Casey Anthony: Not Very Appealing, Part 3
Tuesday, January 15, 2013 at 2:14PM DOUBLE JEOPARDY
In POINT TWO of the appeal, Casey’s defense wrote that:
II. The Appellant’s constitutional rights were violated when she was convicted of four separate counts of providing false information to a law enforcement officer because each count stemmed from the same single offense where there was no break in the temporal aspect of the crime.
In that sense, if I fire a bullet through the brain of someone (who dies, obviously) and, as it passes through my intended victim, kills the person standing immediately behind him; does that constitute two homicides but one murder charge because it was one bullet? After all, it stemmed from the same single offense. That’s the logic of this Appellant’s argument. The defense also argued Fla. Const. Article 1 §9:
”[…] that individuals are given ‘protection from multiple convictions and punishments for the same offense arising out of a single episode.’”
I completely disagree. First, let’s look at the testimony by law enforcement at Casey’s murder trial acknowledged by her defense:
TRIAL TESTIMONY
Corporal Rendon Fletcher:
“Corporal Fletcher relayed that the Appellant, after questioning, stated that her daughter was missing, in the custody of a nanny, and that the Apppellant was conducting her own search.” LIE #1.
Lieutenant Reginald Hosey (then Sergeant) and Officer Adriana Acevedo:
”[…] Officer Acevedo escorted the Appellant to the last stated location of the ‘nanny.’” LIE #2.
Hosey: “[…] after being escorted to the Sawgrass Apartments, […] the Appellant was led back into her residence…” LIE #3. There was never a Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez living at Sawgrass, in Apt. #210 or anywhere else. She led Hosey on a wild goose chase.
Detective Yuri Melich:
“The recorded statement by the Appellant stated that she worked at Universal Studios, Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzales was Caylee Anthony’s babysitter, and that the Appellant informed Jeffery Hopkins and Juliette Lewis of the disappearance of her child.” LIE #4.
You cannot simply lie to every law enforcement officer that comes down the pike and consider it one big lie. It may have been one in Casey’s mind, but each lie to each officer is a separate offense.
On March 12, 2009, I addressed the fraud charges filed against Casey by her onetime friend, Amy Huizenga, on a post titled Double Jeopardy. Casey stole and cashed her checks while she was out of town. Thirteen third-degree felony charges were filed in all. She was convicted of six and Judge Stan Strickland withheld adjudication on seven.
This applies today because the defense tried to do the same thing then; to count the separate charges as one. They failed. On The Wisdom of Solomon, dated January 10, 2010 - three years ago! - I wrote:
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. He said that he had given this a lot of thought prior to sentencing.
“There was not an even number of offenses, so I withheld in seven, I adjudicated in six. If that seems Solomon-like, it is.
On each and every count, Casey must submit a DNA sample because she is now a convicted felon. There it is, the words everyone has been waiting for…convicted felon. Time to move on to the next chapter, but first, Casey apologized to Amy Huizenga.
“I’m sorry for what I did. I’d like to sincerely apologize to Amy. I wish I would have been a better friend.”
§
That same standard for double jeopardy applies today, as surely as the day I wrote it in the 2009 article based on those fraud charges:
In essence, Casey’s defense team points out that under law, she should be charged for one crime by one count. The defense also claims that charging her with multiple counts for the same act prejudices her, therefore the counts should be dismissed.
According to the motion, “Miss Anthony is guaranteed double jeopardy protection by the Fifth and Eighth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Sections 9 and 17 of the Florida Constitution for duplicative charges.” Let’s take a look at what the law says:
I will leave the indentation out for now, but the following paragraphs are from my 2009 article:
Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment 8
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Florida Constitution – Article 1, Sections 9 and 17
SECTION 9. Due process.
No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, or be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense, or be compelled in any criminal matter to be a witness against oneself.
SECTION 17. Excessive punishments.
Excessive fines, cruel and unusual punishment, attainder, forfeiture of estate, indefinite imprisonment, and unreasonable detention of witnesses are forbidden. The death penalty is an authorized punishment for capital crimes designated by the legislature. The prohibition against cruel or unusual punishment, and the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, shall be construed in conformity with decisions of the United States Supreme Court which interpret the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment provided in the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Any method of execution shall be allowed, unless prohibited by the United States Constitution. Methods of execution may be designated by the legislature, and a change in any method of execution may be applied retroactively. A sentence of death shall not be reduced on the basis that a method of execution is invalid. In any case in which an execution method is declared invalid, the death sentence shall remain in force until the sentence can be lawfully executed by any valid method. This section shall apply retroactively.
The double jeopardy rule of the Fifth Amendment is intended to limit abuse by the government in repeated prosecution for the same offense as a means of harassment or oppression. It is also in agreement with the common law concept ofres judicata which prevents courts from relitigating issues which have already been the subject of a final judgment. There are three essential protections included in the double jeopardy principle, which are:
- being retried for the same crime after an acquittal
- retrial after a conviction
- being punished multiple times for the same offense
Does the defense motion to dismiss those extra charges, something it sees as ancillary in nature, hold any merit? In Solem v. Helm (1983) 463 U.S. 277, a split court found that a life sentence without the possibility of parole for a seventh nonviolent felony was unconstitutional. In Solem, a bare majority of the court held a court’s proportionality analysis under the Eighth Amendment should be guided by objective criteria, including the gravity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty; the sentences imposed on other criminals in the same jurisdiction; and the sentences imposed for commission of the same crime in other jurisdictions.
In Harmelin v. Michigan (1991) 501 U.S. 957, a life sentence without possibility of parole for possessing 672 grams of cocaine was upheld. The case produced five separate opinions. While seven justices supported a proportionality review under the Eighth Amendment, only four favored application of all three factors cited in Solem. As one court has concluded, disproportionality survives; Solem does not. (McGruder v. Puckett (5th Cir.’92) 954 F.2d 313, 316.) In Harmelin, Justice Scalia, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, determined Solem was wrongly decided and the Eighth Amendment contained no proportionality guarantee. Justice Kennedy, joined by Justices O’Connor and Souter, found the Eighth Amendment encompassed a narrow proportionality principle. In other words, the Eighth Amendment does not require strict proportionality between crime and sentence. Rather, it forbids only extreme sentences that are ‘grossly disproportionate’ to the crime. Moreover, in Solem v. Helm, the court focused on the nonviolent nature of both the defendant’s current offense of uttering a ‘no account’ check (one of the most passive felonies a person could commit) and his prior offenses. The majority acknowledged a life sentence for fourth-time heroin dealers and other violent criminals would pass constitutional muster.
While we ponder the legality of the double jeopardy clause in the appeal, allow me to look at the April 19, 1995 Oklahoma City bombing which killed 168 people and was the deadliest act of terrorism within the United States prior to the 9/11 attacks. I don’t need to go into any detail of what transpired. This is purely about the charges, the trial, and the conviction.
On August 10, 1995, Timothy McVeigh was indicted on 11 federal counts, including conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, use of a weapon of mass destruction, destruction by explosives and 8 counts of first-degree murder. On June 2, 1997, McVeigh was found guilty on all 11 counts of the federal indictment. He was executed by lethal injection at 7:14 a.m. on June 11, 2001, at the U.S. Federal Penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana.
Despite killing 168 people, McVeigh was only charged with 8 murders. Casey was convicted of four misdemeanor counts of lying to law enforcement personnel. The convictions should stand. Double jeopardy, in this case, would mean reducing her convictions from four to one. No dice, I say! Why? If Timothy McVeigh’s attorneys used the same logic and prevailed in a similar motion to dismiss the counts by reducing the eight murder charges to one, that means out of 168 deaths he was responsible for, he would have been tried for one single murder and the entire weight of those deaths would have been reduced from 8 to 1. Would he have been sentenced to death for one murder? If so, would it have been appealed? Yes, and it would have carried much less weight. With Casey, it’s the same thing in my book, although the charges are not similar. I am merely making an analogy.
Ultimately, double jeopardy should not be an appeal issue as far as I’m concerned. Casey was convicted, sentenced, and she did her time on all four counts. That cannot be taken away from her. In the end, it will hinge on whether she was in police custody when she was questioned. Was she free to go and was she Mirandized? Should she have been? By her own admission, she spoke freely. Should she have been Mirandized just because she decided to sing like a bird? Not until she was placed in custody, meaning under arrest or when her freedom was greatly deprived; enough to be equal to an arrest. Custody could be interpreted as being handcuffed and placed in the back of a police car. It could also include her interrogation — an attempt to elicit incriminating statements — but to what extent? Who said she was a suspect at the time?
I believe the appellate judges will rule against her. Those misdemeanor convictions will stand by a vote of 2-1. No matter what the outcome is, she’s still — and shall always remain — a convicted felon. Thank you, Amy Huizenga.
Dave Knechel | in Amy Huizenga, Casey Anthony, Caylee Anthony, Cheney Mason, Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, Double Jeopardy, Fifth District Court of Appeal, Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal, Judge Stan Strickland, Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Marinade Dave’s Caylee Anthony Posts, Miranda Warning, Ninth Circuit Court, Ninth Judicial Circuit, Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez, Zenaida Gonzalez, marinadedave | Share Article 
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 (34)
Without going through the entire case and or how each issue was presented I think the first order or charge was “check fraud”. The second: theft (the car as Cindy got this ball in motion), and third, obviously, was murder.
Taking this case in the perspective of a claim each one of these “incidents” triggers the law individually, not as a collective. I argue the premise that she was being interviewed as a murder suspect although that’s what it turned out to be. It’s important to understand that at that time detectives were looking for a “live” Caylee; and trying to sort out the theft of the vehicle which was predicated by Cindy who hadn’t seen her granddaughter for 30 days. KC said she had stuff to help find her (Caylee) in her office and although detectives thought she was lying she was adamant that she worked at Universal. In the event detective thought she killed Caylee at any point of the interview my guess is it would’ve gone completely different. Lying to detectives was not substantiated until Caylee’s bones were discovered and it came down in the indictment.
Obviously when the case concluded we know she was lying from day one (I think its safe to say that pretty much everyone knew she was lying) but law gives the benefit of doubt.
The beauty and tragedy of law is its interpretation. Sure they thought KC was full of crap. Everything stated mid-July about where she dropped-off the child, who she was with, where she was working was clearly investigated. Although there were holes in the stories being told one thing remained the same, KC stood on her own convictions that Caylee was with the nanny, Zanny. Sure, the detective threw-out the rotting corpse and what not but KC still contended that Caylee was alive. That is the only thing that remained consistent, right or wrong. The trial and investigation continued on a day to day basis; throwing it together in the end is unfair, IMO, and does not recognize the investigation process. To argue KC was the only suspect is a stretch (as its being implied in a negative connotation) she was the only person who was last seen with Caylee and she stated that emphatically not to mention she was with the Nanny. In my views this is not a suspect but a possible witness.
We have a “repeated exposure and trigger” in viewing this like a claim. As you eloquently point out there were 4 separate instances when she lied. Each officer is a single trigger (again as you point out) and she had the opportunity at each questioning to tell a story. The questioning was not done on a “collective” basis so I agree that the 4 “lying to law enforcement” is absolute and is warranted
Hi, Dave -
You got that right, Dave!! Thank You, Amy Huizenga!!
We also need to remember that Casey was only put in handcuffs and put in the back of a squad car for 10 minutes - at Cindy's insistence - for stealing money and the deathmobile, not for suspicion in Caylee's disappearance. (How Cindy could have been more concerned about the money and the car after finally getting that car from the pound still boggles the mind) Plus - as you pointed out, Casey was taken to Sawgrass Apartments (twice, if I recall) ...and of course the so-over-the-top trip to Universal where she had the chutzpah to think that she could flim-flam Yuri Melich and John Allen (Good Luck on that one).....
So yes - she was always lying (my favorite Judge Stan quote" The truth and Miss Anthony are stangers" - a classic!) ...but they were four separate lies on four separte occasions - and actually to four different people.
What I still can't figure out is why a better job wasn't done on the computer forensics. My understanding is that the computer folks wanted the Prosecution to come up with the search terms that they were looking for ....which - in my mind - is backwards - especially with someone as wacky as Casey.
Of course with that jury of 12 village idiots ...I guess nothing would have worked. I stll don't understand though how 6 of the 12 could have thought her guilty of one of the lesser charges ...and then that evaporated into 12-0. I will never understand that as long as I live.
I am so praying that you are correct and the justices blow this enfuriating appeal out the window. Casey needs to be held accountable for what she did - even if only periferally with ZG and Texas Equusearch. Lord knows, that the BIG accounting for what Casey did to sweet Caylee will have to wait on God's time ..when Casey finally meets her Maker. ...If I were she, I'd be afraid to die....
Thanks so, Dave, for staying no top of this .... This si one of those cases that will really never go away because that little sweet Caylee never ceases to tug at your heart-strings.
Isn't it a bit a bit ironic that Casey can exercise her constitutional right under the US Constitution. How is this so? Caylee was a citizen of the the US. It just stands to reson that she had rights to.. I think it only fair that the Supreme Court take this fact into account. George, Cindy, and Casey all lied to law enforcement. They lied to save their precious Casey giving no regard to the Granddaughter they so dearly loved. That's all BS. IMO with or without handcuffs the fact remains Caylee was drugged and duct taped like all the other animals who passed in the Anthony household. How is it that Casey is even allowed to adopt an animal when she murdered her own daughter ? George and Cindy were granted immunity and Casey was acquitted and Caylee was creamated. How is this fair? IMO I think it only fair that the US Supreme Court should retry Casey. That would be Justice for Caylee Marie.
Thank you for such a thorough analysis of these issues- it all SEEMS so complex, in reality not so much, and I really do not doubt for a second that this has no merit and we'll all enjoy seeing it unceremoniously thrown right out.
I suppose a case could be made in your example of one bullet/two victims, that the second could be viewed as, say, unintentional manslaughter. This, (Skank's multiplicity of lies) is not THAT, as she intended a certain result from each separate lie.
Dave~~If I robbed the same bank at four different times of the day, how many charges could be legally levied against me? I was caught on surveillance the first three times in the act ( no question, it was me) and the police caught me red handed the fourth time. Oh, and I stole the exact amount of money during each of the 4 robberies, $5, 067.13.
Sorry that I have been so tied up with the Arias trial. It looks like you put a great deal of work into this post and all the legal jargon is right up my alley. If there is no court on Friday, I will be in here all agog playing catchup. SS
PS...need any money? The cops cannot find the loot I stashed from the first 3 robberies.
I think good 'ole Cheney Mason just wants to win. Does he really give a crap? Why bother? The old fool is damaging his reputation even more. Is he that dedicated to Casey Anthony? Does he seriously think she is innocent? Come on. What a waste of time, and taxpayer money to appeal these convictions.
[I think a victory could limit the scope of questioning in the civil cases. That's what he's aiming for.]
Cheney filed the appeal so Casey could plead the fifth in the Zenaida civil case all the time the motion was undecided. We should have a decision soon from the appellate court or has there been one?
[There could be consequences to pleading the Fifth in any of Casey's civil trials, Snoopy. SCOTUS held in Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 318 (1976) that “the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them.” In other words, by merely keeping her mouth shut, she could incriminate herself, especially if the evidence leans in favor of the plaintiff. In Zenaida's case, it may be a difficult sell, but in the Texas EquuSearch suit, the evidence will weigh strongly against her. Pleading the Fifth could be considered evidence of acquiescence. Justice Brandeis said in United States ex rel. Bilokumsky v. Tod, 263 U.S. 149, 153-154 (1923) that, "Silence is often evidence of the most persuasive character.”]
So, while it is being appealed she can plead the fifth? And after a decion~either way~then she cannot?
Dave~~your presence is required to respond to some very difficult questions!!!
Although we all know the ending of the story however this Saturday (on Lifetime I believe) Prosecuting Casey Anthony; I think Rob Lowe stars as Jeff Ashton.
I have a doctor appt. this afternoon. I will be back to respond to comments, but I will say this...
If you've ever seen COPS on TV, how many times have you witnessed a cop toss someone in the backseat of a squad car? Handcuffed? While they carry on their immediate investigation? BEFORE AN ARREST? BEFORE BEING READ THEIR MIRANDA WARNING?
If every person arrested as a result of an investigation like the above example uses the same rationale as Casey's defense, how many cases in the United States alone would be tossed for that very reason? It defies logic.
The only way I could see an issue is in the trip to Universal and back, including the room she was put in for interrogation. Was she really free to go with no means to leave on her own? That is the gray area open to legal interpretation. As for double jeopardy... BALONEY!
Thanks Dave.
Kims comment above says it all.
Where are Caylees rights in all of this.?
I beleive the criminal apeals are stratigic to enable her to plead the 5th in the civil case.
She can drag out the apeals process for years an years..moo.
True Ecossie Possie-Kim is right about Caylee's rights but that's just it. When we all started we were togehter on Hinky's site (it would be about a year year and a half before I was made aware of Dave's site) but we all agreed that it evolved into a case that protected Casey, it turned into her plight; it stopped being about Caylee once the mom was fingered for the murder. I'm certain, almost 100% that Cindy regrets that the murder of her granddaughter has been solved and it was her daughter who did it and she knows she was insurmountable in getting Casey off. No one is looking for Caylee's killer cause she's living in Cape Canaviral (sp?) and you dont see anyone jumping up and down asking to re-open the case. Caylee has no rights she is simply a bag of bones left by her mom....sorry to be so harsh....
Caylee drowned in the family swimming pool. The jury believed it and brought back a verdict of not guilty of Murder One. Casey cannot be charged again for murdering Caylee. The case cannot be tried again in a criminal court. Maybe Caylee's bio daddy will suddenly appear and file charges against Casey in civil court for wrongful death however time is of the essence and he must do it soon. I am not sure of the time limitations to bring charges in the state of Florida.
Snoopy! Yo! You think she drowned in the pool, or are you being sarcastic about the jury's gullibility vis-a-vis, Jose? I know Dave set semi-drowning out as part of his scenario of what happened that day- and I do think she placed the ladder there, but that she either decided the drowning scenario was too likely to be walked in on, or someone hearing something, or simply as an alibi tool of sorts.
But we do have two likely bona fide causes of death, and it could also have been a plain old vanilla smothering with a pillow, followed up by duct tape if she thought Caylee might somehow revive later... goodness knows many a murderer has been startled to find his victim conscious again after being stuffed "dead" in a car trunk. The chloroform may have been to just knock her out- there are a few ways these elements can be seen to fit in...
Personally I think she accidentally spilled some of her batch on the trunk carpeting (such a klutz), and had to abandon that idea, after brewing it up for the occasion. Then, I think she resorted to a "game" with duct tape to silence Caylee, followed immediately with smothering (actual COD), perhaps with a pillow at home, not wanting to see her wide and frightened eyes anymore- a pillow would do very nicely over the face if any breath at all could be managed with that duct tape. If one thing doesn't work, try another...
Karen C~~I was being very sarcastic. The jury handed down a verdict of 'not guilty' so we have no other choice than to abide by their decision. They believed Casey's story so Caylee drowned in the pool and there is not a dang thing we can do about it.
Caylee was smothered in some fashion and the duct tape came into play. Casey got away with murder and we have to accept that and move on. Of course, we would like to see her lose a few civil suits and run scared the rest of her life.
PS...if I sound harsh, it is because of the other case I have been covering. I am wondering if Ms Arias may walk due to some inane technicality.
Dave~~I liked this...
Silence is often evidence of the most persuasive character.
It has worked for me many times...uh huh...lol
So silence is not always golden...
Question.... if by chance, the appellate court grants Casey's motion on all four counts, can she be forced to testify in the Zenaida civil suit about anything that she stated in those lies? Such as saying a Zenaida Gonzales kidnapped Caylee?
BTW, I don't think Morgan & Morgan have a prayer in hoo hoo of winning that suit for Zenaida. The names alone....Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez....is not Zenaida Gonzale(s)....
Jose Baez acknowledged that there was never a nanny. Caylee drowned (yeah, right) in the pool, so the lies about Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez will be considered just that - lies. There was no kidnapping by anyone. There was no nanny. That was the defense in the murder trial. Those statements will be entered into evidence in the civil trial. And, yes, the names don't match.]
Snoopy- I was just making sure! You know, in most cases I would go along with the general assumption, Well, the jury knows more than we mere observers do but not in this situation- literally, they knew and saw much less! It still drives me crazy when I get into a conversation on the topic of crime or trials and the other person (who did not follow this so intently- I personally have not yet met anyone who followed this closely who did not believe in her guilt) takes that la-de-da position. This was unique because of the Sunshine Laws.
BTW, did anyone take note of that study- male jurors are more likely to convict a heavier female defendant than a slimmer one? Uh, DUH, male bosses pay them less, too, we've known about that for YEARS.... So, I'm somewhat concerned with the other case too, now....
Perhaps its the years involved with going over details. Perhaps its the emotions that are wrapped-up in not only her proverbial acquittal but its the injustice bestowed upon Caylee. Baez said that justice for Casey means justice for Caylee. I can find nothing honorable with this sentence. Baez is required to believe his client. Karen C. you are right, men are more likely to convict a heavier person than a thin one, a uglier one than a pretty one and this is no different with the Defense lawyer. Casey is a big jug of Kool-Aid and she poured up glasses full of "poor pittiful me, I'm not a bad person, and mother of the year" and they drank it up like she was preaching the gospel. Her physical appearance had much to do with how they handled this case and how she appeared to her public. Those who supported Casey had a veil of beauty and rose colored glasses to look through and upon her but, IMO, the most beautiful are usually the most sinistar; because they expect the opposite.
I will never entertain the belief that Caylee drowned. I will never believe that George was witness to her death and was an accomplice to Casey. The defense cannot stand the idea that Casey is labeled the most hated person in America and to be honest it is well deserved. But to get back to the civil charges and what not and that we may find some justice and peace I say no. I'd rather have it stop than to re-dredge the memories of a little girl who looked so full of life angelically hands cradling her face on the couch, looking up with innocence into an unknown world. That photo is cemented into my mind and the attrocities carried out by a mother so hell bent on having a life that included some sort of debauchery that it cost her. I want her to go away. I want her to live her last days secluded, isolated only her and a photo of Caylee to be a constant reminder...
....if Oprah got Armstrong to fess-up you think she could get Casey?
Dave,
apparently I have some sort of "mental deficiency or, as some would call: retardation. Apparently I live on a planet which is someone's place of fiction because you might as well go after the felonious convictions...I throw my hands in the air because although I thought I made intelligent comments apparently I lack the intelligence to form an opinion and or understand the law of the land. It is said that when you stand before a judge on the happenstance that "you didn't know" it was always followed by: "ignorance of the law is no excuse" well call me an f'n fool and throw me in jail. This chick best cure cancer because someone is giving this chick a gift. A FARGIN GIFT!!! Apparently her batty eye lashes, sinister smile, and attributes has even fooled "that guy" and now I'm starting to drink the kool-aid....ARRRRGGGGG!!!
It is sad that Felon Anthony goes scott free on lying charges as well as murder charges. I do not believe in the death penalty so I would not have wanted her to get that in any circumstances. I certainly believed that she was a liar and that four lying charges were at least a little justice. I hope that Morgan and Morgan can achieve what the State of Florida could not.
Casey filed for bankruptcy
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-casey-anthony-files-bankruptcy-20130126,0,5220916.story
Janet~~thank you. It seems they timed the bankruptcy perfectly... what a stupid game of cat and mouse...I wish Casey and Cheney Mason would take off for Siberia...I realize Mason is not involved in the civil suit re Zenaida but you can bet your patootie he is their advisor.
Casey Anthony files bankruptcy
It is my understanding that Laws are made by Lawyers, and the loopholes are endless by which the LAW "can be" used. In todays market the courtroom actions are pretty much just that ACTions. Doesn't seem to matter what evidence fills the isles, one word or two used in twisting the truth of the evidence voids in one way or another. I have been looking at some old cases in trial and the vocabulary seems to be short and conclusive both on the prosecution and defense. It took fewer words and more consideration of the undeniable facts before the jury. Like where were you at the time etc. Today, by the time any collected evidence is passed through the channels, dozens, everything comes out tampered with. There are scientists from hell that can make those intent on presenting fact by law, look like ignorants. More and more criminals are freed today. The jury is most always blamed but I can not justify blaming them entirely when the whole process before them can be nothing but confusion. Maybe we should have jurors of Lawyers so they can decipher what the ones on the floor are doing. For Real !
Dave~~good grief! Those connected to the Anthony case are now invading my territory. We need some anti-anthony repellent spray to oust the lot of them. Baez has inserted himself in your Zimmerman case. If you have any pull among your peers, make them go away PLEASE.
Jose Baez discusses Jodi Arias case with HLN’s Dr. Drew
ok. Sorry this isn't about the original post, but about the link stating Casey filed for bankruptcy. Maybe you could write an article about how bankruptcy, particularly Chapter 7 works. I live in the United States, I live in Florida, but for the life of me I can't see how filing for bankruptcy is going to do Casey any good. Sure it might postpone the civil lawsuits, but it won't stop them, and she'll have no way of discharging them when they do happen. So she gets rid of what? 800,000 in debt or part of 800,000, then what? I have a feeling Texas Equasearch for one will win their lawsuit, even if Zenaida Gonsales doesn't. She won't be able to file again to rid herself of whatever they're awarded. It just doesn't make sense to me. UNLESS there's an another reason for filing, like an upcoming book deal that she doesn't want the profits attached. I'd also like to know which ones of those obligations she has in the 800,000 that can be set aside. I'm ready for someone else's opinion on this one. I'm stumped.
Read this and weep.....
This move brings all of Anthony's civil cases currently under way in Florida state court to a complete halt.
More here....
Casey Anthony declares bankruptcy; talks exclusively to CBS 5
Conniefl~~I have no idea about the bankruptcy laws in Florida. I told Dave on FB chat that he was needed in here.
Dave~~how come it is listed that Casey owes Baez $500,000. I thought he worked pro bono??
Casey's 60 page Bankruptcy doc in pdf
I've been a very bad boy when it comes to neglecting my blog and I'm sorry. I have no excuse, but I did have a car accident last Friday. No injuries. My car goes into the shop tomorrow for body work. Yes, it was my fault, but my record is so clean, they couldn't dig back far enough to find anything.
Casey sought Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection in federal court in Tampa. That means she will be protected from everyone named on her filing, including ZG. However, while Chapter 7 bankruptcy is designed to discharge unsecured debts after liquidating and paying creditors of all non-exempt assets, it does not necessarily wash all her debts free. For instance, Zenaida has not won anything yet. Therefore, there is no debt to pay. Down the road? I don't know how far the protection extends, but I will say this; I believe any suits against her will have to be filed in federal court.
I haven't been able to figure out why she owes Baez $500,000, but there's no way he's ever going to see it.
Dave~~I find that $500,000 very interesting. Did Casey give Baez a Promissory note? The question is, for what? You generally give someone a promissory note when they lend you money by paying for your personal debts. This has to be documented somewhere in paper form if they included it in the list of creditors Casey owes as per the bankruptcy application.
I notice Casey used Hopespring as her address and where her assets, except cash on hand, are located. Me thinks Casey has a lucky horseshoe up her behind. It appears Cindy and George are still funding Casey for her overhead etc.
I found a link that explains what can and can not be discharged in chapter 7 bankruptcy. Here's the link . Hope you can make sense out of it.
Cornell Law Edu.bankruptcy code
[This is a tough one, Connie. Thanks for the link. It should be an interesting ride.]
Dave
Glad to see you here I was really getting worried. Sorry about the accident and very glad you weren't hurt.
[Thanks, Tommy's Mom. It's been 2 weeks now - Jan. 18 - and my hair still hasn't grown back.]