The Teflon Judge
Sunday, February 13, 2011 at 5:10PM During the closing remarks of the final presidential debate between then candidate Ronald Reagan and President Jimmy Carter, the GOP hopeful asked the nation a simple question, “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” As simple as it was, the query was powerful and poignant enough to resonate deeply within the minds of the American people, who went on to elect Reagan as our 40th president. The rest, they say, is history.
Today, just over 30 years later, I’d like to ask Casey Anthony’s defense team, particularly Jose Baez and Cheney Mason, a very similar question. Are you better off now than you were one year ago? Actually, by the time Casey goes to trial, by that I mean sitting in the courtroom facing a jury, precisely 2 years and 11 months will have passed since Caylee was last seen alive. For the first month, Casey was living la bella vita, although it was probably more la vida loco, until she was stopped dead in her tracks by her own flesh and blood; her mother. From there, it quickly plummeted from a lofty peak to the depth of the deepest ocean. I’m only interested in the past year, though. A lot of serious changes have taken place. One year ago today, Judge Stan Strickland sat firmly on the bench. Did the defense do the right thing by filing the motion for his recusal?
On January 25 of last year, Casey pleaded guilty to 13 third-degree felony fraud charges. She threw herself at the mercy of the court and came out a convicted felon, but ultimately, she was given no more time behind bars. Judge Strickland sentenced her to time served. In my opinion, that showed how fair, just and lenient - yes, lenient - he was. He could have slapped her silly, and the defense might have taken that punishment as a good sign; what to look forward to from this judge down the road. Instead, they threw caution to the wind. As a matter of fact, two days later, I wrote on my The Wisdom of Solomon post:
Judge Strickland gave the defense an opportunity to challenge the charges. We can discuss the lack of brevity or the levity of the arguments, but let’s cut to the chase – it came down to the judge. First, it should be noted that Casey had no prior convictions and she did make full restitution and Baez did bring up “equal justice” for his client. He asked for one year of probation and credit for time served, rather than the five years of incarceration the State sought. In the end, His Honor sentenced the 23-year-old Casey to (jail) time served – 412 days – plus $5,517.75 in investigative costs and $348 for court. The amount may be discussed and negotiated at a later motion hearing because the defense found the investigative charge too high and not justifiable. He also adjudicated Casey guilty on six of the fraud counts and withheld adjudication on seven, plus he tacked on a year of supervised probation, which could be problematic and complex later on, given that she still faces a huge mountain of charges ahead.
I finished the article with:
This was a sign of things to come, and what I saw was a very compassionate man behind the bench.
In his ruling, the judge wrote:
“I’ve done what I thought is fair based on what I know.”
One year ago, on February 12, I wrote on Why Casey Pleaded Guilty to Fraud:
Personally, I think the defense risked it all and I think it was the right call. Aside from any appeals, which she would lose had she gone a different route, she took her chances with a well-respected judge; one with a very fair track record. The Honorable Stan Strickland is not a hanging judge and odds were, he was going to mete out some fair medicine, certainly after she swallowed all 13 bitter pills.
What went wrong after that? Clearly, everyone knew that Judge Strickland was fair. Some argued too fair. Meanwhile, the defense filed motion after motion and in most cases, the judge denied them, but he based his decisions on case law, something somewhat alien to the defense as we have seen time after time.
It’s a fact no one can deny; that Judge Strickland heard the most motions this defense has filed to date. In the more than 20 months he held court, he judged wisely, and it is because of his focus and direction that this trial has stayed the course. Last January 25, the State submitted its NOTICE OF FILING that included a PROPOSED ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY, MOTION and HEARING DEADLINES and TRIAL DATE. On March 5, the judge responded with his AMENDED PROPOSED ORDER SETTING DISCOVERY, MOTION and HEARING DEADLINES and TRIAL DATE. I strongly recommend that you read Judge Strickland’s order. There, you will see all of the deadlines and a trial date of May 9, 2011. The State originally wanted May 2, but the judge accommodated Andrea Lyon, whose daughter was to graduate college that week. It is of importance to note that Judge Perry is following the schedule set by his predecessor. As a matter of fact, he has allowed deadlines to come and go, and in some instances, has reset them, primarily for the defense. In any event, this trial has been on schedule since the date was first set by Judge Strickland and it’s important to remember that. Today, Andrea Lyon is long gone and Judge Perry could have readily reset the date back to May 2. He didn’t.
Judge Strickland scheduled an indigency hearing for March 18, 2010. It was at that hearing that J. Cheney Mason made his debut. I remember it well because it was almost comical as he made his grand entrance outside the courtroom doors. While awaiting to enter, we all stood there. As he approached with Baez and Lyon, one journalist asked him if he was joining the defense team, to which he responded, “I will be in about five minutes or so once the judge arrives.” The comical part was that I had never seen so many thumbs tap away on cell phones. Tap, tap, tap. Text, text, text. It was the big news of the day up to that point. Of course, we remember the discourse between the judge and Mason:
If you watch the video, you’ll see I said to “Stay Tuned for Round 2!” Of course, the second round was a knockout blow to the judge, but did the defense really win anything? Well, yes. Sort of. The judge did grant Ms. Anthony indigent status, but everything went downhill from there. After a series of motions¹ denied by the judge, this defense showed how disgruntled it was with Strickland by filing the ridiculous motion on April 16 for him to step down. The DEFENDANT, CASEY MARIE ANTHONY’S AMENDED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY TRIAL JUDGE (amended version refiled Monday to correct expired notary) was filed at 4:48 pm on a Friday afternoon and it left the judge and myself incredibly shocked in what turned out to be a very bad, and I mean a VERY BAD, weekend to agonize. Of course, the people who matter in this (what I would call) legal fissure were quick to assure me it wasn’t my fault; that it was purely a defense strategy. In any case, the point of this article is not to argue the merits of the defense strategy as it relates to me, it’s all about whether or not this was a move in the right direction for the defendant. I must say that to a person, I was told, “Be careful what you wish for” in reference to the defense, and those words came from professionals in every field that had an element of interest in the case - journalists and attorneys, civil and criminal. It was a bad move.
What came down was simple and I’ve mentioned it before - Cheney Mason decided to throw his weight around the courthouse. By that, I mean he thought he had some big brass chips to trade in to get the judge of his choice; one who would be more inclined to remove the death penalty and be more amenable to his motions. I also know that the entire courthouse was stunned when the defense filed the motion to recuse. Strickland was (and remains to this day) one of the most respected judges on the circuit court. As a matter of fact, he’s highly regarded throughout the state. What Mason did was blow a circuit breaker. In the end, and there are things I’d love to discuss but won’t until the trial is over, Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. had no choice but to take on the case. No other judge wanted it and his docket was not as thick. It’s called a backfire.
Today, after the defense changed horses in midstream, is their defendant better off? Let’s see… many of Judge Strickland’s orders were left with the door ajar. In other words, they were ordered without prejudice, which means they could change some of the language and refile the same motions, which is exactly what they did after Perry took over². Did the judge overturn any of Strickland’s decisions? Not a one. Nothing. Zip. Zil. Nada. Do I feel subsequent motions ruled by Perry would have the same outcome today had the defense stayed the course? Yes, absolutely. Strickland did not become a reputable circuit court judge by making many mistakes. As I’ve also stated many times, the defense went from Strickland to stricter.
COMES NOW, the recent defense motions denied by the presiding judge:
- The motion to exclude testimony that Casey had a history of lying and stealing. The judge wrote the State successfully argued that getting caught lying and stealing by her relatives may have provided a motive to rid herself of the financial and social burden of raising a young child. Also, the lies are inextricably intertwined with the evidence of the defendant’s activities between June 16, 2008 to July 15, 2008. “Evidence of a defendant’s collateral acts is not admissible to show bad character or a propensity to commit the crime charged,” wrote the judge in his ruling. “However, the state may be able to introduce evidence of collateral acts – such as lying or stealing – which are inextricably intertwined with the crime charged if necessary to adequately describe the deed, provide an intelligent account of the crime charged, establish the entire context out of which the charged crime arose or adequately describe the events leading up to the charged crime.”
- The motion to prohibit the use of references attributed to her Myspace Diary of Days. The defense argued that her posts weren’t relevant and that they were unfair to use at trial. The State countered by saying the posts were inconsistent with a mother actively looking for her kidnapped daughter. The judge wrote, “It is relevant to show the defendant’s state of mind during the time when Caylee Marie Anthony was missing and ultimately, when it was determined that she had died. The weight of this evidence is a matter for the jury.”
- The motion to exclude testimony from the neighbor, Brian Burner, who Casey borrowed a shovel from him. The judge decided, “There is nothing inherently prejudicial about borrowing a shovel, nor is a shovel ‘gruesome’ evidence that would tend to inflame the passions of the jury.”
- The motion to disallow jurors from learning about the La Bella Vita tattoo Casey got on July 2, 2008, roughly 2 weeks after Caylee’s disappearance. The judge wrote, “There is nothing inherently prejudicial about tattoos, which are increasingly prevalent among the population, nor is this particular tattoo likely to inflame the passions of the jury. Thus, the potentially prejudicial effect of this evidence does not outweigh its potentially probative value. It is relevant to show the defendant’s state of mind during the time when Caylee Marie Anthony was missing and ultimately, when it was determined that she had died.”
I don’t think I need to mention the impatience of Judge Perry with this defense. We have all seen it live, up close and personal. Come hell or high water, there will be no delays. More motions will be filed. The court must address some outstanding ones, too, like the one to exclude any references of the decomposition odor coming from Casey’s car. The motion also makes note of statements made by an Oak Ridge National Laboratory official who described chloroform levels recovered from a piece of carpet removed from the trunk liner. There’s also the matter of the stain in the trunk and whether it was organic in nature. The FBI could not make a determination, but Oak Ridge wrote that it showed the presence of “volatile fatty acids consistent with the byproducts of decomposition.” Once again, I’m afraid the judge will rightly allow the jury to hear arguments from both sides.
As I’ve said a hundred times, a good defense will throw everything in its arsenal at the wall in hopes that something sticks. I must say I can’t blame them, but in a sense, Baez & Company remind me of the Democratic party under Ronald Reagan’s reign, at least during his first term. He was given the nickname the Teflon President by the media because nothing seemed to stick. In his administration, it dealt with scandals, but in Judge Perry’s court, it’s all about defense motions. No matter what they file, there isn’t much that sticks. If I were Casey, I’d be nervous right now. Her defense seems to be moving from the frying pan into the fire, and that’s no recipe for success.
Dave Knechel | tagged Jimmy Carter, Ronald Ragan, Teflon President | in Andrea D. Lyon, Andrea Lyon, Brian Burner, Capital Punishment, Casey Anthony, Caylee Anthony, Cheney Mason, Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, Death Penalty, FBI, Forensics, Human Interest, Jose Baez, Judge Stan Strickland, La Bella Vita, Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Marinade Dave’s Caylee Anthony Posts, Ninth Circuit Court, Ninth Judicial Circuit, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Orange County Circuit Court, marinadedave | Share Article | 1 Reference 
LEGAL NOTICE
©David B. Knechel. All Rights Reserved. No portion of this site can be reproduced in it's entirety or in part without expressed written permission by the owner/administrator of this site in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Section 512(c)(3) of the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §512(c)(3). The charges against defendants are mere accusations and the subjects are presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law.
Reader Comments (119)
Dave, another great post! I love the way you start out your posts that draw your readers in right away and has them wondering where it is all going to lead. I don't think this defense is any better off than one year ago. I think they are in a big mess and trying to find a way to get out of it, which I don't think they will be able to. I think had JS been able to stay on this case, that things would be at the same place they are right now with JP presiding over this case. Sometimes JS didn't rule on things right away, but it didn't seem to stop things from proceeding. I have no doubt that this defense team has questioned themselves a few times on what the heck were they thinking when they had JS recused. If I was Casey I would be very worried too. She doesn't seem to really have a care in the world when she comes into the court room all smiles, and it makes me wonder how up front her attorneys are really being with her. They could be up front with her, and I do hope that they are, but with her personality I am sure she thinks she will get out of this like she has every thing else. Maybe once this trial starts it will hit her and we will see her act a little differently in the court room. Time will tell. Thanks for putting together another great post. It is appreciated.
Hi, Mary Jo - I guess there is a method to my madness since I have a pattern of starting my articles and ending them in a similar fashion. On this one, I could have mentioned some of the motions the judge did grant the defense, but the main point of this was to emphasize how madly things have been going for the defense since a mere year ago. Judge Strickland handled Casey fairly in the fraud issue. I don't know what the defense expected. Think about it, the fraud pleading took place just over 3 months after he called me up in court. Did I tell him to sentence her to 5 years? No. Would he have listened to me had I done that? No, so what was the big deal about her treatment by him? My God, he even granted her indigent status. Did I advise him to not do that? No. Would he have listened to me anyway? No, of course not, and here's the clincher: At the time he was reading my blog, it was well after the Casey Anthony Must Die post, and any idiot that might have read it would understand it had nothing to do with her death other than my words against it.
It's strange, but if this isn't a classic case of "be careful what you wish for," I don't know what is.
Thank you, I'm certainly happy you liked it.
No, I don't think that the defense is better off with Judge Perry. I believe Judge Strickland was more than patient with Baez. Judge Perry is being fair but I think he has not been pleased with having to teach Baez law on a few occasions. Strickland, had he stayed, would probably have given Baez a few breaks, like the last extensions Baez asked for would have been granted. JMO, but I believe Judge Strickland was mindful of Baez' inexperience and showed patience with him, but Judge Perry is more mindful of the seriousness of the charges against Casey and is not so much tolerant of Baez' inexperience.
I'll be back. I'm watching 60 Minutes.
First off, I agree with Sherry's comments wholeheartly. Judge Strickland was very patient with Baez because he is a 'gentle' man and it shows through. Dave, that is one of the reasons Stan called you up to the bench, he wanted to give you credit where he felt it was due, People forget that the human comes first and then second, comes the judge.
I recall at one hearing when Baez was at the podium and Andrea Lyon was standing to his right. Baez was bungling along trying to make his argument and really having a hard time. You could see the compassion on Judge Strickland's face when he suggested to Baez that he would give him time to discuss it with his co- counsel. I do find that Judge Perry has been lenient with Baez but I also notice that he loses his patience.
Cheney Mason made a regular ass of himself when he appeared at his very first hearing. He sort of reminded me of Padilla when her first rode into Orlando. Cheney is the type of person who feels a motion should be granted just because he says so. I blame Cheney Mason for getting the judge recused because Strickand had denied a few defense motions. Thank goodness Mason didn't get one of his favorite judges to take over. I am sure he was studying the rotation of the judges quite closely and I am so glad that a judge took over who cannot be manipulated by flamboyance and colorful talk.
Great article Dave! It was well planned out to entice the reader and hold our interest while educating us in the bargain. Thanks for your efforts. You care and it does not go unnoticed!
Dave: Its so wonderful to see you back in your "groove". It's just been the last couple of days that I sensed you were feeling like your "original" self, and this article reinforced that fact for me.
The "OC Corral"--wow, it's was nice to see that again. It's shocking to realize how far the arrogance of the defense went with this.
All I know is, if I were ever in Miss Casey's shoes, I would prefer to have Judge Strickland residing. I mean no disrespect towards Judge Perry; but, I believe Judge Strickland to be the more liberal, open minded judge.
This, I think, would bring me some comfort were I being tried for murder, in the first degree.
Thanks muchly for a well written, thought provoking article.
A really good article,Dave. I Love Ronald Reagan, he had a kooky grin too. I'll bet that there are times when Judge Perry gets his little grin going, that Baez wishes he could see Jude Strickland kind, patient face looking back at him instead. I agree with SnoopySleuth. Baez probably never read your article. Someone may have told him about the headline of your article, and Baez being Baez took it and run with it, just like he did with Jesse, Roy Kronk, and TES. He just gets an idea and won't let go. Mason came along in time to " rescue him" from mean old Judge Strickland. You got it right, it backfired big time. If I were Casey, I would be very afraid. Baez has run with the ball so many times, and IMO he hasn't made a homerun yet. This trial is going to be interesting to see how Baez defends her. One question, do the mental health doctors have to make their reports open to public or is that privilaged ? Thanks for wonderful read.
Margaret~~I do believe that mental reports fall under medical and will be kept under seal, as far as the states evaluations. We will probably hear from the defense's mental experts in the penalty phase of the trial, if it gets that far. I am still waiting for some plea bargaining.
I couldn't agree with you more Dave. EXCELLENT!!!!!! I love reading your articles. Great job and hope you are doing well. Also your family. Hugs from shyloh!
Great article Dave!
Casey Anthoney's defense has cooked up quite a stew that seems to be getting saucier with every motion they add or move they make.I wonder......is it because they have went through so many chefs since the recipe was developed? or is it because they are just stuck with such rotten ingredients? One thing is certain it is harder to cook with teflon than they predicted..... whatever the reason, probably all of the above, their client may end up a cooked goose. Seems only fair since she served up the rotten ingredients to begin with.
Great article Dave! Great point are they any better off. I like the OC Corral video with appropriate music, entertaining. Mason was so disrespectful in court that day and look how Baez has shown the same disrespect to Judge Perry. I'm glad Strickland was given a way out. He don't have to put up with any of there nonsense chatter anymore.
I loved Judge Strickland and I was ticked off about what happen to you and Judge Strickland. For every action there is a consequence, and we don't always like what we get. All your fans know it was very unfair to you. I'm glad it has not stopped you from writing and allowing us to dive in your articles. You've shown & taught me things about this case. I would have not known if were not for you. You're awesome, man! A year later, we got to see where greed, arrogance and lack of logic got Baez and Mason. We also got to see where a more liberal and open minded judge got taken advantage by a couple of conniving defense lawyers willing to body slam everyone ( Just like Tim Miller said.)
Thanks Dave it's been a great year seeing into a little corner of your mind through your words. Me wishes & hopes you are better off this year.
I think your entire article was summed up in one word and one phrase. The word "backfire" and the phrase "it was a bad move". The first mistake they made after Mason joined will turn out to be their worst mistake in my opinion. Not because Strickland was a bad judge but that he was so much more lenient in his courtroom.. he let them argue.. he took minimal time to explain the law but did so clearly. Judge Perry runs a stricter courtroom. He expects the lawyers to know the case law associated with the motion and at times seems impatient that it's just not there.Like he said he does his own research, so he knows what Baez and Mason should be quoting and it seems to irritate him when he just doesn't see it, or they quote some case law that just doesn't apply as well. I get the feeling what we're seeing is the young new-to-death-penalty-cases lawyer and the old ready-to-retire lawyer and they both are missing things and lacking in some areas. I have yet to see Mason in action on a case he's defending, but so far he hasn't impressed me much at all. Ann Finnel seems to be doing better but then she doesn't have the entire case. I fully expect to see bunches and bunches of motions in the upcoming months with the defense wanting all the evidence, thus the case, thrown out.
I find myself wondering what could have happened or what would have if Casey had demanded a quick trial before a judge instead of a long one before a jury. I feel the outcomes would probably have been similar but I feel like it would have been mostly over by the time they found the remains. That being the case they wouldn't have had the death penalty issue on the table. The longer this drags out it seems like the more they find and the worse off they are.
Hi, Sherry - You might be right there about Judge Strickland being more mindful of Baez's lack of experience. He did seem to bend oer backwards at times. Then Mason came along and from the opening bell, he was hostile toward the judge. Nope, this defense made a big strategic error.
Hi, Snoopy - Yes, Sherry is right. When the PI came to my house, I praised Judge Strickland and told him what a great man he was; intelligent, kind and compassionate. It wasn't until I was about halfway into it that I realized what he was up to and I quit talking. I told him what a terrible mistake the defense would be making if they wanted him to recuse himself. It was the dumbest of dumb moves. I call it the Mason Movement.
Thank you for the support, Snoopy. You don't go unnoticed, either.
It was quite the gamble the defense took by having the judge recuse himself. I keep thinking there will be plea bargaining also Snoopy. What I can't understand is why they are letting things get so far. I know very little about the law and even I feel they are letting things go from bad to worse. Do you suppose Casey thinks about this at all? It does appear to me that her "Goose is cooked" but I don't know and can't quite get a grasp on what the defense is doing. Yes, what could have happened had Casey asked for a quick trial? Woulda, shoulda, coulda......... I guess what I do know is the clock is a tickin.......
Thankyou Dave, as always, for this article. It helps me sort things out and understand everything that much more. I find myself wondering what the Anthonys' are thinking and maybe just maybe, they will try and sort things out once this circus is over. I wonder where George is, are George and Cindy still together
?. Where has Lee been and can their llife ever return to some type of normalcy?. I wonder how they can move on from this once the trial has ended and if it is possible to ever have a life after this? The money from the state would have been better suited for some type of therapy for the family, a chance at saving one of these family members. How does life go on after such an event? I wonder.
Very interesting article! I do have a question for you, since you have been in the courtroom to see the judge in action. It looks to me like he already has his decisions made before he ever enters the courtroom and that he has already done his homework on the motions in front of him. It almost seems to me like he is "extending a courtesy" to let Baez and company argue their points..........then he comes right back with some sort of legal quote already prepared.
Do you think he already has 99% of his decisions made before he gets there??
Dave thanks for this excellent article.I read it last night but to tired to comment...
Hi, nan11 - Slowly, I'm getting back into my groove. I'm not letting all that much distract me. I guess it's called hardening.
On the video, I had forgotten how arrogant and confrontational Mason was from the start. It's as if he talked down to the judge. I wonder if he had a personal vendetta against him and that's how this all began; that he called Baez and said "I can take down that judge!" After all, Baez was reported to the Florida Bar. Whatever the reason, it will probably turn out to be a fatal mistake. A roll of the "die" so to speak.
Thank you, I'm glad you think I got my groove back.
Thank you, Margaret! I liked Ronald Reagan, too. Aside from politics, for or against, he was a really nice guy with ca great sense of humor. He had a genuine humble side, too. You know what? So does Judge Strickland. I think, when it's all said and done, the history books will reflect that this was a major error. I have no doubt the defense never rad the article. They based it on the title. One of the other ones they cited was the one titled Guilty as CHARGED, which was merely about the fraud charges. Despite it being checks, it might as well have been a credit card she stole. She was guilty and her plea reflected that.
I sure am glad you liked this post. Thanks!
I think Snoopy's right. Since Casey is not in any condition to plead insanity, it will not come up at trial. Sentencing, however, will be a different story if she's convicted. Then, the defense will pull out all the stops.
Thank you, shyloh, I enjoy writing them, too. My family is fine. Thank you for asking, and hugs right back to you!
Hi, katfish... Thank you!
Like a giant omelet made with expired eggs, this defense isn't at all what it's cracked up to be.
Dave, your posts on this Casey Anthony case is always the best to read. I and many came to trust your take on it all quite awhile back. Always carefully thought out and filled with all the little details that hardly ever come to mind for many of us. We depend on your always being fair and enjoy your personal take as well.
Hello, Alaska! I had forgotten how disrespectful Mason was, too, until I watched the video yesterday. There's an arrogance about him that I don't see when he's addressing Judge Perry. As a matter of fact, he's like a church mouse now and we can hardly hear him in the courtroom. What happened, Cheney???
What happened was a disgrace, but I know for a fact it did no harm to Judge Strickland's reputation. None whatsoever. Yes, they body slammed just like Tim Miller said. The thing about me is that in the scheme of things, they only hurt themselves, and to anyone that blames me, too bad. They have no idea what really went on behind the scenes.
Thank you for your support. In a sense, this was a blessing in disguise, now out in the open. Judge Perry has sentenced a good number of people to death. Just what was the defense thinking? They had to know there was a great risk involved.
By the way, I did get some information soon after Judge Perry took over the case. The defense was quite pleased they had a highly consistent and fairer judge. They sure do. He consistently rules against them. Fair and square.
Dave: I just noticed your "Happy Valentine's Day" banner. I really like it. Thank you and I'll send that back at ya'!
Now, New Puppy has come up with a very interesting remark. This may point to the true answer.
The ones that blame you, Dave, are simply wrong. It really is that obvious.
You take care.
I guess I could have easily called this post Backfire, Connie, but it would have been tough tying in the Teflon reference. You're right, though, it backfired, but I wonder what the defense really thinks about it today. I don't think they would publicly admit to it being a mistake, but inside, who knows?
Judge Strickland was a no nonsense judge when he needed to be, but his courtroom was certainly more relaxed. The only difference I see is the demeanor of the two judges. I firmly believe the hearings would end up with the same rulings, or close enough for government work. Since the change, Mason sure has toned down his rhetoric. What a step in the wrong direction, not to take anything away from the present judge, but why fix something that's far from broken?
Several local attorneys told me very early on that had Casey not waived her right to a speedy trial, the case would have been long settled and she would probably have faced a 12-year sentence, or something like it. That was mistake number 1. The more time you give the state, the more evidence they're going to find.
Thank you.
Hi Dave..
You trust ME, don't you? lol...
uhh..noo
Thank you for another great posting! I watched the clip, and husband hollered, "bring it out here and play 'Breakdown"!!! He thought I was tuning up..dangy-dang ding dang..
Hi, SageMom - There will be no plea bargain in my opinion. The state has absolutely no reason to offer one, let alone accept anything from the defense. All along, Casey and her defense has maintained her innocence. Why change now, after almost 2 years of work by both sides? If she tries a bench plea, the judge will not accept it, either. Why should he?
As far as I know, G&C are together. This would be a terrible time to split up and I don't think that will happen in the foreseeable future. Lee has a day job he must work, so he can't go to the hearings. I would imagine he gets verbal messages to her through her defense team. That's just a guess. As for the future, the family, I'm sure, will get plenty of lucrative offers for their stories. Why not? They all do it, especially today. Look at my detractors. They place no value on human life, yet they are the ones screaming bloody murder about making money off a dead child. They do whatever they want at the expense of those they detest.
I'm glad the post helped you understand things a little better. That's what I'm here for. Thank you.
Thank you, Lexi. I do my best to remain interesting.
You ask a good question. There is a definite difference in style between the two judges, but I think we can agree the outcomes would be the same. First of all, Perry does withhold some orders until he does more research. This could be because he finds case law that works both ways. Secondly, he needs to hear both sides regardless of his studies because laws are constantly reinterpreted by attorneys. To answer your question more directly, yes, I do believe he is thoroughly briefed on most motions before he enters the courtroom. There is always room for opinon, though, and he is an open-minded and fair judge, if that answers your question. If not, fire away! I enjoy doing this..
Dave, u never cease to amaze us with ur writing skills! What a concise summary, the reference to “Teflon” denotes continuity of the article from start to finish. U virtually took us from the “frying pan to the fire”. Great article, makes one question why she hasn’t pled out in hopes of a reduced sentence. According to research, female child killers could find a myriad of defense tactics, to offset the mitigating factors. Thanks for a thought provoking story!!
Happy Valentines Day Dave!!! Wouldn't it be ironic if Mason got Judge Strickland or Judge Perry in his new case. We can only hope,preferrably Judge Strickland. What goes around comes around.
Sending Love and Best Wishes for a Happy Valentine's Day...Know you'll pass on the chocolates but just maybe one won't hurt...after all these are made with carob and stevia...Great to see you back in the saddle...I too had forgot the terrible Cheney scene...Thanks for the memory...He now acts as though the wind has been loosed from his sails...He does seem much calmer, but I bet there is still some fight in the old boy yet...Please note that I omitted the word "good" from my last statement as I'm still out deliberating on that one...Baez on the otherhand still needs to go back for a refresher...He'll think twice before he takes on another grandioso murder case...that is if he retains his status...
Hey Dave,
Do you ever feel like there are more detractors out there than ever? Maybe Cindy and George are kind of like them. I don't know but it sure makes me think. You are right. They place no value on human life. There are so many things about this world I love and so many things about this world that make me sad. Your detractors sure make me sad. I just don't get it. Maybe the Anthonys do.
By the way......................HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY!!!!
It's beautiful out in Illinois and it feels like a Happy day!!!!!
And thank you, too, ecossie possie. What I wrote is exactly how I feel. By the way, I was too tired to respond last night, also. No problemo.
*
•*¨`*•✿•*¨`*•. ☆ .•*¨`*•.•*¨`*•✿
•*¨`*•✿•*HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY•*¨`*•✿
✿•*¨`*•. (¯`v´¯) (¯`v´¯) .•*¨`*•✿
. . . ✿•*¨`*•.¸(¯`v´¯)¸.•´*¨`*•✿
TO YOU ALL!!
Dave, you crack me up.....you're a good egg!
Hello, New Puppy! You know, your comment made me feel all warm inside. I sure do appreciate your honesty about my take on things. I do try to pay attention to details and write in a fair manner. Thank you for feeling that way.
As for Mason, I think he went to Baez and offered to take down Judge Strickland. He promised a better judge. Baez had no problem with that for a couple of reasons. One was to get back at him for saying that Casey and the truth are strangers. The second one was the judge's complaint about him to the Florida Bar. Of course, that's just my opinion, but the facts remain. Those two things did occur.
Nan11 - The Valentine's Day banner wasn't up until about 2 hours ago. That's why you didn't see it originally.
Believe me, I will take care, especially after that dead in 666 days threat.
Actually, dadgum, "yes, of course I trust you!"
I'm happy you enjoyed the post and that your husband likes Foggy Mountain Breakdown. Play it again for him! Actually, play this version for him from Earl Scruggs and Friends, including Steve Martin.
Thanks.
Hi, boxcarbob - Sometimes, I amaze myself, but that's not always a good thing. Thank you for the kudos on the post. I do my best to keep the reader interested and I try not to wander much, which is quite easy to do. No doubt, the burner the frying pan sits on keeps getting turned up. Also, I do think the defense made a great move when Ann Finnell joined the team. She is one nice and classy lady. If anyone could save Casey if convicted, it's certainly her.
Happy Valentine's Day to you, too, Margaret. Unless Cheney Mason represents a client in a civil matter, he will not get Judge Strickland again. Judge Strickland was asked to take the case because of his sterling reputation. If there was ever a better judge, the defense was wrong. Just as good as? Yes, but not better. Odds are good he won't face Judge Perry again, either, but it is a possibility.
Hi, Estee, it's great to see you. Happy Valentine's Day!!! I ate a chocolate and passed the box. Thanks for the treats.
I think what took the wind out of Mason's sails, at least pertaining to this case, was that he didn't end up with the judge he wanted. The whole thing DID backfire on him. He got clipped. Baez will come out of this alive, but not unscathed. I guess whatever the Florida Bar decides this time will spell his fate, but either way, he's not going to be a hurting cowboy after all is said and done. He will be big on the TV circuit.
Actually, SageMom, I know that the number of detractors is dwindling. Only the hardcore sickos are left, but they go by so many different names, they make themselves bigger than they really are. It's like falsies. Tons of padding, but zero substance. It's quite evident they are extremely bitter with life, but you know what? I don't care. They were lost long before they knew who I was.
Happy Valentine's Day to you, as well. I see it is warming up in your neck of the woods. I hope it lasts. The warmth is very becoming of you.
I love it, katfish! Thank you, and Happy Valentine's Day!
I am a good egg. I can be hard boiled, but you have managed to soft boil me with your art. Snoopy's a poacher.
A poacher huh? HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY TO EVERYONE EXCEPT KNECHEL.
BIG HUGS TO KNECHEL'S CATS FOR VALENTINE'S DAY
Just pretend you are Woodstock.
A Special Heartfelt Valentine for Knechel
Big hugs all around!!!
Katfish, you must have the patience of a saint to do all that! Lovely!
Egg roll, please... I mean... drum roll... What a deviled egg you are, Snoopy.
Thank you, Feathers.