The gods must be crazy!

From the past few days, we have “learned” that Casey will plead guilty to one felony charge out of the 13 connected with the check fraud case, we have “learned” that a deal was struck with the State Attorney’s Office, we have “learned” that she will, instead, take her chances and plead before Judge Strickland, and we have solidly learned that it could well be none of the above and then some. It all depends on which media gospel one puts their faith in. Even then, is it really etched in God’s hand? In my opinion, the closest thing to the absolute truth in this matter rests in the hands of the Honorable Judge Stan Strickland and what is still listed on the Orange County Clerk of CourtsWeb site. But can we believe what’s scripted there? It still lists a 10:00 am hearing today which didn’t transpire. It also lists a 10:00 am trial on Monday, with an additional hearing at 1:30 pm on Tuesday. To make matters more confusing, Tuesday’s hearing notes that the judicial officer, meaning judge, will be John H. Adams, a criminal court circuit judge, in room 6-D, on the sixth floor. Interestingly, the docket Register of Actions names Judge Strickland at the helm.

Meanwhile, amidst all this mess, I think it’s safe to say that Casey WILL be back in court on Monday, but it won’t be for a trial in her check fraud case. Or will it? Here is what we think we are learning…

According to most legal experts, why there won’t be a trial on Monday is because Casey is changing her plea. Certainly, she wouldn’t be the first one to do so in a high-profile case. At a pre-trial hearing in November, former astronaut Lisa Nowak pleaded guilty to a reduced charge to avoid jail time. She was sentenced to time served (2 days) and only one year of probation. I think she’s peddling Pampers overseas these days. In Casey’s case, she’s maintained all along that she’s not guilty of stealing Amy’s money, but the proof is in the Bank of America, Target and Winn Dixie videos and Baez’s reimbursement to the bank for the exact amount of the stolen checks. How coincidental and to be quite blunt, there’s no way a jury would let her walk.

Now, to add to the complex nature of what these legal analysts are saying, some believe a felony conviction on fraud charges wouldn’t come up in her murder trial unless she takes the stand. Others are saying the exact opposite. On theWESH Web site, legal analyst Richard Hornsby said prosecutors can use her plea to refute any of her statements introduced in the upcoming murder trial. (This will also be the subject of an upcoming post.)

“That’s very important. Even if she doesn’t get on the stand and testify, they already damaged her credibility by showing she’s been convicted of a felony,”Hornsby said.

Criminal defense attorney and WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer thinks Casey will throw herself at the mercy of the court and hope for adjudication withheld instead of a conviction. He suspects the state and defense could not come to terms on the issue. “If you can’t do any worse with the judge than what the state has offered you in a plea, then you can do better,” he said.

Adjudication is the act of a court in making an order, judgment or decree. It is a judicial decision or sentence, guilt or not. With all of this discussion about Casey and adjudication , it’s interesting to note that the federal government does not recognize withholds. Withholds are convictions in its eyes, so if Casey ever aspires to be president, she can forget all about it.

If Casey enters guilty pleas to any of the charges, Judge Strickland can either rule on the facts of the case and find her guilty or withhold adjudication of guilt in the matter. If, in Casey’s case, adjudication is withheld, she won’t be convictedof the crime in Florida although she will still be found guilty of it. You can be found guilty, in other words, and not be convicted. In Casey’s case, I do not believe the judge will withhold adjudication for a very simple reason. The only cases that are eligible for record expungement or sealing are those where the charges were either dropped or had a “withhold of adjudication.” In my opinion, the judge will not allow 13 third-degree felonies to ever be expunged or flagrantly tossed out a window of the courthouse. She will walk into the murder trial a convicted felon. What part of the conviction will be allowed in that trial will be up to Florida law, although it will be scrutinized by legal analysts across the board.

Whether Casey will plead or not, on Monday or Tuesday or any other day, two motions are going to be heard by the judge. What sources are inferring is that one will deal with papers filed by the defense back in November about TESsearches. In that motion, the defense claimed that “evidence discovered by the defense shows that statements made by TES (Texas EquuSearch) to the court were inaccurate.”

TES handed over documents stating that 32 volunteer searches went through the area where Caylee’s body was eventually found, but the defense found at least two others searchers who offered sworn statements that they, too, had searched the area. To what degree is open to speculation. Baez and his team believe TES wasn’t being as truthful as they should have been and they are demanding access to all documents related to the searches.

The other motion is expected to deal with Jill Kerley, the disgruntled former wife of Roy Kronk, the “other suspect.” She insists he was physically abusive and had a kinky duct tape side. The defense wants the judge to allow her testimony. I don’t see its deep-rooted relevance, but the judge may allow it to show that law enforcement never looked suspiciously at anyone else. I am not rattled by this motion because, in my opinion, the state will make it abundantly clear that law enforcement never had to look anywhere else.

I hope that cleared things up a little and I hope to see you in court on Monday. Or is it Tuesday? Or both? God only knows.