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)
Yup, GLENDA, those sunshine laws really change the complexion of criminal cases in the state.
Thanks for clearing that up for me too Dave. I spent one evening just looking through demographics of cities. I'm glad it's going to be left up to someone as experienced as Judge Perry. Ok I'm out of here since Squarespace seems to be having a "glitch Connie" day lol. I wonder if my getting logged out has to do with flipping back and forth between tabs. This is only the second time it's happened though and I flip all the time in here. Oh well, see y'all later.
Remember, Connie, the jury is going to be selected by the county, not the city. Yes, news saturation will play a big role in it. I'm looking over statistics right now.
I don't know what the problem is, Connie, but I just had to log back in, too. Usually, when there's a problem, Squarespace is very quick at fixing it. I'll go open a ticket and see if I can get an answer. Sorry for the glitch.
Oh this is hilarious! I just went to the US Census site which only has data for the year 2000 listed and the top COUNTIES are all what Baez doesn't like! I'm still laughing!
Orange County - 896,344 (Orlando)
Duval County - 778,879 (Jacksonville)
Hillsborough County - 998,948 (Tampa)
Pinellas County - 921,482 (St. Petersburg)
Dave: You said: "Maybe I should write about the options, you think?" That's a wonderful idea. I would love to read your synopsis on "demographics". :lol: Seriously, though.
I shall do my best, nan11!
Well this motion's title says it all. It's clear as mud.
Motion to Strike State's Motion to Strike Defense Supplemental Witness List
I read that and my one thought after that first statement above was "oh stop whining and get to work on what you have!" .
Casey's High School Boyfriend To Be Witness Defense Attorneys Say Man Can Confirm Date Of Diary Entry
A lot of crap coming out of the defense.
I think I'm ready to publish....Thanks for your help. Please take look.
Fondest
C
It looks great, Kara, your site is very, very friendly, just like you, and it reflects it!
Casey Anthony defense explains late witness list
The Casey Anthony defense team filed a motion explaining the late addition of defense witnesses in the high-profile case, including the addition of a WFTV reporter.
On Tuesday, the prosecution challenged a defense team's supplemental witness list which was filed late Monday. That list includes the name Kathleen Belich, the WFTV reporter. The prosecution took issue with the filing of defense witnesses so late in the process.
On Wednesday, the defense team responded, saying Belich was listed as a witness "to rebut witnesses just listed by the state involving an investigation launched against Laura Buchanan."
Laura Buchanan was a Texas EquuSearch volunteer who became a critical witness because she claimed to search an area where the remains of 2-year-old Caylee Marie Anthony was found in late 2008. Others have said the area Buchanan claimed to search in early September 2008 was under water at that time.
Read more here....
Orlando Sentinel
Regarding the below, well, I think there was a bit more to it than they make it sound; but, apparently he now has a valid driver's license.
Hal Boedeker: The TV Guy and More
"In a related matter, contrary to rumors, defense attorney Jose Baez’s driver’s license was never suspended. He paid the fine, and that was the end of it." :wink:
PS, compliments of Nan11. She winks at Jonathon alot. *blush
Richard Hornsby has a new post up concerning Kathi Belich as a witness. There is a statute for that!
http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2011/02/the-rule-of-sequestration/
Hi Dave - Great Post! I think the defense team is much worse now than with Judge Strickland. I also agree that Mason and Judge Strickland have had a run-in. Maybe Mason tried the same thing before. I worry that all these motions should have been made long before now and only the frye motions should be going on.. When in the world are Baez and Mason going to be planning their trial strategy. You just can't do that overnight.
Hope all is well with you and your family. Our Spring weather iin Florida has been great. As if we in the Sunshine State should be complaining about the cold weather.
Hi, Nika1!!! Great to see you. I spent all afternoon at the doctor's office, so I guess I missed a couple of things around the blogs.
I'm convinced that Mason had a grudge against Judge Strickland, but I think his main reason was to strut his stuff, kind of like a "I'll show you how to run a trial!" OOPS, it backfired.
I'm writing a post now about one of the Frye motions and I hope it helps explain some of it.
Right now, our weather is perfect. Now, it's time for Jeopardy. I'll be back, but thank you, Nika1, it's always a pleasure seeing you. Thank you.
Dave, not that it's hard for me to do, but i am going to play Idiot.
I am also an avid reader of Richard Hornsby's blog and his lates entry revolved around the sequestration (love the play on words) regarding media personnel. Its a very well written article (as all his artlcles are very well written IMO) but what threw be back was that i am unsure where this plays apart, which is the idiot part, since i have not heard anything which would exclude media presence but then it got me thinking...
Not to take away from other bloggers who blog about the Casey Anthony Sage as they are all good in their own right but you, Dave, are the only one that i can recall that was specifically named so was it a rouse to get you out?? i wonder!!
From this point on this is just opinion:
If Baez/Mason are trying to "defend" their client they will use many outlets and i do foresee the use of blogs for the first time in a murder trial. The defense will try and show that your blog, as well as others, that you provide a biased opinion (even though i view yours and you know who elses blog entirely un-biased with biased conotations-you know what i mean?) and somehow what you've reported will predjudice the jury pool therefore to have you there would hinder their defense.
I don't know one way or the other, as i am in Colorado a long ways from you, but you're the poo so they should take a whiff :-)
Hi, B-Man - I have a lot of respect for Richard Hornsby. He's an attorney who tackles many of the legal aspects of this case. He writes them in terms we can understand, and if you think of yourself as an idiot, then we can all think that way about ourselves. We don't, and that includes you.
What the defense chose to do with me was nothing more than a ruse to remove Judge Strickland. Yes, they felt they were "defending" their client, but in the end, did it do them any good? To that end, whatever the outcome of the trial, they are fully responsible for the bed they made. As for blogs and bloggers and how they fit in a trial of this magnatude, yes, blogs will be used at trial as part of the defense, I'm sure. As for bias, every media outlet since the onset has been opinionated, mostly against Casey. In order for the defense to use media against the state, they would have to prove that Casey could not get a fair trial. Since the jury will be plucked from outside of Orange County, and from an area where public exposure has been kept to a minimum, the argument will carry very little weight, if any at all.
As for me, I'm the least of their worries. How would the defense be able to audit my readership? People read here from all over the world, and actually, I am mild compared to some of the blogs that attack them relentlessly. Also, I have not been named on either witness list, so I should be able to cover the trial unscathed... knock on wood.
One of the most important things about the jury will be about how much they know. At my doctor appointment yesterday, there was a young intern from Nova University in Ft. Lauderdale. She graduated from Lyman High, about a mile or so from me, but when the doctor told her about my work on the case, she didn't know who Casey was until I reminded her. Even then, her knowledge was quite limited. Every day I go out, I run into people who don't know much, and that's in the area of the crime. As for taking a whiff, the defense already used me. What more could they do?