Q&A With Matthew McGough Author of The Lazarus Files: A Cold Case Investigation

UPDATE 12:20pm: Corrected for spelling. Sprocket
My friend Matthew McGough did a Q&A with journalist Elon Green, which was just published in MEL Magazine.

Matthew's book also recently received a starred review from Publishers Weekly. Having read the book, I wholeheartedly agree with Publishers Weekly: "This memorable and powerful work deserves a wide readership."

I've been very fortunate to travel along with Matthew for most of his journey in chronicling the Lazarus case and its aftermath. I first got to know Matthew during the Lazarus trial seven years ago. We were the only two reporters who attended every day of the trial. It's been a blast to be back in the trenches with him the last few weeks for the trial in the case of Francis v. City of LA. Matthew has been a true friend and mentor to me.

A special thank you to Linda Zaleskie of CNN for treating me and Matthew to lunch the last couple days.

I've heard people have been waiting for updates on the trial. I have been working on my daily recaps so please stay tuned. Today is a big day. The jury will hear closing arguments sometime after 9:30am.

Conrad Murray Trial Update II

Dr. Murray in court, October 13th, 2011



Several hours ago, In Session's Beth Karas reported the following on her Facebook page:

Quote:
The attorneys were in court this afternoon to give the judge an update. Conrad Murray was excused from appearing. The defense is still getting answers to questions raised when they received a new toxicology report from the State last Friday. The report concludes that Michael Jackson did not have a large amount of lorazepam in his stomach contents, contrary to the defense's own report prepared by a different lab. The State's expert anesthesiologist and pharmacologist, Steven Shafer, will be back on the stand tomorrow morning. He is expected to be on the stand all day. The defense case will begin Friday and will continue through next Wednesday. Among the defense witnesses are four character witnesses, a few police officers, a toxicologist, an anesthesiologist and AEG CEO Randy Phillips. If Dr. Shafer completes his testimony tomorrow, court will be dark Thursday.

From Beth's posting, it appears the State is resting their case-in-chief with the testimony of Dr. Shafer. The defense case will only take four days to present. We still don't know at this time if the prosecution will put on rebuttal witnesses, but it's my guess they will.

Meanwhile, CNN is reporting that Katherine Jackson is against Prince taking the stand in Dr. Murray's trial, "....and that there are no discussions going on with prosecutors about it."

Conrad Murray Trial Starts Tomorrow

Dr. Conrad Murray, right, with his attorney J. Michael Flanagan, at a prior court hearing. Photo: Pool/REUTERS

In Sessions is reporting on their Facebook page that the California Court of Appeal has just denied a defense request to stay Conrad Murray's manslaughter trial. Murray is charged with involuntary manslaughter in the death of pop icon Michael Jackson.

In pretrial motions the defense team had requested that for Murray to receive a fair trial, the jury should be sequestered (a la Casey Anthony jury) to protect it from the onslaught of media coverage. Judge Pastor had previously denied that motion and the defense appealed Pastor's ruling with the Appellate Court.

The trial starts tomorrow with the first phase of jury selection. From my understanding, the first questionnaire will deal with hardship issues to see if they can get a pool of jurors that can serve for the expected five weeks of trial. Once the hardship cases have been weeded out, the remaining jurors would be required to fill out a more extensive questionnaire.

I decided early on that I would not try to get a reserved seat at this trial because it would be difficult to get and the fact that the trial would have cameras in the courtroom. Instead, I chose to cover the Stephanie Lazarus trial (set to begin October 17th) where cameras, laptops, blackberries and smart phones have been banned from the courtroom. Hopefully, our guest writer "KZ" will be able to contribute a story or two on the Murray case once the trial kicks off with opening statements.

CNN Judge Denies Defense Jury Sequestration Motion

Casey Anthony Murder Trial: SENTENCING

Ritanita is on a much needed short vacation, and I have attempted to fill her shoes in covering the sentencing. As you all know, for the last three years she has lived and breathed this case and did a herculean job in covering it.

I am lucky. I get up in time before court has started. I'm listening to the live feed from WESH. At first, all they are showing is a view from the hallway outside the courtroom.

It's 5:29 am PT. The only camera live on my computer is the view of the hallway on the 23rd floor. I just saw one of the defense team walk by the hallway camera. I see court personnel, an occasional officer come into camera view.

Now on the WESH live feed, we have commentary.

OCSO is getting ready for the possibility that she will be released.

I did not stay up late last night to hear the one juror who spoke on Nightline.

I see Mason, George. Oh lord. WESH is replaying the reading of verdicts.

Now the talking heads are saying she could have the cost of the trail charged against her.

It's unclear from the statute how much she might owe.

Anthony is inside the courtroom. Here hair is now hanging down loose.

My trial watching friend, LinZbee tells me Juror #3, Ms. Ford spoke on Nightline last night. (I haven't watched the show yet.) Ms. Ford felt that one could not convict if you didn't know how someone died or the motive.

I totally disagree. You don't need to know a motive. You don't need to know how someone died. It's my opinion that often times people don't realize that behavior is evidence, powerful evidence.

On WESH, there are some talking heads discussing the “courage” of these jurors. I'm personally sick of hearing talking heads say these types of things.

Judge Perry takes the bench. The case is called by the clerk.

JP: Let the record reflect the defendant is present along with her counsel and states attorneys. (snip) Are both sides ready to proceed? (snip) Mr. Mason before we proceed, you had asked me to rule on a motion for mistrial?

The defense withdrawals their motion for mistrial.

JP: The defendant is before the court for counts four, five, and six, and legal cause not to proceed with sentencing?

(I think JP at this point, is corrected by the defense that there is also a count seven.)

Only legal cause... (I miss this.) ... no legal cause not to proceed with sentencing.

JP: Would the state care to present any manners relative to aggravation..

LDB: No not on that issue your honor.

JP: Any issue concerning any other matters?

LDB: Your honor, yesterday, day I filed a motion to tax special costs of investigation and prosecution....

Crap. My feed went bad just as LDB started talking. It’s taking me forever to get a feed.

When my feed comes back, Drane Burdick is gone and defense attorney Lisabeth Fryer is arguing prior cases for sentencing.

LF: It’s our assertion that the Hammel (sp?) case is temporal....

Judge Perry asks Ms. Fryer about count number four, lying about her employment. Fryer is arguing that all four instances were part of a single act, so she should be charged for only one act. Judge Perry reviews the case law the defense provided.

Many legal pundits think she will only be sentenced as a single act and will walk free from court today.

JP: One last question. Are you saying that, Ms. Anthony did not have time to pause, reflect, and form a new criminal intent for each one of those four separate acts?

LF: Yes. your honor. That under Hammell there has to be a separation of time, place, or interview.

JP: Response from the State of Florida?

Only provided... LDB, cites other case law.

LDB: It is the states position there is a temporal break between each lies. (snip) During the course over three separate statements. (snip) 1 am 4 am and 1 pm. (snip) Each of the lies are mater to the issue investigated. (snip) each were intended to mislead law enforcement. (To give an example, LDB says) We see this with separate sex acts acted upon a child at the same time, are charged separately.

LDB: Given the fact that there were multiple statements over 12 hours, it is the position of the State that these separate acts do not violate separate double jeopardy.

Drane Burdick brings up another case to the judge.

JP: Does your client wish to say anything before imposing sentence?

CM: No your honor.

JP: The court will make the following finding concerning the defense motion, to bar imposition of sentence, these four state counts as to violating double jeopardy..

JP: Count four. Basically dealt with the following conduct. It is alleged that the defendant was employed at Universal Studios to 2008. This information was given pursuant to the investigation to a missing person’s report. That information caused law enforcement to go to Universal Studios to expend law enforcement resources to determine that in fact Ms. Anthony did not in fact work at Universal.

JP: Count five is, Ms. Anthony informed authorities that she had left her child Caylee Marie Anthoy, at the the Sawgrass apartments with a babysitter. Which caused law enforcement again, as a result of a missing person report, to develop and follow varous leads trying to locate this babysitter commonly known as “Zanny."

JP: Count 6 again, dealt with the fact that she had informed two employees of Universal Studios "Jeff Hopkins" and "Juliet Lewis" of the disappearance of Caylee Marie Anthony.

JP: Count 7, (she) indicated to law enforcement that she had received a call and spoke to Caylee Marie Anthony on July 15th, 2008, at approximately 12 pm, thus causing law enforcement to devote extensive resources.

JP: As a result of those four separate and distinct lies, law enforcement expended a great deal of time, energy and manpower looking for young Caylee Marie Anthony. This search for her went on from July through December, over several months trying to find Caylee Marie Anthony.

JP: Four distinct separate lies. Just as the jury spoke loud and clear on counts one, two and three, they also spoke on loud and clear on counts four, five, six and seven. There being no legal cause shown (that the court) should not impose sentence, and the court having previously judge you to be guilty in the counts four, five, six, seven, I will sentence you to one year in Orange County jail, (for each count) imposing $1,000 fine on each count. All for counts to run consecutively. (snip) Consecutive to each other, giving credit for the time previously served. Mr. Baez, Mr. Mason, we are going to spend some time this morning figuring out her time for credit served, and it’s going to take us probably about an hour to sort it out. (snip) ...because of the previous sentences she has been given.

JP: With the good time and gain time, depending on the preliminary figures, sometime early August, Maybe late July, but I can’t say that until I first determine time served, and the jail applies their good time and gain time. So if you want to wait around, or we can communicate that with you, or if you have a different figure.

JP: I will reserve jurisdiction for 60 days, to determine cost of prosecution and investigation.

So, Casey Anthony gets four years for the four guilty counts.

LDB: I have advised a minimum of 30, so any time after that.

JP: Mason?

(I can’t hear him.)

JP: I’m trying to give you a date now. The week of August 15th, I will not be around. The week of the 22nd, I’m involved in an evidentiary hearing. I have time on the 25th an 26th. Depending on how long, I can fit you in on the week of the 29th, but I’ll have to fit you in. but I’m going to take over Judge Adams division since he’s leaving at the end of the month. I have a week or August 1st, but would have to fit you into that division's regular work.

They are still trying to figure out a return date.

JP: So when would you like the hearing folks?

LDB: Any of those dates would be acceptable.

I'm not clear, but I think they settled on Thursday the 25th of August.

Judge Perry rules she can waive her appearance. Mason waves her appearance. Will impose statutory court costs.

Judge Perry addresses Anthony.

JP: You have a right to appeal the judgement and sentence provided you file a notice with the court. If you can’t afford an attorney to assist in your appeal, (snip) ...do you wish to appeal?

JB: If we could have a moment your honor. (So he can confer to see what Anthony wants to do.)

JP: You may.

JB: We would like to reserve our right to make our decision at a later time.

JP: Does she have the financial where with all, if she decides to appeal to pay for appellate counsel?

I miss the full extent of this answer.

JP: If she decided to do that, make sure she fills out insolvency with the court and bring that, so counsel can be appointed. (snip) If she does not file a timely notice of appeal then she forfeits a right for appeal, but it will be YOUR responsibility to file appropriate appellate paperwork (more that I miss.) with the court.

JP: It will be your responsibility before you are relieved of your responsibility of this case to have those documents filed. Are the any other matters on behalf....any other matters behalf of the state? On behalf of the defense?

Both sides answer no.

JP: Okay. Court will be in recess.

She could be released later this month or early in August.But today is not the day that she walks out of the courtroom.

CNN's blog reported: "Anthony has remained stoic during this portion of the court hearing. She is conferring with her other attorneys as the judge hands down the sentence. But as she prepared to exit the courtroom Casey Anthony let out a tiny smile."

Later, a court representative came out and addressed the media. Her time served had been calculated and Casey Anthony will be released from jail on July 13th, 2011.

July 13th, almost 2 years to the day from the time that the world became aware that little Caylee had already been missing a month.

A Reflection on the Jury Verdict by Sprocket
I was in shock like everyone else when the verdicts were read. The jury obviously did not see the case as the prosecution presented it. But what did they really think?

We finally got to hear from one of the jurors, Juror #3, Jennifer Ford who spoke on Nightline. If you listen to Jennifer, she states that you cannot convict someone of murder if you don't know the cause of death or have a motive for the murder. She stated that the prosecution did not provide the jury with those facts. She also stated that she did not believe the defense case. On the Nightline show, she completely sidestepped the evidence of the duct tape on Caylee's skull. She never addressed it. She also stated she didn't know what to think about the chloroform. She basically didn't know about that.

After hearing a short clip of Jennifer speak, here are my thoughts.

Like lie detection expert EYES FOR LIES, I was blown away that the jury totally discounted the defense case. That even though the defense in their opening statement presented to the jury that this was an accident, that the defendant was at the home and involved in an accident with her daughter, they totally discounted that when considering a verdict.

I think this jury was totally taken in by the CSI effect. They were unable to make any type of conclusion about Casey Anthony's post-incident behavior and wanted all the evidence tied up for them in a neat package. In my opinion, that's what the CSI effect is. They wanted to know when she died, where she died and how she died before they were willing to convict. It shows us a jury that is unable to analyze evidentiary behavior critically, and come to a conclusion about it. This jury also rejected the prosecution's motive that was presented to them. I believe they rejected it because they didn't understand it.

Even though Casey Anthony lied to every person in her immediate orbit, law enforcement officers, the general public and beyond about having a job, where she was doing what when, having a "Zanny the nanny" and a kidnapping, that behavior by Casey Anthony was rejected by the jury as having any weight as evidence that a crime had been committed. They basically said, Casey Anthony's post incident behavior means nothing without a motive or cause of death.

Even though the prosecution presented strong evidence that there was a dead body and high traces of chloroform in the trunk of Casey Anthony's car, they still could not come to the conclusion that a dead body had been placed inside it. Even though the prosecution presented powerful evidence that three pieces of duct tape were attached to the child's skull, mandible and hair, the jury did not see that as evidence that a crime had taken place. Many of us are wondering what person in their right mind could think that how and where little Caylee ended up, in plastic bags, in a swam, with duct tape wrapped around her head was the result of an "accident?" To me, this tells me that this juror, and most likely the rest of the jurors were unable to connect the dots and put the pieces of evidence together.

When you have jurors that are unable to make reasonable conclusions about post-incident behavior and powerful scientific evidence this is the type of verdict you get.

I also believe that some of the blame has to rest on the shoulders of the prosecutors, who I do think did an excellent job presenting the evidence. Is it possible that the prosecution team, so sure of their understanding of the evidence and what it would prove, had a bit of tunnel vision that the evidence could only be interpreted one way? Because I did not see all of the prosecution's closing arguments I do not know if the prosecution spent any time addressing the "unknown" issues to the jury, or presented compelling arguments refuting the defense theory of an accident.

I'm reminded of the OJ Simpson case. The defense theory proposed that OJ Simpson was framed by the LAPD. There was absolutely no evidence to support that, but they hammered home that possibility. According to former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi in his book Outrage, stated that in closing arguments Marsha Clark spent about two sentences in her entire closing argument on the defense theory of a frame up. That's it. The prosecution was so certain of their evidence proving guilt, they didn't think it was necessary to spend any time refuting in arguments the defense theory.

As like ritanita said in her last entry, I don't think I wasted any of my time following this case. With every case we follow, there is something to be learned from the experience. I've learned quite a bit about Florida law during this case thank's to the open courtrooms and Florida's "Sunshine Laws." This case also reaffirmed my belief that, regardless of what evidence is presented, you can never predict was a jury will do (or an appellate court for that matter), because juries will surprise you. This jury certainly did.

Postscript. I highly recommend reading an excellent analysis of Casey Anthony's behavior over at or fellow blogger Valhall's site, The Hinky Meter. Although it was written over a year ago, it's spot on in identifying Casey as an "Eraser" killer, like author Marilee Strong outlines in her book, Erased.

Did the CSI effect sway this jury?

Conrad Murray Adds New Lawyer

Updated 2/15, 4:40 pm:According to CNN.com, Judge Pastor has delayed the addition of Nareg Gourjian to Murray's defense team until a possible conflict of interest issue can be further investigated.

From the CNN article:

The decision rests on if Gourjian's work for Jackson was "substantially related" to the current case and if his work for the defense would require "Gourjian to attempt to discredit his former client directly or indirectly," Pastor said.

Updated 2/15/2011:
According to Radar Online, the new member of Murray's defense team could create a conflict of interest. Sprocket___________
According to this CNN article, Joseph Low IV left Murray's defense team and has been replaced by Nareg Gourjian. Gourjian, formerly an associate of high profile attorney Mark Geragos where he assisted in the defense of Scott Peterson, Kazuyoshi Miura, and Chris Brown.

I got my first glimpse of Gourjian at one of the many hearings in the Miura case and if my memory serves me, he was in the gallery a few times during the Cameron Brown case. I was not very impressed with Low's closing argument for the defense at Murray's preliminary hearing. It also seemed to me that Judge Pastor had to educate the defense team what would happen next after the prosecution presented their closing argument.

To me, adding Gourjian to the team was a smart move. I suspect Gourjian is probably familiar with Judge Pastor's courtroom rulings from when Geragos's office was representing Cameron Brown.

Cameron Brown Retrial: Still in Limbo

The quick news is, Judge Pastor did not make a decision today because one juror did not make it to court due to an unavoidable emergency. Consequently the juror could not be interviewed. That juror, Juror #1 has been ordered back to court at 8:30 am, Monday October 5th.

I arrive on the 9th floor and see that Dr. Carroll Adams has rearranged some appointments and made it to court early to find out what's going to happen with the Brown jury today. Dr. Adams told me that in all the time he's spent in Pastor's courtroom, he didn't think he's ever seen Judge Pastor look as upset as he did yesterday, once this latest note from the jury came to light.

Dr. Adams and I talk about the Polanski case and the latest drama about the retired DDA David Wells who is now admitting he stretched the truth so to speak, to the HBO documentary film producers. Dr. Adams reminds me that when he spoke on camera in that documentary, he wasn't under oath. I mention the statements Polanski made in an interview several years ago, where he defends his actions of raping a 13-year-old girl by stating something to the effect of, everyone wants a young girl. Jurors want a young girl. Judges want a young girl. Again, Dr. Adams reminds me that Polanski wasn't under oath when he made those statements.

Harris and the woman working as the defense clerk arrive and go into 107. Patty is sitting at the very end of the hall. She's dressed a bit more casual today than what I've seen in the weeks I attended the trial. As Dr. Adams and I chat, DDA Hum and Deputy Leslie arrive. Sarah, her husband and a friend are here. Soon after, Denise Nix from the Daily Breeze arrives. After pounding on the door, DDA Hum and Leslie get admitted to 107.

The proceedings started before 8:30 am, but the courtroom is not opened to the public before that time. So as Carroll and I enter, I hear Harris in the middle of making an argument. Mavis is the court reporter up. There are several other attorneys in the courtroom, waiting to have their pretrial discussions put on the record.

PH: (It's) ...very clear there is misconduct.... [...] Appears to be the way it was phrased, they (the juror) consulted a dictionary but did not bring it (up? further?)

Judge Pastor then states he agrees with both counsel that they don't know the facts and they need to speak to the jury foreman. Judge Pastor also wanted to add that they received the note at around 10:30 am and after that the jury was excused.

JP: That has some meaning here as far as any (likelihood) [...] like Mr. Harris said, of infiltration [...] of the virus [...] and any other....

Judge Pastor asks Ms. Benson to get Juror #7, the foreman and direct him to his seat.

The juror is brought in and Judge Pastor starts to question him. The juror gives a bit of background on the malice discussion. I believe he states that one juror (unknown) asked if the group could use a dictionary definition for the word "malice." Juror #9 (the former alternate #2), states that if people would like I have the dictionary definition.

Some jurors were interested; some were not. The foreman then states that Juror #12 said no, we're really not supposed to use that. Then Juror #5 asked if they could at least submit it as a question to the court.

Judge Pastor clarifies some points with the foreman. He asks if it was Juror #5, but it's clarified that it was Juror #9 who voided this point, "If people would like I have looked up the dictionary definition."

JP: He looked it up on the Internet and printed it and some how it came up that is was the Columbia Dictionary?

J#7: He did have a copy. [...] He proposed passing it around.

(I'm not sure if the foreman states this or Judge Pastor asks: "But number 12 objected."

It's clarified that a piece of paper was brought into the jury room, and he (#9) said, "Here it is."

It was a few minutes later that people cleared it up. (A few minutes later that Juror #12 objected.)

JP: Was the info from the form read, disclosed by Juror #9?

J#7: No.

JP: Was any definition of malice...

Juror #12 objected. The foreman decided to write a note when another (juror inquired).

The foreman states he did not see what Juror #9 did with the paper.

It's 8:43 am. The foreman is excused and Pastor asks to see counsel at sidebar.

There is a lengthy sidebar and Judge Pastor then asks Ms. Benson to get Juror #9.

Juror #9 is brought in. Judge Pastor starts off by saying something to the effect, "I'm advised a dictionary (was used?) yesterday morning, in part..... [...] Did you volunteer.

J#9: One of the jurors asked for the definition. [...] Wednesday, ... sometime, there was a mention.

Under extensive questioning, Judge Pastor asked the juror what he did and it was finally clarified that Thursday morning before court, Juror #9 accessed the Internet. He used a search engine. "I have AOL." He went to the AOL home page and typed in the word malice. He printed it out and gave it to Juror #7. He gave Juror #7 a piece of paper. Juror #9 states that, that morning he was in a rush and didn't read it.

J#9: I glanced at it. I didn't really read it. [...] We just talked about malice. [...] Juror #7 read the paper out loud. [...] Juror #6 asked about it. [...] The paper was passed to Juror #6. [...] Juror #12 opposed it right off the bat.

JP: Juror #7 read it out lout to...

J#9: Yes he did.

(Juror #9 has the paper on him and it's brought out and handed to the court I believe at this time.)

Juror #9 then clarifies that some of the information is highlighted but he didn't do it. Juror #6 did that.

Juror #9 is then asked to go into the jury room while the court and counsel go over the paper that was brought into deliberations. Terri Keith from City News Service arrives. At 8:55 am, Cameron Brown's parent arrive and the sidebar is still going on.

The stories between Juror #7 the foreman and Juror #9 are different. Dr. Adams reminds me that the jurors take an oath. They are sworn in. Everything they say in court is under oath. So either a juror is lying or their memories of events are different. I overhear at the sidebar they are trying to get a color copy of the piece of paper, since the highlighting is causing a problem with copying the document.

Pat Harris brings up a point and wants the Judge to ask Juror #9 another question so he is brought out again.

JP: In looking again at the copy, the page number says "one of two."

The Judge asks if there was another page. The juror states that he thinks it was blank. He states that this was the only page he brought in.

Judge Pastor then confronts the juror about his actions and the juror states he'd like to explain himself.

JP: Do you recall my jury instructions and specifically stating (not to use the Internet or access a dictionary)?

(I remember much earlier in the trial that this was the juror that Judge Pastor mentioned in open court that they were having trouble staying awake.)

J#9: Honestly, your honor, I don't remember. [...] I apologize to the court.

Judge Pastor then asks the juror, "Candidly, would you be able to disregard anything you read or heard, especially about (malice?) [...] not reading the dictionary?

J#9: When it was read out loud, it was read so softly....

The juror is excused and Judge Pastor says, "Mr. Hum? Some thoughts?"

CH: I think we are going to have to inquire (of the other jurors). [...] It would seem there's a possibility that some have heard. [...] I don't see anything around it.

Harris agrees and he wants to add that when Judge Pastor questions them, I believe he asks that the jurors are questioned, they can be told that's an incorrect definition. Pastor states he doesn't have a problem with that, "If it gets to that point."

Judge Pastor then works with attorneys from another case to go over scheduling for the next hearing while Ms. Benson is instructed to grab another juror. They are going to be polled individually and questioned. Judge Pastor informs counsel that they will pick juror numbers randomly. "That's how we do it so nobody has any rhyme or reason to it."

Judge Pastor asks Ms. Benson to get Juror #5. He then addresses the court and states that Juror #1 will not be here for several hours. I believe it's at this point he states that it's an emergency and a safety transportation issue.

Juror #5 is brought in and Judge Pastor starts to question him.

J#5: There was some slight mention. They were confused about the definition.

I believe Judge Pastor asks if someone objected.

J#5: Yeah, I think somebody did say that.

He's asked what juror number it was, and Juror #5 doesn't remember. Juror #5 states he did read the paper and that it was passed around. He states that the jurors were talking about it.

Judge Pastor then asks the Juror a serious question. "If the court directs you in the strongest terms to disregard this extra information, can you follow my instruction?"

J#5: What ever you say, I'll follow.

What happens next is kind of confusing, since Judge Pastor wants to make it clear what is being said and what is understood. The Juror then says, "I never saw it," with a smile on his face. The Judge appears to be confused for a moment, asks him again, the juror states the same thing, "I never saw it," and then I think Judge Pastor gets it.

JP: Don't go all Soprano on me.

The juror explains that he was trying to make a joke. Judge Pastor clarifies that when the record is read (back) that (innuendo) won't be understood.

Harris asks for a sidebar and afterwords, Judge Pastor asks the juror one more question.

JP: Did you suggest to any of the other jurors that we should perhaps bring it to the attention of the court?

J#5: No.

That's it and he's excused.

Juror #6 is called into court. This is the black woman who injured her foot weeks earlier. Judge Pastor politely asks her how her foot is doing and I believe she replies, "Much better."

Juror #6 identifies it as Juror #9 who brought the paper into the jury room.

JP: What did he say?

J#6: He said he looked up the word malice and pass it around. [...] Juror #7 read it out loud.

JP: Did someone object?

She has trouble remembering which number.

J#6: I think it was number eleven.

JP: Are you sure?

J#6: I'm not sure.

JP: If the court directs you to disregard completely what you read [...] can you do it?

J#6: Yes sir. [...] Yes I can.

Juror #10 is brought in. This is a tall Asian man with a heavy accent.

Judge Pastor starts in with describing what he understands happened inside the jury room but the juror obviously isn't understanding the question at first. He thinks Juror #7 brought the paper into the jury room. He states that he did read the paper.

JP: Did #7 read it out loud?

The juror is not sure; he's vague about that.

Judge Pastor then asks him if he orders him to disregard anything he may have read from the paper, and tell you to disregard anything... [...] Do you think you can do that?

J#10: Yes sir.

JP: I'm ordering you to do that.

He's excused and Juror #2 is brought in. This appears to be a middle ages, very slender, tall black man with glasses.

Judge Pastor begins his questioning. The juror thinks that Juror #9 brought the paper in. He states the paper never got to him but it was passed around.

JP: Was it read out loud?

J#2: Yes. [...] I'm not sure.

JP: Did you hear the reading of it?

J#2: Yes, your honor.

JP: Did another juror ask for it to be stopped?

J#2: There was a question about submitting the question to you, about it's meaning.

JP: Who was that?

The juror states he can't remember. He states that he didn't read the paper but he did hear it.

Judge Pastor then goes on to ask the juror in strong language that if he directs him to disregard everything he heard and/or read, could he do that. He orders him not to consider (what was brought into the deliberations). The juror agrees that he can.

The juror is excused and Juror #11 is brought in. This is another Asian man.

The juror states he doesn't remember who brought in the paper. He can't remember if it was male or female. He states that he read the paper. It was passed around. He also states that the foreman read it out loud. The juror states that he thinks it was Juror #6 who said that it should be brought to the judge's attention.

Judge then asks him if he can disregard what he might have read/heard.

JP: Can you do that?

J#11: Yes.

Juror #3 is called in. This is an Asian looking woman. Her face is quite round. She now has a cast on her left arm that she is holding up and Judge Pastor asks her several questions about how her arm is feeling. Judge Pastor asks her which juror brought in the paper. I miss whether or not she knew.

J#3: It started off with the foreman so I didn't hear.

She states that she didn't read the paper and she doesn't believe she heard the paper read.

J#3: I don't believe so.

She states that she knows someone read it but she, "...turned it off, because she knew from other instructions they received, the material given to them...." that she was not to consider anything that didn't come from the court. She tells the court that she can disregard the information because she already tuned it out.

She's excused and Juror #12 is brought in.

Juror #12 states that Juror #9 brought in the paper. He states that, "Yes, the paper was passed around. [...] I didn't want to read it."

JP: Did you suggest that this be brought to my attention?

J#12: No. I objected. I said we weren't supposed to use it. [...] #7 read it out loud.

The juror states he recognizes the instructions and he will be able to follow the judge's orders.

The upset juror from a few days ago, an older black man with a barrel chest, Juror #4 is called in. He comes in and sits in Juror #5's chair.

JP: Hi Juror #5.

The juror gets up and moves to his chair, #4. I believe he states that he doesn't know who brought it in.

J#4: We all looked at it. [...]I read it. [...] I looked at it. [...] It was the consensus that one person read it and that was #7.

At first he doesn't remember the number of which juror didn't want the jury to use it. After questions by Pastor, he describes the juror as the young oriental man.

The judge asks him the same closing question in stern terms if directed, can he disregard what he read in the paper. He states that he can. The judge so directs him.

J#4: Yes sir.

The last juror called is Juror #8. The juror is asked if someone brought in some paper to the jury room.

J#8: I think it was #7. I'm not sure.

JP: Was the paper passed around?

J#8: Yes, I think so.

The juror states he didn't read the paper but he heard it read.

JP: ...Another juror asked that it be brought to the attention of the court?

J#8: Yes, but I don't recall (the number of the juror).

Judge Pastor asks this juror if he can disregard the information he heard and follow his instructions. He says that he can.

The juror is excused and Judge Pastor and the counsel agree that they need to recall Juror #7, the foreperson.

Juror #7 is called in and he is instructed to sit in the back row. All during the hearing outside the jury's presence, Judge Pastor is aware of the time, his other trial that was being held up and how long this is dragging on. After a few jurors were called, he asked Ms. Benson to have them lined up outside to speed things up. Having the juror just step inside 107 and sit in the plastic chairs against the back wall near the door was in Judge Pastor's words, "...to save a few steps..." to the jury box.

JP: At some time did you actually read out loud (the piece of paper)?

J#7: No. [...] It was first brought in...

He explains something that I miss about it being brought in and then contradicts himself by saying, "[...] What happened was.... [...] I might have read the first few lines...."

The juror is excused and Judge Pastor explains that they still have Juror #1 to interview. They will come back Monday morning to finish with Juror #1. Judge Pastor asks counsel if it's okay to inform the jury what's going on with Juror #1. I believe Ms. Benson chimes in and states that they already know. Two of the alternates are here, but Alternate #4 is at work. Judge Pastor states he's going to request that the jury get here on Monday at 8:45 am.

The jury is brought in and Judge Pastor painstakingly explains the instructions to them again.

JP: I've been ordering you, every chance I got, ordering you [...] giving you instructions not to [?] the case. He gives them the detailed instruction again. " [...] Not to perform experiments. Not to consult references, site resources, legal definition. [...] Don't access the Internet, Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc. [...] You must only follow the legal instruction I give you. [...] Have we heard this before?

Jury in unison: Yes, your honor.

JP: Are we clear?

Jury in unison: Yes, your honor.

The jury is told when to report back and then they are released until Monday. Judge Pastor tells the courtroom that Juror #1 will be here at 8:30 am on Monday.

JP: (If anyone has...) any particular legal citations let me know and we'll go from there.

That's it; until Monday.

I chat with Carroll about his thoughts on what Judge Pastor might do. He's seen Judge Pastor in action through many trials but he's not sure what the remedy is. During the proceeding, I noticed that Katie and Lisa had shown up. As I was leaving I stopped by the third row to say hello to them. They said they were staying because they had started to follow the current case before Judge Pastor. I ask them what they thought. Katie said that they were here yesterday when this all happened and that Judge Pastor mentioned while on the bench that this type of stuff, of bringing in dictionary definitions happens quite often.

We won't know what he decides until Monday. At this point I don't think that anyone wants a mistrial. Certainly the state doesn't because they're broke. I doubt Brown does, because a retrial might take at least a year or more to get back on the calendar and Judge Pastor may retire before that would happen.

I certainly think this is an appellate issue the defense can bring up if Brown is convicted. However, I don't think it is a serious error that would cause irreversible prejudicial harm to the defense. We'll just have to wait and see what happens on Monday.

Denise Nix from The Daily Breeze wrote an excellent synopsis of what happened in court as well as detailing malice and the legal definition.

(I don't know this for a fact but I think that Denise Nix knows the old fashioned "shorthand" which is why she is able to take such articulate notes.)

Dominick Dunne: Power, Privilege & Justice

UPDATED!

Tonight on TruTV, the late Dominick Dunne's series, Power Privilege and Justice will be airing an episode on Phil Spector. Beth Karas, from CNN's In Sessions, Linda Deutsch from the Associated Press and Steven Mikulan from The LA Weekly are interviewed.

Recently, the online tabloid news has reported that Spector, writing his friends and fans from prison has told them that prison is driving him insane. Last night on the Jay Leno Show, Leno quipped:

"And record producer Phil Spector says life in prison is making him insane. Apparently he's no longer the level-headed guy who shot his dinner date..."

Thanks to all my Facebook friends and T&T contributor Dave in Tennessee for the heads up on the show.

UPDATE:
I finally watched the episode this morning. This was one of the best shows that Dominick did. I was surprised to see that another reporter I respect, Ciaran McEvoy with the Los Angeles Daily Journal, was also interviewed as part of the show along with Peter Y. Hong of the Los Angeles Times.

Huckaby Will Face The Death Penalty

"The People are seeking the death penalty in this case," announced Deputy District Attorney Thomas Testa in San Joaquin County Superior Court yesterday. The decision to seek the death penalty was made by District Attorney James Willett following discussions with Sandra Cantu’s family and the San Joaquin homicide unit.

The statement preceded Huckaby pleading not guilty to the five-count indictment handed down by the criminal grand jury.

The court frustrated DDA Testa because no date was set for the trial. Testa pressed for the trial to begin in January however, defense attorney Sam Behar said he wasn’t ready, but expected he could be in 18 months – a timeframe he called reasonable.

Judge Linda Lofthus said 1 1/2 years was excessive and she felt January was too early indicating she was leaning toward a March trial and ordered Huckaby to return to court on September 25 when a trial date may be scheduled.

Huckaby was arrested in April for the kidnapping, rape, and murder of Sandra Cantu.

Huckaby is also charged with attempting to poison two people; an adult male and a 7-year-old girl. The complaint alleges she "did willfully and unlawfully mingle a harmful substance with food or drink" with the intent to harm.

I can only imagine the frustration Sandra’s family must feel.

Mercury News

CNN

Dominick Dunne Dead

He died peacefully at his home today, surrounded by family.

Story in the SF Gate.

CNN

Wall Street Journal

Huffington Post

Melissa Huckaby Finally Pleads

On Tuesday, prosecutors filed a motion requesting the Judge to enter a plea for Huckaby if she refused to. In a short hearing yesterday, Huckaby finally entered a not guilty plea to all charges relating to the rape and death of Sandra Cantu as well as additional drug charges involving another young girl and an adult male.

Huckaby's preliminary hearing begins Sept. 24 and is expected to last at least six days over the course of three weeks, according to Judge Linda Lofthus. The hearing will be held on Thursdays and Fridays for three consecutive weeks.

It was observed that Huckaby smiled several times during the hearing and made small talk.

Meanwhile the custody battle for Huckaby’s daughter continues with her grandparents seeking custody of Madison as well as her biological father, Johnny Huckaby.

The family court case will be heard in Orange County on July 6.

CNN
KCRA
Tracy Press

April is a cruel month for the entire Anthony family

There is a new slew of documents to be released tomorrow (or later today, depending on your time zone) and we who are ardently following the Casey Anthony case in the murder of her toddler daughter, Caylee Marie, are waiting to see what new information will be divulged. Those of us who read and analyze every document and every transcript are hoping these documents will reveal the "smoking gun" that will knock down whatever the defense may invent.

While waiting, I've been thinking about this past month. It was a very busy month with the press following the story's every twist and turn.

The last I reported, George and Cindy had completed their deposition "performances" for the cameras. Now, the proverbial "other shoe" has been dropped and they may be kicked in their financial butt.

Morgan and Morgan has filed a pair of motions to compel George and Cindy Anthony to answer those questions they refused to answer. Cindy's came first and received the most press. In reality, the motion only addresses one question that she did not answer. She was asked if her daughter, Casey, had ever used her credit cards without her permission.

Mrs. Anthony refused to answer in more-than-so-many-words. She claimed the question wasn't "relevant" and finally refused to answer, in spite of her attorney, Brad Conway's attempts to advise her.

Mr. Conway obviously knew that it was a question that she should answer, in spite of his protestations that it was an "ongoing investigation" and stated for her that, "My client does not want to answer that because it's going to affect her daughter's ability to get a fair trial on pending criminal charges."

Read the motion

The motion to compel George Anthony included more questions. In his case, one has to wonder why he refused to answer some of them when he had already supplied the answers while giving information to the FBI in his interviews. In some cases, the information he refused to give was given during TV interviews. Is it possible he wasn't forthcoming in those TV interviews?

Here is a list of questions he is being asked to answer:

"Were there incidences in the year leading up to the disappearance where your daughter had taken money, to your knowledge, that didn't belong to her?"

George refused to answer. In his interview with the FBI, he mentioned how Casey cleaned out Caylee's bank account and piggy bank. He also mentioned that she stole money from other places, such as her mother's purse.

There are a series of questions about Dominic Casey:

When asked if Cindy and George were paying his bill, Brad Conway asserted that it was privileged because it was work-product. When asked, "work product?" Conway stated that it was attorney-client. Gee... did you know that either of the Anthonys was a lawyer?

When asked about leads as to the location of Caylee's remains, George claimed to have heard nothing from Mr. Casey. He supposed the lead came from a psychic.

When asked about his search for the "real" Zenaida, Mr. Conway became very testy. He stated for his client that, "... it had everything to do with the fact that they were being investigated by the sheriff's office. There were obstruction of justice charges being thrown around."

Mr. Morgan replied, "That doesn't work."

When George was asked about the gas-can incident, he again refused to discuss it.

He also refused to answer why he told LE that he had a feeling his daughter hadn't been working for the past two years.

Finally, George refused to discuss the whole "pool ladder" incident.

Read the motion

It will be interesting to see what Judge Rodrigues will decide. The hearing is set for May 21.

One thing is for sure. If Judge Rodrigues orders them to answer any or all these questions, the Anthonys will probably have to pay the costs. All the judge has to do is read the provided transcripts or view the pertinent sections of the depositions to know that George and Cindy came in with very bad attitudes and made a disgrace of the legal proceedings.

On April 13, things went from bad to worse for Ms. Casey when the State filed a Notice of Intent to seek the death penalty. Jose Baez went on record saying that there were Forces Out To Get Casey Anthony. He further went on to give an exclusive interview with WESH to discuss the case. Being sweeps time, WESH spread that interview out for over a week!

I'm not sure what Baez was up to with the interview, but I've always heard him say that Casey has A COMPELLING REASON for all of this problem, and we'll have to wait to hear it at trial!

Meanwhile, we are able to consider Mr. Baez's words of wisdom as featured on WESH.

While Mr. Baez was dealing with the press and the death penalty, Casey's parents were on a rather pathetic press tour. Originally scheduled to appear on Oprah Winfry in May, the Anthonys decided to start their press tour with the 3rd rated morning program, the "Early Show." Oprah cancelled, Cindy says she cancelled, for INTEGRITY? Who really knows, but their performance on the "Early Show" was quite different from their appearance in the Morgan&Morgan depositions!

Finally, cruel April found Jose Baez making yet another motion to obtain extensive phone records from a "few" people involved in the case. Read the motion for the exact details of what records he wants, I have problems putting numbers in my pre-paid cell phone! So far, three of those mentioned in the motion have filed objections due to the unlimited nature of the records being requested. I'll be writing more about this motion and any new ones prior to the re-scheduled hearing on May 28 at 10 a.m.

Laurean In Lock Up In North Carolina

~Cesar Laurean
booking photo






At 9 p.m. last evening, Cesar Laurean was booked into the Onslow County Detention Center. He is being held without bail on charges of credit card transaction fraud, obtaining property by false pretenses and first-degree murder in the death of Lance Cpl. Maria Lauterbach.

Prosecutors contend Laurean killed Lauterbach on December 14. 10 days later he used her ATM card and fled to Mexico. He was arrested in San Juan Vina in the Mexican state of Michoacan. Laurean holds dual citizenship in the United States and Mexico so he could not be immediately deported. He spent the past year fighting the extradition process.

Maj. Cliff Gilmore, Camp Lejeune spokesman, said Laurean would go to the civilian jail in Onslow County and stand trial in a civilian court. Laurean was listed as a deserter after he disappeared, but is still considered an active-duty Marine.

Laurean faces a maximum sentence of life in prison without parole if convicted. Mexico’s extradition policies prohibit U.S. authorities to seek the death penalty.

Because authorities have determined that Maria's child had not been born at the time of her death, DA Dewey Hudson said, prosecutors are only allowed to charge Laurean with a single count of murder under North Carolina law.

Lauterbach's body was found after Laurean's wife, Christina, provided authorities with a note her husband had written that claimed the 20-year-old Lauterbach slit her own throat during an argument.

A gaping 4-inch wound was found on the left side of Lauterbach's neck, but autopsy results indicated the wound would not have been fatal and possibly occurred after death. The autopsy report indicates Lauterbach died from blunt-force trauma to the head.

Prosecutors have said there was no evidence that Christina Laurean was involved in or aware of Lauterbach's death.

An arraignment is scheduled for Monday, April 20.

Defense attorney Dick McNeil says Laurean will plead not guilty once in court.

CNN

News14

jdnews.com

Justice For Marine Lance Cpl. Maria Lauterbach, Finally?

~Cesar Laurean


January 2008, Maria Lauterbach and her unborn child’s charred remains were found buried in a fire pit in Cesar Laurean’s backyard.

Laurean, who has dual citizenship, led police on a three-month manhunt after fleeing to Mexico. He has been held in a Mexican prison for a year while fighting extradition to the US. He will be returned to the US this week.

Laurean and Lauterbach had worked together at Camp Lejeune. Lauterbach had accused him of rape. Before her disappearance in December 2007, military officials said they planned to investigate the allegation.

Onslow County District Attorney Dewey Hudson was forced to agree not to seek the death penalty in order for Mexico to consider returning Laurean.

Laurean is expected to be processed in state court in Houston, where he could waive extradition to North Carolina or fight it. Should Laurean decide to fight extradition, North Carolina Gov. Beverly Perdue would have to request that Texas return him and that could take up to a week.

Defense attorney Dick McNeil said he expects his client to plead not guilty, but he has no access to Laurean while US and Mexican authorities work out the extradition.

"I can tell you we're not pleading guilty. If he does, it's life without parole," said McNeil.

CNN

Foxnews.com

Casey Anthony: The Motions Continue

Lawyers are due back in court on Thursday, March 12, at 3:30 PM. They will be arguing two defense motions. The first is one filed by Jose Baez on January 23. In it, he requests the information from Ricardo Morales' computer. Read motion here. I'm supposing that at this point, Ricardo is ever so sorry he thought that the "Win her over with chloroform." picture was cool.

In the second motion, the defense asks for DNA information, bench notes, reports, and standards. This lengthy motion was filed on January 28. Read motion here. I originally discussed this motion prior to the January 30 hearing. If you would like to read a summary, check it out here.

Fox35 also reported that an affidavit concerning DNA reports and procedures was also filed by Dr. Larry Kobilinsky, an expert for the defense. This could possibly be related to the previously mentioned defense motion. As of this time, this document has not been made available to the public. If and when it does, I will post a link here.

The third motion to be discussed at the hearing will be one submitted by George and Cindy Anthony's attorney, Bradley Conway, on March 3. The motion asks the judge to not allow the release of the document recovered from Anthony's car following his suicide attempt on January 22.

In the motion, Conway indicates that the release of the document because it contains very personal information intended for nobody other than Mr. Anthony's family. He also states that disclosing this document now would create substantial risk of unnecessary annoyance and embarrassment...

Conway also indicated that the document is related to George Anthony's suicide attempt and used to "Baker Act" him. As such, he believes that this is medical information protected by statute.

Since this is an evidentiary hearing, Casey Anthony will have to attend.

WESH has already announced it will televise the hearing and I would expect other stations to carry it as well.

See you all in court Thursday!

Pending Arrest in the Chandra Levy Murder

~Chandra Levy




She was a pretty 24-year-old who disappeared from her apartment on May 1, 2001.

Chandra Levy’s remains were found in Rock Creek Park a year after her disappearance and the cause of death was ruled a homicide, however no one was ever charged with her murder.

What followed in the wake of her disappearance was the Gary Condit scandal. Condit, a California congressman admitted having an affair with Chandra, but always denied any involvement in Levy’s disappearance or death.

Now, it seems an arrest in the murder case may be imminent.

Police have turned over evidence to the U.S. Attorney’s office seeking an arrest warrant for Ingmar Guandique.

Guandique is currently in prison for assaults on two women in the same park where Chandra’s remains were ultimately found.

It appears Guandique allegedly confessed to Levy’s murder to another inmate back in 2001. Guandique, an illegal Salvadoran immigrant, was interviewed by the U.S. attorney's office in Washington by prosecutors and D.C. detectives.

He has now told investigators that while he had seen Levy in the park on several occasions, he had no part in her death.

Let’s hope for Chandra and her family that justice will finally be served.

Fox News

News 10

CNN

The Case Against Casey Anthony: Evidence, Transcripts, and Video

Update!

Today, the court released tape recordings of the Dominic Casey interview.

Part 1 Part 2 Part 3


Ever since the discovery of Caylee's remains on Suburban Drive, I've thought of this case as a triangle. The Orlando County Sheriff's Office and the FBI have been continuing the investigation and tying together the three main crime scenes. The three parts of the triangle are the Anthony home, Casey's Sunbird, and the overgrown area where Caylee was found.

The most recent documents released to the public have helped to tie it all together. We've known for a long time that it is likely Caylee's body was placed in the back yard. From there, evidence of decomposition in the trunk of the Sunbird shows that Caylee was there after her death. Items from the home were also there at some point. These items were found at the crime scene along with Caylee's skeletal remains.

There is still a lot of this evidence that needs to be tested. The heart-shaped stickers need to be analyzed to see if they are the same ones that were found in the woods. The tags on the clothing and laundry hamper need to be researched and compared to those seized from the Anthony home. The plastic bags also need to be compared to the ones in the home as well.

In addition, we have yet to hear about botanical and entomological studies on the plant life and insects. There has been no release about the contents of the vacuum cleaners and carpet cleaners. There are no reports about fibers or hair found on the duct tape. There is so much more that has not been made public.

The FBI reports indicated that trace evidence testing was ongoing. We will hopefully find out more as time passes.

Meanwhile, the defense team is attacking the evidence. They insist that the diary entry from June 21 was written in 2003. Let's hope that some form of forensic ink testing will tell otherwise. In addition, in a press release by Baez's new spokeswoman, Marti Mackenzie released a statement.

The State’s forensic report on duct tape, plastic bags and other items is a one-sided law enforcement-generated report and is biased and speculative. It uses ‘junk science,’ the kind of flawed comparative analysis that the two-year study by National Academy of Sciences released today.

We've been hearing the term "junk science" from the defense team for a while now and this is a good indication of their strategy for the trial. We should all start preparing ourselves for the sight of their world-renowned scientists getting up on the stand to explain why their own work can be qualified as "junk"! It does seem ironic, though, that they won't try to debunk the DNA testing done to identify the remains.

In spite of the defense's desire to jump on the "junk science" band wagon, more and more evidence has come to light in this last document dump. There are no "bombshell" results in any of those pages. There are, however, snippets of information about the family that help to develop a better understanding of the dysfunctional situation into which Caylee was born.

Dominic Casey Transcript Released

Today, we were all treated to an 80-page transcript of an interview Dominic Casey gave to the police and FBI on January 7.

It is a remarkable document in which Casey, accompanied by attorney Brad Conway answers questions from Sergeant John Allen and Special Agent Nick Savage of the FBI.

He starts by stating he went out to the Suburban Drive on his way to the Meet and Greet to check out a tip from KioMarie Cruz, who had mentioned in a statement last July that she and Casey used to hang out in the woods behind the school. However, before he could do that, he received a call from a psychic who told him to search an area at the end of Hopesprings Drive for Caylee's remains. She told him he would find them by three paving stones. Oh, and he invited his buddy James Hoover to come along since the Anthony's had invited him to the Meet and Greet as well.

He claimed he didn't know Hoover was videotaping his search until he happened to see Hoover with a camera. When the psychic told him to go to a certain house to search a culvert, he ended up digging in the soil near the house. He claimed he didn't know Hoover was doing that either.

Another aspect of this interview is an attempt by Allen and Savage to pinpoint when he worked for Baez, Casey Anthony, and George and Cindy Anthony. He first said he was contracted to work for the Anthony's on July 29. Then he changed his mind and said he worked for Baez starting that date. He apparently signed on to work for Casey Anthony separately on September 12 and is still under contract with her. His only problem is, Baez hasn't allowed him access to Ms. Anthony since October 12. We never do learn when he began working for George and Cindy.

There is much more, it's a pretty good read if you have the time. Judge Strickland is at present reviewing Casey's second interview to see if it contains privileged information. I'm looking forward to seeing what happened in that one. One thing I'd like to know is if Casey is ever informed that Cindy Anthony told LE when they were conducting the second search of the house that she had had her people out at the site!

Casey Caught on Tape

Thanks to my friend Kitty Malone for alerting me to the fact that Casey was surreptitiously taped while watching the news on a television in the nursing unit when the discovery of the remains was being broadcast.

Anthony doubled over twice and appeared to hyperventilate, according to the source who has seen the tape.

I don't know if this particular video will be aired to the public or to a jury, but it gives me new respect for the OCSO. When Casey had been caught watching coverage of Leonard Padilla's search of the Econ river, it was reported that she was asked to return to her cell. She got up calmly and didn't seem to respond to the report that "something" had been found.

This time, she hyperventilates and asks for medicine to calm her down. Remember, at that particular point, there had been no positive identification of the remains. Consciousness of guilt, anyone?

Watching the news today, it seems we just may be having another set of documents released soon. Let's hope that the evidence revealed in them will continue tie together the triangle of this crime.

13 News
Dominic Casey Interview
WESH

The Case Against Casey Anthony: New documents to be released this week

WESH has reported that the defense has received 1100 new pages of discovery today.

The state released over 1,100 pages of evidence to Casey Anthony's defense team on Monday. According to a source close to the investigation, test results from the FBI crime lab on the duct tape found on slain toddler Caylee Anthony's skull are in that new batch of evidence. When asked by WESH 2's Bob Kealing if Casey Anthony's fingerprints were on the duct tape, a source with direct knowledge of the investigation said, "This is not going to be good news for the defense."

This is what we have been waiting for. The State's Attorney's office is planning to release the documents to the public on Wednesday.

Let's hope we get the answers to so many of the questions we have been asking.

In other news, Jose Baez, Casey's lead attorney in her defense has been hospitalized with stomach problems. Wishing him a speedy recovery...

WESH
WFTV
Video

Casey Anthony Speaks

I just finished watching a press conference by Casey Anthony's attorney, Jose Baez.

He read a statement from his client:

I miss Caylee every day and every minute of every day. I can't be there for Caylee's funeral, but some day I want to go and visit her grave and tell her how much I miss her.

I allowed my parents to be in charge of the funeral for Caylee. I told them I wanted her buried in a casket and I wanted there to be a gravestone so I could go and visit her. I asked them if there could only be a private funeral for just the family.

I know they cremated her. I still don't want a public event with cameras and everybody around for Caylee's service, but I can't stop my parents from doing what they want. I truly hope that it will help them.

This is such a Casey statement. Notice every sentence begins with "I" and refers to Caylee just four times. She "allowed" her parents to be in charge of the funeral: how generous of her. It doesn't surprise me that she spends more time discussing what SHE wanted (casket, headstone, no public memorial) than the fact that she misses Caylee.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Casey is terribly jealous of Caylee and her mother getting so much attention. It doesn't surprise me she hasn't requested to view the memorial tomorrow.

WFTV

Casey Anthony: January 30 Hearing

Update!

Judge Stan Strickland has ruled against the defense's motion to obtain material from TES. In the one page decision, stated that

The Court does not have jurisdiction to order a subpoena duces tecum as requested. The defense must avail itself of the Uniform Law to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Within or Without a State in Criminal Proceedings to accomplish the this task. This would require the defense to show that the witness is material, and that has not been done in the instant pleading...

Judge Strickland also stated that the defense provided insufficient information to show that TES acted as an agent of the state.


The hearing today was short and to the point! To quote Ron Kuby, who kindly re-broadcast portions of the the hearing on InSession, Judge Strickland "cut through the BS." In just under an hour, he listened to the motions and either postponed rulings or ruled quickly with a minimum of argument.

Casey Anthony appeared in court in what I would call her "paralegal look." Jean Casarez was sitting just behind her and described her as wearing a blue jacket over her jail scrub pants. I noted that her hair was freshly washed and tied back on her head. She spent the majority of the time taking notes on a legal pad and at one point, beamed one of her famous smiles at her attorney, Jose Baez. She also chatted with Linda Kenney-Baden who was also present for the hearing.

The first motion to be addressed was Motion to Inspect the Crime Scene. Baez stated that he had attempted to contact the owner of the property to no avail. The owner's mother had called him, denying him access. The judge granted the motion, permitting the defense experts to examine the scene.

Jose Baez spoke briefly on the matter of information they want from Texas Equusearch. I couldn't quite follow his argument, but my friend donchais remarked that he was basically asking for information from the searchers as to "what they found AND didn't find...made my head spin."

Mark NeJame, representing TES put forward the same arguments he mentioned in his motion. He said that the motion was not made in the proper way. He explained that TES was not a material witness in the case and therefore there was no subpoena to send to Texas. He also stated that it, "baffles logic that those going out to find the remains would NOT report finding a child." He ended his comments by stating to Baez that, "your request is flawed."

Baez responded by stating that TES had been working with authorities and was paid by the authorities who were at the various search locations. He pointed out that NeJame's motion didn't address that particular issue. I noticed that Baez mentioned they were "paid." That pay was a mere $5000, a donation, actually. He didn't mention that the search has literally broken TES financially!

Baez requested that the judge issue a subpoena and that he would take it to Texas. He also pointed out that TES had opened an office in Orlando and was doing business in Texas.

Judge Strickland indicated that he would take the arguments under advisement and that both sides could submit further case law to him before he made a decision on the motion. He stated that he will rule on it later today. The judge also mentioned that Baez' term "doing business" may not be appropriate.

NeJame then addressed the fact that Baez hadn't mentioned that his contention that TES is an "arm" of the state of FL is not even in the pleadings. He then went on to mention the financial provisions in his motions as well as the chilling effect the granting of this motion would have on the volunteer searchers.

Baez' response was that NeJame had been following the case and was aware that TES "could" be an agent of the state. He then indicated that he has a bill stating that some of the tips were not in conformity with what the defense had asked for.

The judge reiterated that he will rule on the motion today.

Mark NeJame commented that the defense was aware that he was representing TES and sidestepped contacting him in the matter and went to TES directly.

The judge said that he was off topic and that he will rule on the motion today.

Baez next brought up the fact that Mark NeJame had represented the Anthonys and the judge told him to "file a motion" about it. Baez indicated he wouldn't do that.

The judgesaid he would rule on the motion today.

The motion to strike the defense witness list was moot since they have submitted a new one. It will be interesting to see it when it is released to the public.

Linda Kenney-Baden was next up at bat. She argued the defense motion to recuse the prosecution attorneys. She spoke at her usual fast pace, summarizing her motion to the judge. She mentioned a Mr. Chinais, who is Baez' attorney in this matter and listed his bona fides, among which was the fact that he, at one time, chaired the Florida Bar Ethics Committee. She indicated that he spoke to a Mr. Marvin who confirmed for her that "someone" from the State's Attorney's office had sent the complaint.

She informed Judge Strickland that it was his responsibility to launch his own investigation into the issue.

Next, she read the quote from Jose Baez's press conference after the infamous Todd Black press release which attacked Lawson Lamar. She pointed out that Baez had said, "I'm not going to throw out any accusations... it wasn't me that said..."

She again informed Judge Strickland that he needs to investigate this for himself and find out what the person's motivation was.

At that point, the judge gave her 30 seconds to finish!

State's Attorney Linda Drane Burdick requested that the judge strike the motion, telling him that the assertions from the media are double, triple, hearsay. She pointed out that Ms. Baden's arguments mention a person not mentioned in the pleadings. In addition, the motion did not address HOW the State of Florida, through the filing, had harmed Ms. Anthony.

Drane Burdick said that if it's inconvenient to Mr. Baez, embarrassing, he can get a lawyer.

She summed up the prosecution position by stating that if some person in the office filed a complaint, it wasn't any member of the prosecution team and that the motion had no factual or legal support.

Baden spoke again briefly, saying that the judge has to find that out for himself.

Judge Strickland ended the debate by denying the motion. He indicated that, based on what he has heard, is a Florida Bar matter and that the factual base is thin.

Clarifying the matter, Jean Casarez mention on In Session that she had checked with the Bar Association and learned that no complaint had been filed. Someone from the State's Attorney's Office had merely faxed the articles to them and they opened their own investigation.

The remainder of the hearing concerned schedueling a trial date. The defense mentioned that there was a "mountain" of discovery that he needed to go through. The prosecution stated that it was likely the trial would not take place until later in the year.

Judge Strickland said he would set another hearing within the next 60-90 days. He also mentioned that a motion for change of venue had not been filed. Drane Burdick pointed out one may not be needed if the trial doesn't begin until later in the year. The judge said that Baez could file papers in the meantime if he so desired.

As a finale to the hearing, Bradley Conway, the Anthony family attorney waived the Anthonys' privilege in order to expedite the discovery process. He said that they love Casey and wants things to move along.

Casey Anthony's Video, August 14

In his recent set of motions to the court on January 8, Jose Baez petitioned the court for the video records of Cindy and George Anthony's visit with their daughter on August 14, 2008.

According to the prosecution attorney, Linda Drane-Burdick, the fact that the defense had not received the video was an apparent oversight. I can't help but wonder if the prosecution was doing a favor for the defense here!

Yesterday, this video was made public. Bloggers and posters on various message boards, as well as me, are wondering if Baez opened a Pandora's Box with this video. It does not show his client in a very favorable light. It shows Casey at her narcissistic best. She uses personal pronouns referring to herself about 378 times (yes, I counted), mentions her daughter's name 5 times, and refers to Caylee as "she" exactly 4 times. In the meantime, she shows a nasty temper and her great ability to manipulate her gullible parents numerous times.

I think a person working on a doctoral degree in abnormal psychology would have a field day with this video. I am just going to point out a few of the things that struck me the most.

As the video begins, Cindy Anthony is crying. George has the phone and greets her cheerfully as is his way. Casey greets him back with a hint of laughter in her voice. Casey then immediately asks,

Why is she crying already?

Doesn't Casey understand that her mother is exhausted and grieving for Caylee?

George mentions that it's because they miss her and Casey echoes his words. There is no other mention of her mother and the discussion moves on to the butterfly T-shirts her parents are wearing. Casey says she likes them and the conversation continues.

George hands the phone over to Cindy who is still crying and Casey gives her eyes a poke with her finger and says that "she" didn't last long. To the news that reports say Caylee may have drowned in the pool, Casey answers, Surprise, surprise! with a little giggle in her voice.

When Cindy mentions all the bad materials that have been published, Casey brags that she hasn't received any such information.

They discuss the "secret" meeting with George Anthony. Casey mentions that she has discussed with whom she shold have this meeting with Jose Baez and that she has decided it should be her father. George is thrilled with this. He goes so far as to thank her more than once. He also tells her that she should not go through her lawyer to request the meeting. Casey rejects speaking to Lee, since he will do nothing but ask her questions, and her mother, who will dominate the conversation. She chooses the one who she has been the most "distanced" from. She chooses the one who calls her "beautiful" and is not exactly the one in control of the family!

The very same day, Casey wrote this note to Sheriff Beary

Sir,

I ask your help at this time. If there is any way that I can have a meeting set-up with my father (George Anthony) I would in every way appreciate it. I know it is an unusual request, but it is important nonetheless.
I was told that you could help me in this manner. I truly hope that it can be done, and without causing any trouble.

Thank you so much for all of the help you have offered to my family, and to helping find my daughter.

Sincerely,
Casey Anthony

We later learn that such a meeting was arranged for that same evening. According to the police reports released on November 26, that George Anthony was brought to the jail and waited from 7:30 PM until about 9 PM to meet with Casey. At the time, Casey was meeting with attorney Adam Gabriel. Sergeant Allen had made it clear that the meeting was entirely Casey's decision. She could meet with her father alone or with her attorney. In the end, Casey rejected her father's visit.

Whether or not Casey was affected by her attorney's opinion, I have to wonder why she had spoken to Jose Baez about such a meeting and why the attorney with her at the time talked her out of it.

The rest of the video goes on and on and on. Casey whines to her parents constantly about her problems, seemingly glossing over their situation. She also loads her parents with a guilt trip for not getting her out of jail by mentioning that they had an opportunity (what, with the reward money?) to get her out. Mind you all, Leonard Padilla says that this was the very day Casey was informed that he would be bailing her out.

Thank you to Greta Van Susteren for the following quotes from Casey (with my personal, perhaps sarcastic comments).

I am upset now. The media is going to have a freaking field day with this. I wasn't even supposed to take this.

Since Baez was in New York at the time, one has to wonder whether that boat trip with Geraldo was worth it!

My entire life has been taken from me. Everything has been taken from me. You don't understand. Everybody wants me to have answers. I do not have any answers because I do not know what is going on.

However, she did know what did happen back in June! In addition, she's apparently viewed an episode of Nancy Grace and doesn't like what she's hearing there!

That is why I have not been calling, why I have not been taking calls, because I am trying to make sure that I am not going to give anybody else anything else to throw against me. But even with me giving them nothing, they are still doing it.

Casey, Casey. Anything you had to say pales in comparison to what was found of your daughter a short, convenient, distance from your own house.

I have been here a month, out of contact with everybody except you guys on a rare occasion that I get to see you, and my attorney. Do you understand? What am I supposed to learn from that? What am I supposed to learn, the first week and a half?

Perhaps you could learn what happens when you kill your little girl?

There is nothing more that I can say or do until I'm home, and even then, I do not know what I can do from that point. But I can least do something other than sit on my butt on day and read or look up stuff for my case, because that has to be my focus right now.

Casey did get home. We know from Leonard Padilla and Tim Miller how useful she was to her case. She also says here that she can only focus on her case right now. She was only charged with negligent child abuse at the time. Perhaps she already knew exactly what charges would be coming. I doubt she was referencing check forgery!

I do not have access to the Internet. I can't make phone calls. I can't go anywhere.

That was Casey's whole life before being arrested. In her whole 31 days of Caylee being "missing," she had all of those. It didn't work then, and it certainly didn't work whenever she was out on bond.

I am going to just walk away right now, because I am frustrated and I'm angry, and I don't want to be angry. This is the first time I have truly been angry this entire time.

Is anyone out there buying this?

But I'm so beyond frustrated with all of this that I can't even swallow right now. It hurts.

What does really hurt, Casey?

Video
Documents
Van Susteren