull. He said that Dep. Cain went down near the water, looked left and right, slipped and chewed Kronk out for half an hour. Cain never got within 6-8 feet. In the statement to Melich, he also said that in the interview.
At that point, Ms. Burdick had an objection. Judge Perry asked Mason for the document so he could rule.
We were treated to our first after-lunch side-bar.
Mason then went to the period of August 13 to December 11. He asked Kronk if he tried to work with LE to find the skull. He didn't. Mason then went into the fact that he got $15,000 for the picture of the snake and the interview with a TV station. Kronk collected $5000 from Crime Line. He indicated that the county paid his lawyer for a while and then stopped.
Kronk denied calling his son, Brandon Sparks in November to tell him he would soon be famous.
Between August 13, and December 11, Kronk only went to the area only when he had that route. He didn't search the area those times.
No law enforcement officer inspected his car, no cadaver dog sniffed it, he was never asked to give DNA samples. He didn't know if he was investigated. He allowed Det. Melich to take a photograph of his phone. He never knew his phone records were subpoenaed. He never had contact with the people working on the case between August 13 and December 11, 2008.
Finally, Mason got to December 11. He was on the same route, but never got to the Anthony home. He went to the area by himself and went into the woods. He wasn't searching. He did find the remains of Caylee Marie Anthony.
He said he'd never gone near the area, so he couldn't be sure if they were in the same place. When asked again, he explained that the area was flooded, in December it looked different.
Between August and December, he never contacted LE. He let it drop.
Kronk, on December 11, was able to get near the bag. When he saw the white object, he put his stick into the eye socket and lifted it up gently (pivoted it gently) and put it down again when he realized it was a skull. He called his area supervisor. He said he needed him at the site and needed him there.
The deputies arrived quickly. He didn't remember who he spoke to. He didn't ask if he was entitled to the $250,000 reward. He didn't remember if he discussed it at all. He was challenged with telling a deputy, he said he couldn't remember.
Mason kept asking questions. At one point, he said he was angry that nobody had done anything about finding the skull.
Kronk said he was jokingly talking about the reward with his supervisor. A comment with about his ex-wife was said somewhat jokingly due to problems he had with her.
Kronk said he'd gone into the woods that day to relieve himself and hadn't read any meters yet.
He spoke with detectives about the reward from Crime Line, not the other one.
When accused of joking about finding the body, Kronk reaffirmed that they were joking about the money.
Mason kept repeating his questions from earlier. It was getting very wearying to me. I kept waiting for someone to object/asked and answered.
Then, Mason went back to August. Kronk kept saying he never got near it because it was in the water. Mason kept trying to trip him up by going from August 11 to December 11 and back and forth throughout the questioning
Then, Kronk again denied the phone call to his son. IT NEVER HAPPENED! He said that he called Brandon on December 11 to tell him he was going to be on TV and he could see him for the first time since he was 8 years old.
This was painful to watch. I'm not saying anymore, it's repetitive and to no avail.
Just as I typed that, Mason asked to recess for a few minute.
We were treated to a long break, but Cheney Mason had that time to try and dig for more testimony to impeach Roy Kronk.
Mr. Mason was back at the podium to take a few more whacks at Mr. Kronk.
Next Mason was on to categories.
1. His son: Kronk said the call Mason referred to never happened. In the pertinent period of time, he called him a number of times. He couldn't give his son's number, but gave his own. Kronk said he didn't believe he ever told his son he was going to be rich and famous. (On the "rich" he meant that when his son got out of the Coast Guard, they may work together.)
2. Money: Mason asked if he made comments to any of the detectives such as "Roy has to eat, too." Kronk said no. Mason brought up an interview with a number of detectives. There was a conversation with Melich about his needing money but keeping a low profile. Kronk said he probably said that line jokingly.
3. Changing story. Mason asked about his conversations with LE about his changing story. Kronk said he'd made a mistake and later changed it. Again, there was a document to impeach. There apparently was a comment about the skull rolled out when he poked the bag. Kronk said it was in his original statement. He didn't say he'd lifted the bag and held it waist high. It wasn't in any of his statements. Then, the comment about lifting the skull with his stick wasn't in his statement either. Kronk said that he had conversations with LE and mentioned it and didn't write it down. Kronk said, the skull did NOT roll out of the bag when he lifted it. When he moved the bag, he gently lifted the skull. He wouldn't have even done that if he'd known. (Also, if the skull had rolled out of the bag, the skull wouldn’t have been full of debris and had roots growing through it.)
Mason asked if today's version was that the skull rolled out or it didn't. Kronk said that it didn't.
Mason went back to the December statement, he said it dropped out. Kronk said it upset him so much that he left and went back to his trunk. The skull was where it was when he lifted the bag.
Kronk said he had no idea how many statement he gave to LE. Mason informed him that he never told them he never put the meter stick in the hole. Kronk said he believed he did and even mentioned it in his NBC interview.
Mason then asked if he'd told Melich that he'd called in August about finding the skull. Kronk said he did. He wasn't told to keep it a secret (that he made the 3 calls). Kronk said he was never told to keep it a secret.
This must be the 3rd or 4th time he's gone through this line of questioning. Kronk kept saying NO, SIR!
Kronk was asked about keeping a low profile. Ms. Burdick objected/sustained.
Mr. Kronk was asked if he had a computer. He said LE did not do any research on his computer.
Mason had ONE more thing to talk about. He asked Kronk about his day off on December 10, 2008. Kronk said his clutch went out and it had to be repaired. He needed over $1000 for repairs. Mason asked if he mentioned to someone, perhaps his son, that he needed money? Kronk said that he could have. Mason said that the next day, he went to Suburban and discovered the body. Kronk said YES SIR!
Mason then showed Kronk the bill for his car repairs. It was offered into evidence. Linda Burdick said she had no objection.
The bill was then projected for all to see.
If you though you read something before during Mr. Kronk's testimony, you're right. I was tempted to edit it down, but it would have taken the flavor out of Mr. Mason's totally disorganized and repetitive questioning.
Linda Burdick cross-examined the witness.
Kronk said his didn't know Casey, Cindy, George, Lee Anthony. He didn't know James Hoover or Dominick Casey.
He lived in St.Cloud in Osceola county and got his job with Orange County in May, 2008. He became familiar with the places using a GPS. After his training, he started reading meters. It wasn't until August 11, 2008 that he was even in their neighborhood, except once during training. He wasn't assigned the area again until December 11, 2008.
Then, Ms. Burdick went through the entire story, incorporating everything Kronk had testified to. She did a wonderful job. Kronk kept affirming what she had said.
Ms. Burdick mentioned he needed money for his clutch. She asked if he needed money in June, July, August? He said he did.
Mr. Kronk had no access to the Anthony family home except their meter in the front yard.
He never had access to Casey's car, to the inside of the home, the family computer, Caylee Anthony's clothing, diapers, pull ups, laundry bags and so on and so on. Oh, and the duct tape!
The witness was excused subject to recall.
Jose Baez called the next witness, David Deen. He was with Roy Kronk on August 11, 2008 when he first spotted the skull.
They parked under the trees on Suburban to hang out in the shade. Deen and his co-workers didn't discuss the media. He and Roy Kronk talked about the fact that the little girl's body might be in the swamp.
Kronk went into the woods to use the restroom. Then, he walked along the lines and said he saw a skull in there. Deen was headed that way until he stepped on a dead rattlesnake. At that time, he found the snake more interesting than the rattlesnake.
Kronk had told them, but when he came back to the truck, he didn't mention it so they didn't take him seriously.
Deen discussed the case in the office and it was in the news every day. (Lots of objections/sustained). Kronk didn't push the issue of the skull. He never mentioned telling the media about it.
When he got back to the office, the snake was the center of attention.
The subject never came up again between him and Roy Kronk.
Baez nattered on about when Kronk didn't say anything until Ms. Burdick objected/heresay, leading/sustained.
The next he heard of the skull until December 11, 2008. Baez attempted to get Deen to testify about what Roy said to him, what his demeanor was, and so on. (objection/sustained multiple times)
Baez tried to get the testimony as an excited utterance. Judge Perry asked how Kronk sounded and Deen said that he spoke in a normal tone of voice.
Deen told Kronk that he knew she was in there, referring to August 11. Roy Kronk was the only one to see a skull.
Baez mentioned the snake. Deen put it in his freezer until the police came and took it for an autopsy.
Deen said that Kronk went about 25 feet into the woods that day.
On cross, Linda Burdick had Deen point out that it was his idea to have Kronk to look in the woods and the December 11 statement was said just because he thought it was a good place to put a body and what Casey had said about her being close to home.
In August, the area was swampy. This was before Hurricane Fay hit Orlando.
On re-direct, Baez asked if the woods were dry enough for Mr. Kronk to go in 25 feet. Deen said that it was dry where he went. Deen said the vegetation was so dense, he couldn't see where the water was.
Baez asked if he heard George Anthony say she's close to home... (objection/sustained)
With that, Mr. Deen left the stand.
Alex Roberts was the next witness. He is the senior meter reader and supervised Roy Kronk. Kronk did read the Anthony meter on August 11, 2008.
On December 11, 2008 he was supervising Roy Kronk. That day, Kronk didn't read any meters in the area of Suburban Drive.
When he arrived at the scene, Kronk was smoking a cigarette and leaning against the truck. Baez asked him what Kronk said (objection/hearsay/Baez/impeachment/sidebar/sustained)
Baez then asked if Kronk had ever told him he called police three times. No (objection/sustained)
There were no more questions and Mr. Deen was excused.
The next witness was Sgt. Dennis Moonsammy. He is the supervisor at the Woman's Detention Center where Casey Anthony is housed.
Baez tried to ask if Casey was being kept under special circumstances (objection/relevance/sustained).
Then Judge Perry said that there was a not-to-brief legal matter they had to discuss. The jury was sent "home" for the evening to prepare for a special event.
Jose Baez was permitted to proffer the testimony for the record.
Moonsammy testified that Casey is in protective custody. She is a high profile inmate. She has to be in her cell 23 hours a day. She's allowed to take a shower, go to the recreation area, watch TV in her free hour. She's been in PC for two years.
She is a model inmate. When he sees her and speaks to her every day per the rules. She's been very pleasant, smiling, never a problem.
Baez asked if her behavior seems unusual. Moonsammy said that he paid little or no attention to the inmates behavior unless it's real bad or they become uncontrollable. Her behavior is to him, the same as the other inmates in the area.
Baez asked if he has engaged her in conversation otherwise. He said she engaged in conversation with him and was always happy.
This behavior has been constant since the beginning. She is never up or down, always pleasant.
The prosecution had no questions.
Marlene Baker was called to testify under the same situation.
She formerly worked in the Lima dorm where Casey is housed. She observed her from October, 2008 until 2010. She viewed her on a daily basis for a year and a half. Her demeanor was pleasant. Even waking her up out of her sleep, she was pleasant. She was in PC when she was there as she still is.
The cells are 6x8 and she was in there 23 hours a day. It can cause inmates a lot of stress. Being an inmate in a small area where being confined can cause problems.
Casey's would cry sometimes when she was upset, otherwise she was pleasant. She didn't cry much. She quite often smiled around her.
This witness was dismissed.
Judge Perry stayed with his ruling that the testimony was irrelevant to the facts of the case. Baez also wanted to include that the proffered testimony goes to the theory of the defense.
Baez also wanted to proffer the testimony of Jesse Grund. Baez mentioned one of the motions in limine concerning what he would testify to. Then, the defense said they could discuss this at side bar for 5 minutes instead.
Jesse Grund then proffered his testimony. He testified that shortly after Caylee was born, he felt uncomfortable around Lee. He seemed stand-offish, surly, and so on.
He asked Casey about it and she told him that she felt uncomfortable around Lee because she woke up one night and he was standing at the foot of her bed. He also groped her once. She didn't want him around Caylee.
Grund also stated that, at the time, he believed Casey.
The state had no questions.
The state objected due to hearsay. Jeff Ashton read from the rules. The testimony was about something that was told to him in 2006.
The defense asked to argue their side in the morning so they could prepare.
Judge Perry said it was not permissible hearsay, but that he wanted to do more research tonight.
Ms. Finnel wants to argue her motion tomorrow at 8:30 by phone.
They then spoke about the grief counselor. The state agreed to a proffer of her testimony because there was her report had no facts of the case. They didn't depose her.
Baez ranted on a bit about a proffer and that he was tired of it. He expected her to testify in general about grief.
Jeff Ashton said that she was to be deposed by Skype when the Bill Rodriguez situation came up. She was sitting at a neighbor's house for over an hour. At that time, he said that the defense agreed to a proffer. Ashton got really hot about it and said that the defense had said they had no problem with the proffer at that time. He also said there was nothing he could ask her to prepare for her hypotheticals.
Baez was very snippy saying if he gave them an inch, they take a yard! He ranted on and on about how he and Mr. Ashton were tired and they didn't do it! (Maybe he should remember that she wasn’t deposed because of the discovery violation with Rodriguez!)
Judge Perry asked if the witness was going to testify to hypotheticals. Had the witness interviewed Ms. Anthony?
Baez sat that she will be here tomorrow morning. Perry said he had no idea about what the witness was going to be asked. He had given the attorneys case law dealing with testimony about grief. He said that some of her testimony may be admissible, some of it will not be admissible, depending on what is asked, based upon the testimony that has been offered in the case.
Perry said that the jury may go in and out like Pop Tarts. Essentially, the questions and hypotheticals will need to be well thought out based on the testimony.
Cheney Mason said that there would be about 6 witnesses after the grief counselor.
Ms. Finnell's motion is for the record. It will be heard by anyone who has ears.
With that, today’s court session was over. The death penalty motion will be argued tomorrow at 8:30 AM. Court will be in session at 9:00 AM.