Caylee Marie Anthony # 145 8/24/09 - 9/4/09

[A_News_Junkie_Monkey]

I am not a smart monkey, but I think she would have to submit a pro hac vice request for the civil case and notice of qualifications.  She has been granted pro hac vice in the capital case only, as far as I have heard.

That's what I thought and wondered why JS didn't mention that to her when she was flapping her mouth about taking time away from the murder case to work on the fraud case.

I knew you were gonna male me go to  the darn law dictionary!!

pro hac vice
    (proh-hock-vee-chay) Latin meaning "for this one particular occasion." The phrase usually refers to an out-of-state lawyer who has been granted special permission to participate in a particular case, even though the lawyer is not licensed to practice in the state where the case is being tried.

Sorry    But do I get half credit for narrowing down the term for you? LOL         

LOL....OK...if you insist!  And BTW you are one SMART MONKEY!!!
[/quote]

Awwaaaaaah, sucks Sunny. 
So Do I send the check to:
Sunny
IN
Texas   <----------------- you must be famous! 

[monkalicious]

9/3/2009     A     NOTICE OF INTENT TO RELY UPON BUSINESS RECORD CERTIFICATION

9/3/2009    A    TRANSCRIPT FILED HEARING ON AMENDED MOTION TO COMPEL BEFORE HON. STAN STRICKLAND 03/12/09

http://www.myorangeclerk.com/myclerk/CriminalSelect.aspx?SessionID=f0f09083-f529-4900-ad06-ed86a9c4a9c7

Trimm, could you explain what these mean?  I have such a hard time understanding this court info.  Thanks.

I just saw you post a couple of minutes ago......ANJ answered.     

No worries, Trimm.

[DonFL]

I might be wrong about this but I think they will plead NO CONTEST when the time comes.  They are allowed to change their plea.  A no contest will mean the same as guilty but she won't have to answer questions.  The state can't prevent that.   They will just take whatever they have to since this is a no win anyway.  JMO

 

I also would love to see the trial.

[monkalicious]

Tomorrow is DOCUMENT DAY!!

So tonight is Document Eve!  I'm hanging up my stocking and maybe tomorrow I'll find something to convict Casey in it!

[Western Observr]

I might be wrong about this but I think they will plead NO CONTEST when the time comes.  They are allowed to change their plea.  A no contest will mean the same as guilty but she won't have to answer questions.  The state can't prevent that.   They will just take whatever they have to since this is a no win anyway.  JMO

 

I also would love to see the trial.

What's the difference between No Contest and Guilty? Does it make a difference as to punishment?

[Western Observr]

Thanks cece...... set a trial date......uummmm based on the attorney's schedules.....   betch Lyons is gonna try to stall, stall, stall

***********************
why would a DP try a fraud charge, im sure or i hope strickland will say bozo can handle this one....not the entire death team. I mean if bozo has time to put his mug on tv, then he has time to try this case, it looks pretty cut and dry with video and receipts, all of it.

Hi monkeys.  I haven't posted in a while but have been lurking.  I think that Bozo will most likely try to plea bargain this one.  I could be wrong but I don't think he want her to open her mouth at all.

 

Wouldn't she just plead guilty? Baez has already admitted Casey is guilty - he sent checks reimbursing Amy for what was stolen.   

She already pleaded not guilty.  That's why the trial.  I think they will try to bargain

Hmm-   How does that work now?  They have her on Target video, her signature is all over the checks, she is on the bank's security camera withdrawing funds.     How does anyone have the nerve to plead Not Guilty?   

[DonFL]

I might be wrong about this but I think they will plead NO CONTEST when the time comes.  They are allowed to change their plea.  A no contest will mean the same as guilty but she won't have to answer questions.  The state can't prevent that.   They will just take whatever they have to since this is a no win anyway.  JMO

 

I also would love to see the trial.

What's the difference between No Contest and Guilty? Does it make a difference as to punishment?


The basic difference between guilty and no contest is that for guilty you admit on the record that you actually did the crime.   No contest lets the judge decide that you are guilty.  Not sure if it matters as to punishment.  JMO  I may be off on this.

[/quote

[SunnyinTX]

Casey Anthony: WKMG says duct tape on toddler was rare make 

posted by halboedeker on Sep 3, 2009 6:47:49 PM


The duct tape found on Caylee Anthony's remains is rare and could be a major setback for Casey Anthony's defense, WKMG-Channel 6 reported tonight.

The defense has argued that Henkel duct tape was the best seller in the country, WKMG's Tony Pipitone said. Yet the tape attached to the toddler is a special make.

"This specific, industrial, fire-resistant tape is a tiny fraction of all the tape sold by Henkel," Pipitone said in a first-rate, eye-opening report. "We tried to buy some today. We couldn't find any." 

And what does this mean? "It is extremely rare" and "a crucial find," Pipitone said of the duct tape. Prosecutors said today in a court papers that they will explain how rare that tape is. And Pipitone said the prosecution will argue that the tape is a link between the body and Anthony.

There was more bad news today for Anthony's defense team.


Judge Stan Strickland ruled today that her check-forgery trial will be scheduled before her murder trial. She is charged with the first-degree murder of her daughter, Caylee.

WFTV and WKMG stressed what the scheduling could mean: Anthony might be a convicted felon -- on as many as 13 counts -- before the murder trial starts.

WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer explained how a conviction might play at the murder trial if Anthony takes the stand. "If I were a prosecutor, the first question out of my mouth would be: Miss Anthony have you ever been convicted of a crime?" Sheaffer said.

She'd have to say yes.

"As soon as a jury hears that, it would be as though when a dog hears when you talk to a dog after you say it's name. It's just blah blah blah blah blah," Sheaffer said.

A forgery conviction could hurt Anthony's defense team in fighting the death penalty, WFTV's Kathi Belich added. Sheaffer said a previous conviction heightens the possibility that the jury would recommend death and that the sentence would be upheld on appeal.

WFTV and WESH-Channel 2 showed footage of Anthony on a shopping spree, when she allegedly used former friend Amy Huizenga's checks. Belich listed the items that Anthony purchased: "sexy lingerie, beer, the blue hoodie she wore the first time she was arrested and her big, white sunglasses."

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2009/09/casey-anthony-why-the-defense-possibly-suffered-a-huge-loss.html

Hi NUT!!     I think this:

  9/3/2009     A     NOTICE OF INTENT TO RELY UPON BUSINESS RECORD CERTIFICATION

is regarding the statement bolded above re: the rare duct tape!!!

[SunnyinTX]

I am not a smart monkey, but I think she would have to submit a pro hac vice request for the civil case and notice of qualifications.  She has been granted pro hac vice in the capital case only, as far as I have heard.

That's what I thought and wondered why JS didn't mention that to her when she was flapping her mouth about taking time away from the murder case to work on the fraud case.

I knew you were gonna male me go to  the darn law dictionary!!

pro hac vice
    (proh-hock-vee-chay) Latin meaning "for this one particular occasion." The phrase usually refers to an out-of-state lawyer who has been granted special permission to participate in a particular case, even though the lawyer is not licensed to practice in the state where the case is being tried.

Sorry    But do I get half credit for narrowing down the term for you? LOL         

LOL....OK...if you insist!  And BTW you are one SMART MONKEY!!!

Awwaaaaaah, sucks Sunny. 
So Do I send the check to:
Sunny
IN
Texas   <----------------- you must be famous! 
[/quote]

As long as you send it to MISSOURI!  I'll get it! 

[KarmaRoundUp]

Good morning Monkeys!   


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/orl-bk-casey-anthony-court-090309,0,5656942.story


Orange County Circuit Judge Stan Strickland ruled Wednesday that Casey Anthony's check-fraud case will be set for trial in the near future.

State prosecutors had requested that a trial date be set for that case as soon as possible. But Casey Anthony's defense argued that preparing for the check-fraud case would hamper her legal team's ability to prepare for her murder trial.

In support of its motion, the state offered an affidavit from Amy Huizenga, Casey Anthony's friend and victim in the check fraud case. Strickland wrote in his order that he found Huizenga's affidavit "compelling."

"The affidavit states that the duration of this legal process over the last year has caused her a great deal of mental stress," Strickland wrote.

"After considering all of the factors and argument of counsel, this Court feels that the best resolution is to set the matter for trial in the near future," Strickland wrote. "In terms of legal skill and analysis, this case is rather simple."

He noted few witnesses will be called during trial, and excluding jury selection, should not take more than a day or two.

"This Court cannot justify making the victim wait even longer to have this matter resolved," Strickland wrote. "Therefore, in the coming days the Court will set this matter for pretrial and trial."

YES!!!!!!     
Hi Monkeys

[SunnyinTX]

I might be wrong about this but I think they will plead NO CONTEST when the time comes.  They are allowed to change their plea.  A no contest will mean the same as guilty but she won't have to answer questions.  The state can't prevent that.   They will just take whatever they have to since this is a no win anyway.  JMO

 

I also would love to see the trial.

Don...I think you might have it the Bulls Eye on this one.   

no contest
    A criminal defendant's plea in court that the defendant will not contest the charge of a particular crime, also called "nolo contendere." While technically not an admission of guilt for commission of the crime, a plea of "no contest" will be treated for sentencing purposes by a judge as an admission of responsibility. A no contest plea is often made in cases in which there is also a possible lawsuit for damages by a person injured by the criminal conduct (such as reckless driving, assault with a deadly weapon, aggravated assault), because it cannot be used in the civil lawsuit as an admission of fault. (See also: nolo contendere)

Nolo contendere allows a defendant in a criminal action to accept the court’s punishment for a crime without having to admit guilt. Why is this better than pleading guilty? One crime or criminal action is often tied to another, and a defendant may not want to admit guilt to one crime that might be linked to other actions pending against him or her. Pleading no contest allows the defendant to move ahead in court proceedings without having an admission of guilt on the court records to be used as evidence in another trial. Nolo contendere essentially means that the defendant does not admit nor deny the charges, but will accept the penalties for the crime without protest.

In some areas of the country I believe this is also referred to as The Alfred Plea.

[DonFL]

I found this about no contest.....


Difference between "Guilty" and "No Contest"


The purpose of entering a no contest plea is often to avoid being sued civilly for essentially confessing to a crime, which is the basis of a guilty plea. If the no contest plea restricts someone from sueing you civilly for an action, why would anyone enter a plea of “guilty” to charges against them?

Pleading guilty means you admit the charges, you have no defense for your actions, and the court can go ahead and levy punishment against you.

The court first ensures that you entered the guilty plea voluntarily and that they have some reason to believe you are telling the truth. It is not unheard of, for example, for a parent to plead guilty to a crime to protect their child. The prosecutor must explain what evidence they would have had against you had you pled not guilty and a trial had been set.

Pleading no contest or nolo contendere means you admit no guilt for the crime, but the court can determine the punishment. The judge will hold a conversation with the defendant to ensure s/he understands the plea and the possible punishment. This gives the defendant an opportunity to explain the circumstances and why s/he is pleading no contest instead of guilty or not guilty. Through this conversation, the judge gains a better perspective on the situation. The defendant has some possibility of getting a less harsh sentence than might be handed down after a jury trial.

Restrictions on pleading no contest vary between states, and in some jurisdictions it is prohibited. It is unlikely that the court will allow you to enter a nolo contendere plea while vigorously denying your guilt to the media. This would be known as an Alford plea, based on a 1963 murder case in North Carolina. The defendant pled guilty to second-degre murder to avoid the death penalty, but still vocalized his innocence. Neither the nolo contendere plea nor the Alford plea could later be used in a civil action as evidence against the defendant.
 

[DonFL]

Sorry for the dual post.  We must have been doing it at the same time Sunny.   

[SunnyinTX]

I might be wrong about this but I think they will plead NO CONTEST when the time comes.  They are allowed to change their plea.  A no contest will mean the same as guilty but she won't have to answer questions.  The state can't prevent that.   They will just take whatever they have to since this is a no win anyway.  JMO

 

I also would love to see the trial.

What's the difference between No Contest and Guilty? Does it make a difference as to punishment?

Hi WO - No it doesn't...I posted some info about this just seconds ago....probably as you were posting the question!!

[SunnyinTX]

Sorry for the dual post.  We must have been doing it at the same time Sunny.   

Yep...like minds!!!

I had to look up 'no contest' as I knew it as Nolo Contendere Plea and the Alfred Plea


here is a little more info on that

It is unlikely that the court will allow you to enter a nolo contendere plea while at the same time firmly asserting your innocence. This type of plea is known as an Alford plea, based on a 1963 murder case in North Carolina. The defendant pled guilty to second-degree murder to avoid the death penalty, but still vocalized his innocence. Neither the nolo contendere plea nor the Alford plea could later be used in a civil action as evidence against the defendant.

Restrictions on pleading no contest vary between states, and in some jurisdictions it is prohibited.

[SunnyinTX]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolo_contendere#Florida






Florida

In Florida, the state Supreme Court held in 2005 that "no contest" convictions may be treated as prior convictions for the purposes of future sentencing[

[no rose colored glasses]

I might be wrong about this but I think they will plead NO CONTEST when the time comes.  They are allowed to change their plea.  A no contest will mean the same as guilty but she won't have to answer questions.  The state can't prevent that.   They will just take whatever they have to since this is a no win anyway.  JMO

 

I also would love to see the trial.

I posted that this afternoon, I also believe she will plead no contest. Guess we will wait and see.

[Western Observr]

Well this Nolo Contendere thing is going right over my head-  but from what I am reading about it, it does seem like another way to let a guilty person get away with less than full justice...

[Western Observr]

I might be wrong about this but I think they will plead NO CONTEST when the time comes.  They are allowed to change their plea.  A no contest will mean the same as guilty but she won't have to answer questions.  The state can't prevent that.   They will just take whatever they have to since this is a no win anyway.  JMO

 

I also would love to see the trial.

I posted that this afternoon, I also believe she will plead no contest. Guess we will wait and see.

Let me get this right- she entered a Not Guilty Plea when originally arraigned.
So when will we know if the plea has changed?  When she is actually in court at the start of the trial ?

[DonFL]

I might be wrong about this but I think they will plead NO CONTEST when the time comes.  They are allowed to change their plea.  A no contest will mean the same as guilty but she won't have to answer questions.  The state can't prevent that.   They will just take whatever they have to since this is a no win anyway.  JMO

 

I also would love to see the trial.

I posted that this afternoon, I also believe she will plead no contest. Guess we will wait and see.

Let me get this right- she entered a Not Guilty Plea when originally arraigned.
So when will we know if the plea has changed?  When she is actually in court at the start of the trial ?

My thoughts are that they will notify the court once a trial date is set.   I HOPE I'M WRONG AND THEY HAVE A TRIAL!!!   However, not even that nitwit bozo is dumb enough for that move.