ON AIR at 4PM EST

>>>>> Simon’s Show <<<<< 

Listen to internet radio with Simon Barrett on Blog Talk Radio

A Snail's Pace

Jury selection is moving at the same pace as a race between a tortoise and a snail.

Hurry on over to Orlando Magazine and take your time reading my latest post…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Casey: Is Her Goose Deep-Fryed?

The judge has ruled on the final Frye motion. Air samples will be allowed at trial.

Find out what I think…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Pinellas? You be the Judge

It looks like Pinellas will be the county where Casey’s jury will be plucked. What do you think about that idea?

Find out what I think…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

What's so special about today?

Simon Barrett’s Radio Show

 

A Daughter's Scorn; A Family Torn

 What transpired in the courtroom yesterday, May 6? The outcome is that George and Cindy will be allowed to attend the entire trial, despite being witnesses. Why was the Rule of Sequestration waived in their case?

Find out here…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Busy Day

Please post any updates here and discuss them. I’m trying to write a post and some important stuff is coming down the pike, plus, there’s an emergency hearing today…

Open the Door and Let Them In

In my new post, renowned attorney Mark NeJame explains George & Cindy Anthony’s motion asking the court to excuse them from the rule of sequestration. Should they be allowed to attend the entire trial?

Find out here…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Uh Oh...

The media attorney from yesterday just filed documents with the Fifth Court of Appeals. Do I smell a delay?

OSAMA BIN LADEN IS DEAD

 U.S. has body nearly 10 years after 9/11 terrorist attacks

 

Casey's Defense: Scrambled and Fryed

In my new post, I explain the latest Frye rulings - chloroform and plant root growth. Plus, I explain why this case will never see a plea bargain.

Please take a look…

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

You want Orders with those Fryes?

My first post is now published on Orlando magazine’s Website. Titled, You want Orders with those Fryes?, it addresses the Frye motions Judge Perry ruled on yesterday. Please stop by and say hello. It will be my new digs for the next two months or so, because I am now an “on assignment” reporter for orlandomagazine.com.

Of course, that doesn’t mean I’ll be neglecting my blog. My home is my home and my friends are my friends and that will never change.

Please click the image.

Or click HERE

THANK YOU VERY MUCH!

That Smell

Ooooh that smell
Can’t you smell that smell
Ooooh that smell
The smell of death surrounds you

- Lynyrd Skynyrd from “That Smell”

On June 27, 2008, Casey Anthony contacted her close friend, Amy Huizenga, about a peculiar odor emanating from her car. The message was clear, and it was confirmed during Amy’s deposition taken on February 14 of this year. Jose Baez asked her about it starting on page 32:

Q: Okay. Now, she sent you a text message in reference to the smell of the car; is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Okay. And that was on what date, do you recall?

A: I think it’s in here somewhere. I don’t know what day it was.

Q: I can help you if you want to look towards the date for your statement to confirm it.

A. That would be great.

Q: Okay. The 27th. June 27th.

As the interview progressed…

A: Okay. Yeah, the 27th is when she confirmed - - like, when she said it was. But there were definitely a day or two that she had been like, dude, my car smells and I don’t know what it is. Just, like, one of those - - I mean, I think everyone’s had the time you’re like what is that smell. I don’t understand. And she just said it smelled, like, you know, something had died in her car and she had no clue what it is. And I think it was - - she - - it was coming from the engine areaish is what she had said. And then when she - - you know, finally, it was - - she was letting me know she had found it was and that was a squirrel that she figured her dad had run over when he was driving the car.

Q: Let me ask you this - -

A: Yes.

Q: - - do you have any other text messages about the smell or was it just that one text message?

A: I don’t know. You have the text messages.

What’s so important about this exchange is the fact that Casey acknowledged the odor of death in her car, as confirmed by a text message written and sent by her. She also told Amy that the smell had been in the car for at least one day, perhaps two. Was this the start of attempting to pass the blame on to her father?

Q: Okay. Do you know if you spoke about it before the 27th or after the 27th?

A: Before, because the 27th was when she said what it was and there was at least a day, if not two days, that she told me about the smell.

We have now established that Casey freely admitted that the smell of death did, in fact, exist in her vehicle. This leaves us with two possible choices: Casey knew exactly what it was and she was working on an excuse to cover it up, or she had no idea what caused the foul odor.

Let’s fast forward a bit to Amy’s conversation with Cindy, after Cindy picked her up at the Florida Mall. Remember, Cindy called 911 that night and uttered those now famous words,  “I found my daughter’s car today and it smells like there’s been a dead body in the damn car.”

Within a week, she changed her tune. “It smelled like something had died in the car. I smelled it. I thought something had died in the car. I didn’t know what it was. It could have been a squirrel. It could have been anything. But when we opened the trunk and we saw the maggots in the trunk with all the pizza and stuff, it was a rancid smell.” (See: http://www.wftv.com/news/16981004/detail.html)

She also told FOX News, “Do me a favor, put a little piece of pizza or any piece of garbage in your car today and leave it shut up for 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 days in this heat and then come back to me in 19 days and tell me what it smells like.” (See: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,389642,00.html)

What she did was a complete spin. It meant that the smell of death was not really death at all, it was pizza and other garbage found in the trunk that reeked so badly. She told the 911 dispatcher about the smell of death for one reason only: to quickly bring law enforcement to the house. She didn’t really mean what she said. Excuse me. Never mind. Except for one major issue. It wasn’t only the dispatcher she told that to.

Starting from page 52 of the deposition, where Amy dropped Casey off at Anthony Lazzaro’s apartment in Winter Park…

Q: Okay. And then where did you go?

A: I went to the Florida Mall with JP [Chatt] in his car because he wanted to go pick up the new iPhone that had come out while we were gone. And the Florida Mall is fun to walk around in so I tagged along.

Q: Tell me about the conversation when Cindy calls you. What happened - -

A: She called me and asked me - - you know, obviously stated who she was and then asked me if I had seen Casey or Caylee. I was, like, well, I just saw Casey like an hour and a half ago, but I haven’t seen Casey - - or Caylee in a while. And so she proceeded to tell me that, like, she needed to find her, that she was going to be in really big trouble. I believe she mentioned jail for some reason. I don’t recll what the reasoning was why she was going to be going to jail, but just seemed very important that she find her and that she hadn’t seen her in a long time. So that the car - - her car had been impounded for two weeks and that she just really needed to find Casey.

Q: Did she say anything about the smell in the car?

A: I don’t think she said anything about the smell of the car on the phone conversation. She said - - she did later in the car, but not, I don’t believe, over the phone.

AHA! I received an e-mail yesterday afternoon. A very nice person, who shall remain anonymous, wrote this to me:

I read the deposition of Amy. In it, Cindy states to her that the car smelled like a dead body had been in it. She says the same thing on the 911 call later. Then much later she says that she would have said anything to get the police there ASAP. I think saying that to Amy BEFORE the Police might come back to really haunt her.

She makes a very valid point. Continuing with Amy’s depostion:

Q: Okay. So then [Cindy] picks you up at the Florida mall?

A: Yes.

Q: You got in the car and then what’s the conversation like as you’re going to Tony’s house?

A: Well, first it was a, it’s nice to finally meet you because I had yet to meet her at that point. And she told me - - like actually then told me then the whole story of the car impound, that was when she told me about the smell.

Q: What did she say in describing the smell?

A: She said that it smelled - - it was the most horrible smell that she had ever smelled and that they were terrified that it was either Casey or Caylee in the car - - in the trunk until they got it open. But that was - - that her fear and she was barely controlling, like, emotion in saying that. Like, it was - - you could see that that was still something [t]hat she remembered being upset about that that thought was in her mind.

Q: Did she say she smelled the car or did she say George smelled the car?

A: Both of them. I believe they were boh there.

Q: Okay. So she’s telling you this on the way to Tony’s house?

A: Yes.

If it wasn’t the odor of death, what prompted George and Cindy to immediately think of Casey and Caylee’s well-being? Here are two snippets quoting George and Cindy’s own words from a transcript of the HLN program, Nancy Grace, dated November 17, 2008:

GEORGE ANTHONY: You guys don’t know! The person who was in the back of my granddaughter’s (SIC) car is not my granddaughter!

CINDY ANTHONY, GRANDMOTHER OF MISSING TODDLER: My husband is a deputy sheriff. Years ago, he was a homicide investigator, as well. And the first thing he thought was human decomposition. I’m a nurse. I thought human decomposition.

It’s interesting, to say the least. Ooooh that smell!

Reference: Huizenga Depo 2_11

A hardboiled eggzamination of Casey on today's radio show

Happy Easter, everyone. Yes, there will be a radio show today and I hope you can join Simon, Jan, and their panel of guests. I know it’s a holiday, but the show must go on!

CASEY ANTHONY - KILLER MOTHER?

Orlando Magazine

 

I have been following Casey Anthony’s every move for the past 2½ years, but I am no stalker. You can’t stalk someone who lives in jail and makes an occasional visit to the courthouse, where I go to see her in person. We have never spoken, though our eyes have met and I believe she knows who I am. Casey is a big part of my life, but probably not for much longer. 

My immersion into the Anthony saga is not normal, I know. You’re probably sick of hearing about Casey Anthony, who is to go on trial this month, but her name is always on my mind. I’m 58 years old and take care of my elderly parents and two cats, working from home as a freelance Web designer. I would go stir crazy if not for outside interests that stimulate my mind and get me out of the house. I have a laptop and loads of free time. I love to write. I have a blog, marinadedave.com.

It was never my intention to become a crime blogger. Casey just happened to come along at the right time for me, when I was immersed in blogging about a passion of mine that, frankly, makes my fascination with the Anthony case seem normal.

You don’t get the moniker “Marinade Dave” for writing about a murder mystery; you get a nickname like that honestly. I used to make a marinade I sold in local markets, and in 2004 I started blogging about marinades and marinating tips. About 5,000 marinade lovers visited my site every month.

But there is only so far you can go with a blog on marinades, and I had reached my limit with it just as the story of the “Tot Mom” erupted into a national media frenzy in July 2008. That’s how CNN talk show host Nancy Grace referred to Casey during the early days of the mystery surrounding the disappearance of her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee Marie. In October 2008, Casey was indicted for first-degree murder while the search for Caylee continued.

The leap from blogging about marinades to blogging about the Anthony case does seem like a giant one, but it actually began as a small step. I just didn’t know at the time that I had put both feet in quicksand.

In November, while working as a videographer, I found myself in the vicinity of Jay Blanchard Park in east Orange County where a search operation was under way. I decided to stop by, and there I met an affable Leonard Padilla, the bounty hunter who had posted bail for Casey after she was first arrested on child-neglect charges, and members of a dive team searching the Econlockhatchee River.

I asked questions, took notes and shot video and a few photos, then went home to my computer. “The Search for Caylee takes a nose dive” was my first blog on the case, complete with visuals.

The blogosphere is not normal, either, and therefore, it is the perfect place for a guy like me. Through search engine optimization, key words and the power of Google, virtual unknowns like me can be read by thousands of people. My blog gives me some sense of legitimacy as a journalist, despite not working for a recognized media outlet. I’m on my own, but thanks to the Internet my voice is heard.

My first Anthony story brought me new traffic, exciting exchanges on my site’s forums and fresh inspiration. The next thing I knew, I was hip-deep in the quicksand.

On several occasions I drove to the home of Casey’s parents and to the nearby wooded area where the remains of Casey’s daughter were found in December 2008. At both places I shot videos and photos for my site. I attended the memorial for Caylee Marie at First Baptist Church of Orlando in February 2009, delivering hundreds of messages of condolences my readers asked me to pass along to the slain toddler’s grandparents, George and Cindy Anthony.

Since the beginning of the ordeal I have felt sorry for George and Cindy. They have lost a beautiful grandchild and have had to deal with the torment of not only knowing that she was murdered but that their daughter is on trial for that heinous crime and she could be executed for it.

Altogether I’ve written more than 200 posts on the Anthony case, covering everything from my thoughts on possible motivation that could have led Casey to kill her child (“Caylee’s Murder: Premeditated and pretty stupid, too”) to the irony I found in comments from some professed “good Christians” who wanted vigilante justice (“Casey Anthony must die!”) to the intricacies of various legal maneuvers in the trial (I have amassed a small library of law books).

Somewhere along the way my blog, which now attracts about 100,000 visitors a month, got the attention of the judge who originally oversaw the Anthony trial. I would have never known this had he not complimented my work, and I’m sure he wishes he now had kept that comment to himself.

While researching the media’s coverage of the Anthony murder case, Judge Stan Strickland read some blogs, including mine. He apparently thought mine was fairminded, and he told me so in his courtroom after a hearing—the first of about 30 I have attended in the case—in October 2009. That remark and a personal phone call to me while I was ill led Anthony’s attorneys to seek his removal from the trial, claiming Strickland was biased against their client.

Instead of fighting the claim, Strickland stepped down in April 2010 to avoid giving the defense ammo for an appeal. While the recusal was good for marinadedave.com, bringing to it thousands of new visitors, it also torqued the lunatic fringe that follows the Anthony case.

I have a small group of haters watching my site, but what a loud and rowdy crowd it is. They are of the mindset that Casey and her whole family should be taken out and shot, with their bodies left to the vultures. And if you don’t agree, or you believe in due process, or you keep them from posting their Jerry Springer-esque tirades on your forums, like I do, well, they get nasty.

The vitriol my haters have directed at me is of the cheap-shot variety: I have AIDS, I’m gay, I hate gays, I’m into child porn, my teeth are rotten and I smell bad. If only their harassment ended at name-calling. My home address has been posted on various Anthony related comment fields on the Internet, an oblique suggestion to do me harm, I believe. Posts on other blogs about the Anthony case make it quite clear that I’m being watched when I attend courthouse hearings. Last year an animal control officer stopped by my house, saying an anonymous e-mail had accused me of hoarding pets. (My cats would never stand for it.) My personal e-mail accounts and blog have been hacked.

Normal people would not do such things, but the blogosphere is kind of like the wild, wild West, only worse. There are no rules or codes of conduct. Hiding behind screen names and avatars, blog readers are emboldened by their anonymity to sling virtual mud in the comment forums.

But there’s no better place to throw something out there to see if it’ll stick. Between myself, my contributors and people on other blogs and forums, we have come up with some interesting theories in the Anthony case. For example, back in 2008 the last two houses on Hopespring Drive, where George and Cindy live, were occupied by a woman whose first name is Zenaida and a man whose last name is Gonzales. Put those two names together and you get the phantom nanny (with a “z” at the end of the last name) Casey accused of running off with Caylee. The backyard property lines that separate the two homes point directly to the spot where Caylee’s remains were found. If you type 8905 Suburban Drive in Google Maps, it takes you to the same spot, though there isn’t a house at that location. It’s all woods along that street.

Why 8905 as a street address? August 9, 2005, or 8-9-05, is Caylee’s birth date.

I don’t buy into such theories that suggest the plot to kill Caylee involved such intricate planning as expropriating neighbors’ names and using a birth date as some sort of code.

Still, it’s the bizarre that makes this case so engrossing to my readers and me.

But it will end, sometime in the next month or two probably, and when it does, I will have to move on. I imagine many of my readers will, too. I don’t see myself going back to writing about marinades, though.

That wouldn’t be normal for me anymore.

While waiting for Frye...

Glaring from the headlines of WFTV and the Examiner were shocking declarations that Casey’s defense is searching for someone else to explain her story to the jury; someone willing to blurt it out so she won’t have to take the stand at her trial. On Tuesday, the ABC affiliate in Orlando wrote:

DEFENSE WANTS SOMEONE ELSE TO TELL CASEY’S STORY TO JURY¹

Yesterday, the Examiner had two separate headline links, and depending on which one you clicked, you saw:

CASEY ANTHONY TEAM FILES MOTION ASKING SOMEONE [to] TESTIFY ON HER BEHALF (READ HERE)²

The other one popped up two minutes later:

CASEY ANTHONY DEFENSE MOTION REQUESTING SOMEONE OTHER THAN CASEY BE ALLOWED TO TELL HER STORY AT HER TRIAL³

Of course, it would be easy to surmise, from WFTV’s headline and the first one from the Examiner, that Casey’s defense team is searching for someone who knows how to narrate a good story, perhaps someone like Garrison Keillor. The problem is, that’s not at all what the defense response says - the one both Websites loosely interpreted.

Initially, the defense team requested the testimony of two psychiatrists, Dr. Jeffrey Danziger and Dr. William Weitz. They were expected to explain, at trial, Casey’s actions after her daughter disappeared. Why did she wait until her own mother reported her grandchild was missing? A whole month, for crying out loud! How long would it have been had Cindy not corralled her daughter?

From the WFTV story:

Now, the defense has filed new documents (read them) asking the judge to let “someone else” tell Casey’s story, but it’s not known who. They don’t want their experts to do it anymore, because then the state’s experts would have gotten free rein in examining her.

But they are trying different tactics to bring in that testimony some way, somehow.

Most interesting to me is that “someone else” is in quotations, which leads one to believe it was taken verbatim from the defense response, RESPONSE TO STATE OF FLORIDA’S MOTION IN LIMINE. It was not.

The Examiner’s subhead says, Casey Anthony team files motion asking someone testify on her behalf (read here), only the response does not say that.

What the response does say is that the defense team wants the judge to deny the State’s Motion in Limine - which he did deny yesterday. Specifically, it asks the court to “prohibit any reference to or mention of certain testimony by the Defendant or any other witness as to events subject to Florida Statutes 80.401, 402, 403, and 404 until such time as their testimony has been proffered to the court”… Because both doctors have been removed by the defense in the guilt phase, “… the reports and the express contents of will not be introduced at trial.”

Here’s where it gets tricky. While the response does not ask for permission to have someone, anyone, recite her story, it does make the claim that “… the events referenced in the reports, which were gleaned through interviews with Ms. Anthony, are admissible as subject matter germane to the theory of the defense.” Although that is tantamount to requesting someone else testify on her behalf, it does not blatantly say so. It is an inference only, because what it does say is that her account of events should be admissible in some form or another. Is it up to the court to decide? I don’t know, but there are several avenues that may work.

WESH asks, COULD FAMILY DYSFUNCTION EXPLAIN CASEY’S BEHAVIOR?‡, with this subhead, Possible Defense Strategies Would Keep Casey Off Stand. The article then goes on to say:

Anthony’s defense argues that what she revealed to the experts is so important that it should still be admitted as evidence.

Lawyers say the information is highly relevant and supports a defense theory that would explain why Anthony didn’t report her daughter’s disappearance for 31 days. Prosecutors said she lied to investigators during the initial days after Caylee was reported missing.

What WESH reported was the truth. You’ll notice it makes no claim that the defense is searching for a storyteller. When Richard Hornsby was questioned, he said that he thinks they want to introduce the information without Casey having to take the stand. He’s right, and he goes on to say:

Who else could testify about trauma in Anthony’s life? Her own family.

It seems they’re pointing at George, who would overreact or act out. That is going to be why Casey didn’t feel comfortable coming forward to her parents during the first 31 days.

Anthony Colarossi, an Orlando Sentinel senior reporter, wrote an article that went online yesterday. Titled, CASEY ANTHONY’S EX-BOYFRIEND SAYS SHE WAS ABUSED BY FATHER†, it cites Anthony Lazzaro’s recently released deposition with law enforcement. It explains why Casey may have been afraid to tell her parents about what happened to Caylee:

 “From what I remember, I think it was just hitting – that she was physically abused,” Lazzaro told attorneys during a Feb. 18 deposition.

He said Caylee never appeared to be neglected or abused, but when asked about Casey, Lazzaro said she had told him about being abused herself.

“I just don’t recall it being sexual in nature,” Lazzaro said. “It could have been. Honestly, it would have been much better to do this at that time. I just know she said that they didn’t live together and she made it sound like her dad was like this really bad guy.”

The article continues with Lazzaro’s deposition and includes snippets taken from Amy Huizenga’s interview with the State. In my opinion, anything that Casey told Lazzaro and Huizenga should be hearsay because it is being told by a third party, and since there’s no way Casey will take the stand to corroborate their stories, it leaves the defense team befuddled. How do they get Casey’s story across?

To be quite frank, someone will have to address the issue. How should they handle this dilemma? Well, not that I’m trying to help the defense or anything, but if it’s that important, couldn’t Jose Baez & Co. easily turn George into the fall guy, a scapegoat, by having him testify that Casey was scared to death of him, that she was petrified of his nasty temper? Cindy’s, too? It would certainly get the point across, and that may be exactly what the defense is planning. I have another idea. They can ask Casey to write a new letter to Robyn Adams that explains, in great detail, everything she told the mental health experts. Or better yet, she can write one to George. Either way, they could then submit it as evidence.

When a mother kills

I originally published this in April 2009. I think, as Casey awaits the start of her trial, less than a month away, it is worth another look, especially with psychologists Dr. Jeffrey Danziger and Dr. William Weitz figuring so prominently in the picture. Please remember that Casey has not been tried in a court of law. Therefore, she has not been convicted of murder.

I resourced a number of clinical studies that can be referenced through the link at the bottom of this post. Did I plagiarize? No, but I borrowed heavily because I am not a psychiatrist, nor am I a psychologist. I have interpolated and interpreted those documents and condensed them into one - in my own words. Hopefully, this will render a more palatable post that’s easier to read and mentally ingest. You can digest it in the privacy of your home or workplace, and you can egest it in the comments section.

Murder is considered to be an unthinkable crime by most societies on earth, but when parents kill their own children, it rattles and shakes the foundation of humanity. It is the lowest of lows, the worst form of all crimes imaginable. Casey Anthony will go on trial for first-degree murder in the death of her not quite 3 year old daughter, Caylee. If found guilty of the crime, she faces her own sentence of death. This is not intended to place guilt or innocence on her. It is a study in filicide, the murder of one’s own children.

Because of a lack of understanding, most of us are immensely shocked by the pure nature of filicide. Although considered uncommon, it is one of the leading causes of child deaths in civilized societies throughout the developed world. In a 1995 poll taken of 25 countries, it indicated that the homicide rate for children under 1 year old was greater than the rate for adults.  Large-scale studies have shown that younger children are most at risk, especially those under 6 months old. After that age, the risk lowers steadily, but increases again in adulthood.

In order to make sense of this crime, large scale population studies of filicidal offenders have been performed and remarkably, rates of infanticide (child murder in the first year of life) parallel suicide rates. Based on their studies, the existence of several groups and classifications have been determined for filicide, and each classification has distinct characteristics and factors that drive parents to kill. Because of these reviews and publications, we will explore the different types, paying particular attention to maternal filicide, which is defined as a child murdered by the mother. My goal is not to elicit sympathy for Casey; it is to offer explanations for why she might have done it. Remember, until a jury decides, she is innocent in the eyes of the law, the only thing that matters. Please bear in mind that in some developing countries, the preference for male children may lead to selective killings. Think China. Religious, cultural and legal differences across borders will vary some of the research findings in some studies. Also, one country’s decision to send someone to prison may be different than another country’s choice to send someone to a psychiatric hospital. Because actions vary greatly, all I ask is that you maintain an open mind. Although specifically dealing with maternal filicide, this article is not just about one person.

Classification Systems

Motive

In 1969, psychiatrist P.J. Resnick looked into 131 case reports from world literature on child murders by both mother and father from the years 1751 - 1967 and wrote his article based on the apparent motives for the acts.The five categories he came up with in this system are “altruistic” filicide (64 cases, 48.9%), “acutely psychotic” filicide (28 cases, 21.4%), “unwanted child” filicide (18 cases, 13.7%), “accidental” filicide (16 cases, 12.2%), and “spouse revenge” filicide (5 cases, 3.8%). Resnick described cases of altruistic filicide as murders committed out of love. The mother believes it is in the child’s best interest. A suicidal mother may not wish to leave her motherless child to face an intolerable world or she feels she is saving the child from a fate worse than death. In acutely psychotic filicide, the parent kills the child under the influence of severe mental illness or a psychotic episode. Here, a delirious mother or psychotic mother kills without any comprehensible motive. It may be merely following a command hallucination to kill.

In accidental or fatal maltreatment filicide, death is not the expected outcome. It results from cumulative child abuse, neglect, or Munchausen syndrome. Unwanted child filicide occurs when mothers, for reasons such as illegitimacy or uncertain paternity, kill their child through acts of aggression or neglect. It could also result from a mother thinking of her child as a hindrance. Spouse revenge filicide happens when the mother kills to emotionally harm the child’s father.

Resnick’s review on world psychiatric literature on maternal filicide found most of these mothers to have frequent depression, psychosis, which is a “loss of contact with reality,” prior mental health treatment, and suicidal thoughts.

Impulse to Kill

Although useful, one of the problems with classifying the motives of filicidal parents is that the motive is almost entirely procured by police and forensic psychologists, mostly at a time when the offender is likely to be very vulnerable and highly defensive. The individual is concerned with criminal charges. Some doctors feel a classification based on the origin of impulse to kill is more objective than simply basing it on motive, which may be more subjective, over-determined or defensive. The impulsive system is not widely recognized because it lowers a mother to a primitive level and looks at sophisticated motives such as revenge or altruism as inappropriate.

Because most modern classification systems focus on the characteristics of the female parent, a six-year study was done of 89 women remanded to a prison under the particular charges of murder or attempted murder of their children. In this study, six categories unfolded:battering mothers, mentally ill mothers, neonaticides, retaliating women, unwanted children, and mercy killing. These categories are similar to Resnick’s, with the exception of the exclusion of the “acutely psychotic” classification and the addition of “mercy killing” which is basically nothing more than euthanasia for a sick and suffering child. In the studies, three most common identifiable groups emerged: neonaticides, battering mothers and mentally ill mothers.

Classification Subgroups

Neonaticide

Resnick coined the term neonaticide to describe the killing of a child less than 24 hours old. This group is the most clearly defined and it is the one that mostly differs from the other groups. It is the largest group. Neonaticide is almost exclusively carried out by women. The mothers are younger, rarely married, poorly educated, have a low level of psychiatric disorders and psychosocial stressors, no history of criminal behavior and do not attempt suicide after the murders. They generally do not seek out abortions. They conceal and do not acknowledge their pregnancies and are sometimes motivated by a feeling of shame and guilt because of the fear of child-rearing out of wedlock. So why don’t these women just get abortions? There are major differences between the women who get abortions and those who commit neonaticide, with passivity being the most important separating factor. Most women who commit neonaticide have made no plans for the birth and care of the child and their decisions are primarily based on denial and disassociation.

Accidental Filicide/Battering Mothers

This is the second largest group. Though not as clearly defined as neonaticide, some similarities can be seen. Unintentional deaths result from child abuse. There is no clear impulse to kill, but there is a sudden impulsive act characterized by a loss of temper. In case studies of large groups of filicidal mothers, these mothers suffered the greatest amount of social and family stress, marital stress, and housing and financial problems.

Mentally Ill Filicides

Though the least common, mentally ill filicides are the most complex. The intensity of the suffering perceived in the mother’s delusional state is so great that the murder seems rational to them. Most of these women are older, in their late 20s - early 30s, are generally married, are not under a lot of stress, and their children were older. Because of this, killing a child older than one year indicates a much more profound disruption in emotional or mental status than does the killing of a newborn.

About 10-22% of adult women suffer from postpartum depression within the first year after the baby’s birth. The “postpartum onset specifier” includes fluctuations in mood and a preoccupation with infant well-being that can range from over-concern to delusional, and the presence of delusional thoughts significantly increases the risk to the child. Infanticide is most often associated with postpartum psychotic episodes that are characterized by inner hallucinations that command the mother to kill or that the child is possessed. Severe cases seem to occur in from 1 in 500 to 1 in 1,000 births and the risk increases in women who have experienced prior episodes. Once a woman has postpartum depression, the risk with each subsequent delivery increases 30-50%.

In studies, the majority of mothers had displayed psychiatric symptoms prior to filicide and just under half had previously received in-patient psychiatric treatment. While mentally ill filicidal mothers generally have psychiatric histories, they don’t, as a rule, have any history of child abuse and they usually describe having experienced a clear intention to kill. In all studies, drug and alcohol impairment were rarely seen as a consequence, but that’s not to say that substance abuse did not ever factor in.

Methods of Killing

Methods used by mothers to kill their children differ greatly from most homicides and this is where vast differences in gender occur. In contrast to domestic homicides of adults, women do not use knives or guns to murder their victims. Maternal filicide is usually committed using “hands on” methods that entail close and interactive contact between mother and child; methods such as shaking, beating, suffocationor drowning, and some indirect methods such as arson or drowning while the child is asleep or sedated. In cases of paternal filicide, fathers are more likely to use methods like striking, squeezing, or stabbing, and they are more apt to use weapons. Suffocation, strangulation and drowning are the most common causes of neonaticides.

Interestingly, drowning was high on the list of methods to kill. So was suffocation. In my fictional account of what may have happened to Caylee, I took drowning into account long before I researched this article. Of course, we are all aware of the (inferred) suffocating duct tape found secured to Caylee’s mouth. (Remember, the jury will decide who put it there.)

General Population Studies of Maternal Filicide

If we study the general population of filicidal mothers, we find that they were often poor, socially isolated, full-time caregivers, who were victims of domestic violence or they had other relationship problems and socioeconomic disadvantages. Certainly, Casey had problems with her parents and she had no money of her own. What’s puzzling in her case is that she had no history of abusing her child and by all accounts, seemed to be a devoted mother. Friends and family concur.

Persistent crying or other child factors were sometimes the cause for filicides. Some mothers had previously abused the child, while others were mentally ill and devoted to their child. Neglectful or abusive mothers were sometimes substance abusers and many of them had elements of psychosis, depression, or suicidality, the taking of one’s own life.

Psychiatric Samples of Maternal Filicide

In psychiatric studies, filicidal mothers had frequently experienced psychosis, depression, suicidality, and prior mental health care. Their mean age was in the late 20s range. Some were diagnosed with personality disorders and some had low intelligence. Significant life stresses were often noted. In a recent study of mothers found not guilty by reason of insanity in two U.S. states, it was found that the mothers were often depressed and frequently experienced auditory hallucinations, some of a command type. Over 1/3 of the homicides occurred during pregnancy or the postpartum year. Almost all of the mothers had altruistic or acutely psychotic motives. In New Zealand, a small study that interviewed mothers after their filicides found that psychotic mothers who had committed filicide often killed suddenly without much planning, whereas depressed mothers had contemplated killing their children for lengths of time prior to their crimes.

Correctional Samples of Maternal Filicide

In prison studies, filicidal mothers were frequently unmarried, unemployed and had limited education and social support. Economic, social, partner relationship problems, primary caregiver status and difficulty caring for the child were frequently mentioned as causes. Let me ask you, does this sound like anyone you’ve read about lately, someone who will may be added to this list?

Conclusion

In closing, let me say that there are other factors involved in maternal filicide and to go deeper than I have here would be boring and somewhat senseless because they are not really related to the Casey Anthony story. Areas of study include more in-depth looks at previous psychiatric symptoms, intrapsychic processes that include delusions, environmental stress and social isolation. I can’t justify taking up any more of your time, but I may offer another post on the legal process and how we may predict it.

In spite of large scale and individual case studies, filicide will always remain one of the world’s most reprehensible offenses. Cases like Casey Caylee continue to shock and awe communities and nations, especially when there are seemingly no salient reasons for the offense. While these studies have revealed several groups, patterns and risk factors, prediction - even by the closest of friends and relatives - is extremely difficult, no matter how much knowledge and organization has been gained. Where you may have a proclivity to blame Casey’s parents for her outcome, please understand that many underlying and complex factors are at play that go completely unnoticed. There is much more to a filicide than casually placing blame on someone else, especially if you have no understanding or training of the psyche of the human mind. If you had any trouble deciphering some of the above psycho-babble, there’s a reason for that. It means I did my job, because as much as you may think you know about Casey’s mind, you don’t. Don’t worry, neither do I.

To view references, please CLICK HERE

Simon and the Barrettones

I am in the midst of writing an article about Friday’s hearing, along with a thing or two about last night’s CBS broadcast, Only Casey Knows, on 48 Hours Mystery. When I’m finished, of course I will publish it, but in the meantime, I will be offering commentary on Simon Barrett’s radio show today, along with the usual suspects. Please feel free to join me and the others by listening and offering your thoughts on the cha cha cha chat channel.

Here is where you’ll find it…

Casey Anthony - Killer Mother?

4:00 PM EST

Stalemate?

I have been a little under the weather lately, but in all honesty, I had planned on writing about the Frye hearings and how I believe the judge will rule and why. Now, with so much attention focused on the impending 48 Hours Mystery program that’s scheduled to run this Saturday night, I feel compelled to proffer my thoughts on the matter. On the show, a mock trial jury acquits Casey Anthony of first-degree murder.

I recently wrote about a motion filed by Cheney Mason that accused Judge Perry of bias in favor of the state. On Fool’s Mate, I explained how useless the motion was. In my opinion, it was a feeble attempt to intimidate another judge into stepping down and it failed miserably. Belvin Perry, Jr. is going nowhere until this trial is over, but once again, I see the defense testing the judge’s fortitude, determination and resolve.

Yesterday, Orlando attorney Richard Hornsby published a new article on his blog that focuses on one particular aspect of the CBS piece - whether Jose Baez may have inadvertently waived attorney/client privilege because of a jury consultant who aided the defense. At issue is whether he was paid or not, and if so, by whom. Did CBS pick up the tab? Will we ever know? I strongly encourage you to read it because it is the most brilliant essay to date on this very strange and convoluted saga.

Early on, when this case was still in its infancy, Jose Baez successfully argued against a State motion requesting the imposition of a gag (or suppression) order. That was way back in November 2008. Judge Strickland said he would issue one as the trial nears. A few months ago, Judge Perry said he would impose one, too, as the trial draws nigh. With less than a month to go, when does His Honor plan on ordering one? I can’t think of a better time than now.

The law.com Website’s legal dictionary describes a gag order as:

“a judge’s order prohibiting the attorneys and the parties to a pending lawsuit or criminal prosecution from talking to the media or the public about the case. The supposed intent is to prevent prejudice due to pre-trial publicity which would influence potential jurors. A gag order has the secondary purpose of preventing the lawyers from trying the case in the press and on television, and thus creating a public mood (which could get ugly) in favor of one party or the other. Based on the ‘freedom of the press’ provision of the First Amendment, the court cannot constitutionally restrict the media from printing or broadcasting information about the case, so the only way is to put a gag on the participants under the court’s control.”

What this means is that the judge is powerless to stop media from running stories about the case, but he can stop everyone directly involved (meaning attorneys) from talking or writing about it. This would include investigators on both sides of the aisle. While CBS or any other media outlet would not be bound by law to kill a story, the legal implications should, nominally, deter editors and news directors from publicizing further stories based on inside sources or whatever means are still available. At the same time, it would have no effect on information garnered prior to the order, like Saturday night’s program.

On May 9, Judge Perry and all counsel affiliated with Case No. 48-2008-CF-015606-O will assemble inside a courthouse outside of Orange County. Its sole mission? To pluck a jury of Casey’s peers, who will then sit in judgment of her the following week, in what many consider the trial of the 21st century; still quite young. The jury will come to Orange County, where it will be sequestered. If this proves to be problematic, the judge will attempt to seat a jury from home, and if all else fails, somewhere else - until the job is done. Right?

Well, there may be some complications that could, quite possibly, quagmire the will of the people of the great state of Florida.

In May of 2009, Jose Baez requested a change of venue. This is a legal term for moving a trial to a different location. In a high-profile case like this, it could be next to impossible to seat a fair and impartial local jury due to the widespread publicity in print and broadcast media. However, a judge has other options. He could deny the motion and remain at home, risking a retrial on a post-conviction appeal, or he could deny the motion and attempt to seat a jury from a demographically similar area. Since the Rodney King case, courts have focused on efforts to ensure that demographics from another community are as similar as possible to the demographics of the community in which the criminal offense allegedly occurred. Although it’s only a jury that will be brought to Orange County in order to save taxpayers millions of dollars, it’s intent is to satisfy all parties without any of the bias stirred by so much local publicity. That’s the goal, anyway, but I see something else… an ulterior motive by the defense.

Granted, the wheels of justice are not always round. In the United States, a defense has every right to utilize any and all means available to exonerate their client as long as they abide by the laws of the land; in this case, state statutes and rules of criminal procedure. During Casey’s trial, her defense won’t have to prove she didn’t murder her daughter, guilt falls squarely on the prosecution. Prove it, in other words. In the meantime, the defense can do what it wants to diffuse the charges brought against her, meaning it could try to taint a jury throughout the state until a gag order is in place. Is it fair? Of course not, but it’s not illegal, and appearing on TV isn’t, either. Is the defense taking advantage of the present situation? You bet, but in all sincerity, is it really all that sinister?

Let’s say the location of a potential jury is demographically similar to Orlando and Orange County. Let’s say this area, because of the similarities, has a daily newspaper like the Orlando Sentinel and the requisite network television affiliates, ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC, including independents and radio stations. We can pick anywhere in the state, like Miami or Tampa or Jacksonville or Tallahassee. Why not throw Ft. Myers into the mix?

Eenie, meenie, miney moe, pick a jury, friend or foe.

Okay, let’s say Tampa. No, I don’t have a clue, so don’t ask. The population of Hillsborough County is 1,229,226 according to the 2010 census. The population of Orange County is 1,145,956. For the sake of argument, that’s close enough. Tampa has its own newspaper, The Tampa Tribune, and lots of TV and radio stations. I’m not discussing whether it’s too close to Orlando or not because, as you shall soon see, it won’t matter.

One of the most prevalent aspects of today’s world is that we are very much a global community. What just took place in Peoria, Illinois can be read and seen within minutes of the story breaking. We live in a digital world, and news travels as quickly as thunder catches up to lightning. Not only do we have tons of reliable sources available, we have a more powerful tool today - the Internet. I remember when small town newspapers offered communities intimate coverage of what was going on in their respective neighborhoods. Dora Holsopple made pancakes for her grandchildren after church services on Sunday. Mildred Holcombe’s dog bit the paper boy, Teddy Harvey’s son. Roy Kronk found the skeletal remains of a missing toddler. Odds are, you heard about the last one as quickly as I did, whereas, 30 years ago, you may not have heard about it at all. In today’s society, it’s darn near impossible to plug up holes that spill news and gossip from just about anywhere. That leads me directly to Casey’s defense. Remember, Jose Baez & Co. can do whatever it takes to free their client as long as it’s within the confines of law. Playing dirty may be an issue to you or me, but all things are fair in love and war - in this case love being Casey’s innocence, whether she is or isn’t. And while the defense cries foul over leaked information pertaining to their client, they are more guilty of doing it than anyone or anything else. To me, it’s more of a risk because if a jury is eventually seated, which should be the case, the defense cannot base an appeal on what they, themselves, did from the start. To me, it’s a big gamble. So is Saturday night. To understand the full extent of what the program probably entails, we have to wait until then to watch it, but meanwhile, in its description of a mock trial, therightjury.com states:

“A mock trial is a more in depth, formal, and extensive focus group which also tests the effect of opening and closing statements on the jury. In a mock trial, jurors will be exposed to opening statements, closing arguments, crucial witness testimony, and any evidence or demonstrative evidence which is important to the case. During mock trials, however, the attorneys play themselves, with one attorney from the firm playing the opponent and advocating accordingly. Should the attorney wish for his/her client and/or star/expert witness to be examined in front of the jurors, then the actual client and/or star/expert witness must be present.”

In Casey’s mock trial, she wasn’t present, but it seems so hypocritical, doesn’t it? While the defense complains about bad publicity, they go on national media exposés for the entire state to see. I strongly contend that they are doing their utmost best to taint a jury pool throughout the state for one reason only: to ensure that she will never be able to get a fair trial anywhere. God knows, media outlets are just about everywhere in Florida. So are antennas and cable channels. There’s also the Internet and satellite dishes. In my opinion, this defense knows exactly what it is doing. With so much at stake, Judge Perry said he would impose a suppression order before the trial begins. When? I say, the time is ripe. Slam the door shut! It’s getting stale. As much as I hate to see this sort of order coming for the sake of freedom of the press and what we are still allowed to disclose, there’s no better time than at the next hearing. This, on the precise Friday - one year ago - that Cheney Mason fired off a motion to dismiss the trial judge. Oh yes, I remember it well, but let’s not go there. It makes me gag.

Just to let you know...

I have my moments when I’m not feeling well and I’ve been like that off and on for the past few days. I’m OK, though, and it’s not something I want anyone to worry about. It comes and goes and I’ve had this condition for years.

I’ve also been having some rather annoying problems with the laptop of late, but after I spent hours & hours trying to diagnose and repair it, it turned out to be a glitch in Google Chrome, my main browser. I ran ScanDisk, too, searching for System Errors and Bad Sectors. I uninstalled Chrome and downloaded a fresh version.   

Today, we had long time family friends over and I felt this would be a good time to try to fix it. Nope, it didn’t work, so I am using another browser. Tomorrow, I will be on Simon & Jan’s show, Lord willing and the creek don’t rise. Meanwhile, there’s an issue I will discuss sometime during the week of April 18 pertaining to the trial and my coverage of it. All I will say now is that the “Marinade Dave” blog did not get media credentials, but there’s a very good reason why. I never requested them.

Trust me, it’s all very good. Thank you for being so patient. I promise you, a new post is coming.

Dave