for the sake of reasonable doubt…vroom-vroom!
An interesting Defense motion (click to read), was released today in which the Defense, in the State v. Casey Anthony case, maintains that, in the name of reasonable doubt, the Court should allow the Defense to proffer, at trial, Anthony’s statements to Drs. Danziger and Weitz, mental health experts who recently examined her.
The Defense argues that the contents of these mental health reports include statements from Casey Anthony, that support their theory of reasonable doubt, and therefore should be admissible at trial.
When a defense can offer evidence to support its theory of the case – and it tends to support its claims of reasonable doubt – the Court usually finds it admissible, as courts never want to inhibit evidence that tends to support reasonable doubt. When the court rules against such proffers of testimony or evidence from the defense, it can be construed as error by an Appeals Court.
HOWEVER…. This situation is completely different. This is testimony from expert witnesses that the defense wants to use IN PLACE of Anthony’s testimony. Furthermore, the State had the opportunity to depose these experts, but the defense pulled these witnesses from their case, and the State deposition was halted (presumably something unfavorable to the defense was revealed – we do not know what). The State may have learned of information that would benefit them, and/or the defense heard testimony that would harm their case, though it’s not clear what transpired.
And now? Well, the defense would like to use the statements that Anthony made to these experts in the trial. Presumably to explain away the 31 days. Judge Perry will hardly allow the defense to do this – how can they even dream of using a substitute, unchallenged by the state, to testify for the Defendant?? It won’t happen, despite it being germane to the defense’s theory of reasonable doubt. The Defense can’t use only what’s “beneficial” to them!
This request is another Hail Mary pass. It’s the fourth quarter, 15 seconds on the clock, and the ball is in the air. Oops. The ball is blocked and caught by the opposing team and….. Touchdown! (Hail Mary’s are desperate measures by a desperate team.)
The only way the defense will get testimony about those 31 days – when Casey was on the lamb – is to put her sorry self on the stand. Additionally, the only way the theory of “a pool accident” will come into the trial is to put Casey on the stand. The only way to support Casey’s claims of doing her own investigation of Caylee’s “disappearance” would be to put her on the stand. The only way to suggest Casey was molested by a family member is to put her on the stand (or the Defense may ask Lee or George if they engaged in this behavior with Casey).
Could Casey Anthony’s testimony create the reasonable doubt the defense needs? Hardly.
Regardless, the only way the defense can “spin” any of Casey’s stories would be to put her on the stand. But it would be a disaster. If we see Casey Anthony take the stand, it would mean the defense is throwing its last Hail Mary pass of the game…. and it would be a disaster.
George Anthony = Reasonable Doubt
On the recent 48 Hours No-Mystery Scam Show, Mr. Baez, Cheney, and even Ms. Kenney Baden, would neither deny or confirm that George Anthony was going to be part of their defense reasonable doubt strategy.
After seeing the WKMG Click Orlando video clip (click here for video), that the defense wants to enter into evidence, the signs are pointing to this:
VROOM-VROOM, smell that diesel fuel? That’s George being thrown under the bus.
The clip I’m referring is an August 2008 video that shows the Henkel duct tape on a table at the Anthony’s Command Center.
George had access to that duct tape. George had access to the gas can. George had access to Caylee, and on and on and on they’ll go to blame George.
These are desperate measures for a desperate defense to destroy an already destroyed George Anthony.
Vroom – Vroom………