Casey - Innocent until proven guilty?
 

Yipsters, looks like the state has a case that will be hard to dispute.....Can't wait until Baez "drops a bombshell"??????

Casey Anthony
 

There won't be any "bombshell". Just a matter of Biaz muddying the waters enough for justice not to be done.

Casey Anthony Trial
 

A very effective opening for the prosecution indeed! What could Baez possibly have that would overcome Casey's mountain of lies? If he does have a radical defense up his sleeve or a phenominal bombshell to drop, the only way to pull it off would be to have Casey take the stand and offer proof - if not the house of cards will come tumbling down. How can she sit there and shake her head "no" during the opening argument without taking the stand? I am having a nice lunch and will be ready for it in less than 1/2 hour ...

A few of us were discussing the Casey Anthony stuff while playing cards.

One of the guys said that Casey had been known to use chloroform to knock her child out so she could go party - and that is why the chloroform "scented" handkerchief in the car trunk is not relevant to the case.

Was there anything about her actually chloroforming the child so she could go out partying?

I don't think the defense attorney must have any self respect!
The things he used to describe the meter man seem to be self descriptive.
The bit about the sexual abuse- I wonder if the father has gone along with that to save Casey.

Just a thought and probably not a correct one

I agree with you Jane. Her father probably thinks he is saving her life. Casey Anthony must be a true sociopath to allow her family to take the blame for this.

The defense attorney has self respect. Everyone regardless of their crime is entitled to the best defense possible. And her attorney should do everything possible to provide that. Although I agree she is a despicable person and deserves the worst, she is still entitled to a solid defense. Part of our system which I respect, innocent until proven guilty.

Casey Anthony is a habitual liar. What I have learned about juries is that they will excuse or forgive a lot of bad behavior but never a liar...for obvious reasons. The defense knew what a struggle it would be to explain why a mother would not show immediate concern for a child gone missing. So he made it an accidental drowning and a dysfunctional family that had a practice of hiding secrets. But I am having difficulty believing that because her father was a homicide dective and he would have known that the cover up would make the situation much worse.

I felt the sexual abuse issue would come up but if it were true why didn't this issue come up sooner

Jose inexperience showed!
 

If (big IF) there was a drowning, an accident, why not give your loved one a proper burial....I know this is only the beginning but Baez has an uphill climb!....What a mess!

Wow, what an opening day! I thought I'd never say this, but I actually felt sorry for George Anthony. It was a brilliant move on the prosecution's part to put him on the stand first to dispute the molestation and that he was there when Caylee supposedly drowned. Baez was left looking inept and unprepared. Day one definitely goes to the prosecution - they were sharp and prepared, giving a complete outline of everything they are going to prove with testimony.

All the defense has to do is to create in one juror reasonable doubt (of premeditation) as to her guilt on murder 1 to save her from the possibility of a death sentence; that juror could force the other jurors to agree to conviction on a lesser, non-death-sentence-eligible, offense as a tradeoff in order to avoid a mistrial. I think that the drowning / sexual abuse scenario, as 'out there' as it may sound (and it sounds very 'out there' to me), may be enough of a twist and total disconnect from the prosecution's theory to possibly do that.

Baez all along said 'stay tuned' for a bombshell that we would not hear about until the trial, and boy did he at least deliver on that.

And who knows - since we have not heard the testimony, it is always possible that the jury could believe it (that is, that the death was an accidental drowning, followed by extremely poor judgment and a poorly conceived coverup that snowballed to tragic consequences), and acquit - at least on murder charges. (And it is also possible that it is the truth - personally I seriously doubt it, but who knows until we hear the whole story?)

Exactly! I agree.

It is so hard for me to believe anything about her is innocent. I personally, thank God, have never met a human who could party when their little one was MISSING...and I hope I never do.

I watched the presentation today and was surprised that the prosecution really did not offer any evidence of premeditation. This is supposed to be the first-degree murder trial seeking the death penalty. There is proof that the girl was dead but really no proof as to how it happened. In my opinion the prosecution spent most of its time trying to make Casey Anthony looked at. I think the woman who presented the opening remarks of the prosecution did a very good job of that. I do think however that she didn't come across very likable. The prosecution presentor that is.

As far as the defenses opening remarks, I think the attorney did a fairly good job of muddying the water. If only 20% of the accusations made by the defense attorney turned out to be true then he has won the case.

Time will tell.

Keep in mind that being a despicable person a negligent mother and they generally hated person is not reason enough to execute someone.

Let us hope that justice is served whatever justice may be in this case.

C

Length of trial
 

Living in in Illinois, I don't have accesss to the wall-to-wall, extensive coverage of this trial that Floridians are getting. Has anyone heard how long the trial is projected to last?

I disagree. All the searches for chloroform, how to make chloroform, household "weapons", etc. discovered on Casey's computer certainly sounds like premeditation to me. Also, placing duct tape over the child's mouth could have been just a really stupid thing to do (resulting in the child perhaps aspirating her own vomit, an accidental death), but duct tape over both mouth and nose would be premeditated murder.

What I don't understand is how any rational person could believe Baez's convoluted yarn. Why would anyone put duct tape over the nose and mouth of a dead (drowned) child?

Helene is watching it here on Court TV. Whoops. Tru something channel on direct TV.

[QUOTE=CMANN;357100]I watched the presentation today and was surprised that the prosecution really did not offer any evidence of premeditation.

I think we need to keep in mind that Opening Statements are NOT evidence. Evidence can only be brought in through the use of a witness and testimony. I believe the prosecution will begin the process of showing evidence of premeditation as it calls its witnesses and cross examines the defense witnesses.

It is a horrible situation when an innocent child is the victim of foul play, let's hope that the eventual truth comes out and the responsible party/parties are held accountable.

Before the trial there was the possibility of the Anthonys being hostile witnesses. As far as I could tell George was not a hostile witness. Maybe he was just "****ed" that he was thrown under the bus and decided to be cooperative. Just a thought.

John

I wondered too how this fits into the defense's story. I didn't hear the opening statements, because we're traveling, but from the accounts I heard about them I gather that the story is that Casey accidently let Caylee drown, her father either was home at the time or came home and discovered it; warned Casey that she would be imprisoned for neglect (and also said that 'your mother will never forgive you'); and that after that somehow in disposing of the body her father put the duct tape in place to make it look as though Caylee had been murdered by someone in order to disguise the fact that she had actually drowned - apparently to keep from implicating the family as being responsible. (??!!)

This is just my take on this from having heard bits and pieces; can anyone who actually saw the opening statements fill in any better what Baez said to explain the duct tape?

I agree that the whole thing sounds pretty preposterous. But it is not impossible that it happened. The prosecution's case has so many strong points that only some defense scenario totally off in a different direction has a chance of flying.

What's preposterous to me is to believe that a former law enforcement officer (George Anthony) would try to turn a tragic accident into a kidnapping/murder to redirect blame. He would have to know that all family members would be investigated and probably would not have been stupid enough to use duct tape and other evidence from his own home. But even if that happened, common sense says that they would have reported Caylee missing right away and would have put forth a very public effort in trying to find her...IMHO, that 31-day period of absolutely no effort being made to locate her completely negates Baez's tall tale.

CaliforniaGirl, I agree
 

Gorge Anthony was a long time homcide detective and his experience would direct him to have notified the police immediately and not cover this up. Baez, rather Casey has her back up against a wall starting with her non-chalant behavior when her daughter went missing and the habitual lying to cover it up. How does one defend a mother who does nothing for 31 days? I am waiting to see if anyone testifies as to Casey Anthony's mental state.

By the way much to my chagrin I recently read where throughout history it has been established that more mother than we care to realize murder their young. the point being tha this is not an unusual event.

Please follow the trial. You may have a suprise.

C

Did I hear correctly?
 

One of the many boyfriends said Casey relayed secret that George's only fault was hitting her and Lee tried to touch her chest?....This was said when the jury was out of the court room at the end of trial Thursday 5/26?

Assuming that Casey murdered Calee I have a suspicion that she did it to "punish" her mother. I think that there was a lot of turmoil in that relationship. I know that doesn't make a whole lot of sense but Casey's state of mind as witnessed by her attitude after her daughter was missing casts doubt on her mental stability.

John

Thinking that Casey a wild girl and mother always nagging her

That was a 'proffer', where the judge listens to evidence that one side is wanting to offer into evidence, but out of the jury's hearing, in order to determine whether to allow it into evidence, ie, to be heard by the jury.

It also preserves the issue for appeal, if the proffered testimony is excluded by the judge, by preserving it for the record in order for the appeals court to know what the excluded testimony would have been.

I wasn't going to watch the trial, but Helene comes down from her room with news briefs and I was kinda....drawn to see out of curiosity.

The young people who were Casey's aquaintances at that time all seem to be credible, normal, well dressed, employed, well spoken and unanimous in their opinion that during the time that Caylee was missing that Casey did not mention her, and did not appear to be looking for her and neither did she appear "down" or sad during that time.

To me, that says she is certainly not showing a normal reaction.

This trial almost seems that it was one of the made for TV court dramas. It truly is almost unbelievable...... And terribly sad when you see that darling little Caylee's face all of the time.

Casey may or may not be guilty. I'm just struck with the attention this case has gotten...THREE years of it!! I'm also quite sick of hearing about this and how the t.v. stations will interrupt regular programming for updates. Think of the cost this case has!! Where is the money coming from?? That family doesn't seem like they're wealthy.

This aside...doesn't it seem "over-kill" (no pun intended) how the t.v. stations seem to focus so much on the crime and such for their news-stories?? We lived up north and that didn't seem to be so much a factor there. It's almost like a "Cops" show...therefore we rarely listen to the 'news'.

Jen.

I know that you in TV are getting a lot more coverage because it is close by and frankly because it is news.

But even the Today show has updates on the trial and they usually don't follow local news of trials. I guess it just says that this trial really has drawn the interest of people nationally and my guess is because of all of the video of that darling little person when she was alive. I know that she is "real" to me because of it. What precious, precocious, pretty, sweet little person she was.

After the trial is over - how long will it be until the premise comes to an episode of "Law and Order"?

Right now I think that the evidence just heard today from Casey's brother's fiance, along with that from Casey's former boyfriends/friends about how caring, involved (teaching Caylee things, reading to her, etc), and loving she was as a mother, is going save her from murder 1. No matter what else the evidence is, I would never believe that an obviously loving mother (or father) IN HER RIGHT MIND would/could premeditatedly plan and research how to kill her child.

I think it is also important that the brother's fiance tearfully testified very strongly as to how good, kind, and loving a mother Casey was, and how well she took care of Caylee, despite the defense claiming that the brother had sexually abused Casey - in other words, the brother's fiance would have no reason to want to testify favorably about Casey as a mother unless it was the truth.

To me, all the evidence of Casey's acting so normally (and partying, shopping, etc) after the death of Caylee (who she had clearly loved), plus the evidence of her, as an obviously loving mother, allowing Caylee to sleep in bed with her and her casual boyfriend (something that any normally raised young woman would, I believe, see as an absolute taboo and would never do) is evidence that she had probably been sexually/emotionally (perhaps also physically) abused, and had learned to deal with bad things by repressing/denial behavior. I feel sure that the defense will call experts to this effect.

All of this is totally different than how I felt before the trial started, when I felt that the duct tape would be insurmountable.

It all remains to be seen.

Your arguments are reasonable and well presented counselor. You may be right.

I think it is possible that Casey Anthony is a true sociopath; able to appear normal, yet having no concience or ability to feel deep emotional attachments. She also appears very narcissistic, another symptom of sociopathy. She appeared not to hesitate to use her friends checks and didn't appear to feel bad about that. I think that this malady is not developed but inate and she has probably evidenced symptoms all of her life, thus Cindy Anthony's frustration with trying to talk to her or direct her and their very bad relationship.

I would like to know who Caylee's father is. I wonder if that is going to be the "bombshell" evidence.

Freeda,

You could be right, but I doubt it!

You are certainly the person the defense would love to have on the jury.

Cindy Anthony
 

Good witness, not sure what the defense can do with her testimony!....I don't know how Casey kept up with all the lies......I thought Baez fell asleep during Cindy's testimony, very few objections if any!....This case may be shorter than they anticipated....Still do not understand HOW the defense is going to prove drowning theory without Casey taking the stand....We shall see!

Watch George
 

Judging from what I have heard I am convinced that George (father) is the
key to the answers. Probable cover up by him. He seriously lied each time he was on the stand. The question is why is he lying and there is no doubt
in my mind that he is.
Regarding her being a Sociopath. I have seen more qualities of a sociopath in the father than in her.
Regarding lying. Please explain what father in his right mind would not
ask who the father was. If that was and I am convinced it was a lie then
why would he lie. What is his motive??? So far I have not seen who the
father was??
He has thrown his daughter under the bus each time he was on the witness
stand and lied as he was doing it.
It should be remembered that as a Detective he has been on the witness
stand a number of times and is more than familiar with how to avoid replying
honestly to questions. He has offered a number of self serving statements
while lying.

Reading the comments it becomes clear what the jurors are asking themselves. Keep in mind that it maybe both Goege and cindy Anthony are in a Cach 22. They have to defend allegations made against them by Baez and also probably conflited concerning helping the State convict their daughter. Also keep in mind that the attornys will make it appea that a defendant and or witnesses should have acted a certain way. As an example[U] they were critical of the manager at the tow service as to why if he knew the odor was of human decomposition why didn't he immediately call the police. It could have been for a number of reasons or none as he may have questioned what would have happened if he did and it amounted to nothing. Or perhaps he didn't want to gt involved. and if it was the latter do you think he would embarrrass himself with millions of people watching and with a question of how the police would have reacted. The point I am trying to make is that an attorney will make it appear that only one action or reaction should have occurred but that is not life. It is the same with George he took that car home to 1) cover up for his daughter 2) bot sure of what was going on and wanted to investigate more or 3) really never gave a thought to foul play. why becauseit was too personal it was his immediate family and he went brain dead. Bottom line this child was missing for 31 days and her mother mae no attempt to locate her. the jury is not going to get pass that one...and why Baez made up the drowning scenario.

George Anthony has a short fuse, probably suffers from anger issues and is danged used to having his way, but I don't think he caused Caylee's death or her birth for that matter.

Cindy Anthony also has a short fuse and is used to solving problems and fixing things and Casey would not ever obey, would lie all of the time and was extremely attractive physically. She was a hot number and not taking directions from her frustrated and far from perfect parents. It is the dysfunctional family of the year as far as white middle class families go.

It is the saddest ending to a life for a little girl who had such promise. A bright little sparkler who had such a zest for living.

I believe the motive here is the same one as that young woman who drowned her little boys in their car. She wanted to live her life without her children.

So far I am not impressed with the prosecution's case. They are giving every opportunity to the defense to make Casey looked good. I wonder when they are actually going to present evidence of premeditated murder. Their attempt to show Casey's motive was laughed at by the judge.

Maybe things will be different on Tuesday.

C

Casey will most definitely have to testify; both as to the drowning and as to the sexual abuse. Unless there are witnesses who saw these things happen, who will testify to their having occurred, which I highly doubt, there is no other way she can prove these two things. Having claimed these two facts in his opening, there will have to be evidence of them; and Casey will presumably be the only person (since George denied them both) who will have knowledge of them.

Here are some other thoughts I have; and I seem to have many about this case, which I think is very interesting, in large part because it is so tragic. I've seen only excerpted testimony because we are traveling, but this is my take so far.

George testified that he smelled the unmistakeable smell of a corpse in the trunk of Casey's car when he went to the tow lot to pick up the car, and that at the time he feared that it could mean that either Casey or Caylee were in the trunk (since both of them, he claims, were, in his mind, 'missing' at that time). Then, he and the tow lot manager (who also testified as to having smelled the odor of a human corpse in the trunk), opened the trunk, and only a bag of trash was in there; nevertheless, the human corpse smell was, he says, was present and unmistakeable.

Still, since George believed (as an experienced police detective who, he testified, had smelled that odor before) that the smell in the trunk was that of a human corpse, why, if he had no culpability, as he claims, in the coverup of Caylee's death, and if he were truly concerned about the smell possibly being related to his (he claims) then-'missing' daughter and granddaughter, wouldn't he want to have the police inspect the trunk and document the presence of the smell BEFORE taking the car to his home from the tow lot?

In other words, (1) not only is it odd that he wasn't shocked enough by the smell of what he himself believed was from a human corpse having been in the trunk (at a time when his daughter and granddaughter were both supposedly 'missing') to have immediately called the police to investigate it; but also (2) by taking the car to his home, he left open the possibility that it could later be claimed that the smell of a human corpse in the trunk had occurred from a body being placed in the car AFTER he had retaken possession of the car - and, thus, potentially somehow implicating himself (in other words, I wouldn't want to risk even a slight possibility of having to explain how the smell of a human corpse got into a car that is in my possession - would you?)

This suggests to me that George took the car home with the intention of trying to somehow get rid of the smell because he realized it was from Caylee's body having been in the trunk, and he didn't want that to be detected - (and that can only mean that he was involved in, and, in denying it, lied about, a coverup -which further means nothing else that he testified to can be believed; and as mentioned in a post above, I too find much of George's demeanor not credible). However, Cindy detected the odor and called 911 and reported the smell coming from the trunk before he could do that. I think that at that point, George knew his number was up, and that he then was forced to reinvent his conduct to place the blame for what had been made (though falsely; by his and Casey's conduct) to look like a murder solely on Casey in order to hide his own involvement. I think that it was he, also, who did the computer searches (what I don't know is whether it was possible for the police to determine when the computer searches were done - and, if so, what dates they were found to have been done - the evidence on this will be very interesting), during this time frame, to frame Casey with this evidence, to make it appear that she had researched methods of causing death; again, in a desperate attempt to avoid any fingers being pointed to him, since he realized that the coverup was unraveling, and that the police investigation which he knew would ensue would likely conclude that Caylee had been murdered by someone - since that is what he and Casey had, through their conduct, including, among many other things (such as having applied the duct tape to the remains), Casey's having for some period of time, kept Caylee's remains in Casey's car trunk, made it appear had occurred (even though, ironically, the death had, in fact, actually been an accidental drowning).

All of Casey's numerous lies to her friends and mother could be evidence of covering up her having murdered Caylee, as the prosecution claims, but are equally totally consistent with Casey's defense that they (Casey and her father) were (though poorly conceived, and extremely ineptly and stupidly carried out) trying to cover up fact that Caylee had drowned (in order to, crazy as it may sound, avoid blame and prosecution of Casey for criminal neglect, which Casey will say her father had convinced her would occur) by building a scenario of Caylee being with a (now known to be nonexistent) nanny who (they hoped) would eventually be believed to have abducted (and perhaps murdered) Caylee.

Preposterous? Maybe; but some of George's conduct just doesn't fly, as questioned above; and it just may cause the needed reasonable doubt in at least one juror. These are just some thoughts based on the trial to date; it all remains to be seen.

Some comments I have heard in the media, etc., have referred to the drowning and sexual abuse theories having been 'thought up' by Attorney Baez. However, the facts that an attorney advances in a case must come from the client. The attorney, just as he cannot testify, also cannot concoct fictional favorable factual scenarios and then school the client to testify thereto; I do not believe that any attorney would risk losing their bar license, plus prosecution, by doing this. It is his job to help his client prove what she claims occurred that can provide a defense to the charges against her.

The defense only needs to raise a reasonable doubt in the juries mind to get a not guilty verdict. The State must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. I cannot imagine Casey's attorney allowing her to take the stand in her defense. That would be a foolish act in my opinion. She would never stand up to the blistering attack that would come from the State.

This case is both tragic and unique with a young single parent mother charged with the murder of her own child! It is difficult to comprehend anyone being capable of that horrible act. However there are plenty of past cases to prove it happens for all kinds of reasons.

The jury can only use the evidence they learn in the trial to form an opinion on guilt or innocence. I have watched the trial and on the 3rd day, when George Anthony testified about his daughter’s car and the smell, I did not find him credible. That issue, coupled with the Fiancée’s testimony, had to have an impact on many of the jurors.

It will be interesting to hear from the forensic side and the investigators. They better have some compelling evidence that will marginalize what has been said already in the trial.