Summary

Footage Information

ABCNEWS VideoSource
View details on ABCNEWS VideoSource site
CASEY ANTHONY TRIAL / ISO P4
07/03/2011
ABC
NYU95808
FTG FOR COVERAGE OF THE CASEY ANTHONY MURDER TRIAL / ANTHONY ISO CAM NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS ALWAYS IN CAPS ? 8:32:13 JUDGE PERRY ENTERS COURT ROOM 8:32:29 ALRIGHT YOU ALL READY TO PROCEED WITH CHARGE CONFERENCE? Yes, yes. 8:33:04 WE WILL START WITH STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIOSN AND THEN PROCEED WITH SEQUESTERED JURY INSTRUCTIONS. OK INTRODUCTION TO FINAL INSTRUCTIONS. ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT INSTRUCTION? Not from State. Not from Defense. 8:34:00 I'M GOING OFF WHAT I GAVE YOU, THAT'S WHAT WE'LL WORK FROM, MAKE ANY ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS. 8:34:16 INTRODUCTION TO HOMICIDE? we agree that aggravated manslaughter of a child is not a lesser count one. 8:34:45 HAVE YOU FASHIONED AN INSTRUCTIONS THAT SAYS THE JURY CAN'T FIND HER GUILTY OF BOTH MURDER IN FIRST DEGREE AND AGG. MANSLAUGHTER OF CHILD? 8:35:07 State: No... i don't have case authority. 8:35:26 IN TALKING W/ LEAD CONSEL, THE REASON IT WAS CHARGED THAT WAY WAS BECAUSE IT CONTAINTED ELEMENTS THAT WERE NOT CONTAINED IN INDICTMENT AND COULD NOT BE INCLUDED AS LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE. SO WHAT IS IT THAT YOU PROPOSE? DID YOU REDO ALL INSTRUCTIONS AND DO THEM IN WRITING? I'D ASSUME SINCE YOU CHANGED THINGS FROM WHAT YOU SAID YOU WERE GOING TO DO, ..... FROM SOUP TO NUTS. 8:36:42 SO I WILL WAIT TO DO THE CHARGE CONFERENCE AT NOON WHEN YOU CAN PROVIDE ME, SINCE YOU ALL HAVE AGREED TO INSTRUCTIONS, WE WILL DO IT AT NOON AT THE LUNCH HOUR. SO WE CAN GO THROUGH THESE JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE AND EXCUSABLE HOMICDIE. 8:37:13 TEH QUESTION WILL COME UP ABOUT AGG. MANSLAUGHTER. AND THOSE OTHER COUNTS. SO IT'S GONNA COME UP. JUSITIFIABLE HOMICIDE, EXCUSABLE HOMICIDE, ANY CHANGES IN THAT EXCEPT AT BOTTOM WHERE WHAT'S CONSIDERED LESSERS? I believe there are no other changes that i'm aware of. 8:38:04 OK FIRST DEGREE MURDER? No changes the state's aware of. 8:38:14 DEFENSE? IN FIRST DEGREE MURDER I BELIEVE STATE REQUESTED ADDITION BASED UPON CERTAIN CASES TO BE ADDED "IN ORDER TO FIND DEFENDANT OF MURDER ONE, STATE MUST CONVINCE YOU OF DEFENDANT'S GUILT OF PREMED. MURDER OR FELONY MURDER. YOU NEED NOT BE UNANIMOUS IN YOUR OPINION AS TO WHETHER THAT FINDING IS PREMED MURDER OR FELONY MURDER AS I SHALL NOW DEFINE THOSE TERMS." Your honor we'd object to that. 8:39:24 The felony murder charge would be agg. child abuse and to avoid merger doctrine we need a separate finding. 8:40:01 RESPONSE? state says it doesn't need to be changed. 8:40:08 because the state is seeking ultimate sanction, we need a verdict that is reliable. the merged instructions will call into question the reliability of such a verdict. 8:40:42 IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENT, IT STATES THE LAW, THAT INSTRUCTION WILL BE GIVEN. OK FELONY MURDER FIRST DEGREE? Your honor as given, 2(b) states attempting to commit agg. child abuse. because this underline felony requires succession of instances, it's an incomplete instruction. there should be an additional finding of multiple instances, under current law and Brooks. 8:41:56 OK YOU ALL AGREE THAT CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY IS DEAD? 2(A), BEFORE WE GET TO 2(B). 2(a) calls into the same issue as 2(b). STATE? The merger issue counsel is referring to is a legal issue for the court as to whether or not there is sufficient evidence to sustain a verdict for that charge based on separate instances of agg. child abuse. as court knows, this issue is in flux in this state, that various DCAs have disagreed that language in Brooks is the law in the state, that constitutes dicta in that opinion. Nevertheless, this issue was argued and court said it was legally sufficient to go forward, even if Brooks says what counsel urges it says. i don't think it says the court make sepearate findings. we urge the court giev the standard approved isntruction. 8:43:49 as counsel stated, this is an ongoing issue, but we play them as they lie. right now the law as go agg. child abuse is causing the merger doctrine, sot he law in florida is 1 instance of agg. child abuse merges into the bigger charge. this is a factual issue that must be determiend by the jury, not just an issue of law. 8:44:37 court will give 2(a) as written w/ no add'l instructions. is anyone requesting 2(b)? 8:45:16 we have same problem with 2(b) that we had with 2(a). OBJECTION IS NOTED, I WILL GIVE 2(A) AND 2(B) IN THE ALTERNATIVE. 3(A)? I DON'T THINK THE REST APPLY. 8:46:04 in this definition, the definition for "willfully" is lacking. YOU WANT THE DEFINITION FOR WILLFULLY IN THERE? yes your honor. 8:47:06 additionally, even though state has charged under 16.1, this particular instruction mirrors 16.2 more closely than 16.1 definition. WHAT WAS THE ...DID THE STATE CHARGE THEM UNDER?? the proper jury instruction, it's along the line of 16.2 instruction. 8:48:04 this is the instruction as written by court, tracks the indictment and is sufficient. IN INDICTMENT DO YOU TALK ABOUT...AGG. BATTERY, CORRECT? 8:48:39 that is the def. of agg. battery, but we don't talk about malicious punishment or torture. 8:48:55 GO TO 16.1 IN STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS. Y'ALL GONNA NEED TO MAKE SURE SOMEBODY BRING YOU A SANDWICH AT NOON IF YOU WANT TO GET THIS JURY INSTRUCTED TODAY. THAT'S WHY I SUGGESTED WE DO THIS YESTERDAY AFTERNOON. HAVE YOU FOUND 16.1? 8:49:41 yes. 1(a), DO YOU AGREE? You want, commit an aggravated battery against the victim? It's actually 1(e). DEFENSE, 1(A)? we obviously think 1(a) doesn't apply. WE DON'T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE OF WILLFULLY TORTURE ANY BODY? OR MALICIOUSLY PUNISH? WILLFULLY OR UNLAWFULLY CAGED ANYBODY? SO I THINK INSTRUCTION 1 CHARGES 1(E). VICTIM WAS UNDER 18 YEARS, CORRECT? yes correct. IN DEFINITIONS, BESIDES WILLFULLY AND CHILD ABUSE, DO YOU WANT ANY OTHER DEFINITIONS? just the willfully your honor. 8:51:49 FALSE INFORMATION TO A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER? AND WE WILL GET BACK TO AGG CHILD ABUSE. AGG. MANSLAUGHTER. FALSE INFO TO A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. will jury be getting copy of indictment to delineate between counts? YES. Then no objection to that. Defense: We object to that, there should be an issue of materiality. we'd also argue that in each instance, a false statement should not stand alone, it's one continuous act and should be put together. 8:53:22 IF YOU DO NOT FILE A MOTION TO DISMISS THE ISSUE IS WAIVED? I think one was filed. WHAT HAPPENED SINCE I WAS NOT THE JUDGE? state: it was not filed for those charges, it was for counts 1-3, and it was denied. 8:54:07 NOW 2 THINGS DURING CLOSINGS ARGUS... THERE IS EVIDENCE THE DEFENSE CAN MAKE REASONABLE INFERENCE OF AN ACCIDENTAL DROWNING BY USE OF THE PICTURES. WHETHER OR NOT ONE CHOOSES TO BELIEVE, THERE IS SOME INFERENCE THAT CAN BE DRAWN. SO WE WON'T BE ARGUING ABOUT THAT. IF THERE'S AN ARGUEMNT ABOUT THAT, LETME HEAR IT NOW. 8:54:58 THE NEXT ONE IS, NO EVIDENCE THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS SEXUALLY MOLESTED BY HER FATHER OR HER BROTHER. IF SOMEBODY SEES A DIFF. VIEW OF THE EVIDENCE, LET ME HEAR IT NOW SO I WON'T BE COMIGN UP TO THIS SIDEBAR. 8:55:35 Baez: I'd submit that the fact a jury can drawn inferences to sexual abuse is 1) the paternity test done by FBI to see if Lee was the dad. the other inference jury can draw is ms. anthony was not taken to an ob/gyn until 19 yrs old, and despite having as evidence showed that she had menstrual since 19 yrs old, had an irregular menstrual cycle as well as other female problems. common knowledge during gyno exam if there's childhood sexual activity. 8:56:53 I'VE NEVER HAD ONE OF THOSE EXAMS, IS THERE RECORD EVIDNCE OF THAT? 8:57:06 one can argue common sense like the sun rises, we ask jurors to draw on their own experiences, common sense, etc. 8:57:27 LET ME ASK YOU THIS. DID LEE ANTHONY TESTIFY? DID ANYONE ASK HIM IF HE CREEPED INTO HIS SISTER'S ROOM, DAY OR NIGHT, AND ATTEMPT TO MOLESET HER? i think both sides for strategic reasons chose not to. may i finish? HURRY UP. 8:58:04 in addition to that, the jury can make reasonable inference of the hidden pregnancy whcih was discussed extensively, one can draw reasonable inferences that there were quetions whether the reasons behidn that were because of abuse. also evidence ellicted by her sexual background, common knowledge that children who are victims of sexual abuse become promiscuous, don't nkow boundaries of sexual activity, like lying, compartmentalizing. all these were testified to, and all consisten w/ someone who has been sexually abused. it's very similar to all the evidence that came up. there's no more evidence that this child was dealt chloroform that there was sexual abuse. 8:59:56 i think if the jury is gonna hear args of chloroform or suffocation of duct tape, they can also draw inferences from this type of information. while there were no witnesses, tony lazzarro shared secrets, deep secrets, did not. as court knows and everyone knows, testimony and good faith abuse that that secret deals with molestation, improper sexual behavior and incest, we have an inference of child abuse. to pretend it doesn't exist because someone didn't get up there and say it, doesn't make it less. 9:01:23 nobody said they saw casey with chloroform, etc. to deny that would deny casey a proper ability to argue her defense. 9:01:48 STATE DO YOU AGREE? no we don't. 9:01:53 innuendo is not evidence, no record support for inferences counsel has suggested. no inferences to say molestation is connected to any material issue in this case. no evidence that this alleged and unproven molestation somehow relates to what happened in this case. failure of proof of record evidence and also relevance. counsel should not be able to do it. 9:02:42 COURT FINDS THERE ARE NO FACTS IN EVIDENCE THAT EITHER GEORGE OR LEE ANTHONY MOLESTED OR ATTEMPTED TO MOLEST MS. ANTHONY. THOSE ARE TEH ONLOY MAJOR ISSUES I SAW. i don't wanna run afoul of any order. would state restrict jury from ... opening statement? 9:03:34 I RESEARCHED THAT. I CAN ONLY FIND BURDEN SHIFTING. ONLY WAY I KNOW YOU CAN GO THERE IS IF THEY OPEN THE DOOR ANDMAKE A COMMENT THAT REQUIRES A REASONABLE COUNTER COMMENT BY THE STATE. THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS UPON THE STATE OF FLORIDA, I TOLD THEM OPENING STATEMENT IS NOT EVIDENCE. IF THEY REMEMBER, THEY REMEMEBER. IF THEY DON'T, THEY DON'T. 9:04:25 THIS IS THE INSTRUCTION I INTEND TO GIVE THEM REGARDING DR. RODRIGUEZ. "DR. RODRIGUEZ WAS CALLED BY DEFENSE. THROUGH NO FAULT OF DEFENSE/STATE, HE COULD NOT FINISH HIS TESTIMONY. YOU ARE TO NOT CONSIDER HIS TESTIMONY IN YOUR DELIBERATIONS." ANY OBJECTIONS? no sir. DEFENSE? Yes your honor. 9:05:19 we agree wtih the instructions as you drafted them. ============================= 9:05:45 SHORT 5-MINUTE RECESS ============================= ? 9:13:51 is the court precluding me from mentioning... the evidnece that was admitted at trial? 9:14:13 I'M NTO SAYING YOU CAN'T ARGUE I'M SAYING YOU CAN'T USE IT TO SAY GEORGE MOLESTED MS ANTHONY. 9:14:34 i can still do it with family dysfunction, etc. AS LONG AS YOU DONT SAY SHE WAS ABUSED BY HER FATHER AND HER BROTHER. 9:14:51 BOTH SIDES READY TO PROCEED? LET'S RETURN THE JURY. 9:16:00 GOOD MORNING JURY, DID YOU FOLLOW ALL MY PREVIOUS ADMONITIONS? 9:16:21 THROUGH NO FAULT OF DR. RODRIGUEZ, HE COULDN'T COMPLETE HIS TESTIMONY. YOU ARE NOT TO CONSIDER IT IN DELIBERATIONS. LADIES AND GENTS, BOTH STATE AND DEFENSE HAVE RESTED THEIR CASE. ATTORNEYS WILL PRESENT THEIR FINAL ARGUMENTS. PLEASE REMEMBER THAT WHAT ATTORNEYS SAY IS NOT EVIDENCE OR YOUR INSTRUCTIONS ON THE LAW. LISTEN CAREFULLY TO THE ARGUMENTS THEY WILL HELP YOU UNDERSTAND CASE. EACH SIDE IS GIVEN SAME TIME, BUT STATE CAN DIVIDE A REGULAR ARGUMENT AND REBUTTAL ARGUMENT. STATE MAY PROCEED. 9:17:29 Jeff Ashton giving closing....... 9:17:36 good morning. i want to be the first and not the last to thank you for your time given us in this case. we've taken you away from youR families, your lives, we all appreciate the sacrifice. i'm happy to say we came in on the low end of the estimate, it's been 6 weeks. our work is about done and your work is about to start. (video of caylee playing with casey). 9:18:54 it's easy to be a parent sometimes. it's easy to be a parent when you're playing w/ your children, easy when they're a joy, they're fun. we all know being a parent is so much more than just playing. being a parent is about sacrifice. being a parent is about sacrificing your time, your love and sacrificing your dreams and your life. when you have a child, that child becomes your life. this case is about the clash between that responsibility and the expectations that go with it, and the life CA wanted to have. 9:20:16 when caylee was born, CA was saddled w/ expectations and responsiblities. those expectations came not only from society but from her parents. the expectation was that she'd care for daughter w/ help from parents, work hard to support her. her response to those new responsiblties as evidence as shown was to lie. 9:20:55 the first expectation of her parents was that she'd work. she'd help support her daughter and w/ generous contributions of parents. for whatever reason, her solution was to lie. she told parents she went back to job before caylee was born at univ. studs. taking photos. daytime job. her parents accepted that, believed it, they worked during day. 9:21:43 the significance of what i'm about to tell you isn't just CA lies. it's the pattern and the reason that she lies that's important in this case. what i'm going to tell you and what you've seen is that when CA is faced w/ a problem, her solution is to change the lie, to modify it. CA is very bright, very smart and her lies are very detaled. but what you see is this persistent pattern. when CA wants to do what she wants to do, she finds a way. 9:22:39 first she says she's working. problem is when you're working someone has to care for the child. obvious question is who's taking care of caylee? Make up a lie. CA makes up Zanny. for 2 years, CA pretends to have a job and a nanny to care for caylee while at work, eveyrthing seems fine. but that creates a problem, CA is w/ caylee 24/7, every day and night, she's not at work, she's w/ caylee, and what kind of life is that? 9:23:40 so CA solves problem. solution is new job, event coordinator, flexible hours, sometimes has to work at night. if she goes out at night, hang w/ friends, she just says i have to work, and drops caylee off w/ mother. mother is happy to help. that works for a while, works well. 9:24:20 CA can do what she wants, have support of parents, have caylee when it's fun and when it's not, leave her w/ mom. 9:24:38 but then she meets ricardo morales, but how do you include caylee in relationship w/o letting mom know it's a lie. you create new solution. Zanny will take her overnight, we spend the night there. 3-4 nights a week, CA and caylee stay at zanny's, another fabrication. 9:25:22 mom and dad think i'm working late, it makes sense for me to spend night, i can stay with my BF. but ricardo says he doesn't want a serious relationship, playing house not working. 9:25:50 april/may 2008, this is where problems start. solutions of lies no longer giving casey what she wants. Amy Huizenga, her friend through april-june, cindy is resisisting. cindy isn't letting CA go out and do what she wants. the freedom casey wants isn't there anymore and she can't come up with a story to make it happen, but that's what she wants. 9:26:41 her parents are getting suspicious. remember the sports authority job early 2008. george is getting suspicious and trying to find out what's really going on, but george being told to stay out of it. his suicide letter says "I've tried for months, over a year, and i was told to stop being negative." he's trying to get beneath the layer of lies, but told to stay out of it, stop being negative. and CA's lies continue. 9:27:40 but there's a problem. the only way casey's lies work is if caylee isn't talking. caylee's 2.5/3, starting to become verbal. starting to talk. caylee not gonna cooperate. she can't, doesn't nkow enough to lie. at some point, caylee is going to say something. someone's gonna ask her about zanny and she'll say, "WHO?" did you have a good time at zanny's, and she'll say no tony!. it just can't keep going. 9:28:41 CA meets tony. tony has this life, he's free. he's a club promoter, out there loud music, dancing, free life. w/ tony she can do whatever she wants. i believe the testimoy was on June 6, 13, they have the nightclub Fusion. fantastic. shot girls, music, dancing. young people doing what they're supposed to do. i want to be clear about this. there's nothing wrong with young people being young people, nothing wrong with having fun, drinking dancing, nothing wrong with that. but that's not the life CA has because casey is a mom and that gives her responsibilty. 9:29:55 that's so much what she wants. during week of june 2-9, CA has chance to embrace that life because cindy was on vacation and spent most of it with caylee. that whole week casey is essentially free. she has a taste of that freedom, doesn't have to lie to get around it. it's fantastic. 9:30:36 so she has a choice. a life tethered to a child, or a life free to be 22. you might ask yourselves, why not just leave caylee with cindy, just give her custody and walk away? because based on this case, cindy would never permit CA to walk away. cindy wanted her daughter to be a mom and act like a mom, and there's no way that cindy anthony would have ever permitted CA to walk away. so those were CA's choices: the life she wanted, or the life she had. 9:31:47 as hard as it is for anyone to imagine she had to choose between, sacrificing 2 things. her life and dreams of what she wanted, and second was her child. we submit to you the evidence in this case shows the choice she made was her child. 9:32:20 on June 16, 2008, CA left the house with caylee and used the tried and true ricardo excuse. i gotta work late, gonna spend night at zanny's. an excuse she hadn't used since she was with ricardo, didn't seem strange. used it to father and to mother in a phone call later that day or perhaps even a night before. what this tells us about her plan is this..... she wasn't gonna stay at tony's w/ caylee b/c that was not her relationship. on that morning, she knew she'd not be staying at that house, and neither would caylee. she knew that night she'd be in arms of boyfriend and that caylee would be dead (Casey shaking her head) 9:33:54 on June 16, the same excuse, tried and true. gotta work late. spent night at tony's. June 17. done it a couple days before, so she knew her mom would accept one more day. spending night there again. by june 18, casey knew cindy would not accept that excuse, didn't make sense to do that. so CA had to change the lie, add an element to explain the continued absence. so on june 18, CA adds the conference in tampa wrinkle. I've got this conference, gonna take caylee w/ me, along with Zanny. not just that. adds another element. says by the way, there will be another mother there with child same age, what a good time caylee will have. every time you add to the lie, you do it for a reason. 9:35:34 CA is very smart, knows how her mother thinks. a great story. mom will buy it, keep her off my back. when in fact, she's staying with boyfriend tony and sadly, caylee is in all likelihood, in the trunk. dead. and decomposing. put out of casey's mind as easily as she puts out the truth. 9:36:23 17th, the 18th. on 17th, casey's car seen backed into driveway with no one home. CA borrows shovel, i submit the reason was she thought briefly of burying caylee in the backyard just like they buried their pets. too much work, so she just decided to throw her in the swamp. 9:37:10 story on 18th is good, buys her a couple days. having a wonderful time in tampa. on 20th adds Busch Gardens, gonna have fun, caylee going with other kids, satisfies everything. Cindy is sad caylee not with her, but glad caylee is at theme parks. tells cindy they'll be back on the 21st. 9:37:56 21st she says conference still going on, still at busch gardens, juliet lewis and annabelle, the fictional people. 9:38:17 counsel in questioning has suggested these people are imaginary in the sense of not a deliberate fabrication. the fact that they are deliberate fabrication is established by that when she's telling all these people they're at busch gardens, she tells maria kissch that caylee is at the beach. the friend does not need the whole story, and the tampa story would not work. CA's lies fit the audience. 9:39:20 clearly they should be back by now. 22nd, cindy is told the conference ran late, day before, gonna stay and go to busch gardens again. Cindy placated by that. supposed to be back on 23rd. Casey still at tony's. by this point, based on evidence, caylee was already in her resting place off of suburban drive in process of decomposition. 9:40:12 on 23rd, when they're supposed to be home, CA needs another reason to not be there. comes up with the accident story. Imaginary Zanny is in imaginary accident in imaginary place in an imaginary hospital. 9:40:50 that extends the stay a little longer. CA continues to update mother on zanny's imaginary injury and extends the stay longer. 9:41:11 on 24th she has problem. that's when she comes home and sees her father. she's gonna come up with something why caylee isn't with her. tells mom she came home to get insurance papers for the accident. CA is smart. CA is quick. it's absolutely amazing how nimble her mind is to come up with an appropriate and believable lie in an instant. 9:42:00 she is in fact hanging out with tony. 9:42:06 june 25th staying in hospital, 26th, zanny released late, how that's the theme, everything's late..... zanny released late, stay at hotel, so finally, cindy thinks, caylee will be home. it's been 10 days, longer than she's ever been away from granddaughter. 9:42:44 next day comes, june 27th, we're back in town, but met up with jeff hopkins. he's imaginary connection to zanny. she's got an amazing memory, imagine being able to remember the lies you told a year ago and incorporate that into new lie, it's impressive. jeff hopkins, staying at hard rock hotel w/ him. mom is placated by that. 9:43:30 of course she tells Amy that caylee is at beach with nanny. again, contradictory lies depending on audience. 9:43:45 june 28th still at hotel, jeff hopkins, mom we can't come home. june 29th, having so much fun, can't come home. jeff hopkins becomes an interesting part of her long term strategy. 9:44:14 june 30th, tells cindy jennifer and caylee going to Universal studios. on july 1 she makes a mistake. tells cindy that casey and jennifer rosa are at universal. cindy goes to universal, calls casey on phone and she wants to see her granddaughter. 9:44:56 i'm sorry that's july 3rd, we're at a character breakfast. cindy tries to see her, arrives at universal and says casey i'm here ready to see granddaughter. Oh no, we're in Jacksonville, with jeff hopkins. backstory is he's a wealthy friend of hers she has a romantic interest in who lives out of town. 9:45:40 this is the beginning of casey's long term strategy on how to deal with cindy. remember timer 55? the password casey created for her myspace and facebook accounts. 2 references to timer 55. first was in a tape recorded conversation with lee. it's related to caylee. remember later, lee said, as his recollection was refreshed, timer 55 reflected 55 days between june 16 and caylee's Birthday. that was some reflection on when zanny would bring caylee back, but we know now that zanny is a fiction. 9:46:57 timer 55 meant that she knew she could only stall her mother til caylee's birthday. timer, 55 days. the most she could do was 55 days. then her mom would insist on seeing caylee. what i submit to you is hopkins is a long term strategy. on the big blow up, cindy created a myspace page, her and casey finally had a heart to heart. CA tells her i'm in Jacksonville. this man i think i could have an actual relationship with. a wealthy boyfriend with a child. i can have a long term relationship. you gotta get used to the fact that i won't always be with you. got mom convinced she's in a relationship with a wealthy man out of town. timer 55. coming up with long term strategy. 9:48:32 maybe she'll marry jeff hopkins, elope to europe. she could extend that 55 days for months. she never had the chance. 9:48:50 july 5th, tells mom car being fixed in jacksonvile. july 13, tells mom hopkins' mom is getting married, a fantastic and fictional marriage. the july 3rd conversation backed cindy off. 9:49:26 until july 15, on then, all hell breaks loose. because they got the car. had they not gotten this car, i would submit based on evidence that CA would have kept this story going until caylee's birthday and beyond. the car made that impossible. car is discovered. cindy is on a mission, gonna find her granddaughter and will not be denied. tracks down Amy, grabs Casey, you will take me to your granddaughter NOW. 9:50:23 she's at zanny's don't wanna wake her up, despite everything cindy says, despite threat to call police, same old story, zanny zanny zanny zanny zanny zanny. until finally, her brother Lee says to her lets play this out. i'm the cop, you're You. ms. anthony, take me to your granddaugther. no she's sleeping. take me to your granddaughter. convinces her this story will not stand. the lie will not succeed. in a pattern you'll see repeated in the face of a lie that cannot stand, she comes up with a new lie. 9:51:28 yes there's a zanny, but zanny kidnapped caylee. did it 31 days ago. that though casey got the date wrong, she told police it was june 9, but 31 days of the 55 were gone. i haven't seen my daughter in 31 days, doing my own investigation. elaborate story, knows zanny from universal, tells police this elaborate consistent lie. 9:52:23 and initially police treat her like a victim, child kidnapping. the more they investigate, the more it falls apart. in what can only be described as if it weren't true, you couldn't write it this good, is the incident at universal studios. 9:53:01 she maintains this story of the kidnapping. takes them to universal, walks with confidence to a bulding, with absolute confidence, walks to end of hallway, turns around, puts hands in pockets and says OK i don't work here. CA maintains lies until they absolutely can't be maintained anymore. 9:53:42 when she gets to end of hallway, this lie has failed me, i must abandon it and replace it with a new one. in that amazing conversation with melich and john allen, she admits she doesn't work at universal, i lied about working here but everything else is true. maintains that lie through conversations with law enforcement, with conversations with her family, and into july and august. 9:54:41 but a problem...her claim of where she dropped caylee off is conclusively disproven. her claim she was looking for caylee is disproven, NO WAY it's true. realizing that, when she's briefly released, she comes up with new story. the kidnapping story, the blanchard park story, she told Lee when she was out in august, that in fact zanny did kidnap caylee but by force. we met at blanchard park. held my arms, held me down, took caylee away because i was a bad mother. faced with overwhelming evidence that the story is a lie, CA comes up with a new one. Casey 3.0, new version. 9:56:01 problem with that version coems up dec. 11, 2008. can i have exhibit 208 please? (photo of remains shown) caylee's remains are found. they're found within a 1/4 mile of anthony home. with her remains are found a number of items, very important items. 9:57:16 the tape found on caylee's remains, which are contained in this bag, and you can look at, 3 pieces of duct tape, and a photo with a distinctive brand. found on caylee's body. the difficulty of casey 3.0, the same tape found on her body was found on a gas can taken from her home. you'll see by sales exhibit that this tape is rare, hasn't been sold since 2007 and only then only 100K rolls sold. it's on caylee's body and on that exhibit and in fact, in what has got to be the most bizzarre part of this case, that tape was used by her father to hang up the poster. 9:58:41 the tape used to kill caylee anthony was used to implore people to look for her. 9:58:54 i guess you could say this was her coffin (the laundry bag). this is the tag from that very same bag. (says whitney design). 10:00:04 this is the laundry bag taken from the anthony house, i believe dec. 11, 2008. this is the mate of the bag that served as caylee's coffin. remember we saw an ad, they're sold in sets. a square one, a cylindrical one. the cylindrical one is in this bag, exhibit 264. rather not take it out, not in good condition. that bag is caylee's coffin. 10:01:02 this is the photo of the shorts found w/ the remains of caylee anthony. you recall from medical testimony, very tattered from decomp. this is a photo of caylee wearing those very same shorts. 10:01:38 this is a photo of the lettering found in bag w/ remains. last remnant of a shirt. all that was left was stitching around collar and these letters. 10:02:01 this is a photo of caylee marie anthony wearing the shirt in which she died. with not a stranger. but with casey anthony. 10:02:44 this is a photo of the blanket that was w/ the remains of caylee, found in dec. 11, 2008. you'll notice in the middle you'll see a particular character, winnie the pooh with piglet on his shoulders. 10:03:21 this is a photo of the bedding found by grandparents. you'll see the winnie the pooh theme. but also, you'll see exact same figure on the bumper from caylee's bed. this blanket was not taken from the home of some stranger. taken from home of george and cindy anthony where george and cindy lived. 10:04:19 the claim that some stranger abducted caylee anthony was no longer tenable. just as the claim she had that zanny's sleeping, just like universal studios., just like she was left at the house. those claims died. by the time caylee's body was found, any suggestion that caylee was kidnapped and murdered by a stranger was gone. there's no question left that caylee anthony died at the hands of someone in that house. 10:05:21 we started this trial, the defense in opening statement made some statements. i want to remind you that what attorneys say, what i say, is not evidence. what you must decide on comes from witness stand or these exhibits. 10:05:52 defense counsel gave you detailed explanation, story, of how caylee anthony died. 10:06:07 with dramatic flair, he told you of casey being awakened by her father screaming, where's caylee, about a frantic search, about a grandfather bringing her out of the pool wet, laying her at casey's feet, this is your fault, this is your fault. the judge will instruct you on reasonable doubt. 10:06:58 he will tell you that a reasonable doubt is not a mere possible, speculative, imaginary, or forced doubt. it should not make you say not guilty. 10:07:24 the defense opening statement has not been supported by any evidence in this case. 10:07:40 the only evidence in this case shows that it did NOT happen. george says it did not happen. you may not speculate, you may not imagine, and there is simply no evidence in this case to support that contention. 10:08:09 and you must, you must, reject it. the defense's opening was not simply to create 1 villain. the defense was not satisfied with one. they suggested a second. they suggested someone counsel refered to as morally bankrupt, roy kronk. the defense suggsted to you that somehow, george anthony disposed of caylee's body and that george anthony was somehow, we'll concede that george is connected to the tape, somehow his connection to the tape connects him to putting the tape on caylee's body. 10:09:26 in same opening statement, he suggsted that roy kronk somehow took the body, kept it in another location, and then returned it. dr. spitz suggested that, what's nonsensical proposition, someone took the skull, took it home,a nd put tape on it. 10:10:02 you can't have it both ways. either george put the tape on, which we know is not true, or roy kronk put tape on. you can't do both! either someone put the tape on before the child decomposed, or they didn't. 10:10:29 the arguments made by defense require you to suspend your common sense. to leave in pinellas county everything you know about why people act and do what they do. it is a trip down a rabbit hole into a bizzare world where people who love their granddaughters find them drowned and do nothing. 10:11:08 where they take an innocent act and make it look like a murder for no reason. where a man who buries his pets and takes his granddaughter, the love of his life, and throws her in a swamp. this is the world the defense asks you to occupy. 10:11:39 a world where a guy find a skull, reports it 3 times to the police, is blown off by them, takes the skull and the mandible, which is worht a lot of reward money. takes it home, for 4 months, puts tape on it somehow, and brings it back, and sets it back where it was and calls the police. 10:12:22 in any world, even the most morally bankrupt greedy, reprensible person, if they're motivated by money, and they found a skull that everyone in the country is looking for, if police are not listening, you walk down the street to where there are dozens of reporters and you say have i got a story for you. 10:13:11 roy kronk....no one wanted to listen to him, so he gave up. 4 months later he came back, it's still there. anyone can tell that body has been there for a very long time. that tape didn't get put on that skull. 10:13:42 you know how? because the tape is decomposed just like everything else is. you heard testimony from Ms. Lowe, the fiber analyst. she told you that tape didn't have cotton in it. we know it's the same tape but it had been so long not even any more cotton in it. 10:14:22 the tape did not get out there couple days before. all evidence says that's ipmossible. 10:14:40 look at what are the facts of this case. no reason george anthony had anything to do with disposing of body. he is a doting grandfather, loved that child, LITERALLY, more than life itself. you watched him on hours of video tape with CA. you saw the pain, the anguish, what he wanted answers to. because he didn't know. you have his suicide note. jan. 22, 2009. george was ready to end his life, to be with caylee. and that note, when you read it, there is absolutely no way the man who wrote that note knew anything about what really happened to his granddaughter and that's what was killing him. he didn't know. he had nothing to do with this crime. 10:16:11 but the evidence that casey did is overwhelming. CA's car, when retrieved from tow yard on july 15, 2008, reeked of death. first witness, simon burch, english accent, manager of a tow yard, but a guy who for 30 years has towed cars. also spent 2 years in waste management. he said i've smelled everything a human being can leave in a car. groceries, they rot in the back, dead bodies, 5-6 of them, i've smelled it all. 10:17:18 and yes he smelled rotten milk too. he told you when he approached car and leaned down to get VIN number, he smelled something, and he knew what it was. he told you when he went back wtih george, he said whoa, i know what that is. mr. birch has no reason to lie about any of that. 10:17:58 we could have stopped there. but we went further. you heard from crime scene technicians. unforgettable what they smelled. the defendant's own father even at the time said i smelled that before and i know what it smells like. we didn't stop there. 10:18:39 we got help from the one person who has studied the odor of human decomposition more than anyone else, dr. arpad vass. 20 years he spent studying human biochemistry, the last 10 studying the odor of human decomposition. he told you when he opened that can, he jumped back, i know exactly what it is. we're not just relying on his nose, we're relying on science too. 10:19:24 he examined the evidence and the odor. what's important is he took a piece of the carpet, separated it from the trunk, so the odor he was getting had to come from the carpet itself. not some ambient odor from the trunk. even dr. furton agreed. 10:20:01 both dr. vass and dr. furton agree there is no signature of chemicals that is indicative of human decomposition. all they can say is that it is consistent. and dr. vass, who has researched this more than anyone else, says it is consistent. could those chemicals come from something else? Sure. but those don't smell like human decomposition. 10:20:50 you could throw the chemicals together, but it doesn't smell like human decomposition, since it's unique. he tested everything, and everything he tested came back to one specific cause.... that there was a dead body in the back of CA's car. 10:21:24 dr. furton is experienced but not as experienced as dr. vass. his research is in individual human scent. he agreed the odor from car is, in his opinion, from decomposition. he tried to propose alternative sources, such as milk, cheese, but ultimately he had to admit that the items in the car, the garbage, wasn't sufficient. i guess it was dr. huntington, the bug guy. 10:22:17 tried to say there was salami in the package, but there was no meat. i showed dr. furton the velveeta, there was tiny little residue in there. he agreed the garbage was not the smell. we have exploded the idea that the garbage was the source of the stink. 10:22:54 the odor that was still present by testimony of their own expert, that he still smelled 2 years later. you all have smelled common household garbage. what garbage smells like is not beyond your expereince. when you remove garbage froma trunk, the smell goes with it. it doesn't stay there. the smell was there because caylee's body was in there. 10:23:46 that's not the only evidence you have. you have the hair. a single hair was found in the trunk of CA's car. with an artifiact that you heard more than you ever wanted to. artificate only found in hair attached to decomposing human bodies. that particular testimony has not been rebutted by anything else in this case. 10:24:30 you heard lenthy testimony from dr. shaw on a test that he did. i was trying to create this artifact by a hair from a living person. i tried everything i could think of, and he couldn't do it. he could not replicate it. 10:25:05 defense debated with him some photos, with some darkening, banding/not banding.... when you look at the hairs that actually came from the car, the same as this one, they had NO markings on them. no decomposition of any kind. so regardless of whether you debate whether having a hair buried in the dirt for a month, so what? this hair was not in the dirt for a month, it was in the back of a car. it came from a dead body. 10:26:00 how do we know it's caylees? from mitochondrial DNA. that comparaison proves it came from some maternal relative, either Caylee, Casey, Lee, or cindy's mother. we know it's not casey's because it's too long, and it's treated. we know it's not cindy's because it's the wrong color, it's not treated, and too long. we know it's not lee's because it's too long, his hair is short. this hair is 9 inches long. we know it's not cindy's mother because she was in the car once,a nd her hair is treated. this hair could only come from Caylee. 10:27:21 the hair taken from caylee's body also had the band. the one's on the body, the root had completely decomposed, but the trunk had not. 10:27:48 as hard as it is to accept when CA was at blockbuster, walking arm in arm with tony, caylee was in the trunk of her car in the early stages of decomposition. 10:28:14 when CA returned to house on 17th or 18th, she backed her car into garage with intention of burying caylee in the backyard. she went to neighbor to borrow a shovel. based on the dog alerts in backyard, she probably took the body to the backyard and set it down. it was taking too much work and she decided to toss caylee's body in a swamp. 10:29:05 the evidence proves beyond any reasonable doubt that CA decided on june 16 that something had to be sacrificed. that the conflict between the life she wanted and the life thrust upon her was unreconciliable. something had to give, and she chose to sacrifice her child. she took her child, took her life, put her in the trunk and forgot about it. after a few days she couldn't forget anymore, and she disposed of her body in a swamp. 10:30:06 these are the facts that prove, beyond a reasonable doubt that CA is guilty of murder in the first degree, and that murder is premeditated. 10:30:25 the defense will say we can't prove how CA died. let me echo the words of Dr. G, the med. examiner. she said "no one, there is no good reason to put duct tape over the fact of a child." Why would you put duct tape over the face of a child? 2 reasons? to silence them. but why do you need 3? remember this case, there was not 1 piece, there were 3, overlapping at angles, placed over her fact. why do you need three? 10:31:26 what does 3 do that one does not? 1 would silence her if that's what you wanted to do, as brutal as that would be. why do you need 3? You need 3 because your purpose is not to silence the child. it's to make sure the child cannot breathe. The first piece goes over the mouth, the second piece goes over the nose. but you could still have some gaps, you have to be thorough, you have to have 3. 10:32:27 and then the child dies. there is simply no other reason, no other justification, no common sense. there is no reason to put duct tape over the face of a child, living or dead. that is proof beyond a reasonable doubt of how caylee died. there is simply no other explanation for why you put duct tape over the nose and mouth of a child. based on photos it is crystal clear that's where it was. 10:33:19 the forensic anthropologist and others told you, it happened before death, the mandible was in place. 10:33:57 we hope the chloroform was used before caylee went so she went peacefully. she died because she had duct tape over her face and could not breathe. 10:34:33 this murder was premeditated, and the defendant is guilty. thank you. 10:34:45 OK WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A 15 MINUTE RECESS. ========================= 10:34:55 15 MINUTE RECESS ========================= 10:56:30 there's also a page here not in evidence. baez: i just want an instruction that the exhibits are for demonstrative purposes only. 10:57:02 i can read it. counsel can argue it, but this elevates it to a level above just a question being asked. 10:57:26 YOU DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE EXCERPTS DO YOU? yes i do, it's not counsel's memory of what was said, it's a photo of the deposition. he could say this is my memory but clearly it's the deposition itself. and counsel didn't say it that way. 10:58:01 baez: i don't think the standard is that. this is argument to the jury. this was admitted in trial and testified about. it should be noted based on their own recollection. 10:58:35 ANYTHING ELSE FOLKS? WHAT I WILL DO, THE PORTION OF THE PAGE, MR. ASHTON IS EXACTLY RIGHT. PUT SOME WHITE PAPER ON THAT. 10:58:52 our other objection is the photo in the middle is not in evidence. counsel can make reference to what he'll term as imaginary friends. who is the photo in the middle? IT LOOKS LIKE MS. ANTHONY AS SOME STAGE. PROBABLY WASN'T THE BEST PHOTO TO CHOOSE. HOW IS THE STATE PREJUDICED? It makes her look young, a child-like invention that she's come up with these invididuals instead of a photo of her at age 22. 11:00:10 one of the photos objected to was a photo of her smiling at OCSO because it had no relevance to the case. if they want to submit that photo that might be more appropriate, instead of an argument that her lying is childlike and she creates these individuals. i'm going to guess she's in 8th grade in that picture. 11:00:56 i don't know the date of the photo. ms. anthony is a young woman. 11:01:06 THAT DOESN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION. HOW OLD IS SHE IN THAT PHOTO? i'll try to find out an approximate date. 11:01:25 also these other photos are characatures, not real people. 11:01:41 I JUST NEED TO KNOW WHEN THE PHOTO WAS TAKEN, FOLKS. it's a school picture, somebody knows what grade it is. looks like 11th grade. i'm sure she's wearing makeup in high school. IS IT A SCHOOL PICTURE OR WHEN SHE WAS 22? IF IT'S WHEN SHE WAS 22 THEN FINE. ms. anthony... JUST TAKE IT BACK TO HER? 11:02:58 it's 2001, judge. and i won't be, ugh... making...it's just a photo of ms. anthony. i'd note that these imaginary friends were testified that they were at least 2 years in existence. I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE IMAGINARY FRIENDS. WHAT TROUBLES ME IS YOU GOT A PHOTO FROM 2001 AS OPPOSED TO SOMETHING AT AGE 22, OR EVEN 21. BUT HOW OLD WAS SHE IN 2001? i would say 17, something alone those lines. I have no idea. LDB: she's 14-15. 11:04:32 THAT THERE JUST DISTORTS REALITY. YOU HAVE A BOOK OF PHOTOGRAPHS, HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THOSE? THE ONE I CAME UP AND LOOKED AT THAT HE FLIPPED THROUGH? no objections judge. THE ONE THING WE DID AGREE ... 11:06:03 FOR PURPOSES OF THE RECORD, STATE USED 77 MINUTES AND 8 SECONDS. OUT OF THE 4 HOURS THAT WAS GIVEN. 11:08:00 JUST TO REMIND EVERYONE, ONCE WE START GIVING JURY FINAL INSTRUCTIONS, NO ONE WILL BE PERMITTED TO LEAVE OR ENTER. SO IF YOU DON'T WANT TO STAY DURING ENTIRE TIME, YOU WILL HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO LEAVE. BUT ONCE I START READING THE CHARGE TO THE JURY, NO ONE WILL BE PERMITTED TO LEAVE, ENTER, OR MOVE ABOUT. 11:09:38 WHAT IS THAT? 11:09:55 (someone is covering up the picture of casey with white paper on the board that says "casey's imaginary friends"). 11:11:32 (lawyers putting new picture of casey looking older on the board) 11:14:51 OK LET'S RETURN THE JURY. 11:15:01 (jury is returning to room....) 11:16:00 YOU MAY PROCEED 11:16:07 BAEZ: Good morning. I too would like to thank you on behalf of the defense for your sacrifice as citizens of Florida. Came at great sacrifice and both sides saw the attention you've paid. hasn't gone lost on us. want to thank you individually and collectively for the sacrifice you've all made. 11:16:50 here we are at end of journey and you probably have more question than you have answers. if you recall from openings, the final thing i told you at end of day, the one question will never be answered, can never be proven. How did Caylee die? that's why we're all here. 11:17:30 no dispute caylee is passed on, the key question as it relates to all manslaughter, child abuse, murder charges, is how did she die? what happened to her? what is proven beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. not just some, but all of them. that evidence was never presented to you. 11:18:07 there was a great deal of things you were probably looking for and never received. this is my last opportunity to speak to you individually. once i'm done, mr. mason will cover the jury instructions and the law, but generally this is our moment, our opportunity to show you what the evidence showed in this case. 11:18:45 the state when we're done will have a rebuttal argument , this is the hardest point for a defense lawyer because i can never come back up and respond. the reason is the state has the burden of proof, beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. the highest standard in american jurisprudence. wasn't because we tossed a coin. it's because it's their burden. 11:19:35 you'll recall when we did jury selection, and i talked to you individually, i said it's not a 2 sided affair. state has only burden. while defense put on a case, etc., we didn't have to do so. could have sat back and did absolutely nothing in this trial, and it still would have been up to the state to prove every charge, every element. 11:20:22 we talked about elements, what they mean, but that's the same burden, beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. done for obvious reasons. we're here for a serious matter, a serious question of fact. if you were not given the facts you need, your guidance will be the law. 11:20:56 the law will guide you to what is a legal and just decision. perry will tell you what's important is you follow the law. we've lived by them for many years. no one has the right when to deliberate to make a decision is by emotion. 11:21:29 i'm going to start with my biggest fear. what i fear may happen in this case, and explain why i feel that way. i want to then outline the state's case, want to talk about it piece by piece, and my presentation will be a little longer than mr. ashton's. 11:22:04 you'll have to rely on your recollection of what the evidence presented. what we say is not evidence, but it's a guide to see how to look at it. 11:22:22 there were a lot of delays. objections, sidebars. you have to look at what was actually testified to. sometimes it came out odd, not as much cohesiveness, presentation wasn't as fine as it could have been. certainly know that's the case with us. 11:22:55 we think this has a connection to this. pay attention to this fact because of this, to try to piece if together for you, because i remember at that time, but now you explain it, i understand. 11:23:22 then i want to talk about the defense's case, the presentation we put on, even though we were not required to do anything, even though we have no burden, etc. 11:23:46 mr. mason will explain the charges and what must be proven and explain the judge's instructions to you and how they apply to the state's case, to try to give you an understanding. while you're all very educated people, you're not skilled in the law. 11:24:18 finally my last remarks which are points you should also consider before we sit down. it will be the toughest time when ms. drane burdick goes up, but you have to understand why. 11:24:40 biggest fear. this case deals with so much emotion. i know times when every single person felt something deep down inside. law says how to deal with emotion. this case must not be decided for or against anyone because you feel sorry for anyone or you are angry at anyone. 11:25:21 we want you to base your verdict on the evidence, not the emotion. 11:25:34 there were times when things were done to draw into your emotion, to get you to discriminate against someone, because they didn't conform with what was right or normal, they're different. that is not what the law is. you must base your verdict on the evidence, not on emotion. it's my biggest fear because it's something so hard to push aside. caylee was a beautiful innocent child who died far too soon. 11:26:27 but to parade her up here to invoke your emotion is improper under the law and under the rules of deliberation. 11:26:46 that is the strategy of this case. let me start with mr. ashton's remarks today. he started showing you a video of little caylee, talking about parenting, what a mother should and should not do. went on talking about this beautiful child. not on his evidence, it was to set up the emotion for what was to come. and that is exactly how this case was presented. they didn't come out the gate and show you the evidence. 11:27:36 they gave 2 weeks of testimony that was irrelevant to paint CA as a slut, as a party girl, as someone who lies, and it has nothing to do with how this child died. and you would dishonor the law, and the memory of caylee, if you do that. 11:28:12 rule # 3, but i ask you make this rule # 1, the state came out and paraded all these people, but what was unique, they kept saying casey was a good mother. caylee loved casey. you may ask why i asked certain questions. i wanted to see how caylee reacted to casey. a child cannot fake this, love. a child knows when it loves someone. what this did was not to appeal to your emotion. it was specifically directed at the child abuse charges. 11:29:23 we were here for 6 weeks. but you didn't hear one single instance with anything dealing with child abuse. this prosecution was geared in such a manner that it was deliberate, thorough, detailed. you saw every movement of casey during those 31 days. if there was one instance of child abuse, you'd have seen it, you'd have heard it. when did someone get on this stand or show me, or tell me in any way that caylee was abuse. 11:30:24 those cases are sad, one of worst crimes available. if there's an abused child, people notice. there are bruises, other things, broken bones. there was nothing other than this child was loved, taken care of. and from 1 moment, something changed that would change the life of casey anthony, and ended the life of caylee anthony. 11:31:23 what was put before you? i agree with 1 statement ashton said, and that's you can't speculate. it has to be proven to you beyond every reasonable doubt. if you don't know what happened, it wasn't proven. 11:31:58 we can speculate all day long as to the difference possibilities. it must be what was proven. no mysteries to solve. no mystery before you. if you have questions, then it was not proven, and that's as simple as it gets. 11:32:29 you've seen this checkbook prosecution, where they spared no expense, utilized the finest crime labs in the country. even with all the resources, and used established areas of forensic science,but created new ones. you are the first jury to hear this type of evidence in a case. the air tests. hair banding. first jury in florida to hear about a trainer talking about his dog. this i told you from teh beginning. 11:33:29 this prosecution would make up for their lack of evidence. 11:33:40 with their initial set up. the strategy is that if you hate her, think she's a lying, no good slut, then you'll start to look at the evidence in that light, start to discriminate her, rather than give her the right that everyone is entitled to. 11:34:21 we can get away with that if we get the jury to hate her. 11:34:33 i told you, that this was an accident that snowballed out of control. while it's very common, what made it unique was who it happened to. you all sat here and saw bizzare things in this trial. that's what makes this post-death behavior relevant. 11:35:27 at end of day it's irrelevant to the #1 question, how did she die? i will ask you not to speculate as to that fact. 11:35:54 i want to start with the car. what's unique about the car is what i told you in the beginning. the car does not shed any light on how caylee died. Period. i told you all, it will double the length of this trial . all the discussion that came around with being irrelevant evidence was posed to the car. 11:36:35 what the car does is tell you how caylee may or may not have been transported. does not say how she died. why'd you fight it? 11:36:56 we weren't about to let the state put a square peg in a round hole. there are just as many questions as answers. 11:37:15 was there a body in the back of the car? does it tell us how she died? no. we know. caylee acted inappropriately and made mistakes and bad decisions. should have called police, not tried to block this out, should have reported her death. no doubt about that. that question was never contested, never debated. but if there are crimes associated with those acts,the state has the ability to charge her with whatever acts they want. they can't overinflate the case just because it's entertainment, because everyone wants to know. 11:38:29 because there's some mystery. you heard tons of evidence on how this case, the media, the way it all came about, how it influenced people's actions, decisions. but we can't lose focus on what actually occurred. the answer is what you're supposed to answer here in your deliberations? 11:39:33 you'll recall i used these boards during my opening statement, going back will help. you'll recall caylee was last seen on june 16, according to george anthony. i will remind you that the indictment reads from june 15th, not june 16. very important to consider. does that raise the issue that does even the state of florida ... OBJECTION -- indictment is not evidence. SUSTAINED ? 11:40:45 you'll recall tony lazarro testified, on the 20th of june, casey ran out of gas, and tony went to help her get gas. went to anthony home, and in backyard, there is the shed where they got the gas cans from. when they went for the gas, casey did not try to block him away, did not say get away from my trunk. she opened the trunk, and put the cans in there. could have put the cans on the seat, could have said go away i got this. 11:42:02 if there had been a body, or if there had been a smell, this young man would have smelled it. 11:42:19 the place you put gas is right in the back of the car. why didn't he smell it? there's a reason for that, and the car didn't smell at that time. that's the only logical conclusion. 11:42:43 you'll also remember maria kissch, very attractive girl with glasses. you may not remember the bombshell about getting in that car. she said, yeah, i was in casey's car, and was it during living with tony, she said yes. she sat in backseat. it still smells, and all of these people are smelling it, why wouldn't it have smelled so bad if it was so recent? 11:43:51 then you recall the incident with the gas cans. i labored over these cans through this trial because the issue is obvious. who in teh world presents gas cans missing? how many times in the US has someone called and said my cans are missing? why so many lies surrounding that duct tape and those gas cans? it's not a coincidence, you couldn't have odds worse than the lottery. 11:44:53 then the car is towed on the 30th. 11:45:20 why did mr. anthony wait to the 15th to report the car? mr. birch said when george picked up the car, he showed up with a gas can. he knew the car was out of gas. not only did he know that, he knew the car had been there for 3 days. george told me it had been there for 3 days. tow people would have no way to know that. george said "i called when i got to work, i found out it was there 3 days when i got to work." i asked if he called mr. birch, he said no. how in the world did mr. birch know the car was there for 3 days? because george told him. he knew it was there, he knew it was out of gas, and he showed up with gas cans. he smelled the smell of death, the smell you never forget. he did what every responsible parent would do -- nothing. he took the car home and went to work. don't call to see if my daughter or granddaughter is alive. he didn't do any of those things. 11:47:34 that's because he wanted to distance himself from this situation, and he knew. that was all presented to you. he knew something. he knew she was dead. this evidence doesn't make sense. if the state of florida had done as much work as tracking the comings and goings of george as they did casey, you'd probably have more answers. 11:48:30 now july 15th comes around, and as mr. ashton points out, all hell breaks loose. now we take a look at who actually smelled what. 11:49:03 you have CSI bloise, depending on who was asking the questions. if LDB asked it was human decomp, if I asked it was decomp. You have dep. forgey and his dog who was advised it was the suspect's vehicle. i had every person who witnessed this dog investigation, and all said there was 1 car. if you believe him, he said 2 cars. you have to believe Vincent, Melich, and Bloise were lying to you. 11:50:11 arpad vass... we'll get to him later. 11:50:18 cindy anthony who said during 911 call but said so because it was 3rd call and she wanted the cops there faster. 11:50:37 simon birch, who runs the police tow lot. he didnt' make his statement until 9 days later and it had been on the news, and referenced news statements. 11:51:01 george...who did a great job of pointing out to melich what happened that first night. then you have the $40,000 man, haskell. 11:51:28 then the amscot employee, she smelled garbage. tony lazzarro, who went and got the gas cans for casey and was right near the trunk on the 20th. charity beasley who picked it up and took it to the tow yard. maria kissh who sat in the back with boyfriend clint house. 11:52:18 sgt. hosey, he said he smelled something. missing child, etc., but didn't think it was sufficient to call CSI. the trash seemed like a plausible alternative. if trash is in the trunk for 3 weeks, that's probably the source of the odor. ryan oberlin, the guy who handcuffed casey. 11:53:04 yuri melich, lead detective, advised by hosey, and still did nothing. brenden fletcher, a corporal, who did not smell anything, the trunk was open. 11:53:32 adriana acevedo, said she did not smell anything. 11:53:44 i know you heard a lot of evidence about this smell in this car. 11:54:10 cindy's explanation of why she said that, and it leaves one person. and you look at all these people and give them the credibility they deserve, there is an abundance of people who didn't smell anything. 11:54:43 these people have no interest in helping Casey. 11:55:14 the state talked to you a neighbor by the name of brian burner. this is the individual, heavy set guy, came up here, testified about casey borrowing a shovel. if you think about his testimony, police told him to close his eyes and try to remember the day this all occurred. mr. burner didn't see what was done with the shovel. it was borrowed for 45 minutes, she came back and wasn't sweaty. 11:56:20 she's gonna borrow a shovel, even though there are 4-5 in their shed, and in broad daylight bury her child? 11:56:57 ashton said about burying the pets, i'll come back to that. 11:57:09 they're saying come, let's go speculate with what happened with the shovel. you can easily speculate she was doing whatver with the shovel. it was inspected by the FBI, and we brought the evidence forward, and no evidence, no dna, no soils that match the scene, no hair, so let's speculate shall we? that's not proper, not the law, and not your job. but that's what they want you to do. 11:58:12 you saw tons of testimony about the trash and garbage. i can't count how many times i brought this up to you, said take a looka t this (photo of trash). 11:58:38 this evidence was changed. this evidence was altered. whatever evidence could have been used to exculpate casey was destroyed. put into a dry room. you don't know what food was in there. you were passed a velveeta cheese with fingerprint dust on it. they want you to know who cut the cheese. 11:59:28 ashton can do his little show, say what food was in here, what spit was in here? of course you can't find anything because it was destroyed. that's not how it's supposed to be done. they should be photographing evidence, documenting it, so you can answer the questions you have. what chemical compunds could come out of it. 12:00:11 they did the air tests 6 weeks later from this. how absurd, how outrageous, how unjust could that be? 12:00:25 one thing i will point out to you is the issue with the computers. i will get into the detail of the state's, the very heart of their premeditation. i will get back to this. this evidence will so infect the quality of their case, like a cancer, you will have no choice but to enter a verdict of not guilty. 12:01:12 actually judge i think this is a good stopping point. 12:01:23 WE'RE GONNA RECESS FOR LUNCH.... JURY DISMISSED.... 12:02:27 YOU MAY BE SEATED. WE HAVE TO COMPLETE THE CHARGE CONFERENCE. SO WE CAN DO IT HERE OR YOU CAN BRING A SANDWICH AND DO IT IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM. MASON? 12:02:52 i like the idea of the sandwich i ordered. 12:03:03 OK SEE YOU IN MY CONFERENCE ROOM. =================================== 12:03:17 LUNCH RECESS =================================== ? 14:06:53 LET THE RECORD REFLECT.... 14:07:11 Baez: I do have one issue... i continue to see mr. ashton's facial expression while i do my closings. i would ask he refrain from showing gestures. 14:07:46 I CAN'T SEE MR. ASHTON, BUT WE DON'T NEED ANY FACIAL EXPRESSIONS, APPROVING, DISAPPROVING, ANYTHING ELSE. 14:08:02 WHY WE TOOK SO LONG, WE HAD TO FINISH OUR CHARGE CONFERENCE. UNFORTUNATELY, THE COURT REPORTER, WHILE WE WERE TALKING AND MUNCHING ON SANDWICHES, SHE WAS OPERATING HER STENO MACHINE, SO WE HAD TO GIVE THEM TIME TO EAT. BOTH SIDES READY TO PROCEED? yes sir. YOU'VE ONLY USED 38 MINUTES AND 24 SECONDS. (jury coming back in) 14:10:02 STATE RECOGNIZE JURY? 14:10:13 BAEZ YOU MAY CONTINUE. 14:10:18 I'd like to pick up where we left off, talking about physical evidence. i'd like to call this next phase, the state's fantsy of forensics. i'd like to start with the trunk of the car. i'm looking, we've all seen the photograph. i don't see anything that would resemble a stain of human decomp. again, this goes back to grabbing your emotions, hoping you'll see something that's not there. there's no blood in the car. Bloise said how thorough he was examining the trunk. hasn't had a car in 30 years he processed more. you heard heather siebert from FBI say even when tissue decomposes, there's still something there. they could have gotten DNA if there was something there. 14:12:10 state wants it both ways. that there's a stain when there isn't. the maggots. they want to give you all this evidence that if you stare hard enough, you'll see human decomp., or a human decomp. stain. but your emotions are riled up, you're already angry. that's not true. that's not evidence. 14:12:59 evidence would have been a DNA report. something we showed you. not even professional cleaners could get that stain out. that car was 10 years old, previous owner, etc. 14:13:36 all they want to give you is stare a little harder, and you might see it. 14:13:51 this investigation reached a level of desperation. nothing but desperation. i want to remind you that these boards have writing on them but you have to remember what was said and rely upon that. 14:14:33 dr. haskell and dr. huntington both testified, both testified about the bugs in the trunk, or in the trash bag. they both testified that the bug is just an insect that looks like something. even dr. huntington said i found a blowfly in my house, and commonly found in garbage. 14:15:37 then this testimony about towels. huntington said you can't clean this up with paper towels. 14:16:00 instead the state just gave you guess upon guess. fill in the holes. 14:16:19 huntington and haskell said it's amazing how much info you can get with the bug info. 14:17:00 just more speculation. hardest thing up here is to stand up and talk about maggots 14:17:36 so why are these allegations being made? to make up for the lack of evidence. to have you guessing, and to take that leap of faith. 14:18:10 the next point was they talked about hair. stephen shaw and karen lowe, both from FBI. i think it's fair that the FBI lab is the most advanced. 14:18:48 why did we have to call 10 FBI lab personnel to get the truth? Why is important information being withheld from you? 14:19:31 both lowe and shaw would only go so far. something very interesting happened in this case. shaw did his study. 14:20:29 trying to validate their science is not the same as science. this is not DNA. they can't say it came from a dead body. they know it. they know the science is in its ongoing phase. similar effects that mimic post mortem root banding. even the FBI analyst at the lab got these two wrong. i guess it depends who is testifying in your case. but that's not science. neither one could testify how long that hair was in that car. could have been years, months, etc. you don't know the conditions. we know it's only one hair. just one hair. 14:21:50 and how many times did we have to get karen lowe back? they went crazy trying to find more hairs to say it came from a dead body. 14:22:08 she tested hundreds of hairs and only one hair showed something that could have easily been from environmental effects. if any of these on their own... they're trying to throw everything against the wall and see what sticks. one time it was chloroform. today, it's duct tape. how can you say it's beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. 14:23:07 then we get to chloroform. when we first heard chloroform being mentioned, i thought, this has to be a joke. OBJECTION SUSTAINED 14:23:32 chloroform began in this case by dr. arpad vass. that's how this issue came up. he testified that the reason they progress is that the chloroform were SHOCKINGLY high, UNUSUALLY high. this was a shocking momment in the courtroom. he's not a chemist. i'd like to be a racecar driver, and i drive pretty fast, but that doesn't make me a race car driver. the other chemists have other conclusions. 14:24:35 the state didn't call marcus weiss. all they did was a qualitative analysis, not a quantitative analysis. that's HUGE. you can't determine how much is there, because they didn't do that kind of test. let's rely on this guy selling a sniffer machine. but the very next witness, from the FBI, a chemist, someone who is educated in that specific test, came back and said they were low levels. these machines can say what's in these air tests. 14:25:51 if you believe arpad vass, you have to believe dr. rickenbach was not telling the truth. their testimony was polar opposites. crime lab, and a research lab that does research. they're explorers. push the boundaries of science. marcus weiss wouldn't go so far, how great his buddy was, he wanted to be evasive, didn't want to answer my questions. all they want to talk about is how great his buddy was but can't say how much chloroform was in there. 14:27:09 the main compound was gasoline. they want to say the liner was removed. the air is the air. the person who collected the samples was michael sigmund, a state expert. hired by the state of florida, not the defense. he was hired by the state. the only defense expert you heard from was dr. furton. we had to call them all. had to bring them to you because the state didn't do so. why is that? is this a straight forward prosecution? wen someone's life hangs in the balance. OBJECTION OVERRULED. 14:28:34 these are things you have to consider, the lack of evidence, take a look, and wonder why these questions were not answered. 14:28:52 is that justice, a search for the truth? is that what someone deserves when they're fighting for their life? and when the truth surfaces, it hurts a lot more than a single lie. 14:29:28 now dealing with arpad vass, you heard he had a financial motive, this patent for the sniffer machine, this device he's trying to sell to law enforcement. a guy in greece agreed with him. we didn't see anyone from greece testify here. the only other person who did this research was dr. furton. he testified there was no chemical aspect of decomposition yet. and this man will be much more willing to take the leap of faith. 14:30:36 some of his designs and work is great, excellent, groundbreaking. but that doesn't make it science, doesn't make it true. he said you can take a coat hangar, find a hidden grave with it. you can find a clandestine grave with it and it's actual science. this is the kind of nonsense, the stretchiing of the science. maybe one day he'll be able to sell hangars and patent that idea. the desperation the prosecution will take it to. 14:32:02 they couldn't find a single link from casey to caylee's death. yet they want to create things for the cameras? for the high profile case? no matter the case? OBJECTION, counsel violating court's order derogatory comments, SUSTAINED. 14:32:42 now i want to take you to what i think the evidence showed in this case when it reached the most outrageous level. the computer searches. the state of florida took this approach. this gentleman, stenger, using software called net analysis. did a report, it came out, it was on the main issue in this case, the chloroform. they were looking for chloroform and they got it. 14:33:42 it came up with the sci spot site and there was one visit. just one. he gets cacheback software later, can't get it to work, calls guy from canada and says he can't get it to work. he stayed 3 nights trying to get it to work, they come back with 84 searches for chloroform. 14:34:31 now what's odd, when i saw that, it was a jaw dropping moment for me, and in this court room because i know i couldn't have missed that. i went back, i looked back, and we realized that the net analysis report... this man not only testified falsely about what was there, but he testified about someone else's report, kevin stenger. i asked him, he said it's not my report, and i asked him if he could testify intelligently about anything in the report, and he said no. 14:35:34 state exhibit 166 was done friday june 3, 2011. you'd already been jurors in this case. the state calls this man after the report was made in 2008 after using established software. this is a fraud. this is trying to pull a fast one. OBJECTION, SUSTAINED, MOTION TO STRIKE GRANTED. 14:36:38 you're being asked to take someone's life and this is the type of evidence you're given. i suspect when prosecution gets back up, they'll tell you should rely on the lower number, because this is the true number, because of the progression we showed you. 84 times was myspace. myspace was 2 levels up. not even on this report. how did that get missed? i called the man who wrote the report, we called him to expose it to you. 14:37:34 when the defense has no burden, why do we haev to call police officers to bring the truth to light. this is outrageous. and you will see in defense exhibit 45 the progression of when someone typed in myspace 84 times, 83, 82. you see no such thing. this is their murder case. 14:38:24 ashton says we can only hope they issued the chloroform beforehand. they're hoping they'll get a conviction now? that they'll use chloroform? you're supposed to show things beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. you're not supposed to hope. this junk that doesn't even work. why didn't this creator issue a report? He's in canada now. no one will prosecute him for perjury. this is a police officer who works here and he didn't say a word about this report until we called him that showed there were no such searches for chloroform. it was 3 minutes of time, 3 months earlier, and has all to do with the myspace posting of ricardo morales. 14:40:08 you heard evidence that ricardo morales posted this on his myspace at the exact time he was dating casey anthony. also said he was posting this in march, when these searches were. 14:40:50 if you don't know what chloroform is, it's not reasonable for a young woman to see what's posting on her boyfriend's wall. then there comes the issue of cindy anthony. we all knew in 2009 cindy testified to doing these searches. that was something you needed to hear. FLorida decided to spend their entire rebuttal case proving she's a liar. i told you she's a liar the first day, i said the whole family lies. 14:42:00 one thing you can't deny is that myspace comes right before the chloroform searches. 14:42:18 drane burdick said 84 times you searched for chlorophyll? 84 times? when this report was in existence. how could they do that? how is that truth? that's why you have more questions than answers. why situations like fantasy searches, fantasy forensics, fantasy stickers, fantasy stains, nothing... but she's a liar and a slut. convict her on that. 14:43:15 she made some stupid decisions but let's make her pay with her life. it's out of control, and has been out of control since this trial began. it's out of control. it's true, casey made some bad decisions and started this, but it doesn't have to be continued, doesn't have to end this way. the truth stops here, truth starts here. the nonsense stops right now. it should have stopped when y'all raised your hands and said you'd be jurors. 14:44:13 this is what they want to raise a verdict. this is sufficient reasonable doubt ladies and gentlemen, that i don't trust this evidence. i can reject part of it, or the whole thing. there's an old legal adage that says if you buy a meal and you find a bug in your meal, you send it back, you don't take it out. something as serious as your health, you don't make decisions like that. when you make that decisions in the jury room, it is irrevocable. you can never take it back. can never say, can i change my mind. can i take that back. no. it's done. 14:45:35 these types of decisions of reasonable doubt, this is why we haev that standard. if this were a financial sheet, and you had your entire life savings, i'm going to invest with this man because he's giving me great numbers... OBJECTION SUSTAINED, MOTION TO STRIKE GRANTED 14:46:10 these decisions are life changing, unchangeable decisions. this type of evidence is reasonable doubt. the stain is reasonable doubt. it's all reasonable doubt. and here's the thing: if you don't know what happened, that's it. if it wasn't proven to you that it happened, that's it. it's over. only the ones proven to you beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt comes back. 14:47:05 it works the same as it does for john, for jane, for casey. those are the laws we have chosen. equal justice under the law. the law is your guide here. not me, ashton, drane burdick. the law. 14:47:41 we will not accept anything less. 14:48:03 the fantasies continue with the heart sticker. where did this come from? this is outrageous. a young, eager, FBI analyst sees something on the duct tape, something like the outline of a heart appears in the corner. they then recover 30 feet away, mr. murdoch, we called him to show you how far away this was found. this looks nothing like the stickers that were found in the home, and this child had all kinds of stickers in the home. there were mickey mouse stickers, a scrap book used by casey to document child's life. this thing found in an area where trash is dumped, 30 feet away, across the street from an elementary school, how crazy is it that you'll find a sticker attached to cardboard, not duct tape. 14:49:48 state said wouldn't you agree that this area was a trash dump? playing on your emotions again. why did they hide her from you? why did the defense have to call gottesman. she used to VSC machine. document examiner for FBI. she saw no sticker or sticker fragments on any of the items. none. it didn't exist. it has nothing to do with this case. this has nothing to do with this case. but if you rely on your anger, your frustration, your desire for blood, maybe you can make this square stick fit in this round hole. this is the quality of their case, of the evidence. 14:51:24 arrest her within 24 hours, we'll get the evidence later. she was arrested for child neglect within 24 hours. ok bring that car over there now, forget those cops there, to me it smells like a dead body, today it smells like a dead body. let's get rid of the trash, because we don't want anyone to think it's trash. OBJECTION, VIOLATION OF PARAGRAPH 5. BAEZ: it's not a violation. SUSTAINED. 14:52:22 what about the beer bottles found next to the sticker? why weren't they presented. maybe we can dust those for fingerprints and see who the killer was. it's far away, why not? that's the kind of evidence you have to rely on. 14:52:56 then we come to Dr. Jan Garavaglia, the medical examiner. she told you she did an autopsy on the remains. this child had no broken bones, no prior trauma, no trauma at all, and sent all the toxicology exams she could to make this case fit, and they all came back negative. the tests for chloroform, for xanax, all negative. cause of death, unknown. that's where the science ends. how did caylee die? 14:54:29 these are her 3 reasons... the disappearance was not reported immediately. the body found in a wooded area. these were opinions that had nothing to do with being a doctor. anybody on a bike could say the same thing. this is not science. the science she used is straight up. they can't establish the cause of death. everything they suspected, and hoped for, was not there. 14:55:31 you remember, yuri melich testified we did 3 search warrants on that house, no printer paper, no receipts for chloroform, no purchases, no chemistry kits, no containers for making chloroform, no ingredients for making chloroform. but they're hoping, they're hoping. let's hope 14:56:10 dr. g gives you this. if that wasn't enough, you had dr. schulz, whose real purpose was to tell you and to get you more angry about how her remains were treated afterwards. mr. fantasy man, dr. warren, who for some reason, showed you a video of a smiling casey and caylee with some duct tape that he got off the internet. got on google, put the duct tape on a photo, with photoshop. there ya go, that's how she died. the only reason i did that is to show it could happen. 14:57:23 she could have been shot, but there's no video of her being shot. it could have been any number of ways. he was up there being an advocate not a scientist. he was up there for 1 reason and 1 reason only. 14:57:51 dr. schulz did't have the same opinion, she said it was homicide, he didn't have an opinion on any one. he was the first medical examiner, fully certified, but she's the big shot, comes into town and takes over, because of her relationship with law enforcement and the media. the politics played out in the medical examiners case, and you got to see it with these two. we were fortunate enogh to have one of the most experienced medical examiners, dr. werner spitz. 14:58:59 they can say all they want, but if dr. spitz had not found anything that would be nothing. but he found physical proof that the remains were not found the way the photos show and the way they want you to think. the semantics of whether it was dirt or brain matter... the man who has 60,000 autopsies under his belt, and the man our country turned to with JFK and MLK, i think his qualifications. OBJECTION SUSTAINED 15:00:15 you can ask if he's more qualified than Dr. G. and he is. what mr. ashton tried to question him is not on the science, but on the facts. how many police reports did he read? but the reports are not the science. this is a man of science who did a complete autopsy to see what could have happened to caylee. he did have 1 important finding. 15:01:09 he told you, when you open up a skull, and someone dies of suffocation, there is a discoloration in the back of the ears. it's not always there, but it wasn't there in this case. so that eliminates another theory of the state. 15:01:47 why not open the skull if you're looking for the truth. there was something there that could help you that could explain to you that it's not the way they say it is. you have to ignore that completely with the duct tape theory. 15:02:18 how could someone put the duct tape on there. you also saw the photos of the duct tape laying on the ground. 15:03:03 initially you might say that's a leap. i can't believe evidence would be manipulated in that way. is there evidence of it? i won't go that far. but it's certainly a possibility. and if we're going to entertain other fantasy, you can certainly entertain that. we think you need to actually rely on true physical evidence. something you can see and look at, and know what's true or not. not some fantasy. 15:03:54 i'd like to talk about the defense case a bit. 15:04:32 the judge will say the defense is not required to prove anything. it's a constitutional guarantee afforded to every citizen. no matter what our position, we share this inalienable right. this is a right of ours. despite any overtures that we must do so, it's completely untrue. 15:05:22 casey reacts the way she does and lies because of the environment she was grown up in. the secrets and the lies. i told you about this photo, i showed it to you in opening. you heard it testified to numerous times. george said she looked this way because she was working out a lot. cindy said the opposite and said it was sedentary. asked her to turn to the side i can't see. i don't think you can believe they didn't know she was pregnant. 15:06:21 i don't think you can deny lee's powerful testimony the only member of the family who was not impeached was lee anthony. i confronted my mother about it, and told to let it go. you saw how hurt he was, the bizareness of that whole situation. you heard about it. the lies that were testified to on this witness stand, they took an oath. no one has the right to violate that oath. 15:07:31 you heard all these stories of what cindy said, but by the end of the case, they're impeaching her. but please believe what she said for us. believe her when it's convenient for us, but don't believe her for others. that's not truth, and that's not what you render a just verdict on. Casey has issues. and these issues were there long before caylee was ever born and long before june 16, 2008. 15:08:43 i want to show you the world casey anthony lived in, you heard testimony in this case. you remember her imaginary friends. you had zanny the nanny from 2006. perfect 10, dated jeff hopkins, how much amazement mr. ashton found in how she remembered these things. black hair, straight teeth, drives ford focus, family is wealthy, comes from miami. jeff hopkins the trust fund baby, also appeared in 2006. couple years older than casey. had child named zach. 15:09:55 anthonys invite him over for BBQs and never showed up. zach hopkins who played with caylee. samantha fernandez, gloria fernandez her mother. i asked, about her having heart issues. juliet issues, zanny's roommate. cindy testifying that she and casey sat in the parking lot of universal studios for an hour and a half waiting for juliet lewis to appear. an hour and a half talking about this girl who will never show up. an hour and a half! that's like going to the movies and waiting. she never appeared. 15:11:13 this has nothing to do with caylee's death. something much, something that doesn't add up. something's just not right. this is the world that casey lived in, and juliet had a daughter named annabelle. cindy knew about her, caylee's playmate. you heard about raquel pharrell. another roommate of zanny's. she worked at universal too. eric baker who could have been cayle's father, but he died in a car accident. 15:12:07 her fictional bosses, tom manley, thomas frank, at extension 104 at universal studioes. her office that does not exist. her office she took police officers down the hallway and couldn't go any further. at that moment, the police should have seen and realized, there's something wrong with this girl. this is not just someone lying to cover up a crime. we need to handle this investigation in a different matter. if you found a drunk guy on the street who just lost his job, staggering all over the place, you don't treat him the same way.....you realize as a cop you must be a professional and deal with people who have issues, and those who do not. 15:13:33 all the signs were there. everythign was there. everythign she was saying didn't add up. ashton says she did get a chance to carry this on or take off. she had plenty of opportunity to hop on a plane and go. you will never see your granddaughter again, and be done with it. those are actions of guilt. actions of someone fleeing the jurisdiction. people at work didn't just stop asking for caylee. this world here, you wonder why this case got so crazy. 15:14:36 and you look at the situation here, the facts, the world casey lives in, and you realize that if a person lives in this kind of world, these facts make more sense. this coverup makes more sense. these unhealthy coping skills make more sense. if you're a healthy person, you can grieve and get some semblance of life. but if you have issues, if you don't have a healthy environment you live in, it can go to all sorts of extremes, which includes dancing, lying, fantasy. all she was doing was continuing what she knew best. 15:15:46 where she felt safe. remember melich? she went somewhere where she felt safe. that speaks volumes in this case. i'm not proud of the way she behaved. i don't think anyone can justify her actions, but they do not constitute murder. you can understand where it all comes from. as opposed to the state's theory, where she's a loving wonderful mother one day, then monday afternoon i want to party. even though there's no party to go to. tony lazzzarro liked caylee. when you look at it from this persepctive you understand it's nonsense. it's not right, but it makes sense. she now wants her freedom? that's how you do it, you kill somebody? that's outrageous. no one's going to come looking for caylee? that's nonsense. she had no motive. casey treated caylee well. she loved that child, and not a single person, despite every resource, every person, no one could say casey was a horrible mother. i saw her do this, do that. 15:18:16 you heard tony, the guy who enjoyed her being around. remember he said caylee was running to the pool and casey had to run and stop her. everywhere you look there are signs of what happened to caylee. 15:18:43 caylee loved the pool and on that occassion she stopped her from drowning that day...but that's all you heard that casey was nothing but a good mother, despite their best efforts to parade her friends and shot girls....they all said the same thing about casey. she was a nice person, treated me with respect, etc. 15:19:22 this is not consistent with a person who is a murderer, a child abuser, a manslaughter. the reason it doesn't make sense is that it's not true. it's an unprovable case because it's not true. despite all the efforts they tried, they can't give you the answers because it's not true. 15:20:14 dealing with caylee in the swimming pool... you heard the evidence in this case. 15:20:32 cindy and caylee went swimming the night before, on june 15. i said i don't know if cindy will admit to leaving the ladder up. she said she took it down. but thanks to the state of florida, we got to see how truthful cindy is. how much guilt would she have knowing she was the one who left the ladder up that day. the denial she'd have 6 months later when she thought caylee was still alive. they had a memorial, televised it, and cremated her, and she comes in here 2 years later and says i think caylee's still alive. 15:21:41 i understand why she said she took the ladder down that day. but what's important is you remember that door. this house had no safety locks, no child safety locks, and caylee could easily open the door. if she could do that, if they were that neglectful, you could see how the ladder would be brought down. sometimes, sometimes not. 15:22:20 now, you hear, you heard cindy say on the 17th of june, she goes to work and tells people, someone's swimming in my pool. why would she do that? that's odd to tell coworkers. what are the coincidences, go in the 17th, and talk about the day caylee dies, and says, someone was in my pool yesterday. and this happened long before the police were called. this is not a fact you can ignore. you heard both george and cindy talk about how she could get out of the house very easily. 15:23:38 we showed proof of that which is evidence. 15:23:46 you heard george say caylee would wake him up and say joe joe swim. this is a child who loved to swim. she could get out easily, and one day when she's not being watched, something happened. 15:24:23 caylee reported missing july 15th. within 24 hours, cindy tells detective melich about the swimming pool. you remember that. melich said he was getting calls during universal inquisition with Casey, he left the room because cindy was calling left and right, desperately, and cindy told him about the ladder and the swimming pool. the shocking thing, you may all remember she said we know what happened, and say tell me about the swimming pool, but he never did that, never pursued that. didn't want to consider something was wrong with that girl. they had a murder case and that's all they were interested in. there's nothing sexy about a drowning. 15:26:00 nothing interesting about a drowning. they didn't care. 15:26:09 now we were able to uncover something that was highly unusual. and that was finding a photo of caylee opening that sliding glass door. most parents have hundreds of pictures of their kids, but how rare is it that you'd haveone of her opening a door? this child was constantly photographed, loved, etc. 15:27:02 there's the proof, that she was big enough, smart enough. you can't get better than that than a video of what happened. we were able to find photographs of a year earlier, of how easily caylee could get up the ladder. what's so odd is you can see... every little moment, captured. look how soft cindy is holding her. she's on her own. look at what caylee is doing. she's diving into that water. this is what she loved to do. 15:28:10 this is what she wanted to do all the time. this photograph, tell the truth. they are documented moments in time that do not lie and clearly show that there is a reasonable hypothesis of innocence. if there are no child locks, and you had the incident with the ladder the night before, it is sufficiently reasonable that she could have died in the pool. 15:29:03 the state cannot rebut this. they can say all they want about the chloroform and duct tape, but the issue is how did she die. we're back to that one question. how did she die? where did she die? did they present 1 piece of evidence where caylee was when she passed away. where did she die? why? because she wants to go party? 15:29:51 it's impossible. this case if you look at the law, and you look at the facts, it's relatively easy to decide. it's a tough decision to make but factually it all makes sense. this is the only explanation that makes sense. as i said in the beginning, it's the uniqueness of who it happened to. these people are different. this girl is different. and this is why she behaved in this way. and this is the only rationale explanation of all this madness because this is what happened to caylee. the moment the state failed to rebut this, and they did, because they had no evidence. dr. g. said cause of death unknown. 15:31:22 they do not have the right to overcharge her with murder, manslaughter, or child abuse, when there is no evidence of it. improper disposal of a body, these crimes are not in front of you. the ultimate penalty, and i think you know why. we've lost our senses here. 15:32:06 i want to talk about the duct tape now. 15:32:22 it's strange how you'd have 1 piece of evidence that can tell you so much. actually 2 pieces. that say so mcuh that you get a clear answer from george about the duct tape on the cans. you can ask why he made certain statements. you recall linda tinelli, the woman who said george used duct tape, he brought it to the command center. i'd like to reshow you this video before we go any further. 15:33:31 (local 6 video of george at command center, showing the roll of duct tape in the back) 15:34:03 look at that duct tape, right there, almost the whole roll. mr. ashton was correct in saying this is rare duct tape. very little quantities. probably never seen it with a logo on it, it's always gray and silver. 10 seconds after playing this video, george took the stand. i said where did that tape come from? he said i don't know, lots of people at command center, could have been anyone's. he wouldn't even admit it was his roll. denied it. even denied where the roll was. he said it wasn't there, it was at another place. 15:35:22 he can't lie at all, can't tell the truth at all. wants to pass it off to someone else. we had this issue with this photo. i'll bet you remember when i cross examined him on this. it was the state's case. the photo was not in evidence. they state did not use him to enter it into evidence. so when i cross examined him, i was shut down. OBJECTION SUSTAINED, MOTION TO STRIKE GRANTED. 15:36:15 he was not cross examined on this subject. he said that photo you showed me, i was shown others, it's a different gas can. then when it was our case, and the photo was now in evidence, and i showed him his deposition transcripts, looked at exhibits, he said yeah, that's the one i was shown. but he said under oath, that's the one. this is not a game. he lied to you about this gas can. george lies when it's convenient for him. he lied to mr. ashton when he was taking his deposition. you may recall during mr. ashton's cross examination, he said remember we sparred during the deposition, and i impeached him on this testimony, where ashton said, so it's your testimony now when they took it on august 1, it didnt' have duct tape on the vent. 15:38:11 and i didn't put it on there, but isn't your testimony here under oath, that you have a specific recollection that when the cops took this from your home, it was not on the can? it was not on the can. it was not on. LYING! 15:38:46 here's the photo. august 1, 2008. the duct tape is on there. but when asked by ashton, it's not on there. the cops must have planted it. why is he lying about the duct tape? He knows he's the only one connected to the duct tape. he knows he's caught on tape by the media that the roll is his. and cindy said he was the only one who had a roll of duct tape. why is he reporting the gas can missing? why is it important to him? 15:39:44 the only direct link to caylee, to her remains, is the duct tape. the only one it connects to is George, if this is their murder weapon, as they claim. they can't hide behind the duct tape. it only connects to him. she's been in jail for 2-3 weeks. look at these facts, look at these events. the 24th, he issues a report. he doesn't say a word about this alleged argument, here's your fucking gas cans. 15:40:45 on the 17th, a detective goes to check out the gas cans, doesn't mention anything about the fight with casey. not until august 1 that he tells them about it. they take this photo, then first week of august, photographed by media, all duct tape is the same. we're not talking fantasy forensics anymore. cold hard evidence that points to one person and one person only. he can lie all he wants, depending on if it's this laughing guy right here... OBJECTION SUSTAINED, APPROACH!! SIDEBAR... ? ======================= 15:45:58 RECESS... ======================= 16:11:45 LET THE RECORD REFLECT... 16:11:51 DURING THIS RECESS I VIEWED THE VIDEO OF THE SEGMENT THAT MR. BAEZ WAS TALKING AND MR. ASHTON'S REACTION, AND MR. BAEZ'S CORRESPONDING RESPONSE. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THAT RESPONSE ON BEHALF OF MR. ASHTON AND MR. BAEZ VIOLATES THIS COURT'S ORDER. NOW IF BOTH SIDES WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE TIME TO GO LOOK AT IT, I WILL ASK THEM TO PULL IT UP AND YOU CAN LOOK AT IT. THEN I WILL PROCEED TO DO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO. WOULD EITHER STATE OR DEFENSE LIKE TO VIEW THE VIDEO CLIP? UNFORTUNATELY THE VIDEO SOMETIMES SHORT, OR SHOW IT THE WAY IT IS. 16:13:31 IT'S BRIEF ENOUGH, I WILL ASK MS. LEVY AND INSESSION, MS LEVY FIND A PLACE WHERE THEY CAN GO SEE IT, AND BRING IT UP. THIS COURT WILL BE AT EASE UNTIL THE PARTIES GET A CHANCE TO SEE IT. ============= RECESS...... ============= 16:15:47 THERE WILL BE NO MORE SIDEBARS FOLKS, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY, SAY IT IN OPEN COURT. 16:16:03 LINDA: (can't hear her) 16:16:13 I HAVE CONSTANTLY TOLD BOTH SIDES WHEN I FIRST TOOK OVER THIS CASE, I PERSONALLY GAVE YOU THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURTROOM DECORUM POLICY. HAS BEEN IN PLACE, I SIGNED IT IN 2003. ITEM 12, COUNSEL SHALL ADMONISH ALL PEOPLE WHO GIVE FACIAL EXPRESSIONS, ETC., AS MANIFESTATIONS OF APPROVAL/DISAPPROVAL ARE STRICTLY PROHIBITED. THERE HAVE BEEN ACCUSATIONS BACK AND FORTH. I SPEND VERY LITTLE TIME WATCHING THE ATTORNEYS. I ASSUME YOU ARE ALL PROFESSIONALS, THAT I DON'T HAVE TO WATCH. YOU ARE ALL CHARGED WITH FOLLOWING THE LAW, SO MAYBE I AM MISINFORMED WHEN YOU WILL FOLLOW THE LAW. BUT I'M BEGINNING TO SEE THAT ORDERS OR ANYTHING ELSE MAY NOT MEAN A HILL OF A BEAN TO ANY OF YOU. SO GO LOOK AT IT, AND I'M GOING TO GO DO WHAT I NEED TO DO. 16:18:10 ASHTON: i trust your judgment on whatever you saw. 16:18:37 MASON, YOU WANT TO SEE IT? MS. BURDICK YOU WANT TO SEE IT? 16:18:52 (can't hear mason since he mumbles) 16:25:11 OK COURT WILL COME TO ORDER, HAVE BOTH SIDES SEEN IT? Yes. ANYTING STATE WANTS TO SEE? 16:25:27 I appear to be smiling behind my hand. I wasn't laughing, not nodding, doing what I could to make sure my expression was not seen by jury. if i violated court order, i apologize. DEFENSE? 16:26:02 i have no other comments that i would not request that mr. ashton not be held in contempt. i think this case has been highly emotional. i just request that it stop because the serious nature of this point on. i also apologize for making those same comments. after 3 years of working with mr. ashton, i do not wish that upon him. i as well have my apologies to the court? 16:26:55 ANYTHING ELSE? I WILL ACCEPT THAT FOR NOW BUT AS I TOLD BOTH SIDES, IF IT HAPPENS AGAIN, THE REMEDY WILL BE EXCLUSION OF THAT ATTORNEY FROM FURTHER PARTICIPATION FROM THESE PROCEEDINGS. AS I TOLD YOU AT THE BENCH, THERE ARE AT LEAST 3 ATTORNEYS ON THE STATE SIDE. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER MR. GEORGE WAS GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN CLOSINGS OR NOT, BUT IT WOULD BE HIM OR LINDA. ON DEFEENSE, IT WOULD BE MASON, OR SIMMS, OR ANYONE ELSE. ALONG WITH OTHER THINGS THAT ARE QUITE UNPLEASANT. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. 16:28:24 I WILL INSTRUCT JURY IN THE MORNING. I WILL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT. I TOOK Y'ALL WORD THAT Y'ALL WOULD AGREE, THOUGHT 30 MINUTES WAS ENOUGH. WHEN WE FINISH CLOSINGS, WE WILL STAY HERE TO GET THESE CHARGES. JUST ABOUT DONE. ALRIGHT LET'S RETURN THE JURY. (JURY RETURNS TO ROOM) 16:30:04 STATE RECOGNIZE PRESENCE OF JURY? DEFENSE? MR BAEZ PLEASE CONTINUE SIR. 16:30:18 as laid out in this trial, this duct tape only points to one person. there's some issues here. some things just do not add up. some things you learned at the end of the defense case, the way the anthony family buried their pets. it's odd, it's different. except george had a little amnesia again. who does all the work, all the burying, seems to forget, but cindy and lee seem to remember. why in rebuttal did we not dig up that backyard? why did george never tell police about the way they buried their pets? 3 years go by and there's no mention of it. 16:32:03 you recall seeing... which would be the top portion of the top of the bag. any number of scenarios that could have happened in 6 months. like the state found out, one was under muck, that can move, but duct tape cant? it's not reasonable to accept the constant lies. now, i told you from the very beginning, i'm in no way nor suggesting that george killed caylee. no evidence of that. no evidence of any murder in this case. that's been our position from the very beginning. 16:33:18 this was an accident that snowballed out of control. whatever happened afterwards had nothing to do with the crimes charged. mr. anthony has on numerous occassions had the opportunity to tell the truth about these items. but given every opportunity, he lied. he was impeached during depositions, he was impeached here, he played games with the photograph, he danced around the truth. there's one thing you can see inside george anthony. 16:34:16 this man doesn't have an ounce of paternal instinct in him. got here on numerous occasions and with an ounce of joy testified against his daughter. i don't know a man in the world who would not fall on the sword for his daughter. even cindy tried, and you saw that. lee was resistent. you didn't see an ounce of that from george. george cares about george. those are not actions from a father. he didn't act like a father once. there were times he even smiled, thought it was funny to spar with me. and there were times when he broke down and showed displays of affections. but those displays are not genuine. 16:35:44 we had this lady (crystal holloway) talk about his affections. she said she had a tumor. it's not a tumor. she's still alive, 3 years later! he went to her apartment at night to console her? he's got a woman at home who needed consoling. cindy needed consoling. he wasn't consoling her, he was consoling HER. one thing is certain. holloway kept the relationship private until the police came calling. she didn't expose george anthony. she knew there was a guard at the gate, couldn't get around, couldn't deny being in her apartment. he was going to her apartment to console her for a fantasy brain tumor that didn't exist. he lied to you. i'm just being a nice guy. 16:37:36 george cares about george. not his wife, not his family. himself. that's what this is about. it's all about himself. it's a self-serving, self-preservation document. his relationship with his mistress is over. cops coming around too often with search warrants. they collect that gas can again after returning it. the can with the duct tape that he can't seem to tell the truth about. they're asking questions. getting his fingerprints. the walls are getting closer and closer to george and what does he do? gets a 6 pack of beer with blood pressure medication and tries to commit suicide. 16:38:59 he had a gun. the only reason he had a gun was to get casey back in jail knowing there couldn't be any firearms in the house. this is a police officer, he knew the rules. he didn't care. george cares about george. if he wanted to kill himself he could have, and it would have taken more than blood pressure meds and a 6 pack. 16:40:07 you saw the text message he sent ms holloway. i need you in my life. him and cindy, doesn't write them a i need you in my life. cindy's not going to her apartment at night. cindy wasn't consoling her. but he was. and before any of this, he goes up and denies saying this was an accident that snowballed out of control. he's telling her she's dead, and showing another face to the public, to the media. within 48 hours of his so called suicide, he's in front of the cameras again. 16:41:10 if there's one thing you've learned about this family, they don't mind putting on another face. lies are what pumps and what lives in this family, and i told you that from the beginning. she was raised that way, and raised to lie. is it a surprise she's got this fantasy world, a surprise she turned out this way? 16:41:55 fortunately they kept coming back on the stand and you got to see them different days, different ways. but they swore to tell the truth, and they lied. now as their own daughter stands trial for her life, you're supposed to believe that, to rely on it. 16:42:33 how is it that they didn't get his cell phone activity during that time. how is it that they can't tell us the comings and goings of that. we have the most advanced technology available to us, if we don't use it, if you don't look for something, you're not going to find it. that's not justice, especially when you're pouring everything you can into one person and not looking elsewhere. they shoudlnt' have been walking around with blinders. if they had, they'd haev seen what was going on here. the truth wasn't really the truth, and there was more to the lies. 16:43:48 you heard dominic casey and jim hoover take the stand. you may recall both of these were private investigators working for anthonys. and you saw a video of where they searched in november. you may recall dominic casey was the one who provided us with comical relief. a strange man to say the least. his partner jim hoover, when they searched off suburban drive. not only searched, but videotaped. for the first time, they were looking for a dead caylee, and mr. casey says, it was a psychic who sent me out there. a psychic introduced to him from cindy. and cindy denied sending him to the woods. george said once i saw that video, he never went and asked dominic anything about it? this is his private investigator and never asks him. 16:45:52 showed the e-mail from dominic casey. i asked him, did you know orlandos 101 sq. miles, and out of it, this is the spot they searched. and it's circled. yuri melich circled where caylee was found. that's where they searched. you heard yuri melich say cindy had her people walk that area. then cindy denied it. then yuri melich impeached her. why is she lying? 16:46:53 then you heard lee anthony impeach his mother 30 seconds later. it angered him so much because they were looking for a live caylee then looked for a dead caylee. we had enough, we got in an argument, i confronted her. a young man talking about his mother. impeaching her 30 seconds after she got off the stand. they knew where she was, she was in jail. they were out there searching. 16:47:48 what are the odds they'd search the same spot where she was found one month later. how odd is that? is that a coincidence? is this a coincidence too? is this a coincidence too? Add them all together, you've got something very suspicious going on. and it has absolutely nothing to do with casey. so where is the truth in this? 16:48:39 it's not in the forensics. it's not in the testimony. and these are the state's star witnesses, which one of them they had to impeach in the end of their trial. 16:49:06 and remember, caylee found with no socks and shoes, one fact that's consistent with the pool. she was at home when she died. they didn't recover any socks or shoes at suburban drive. find any socks or shoes? she was wearing shorts that didn't fit anymore. she had pullups on. hadn't worn those clothes in a long time. things are just not adding up here. things just don't make sense. it's so difficult to find the truth, then this case is not proven, and there's reasonable doubt. remember i said reasonable doubt lives here, it's throughout the case. 16:50:30 you can't trust this evidence. you can't. 16:50:45 when the state rested its case, we had no burden and could have closed up shop there. you didn't have enough info. you didn't hear from 2 people from the FBI. tested for all club drugs and found none. state wants to talk about its meaningless when they don't find it. wouldn't have been meaningless if they did find drugs. 16:51:39 other items throughout the case. (names a bunch of people). who went and got every single pair of her clothes and found no soil from the scene on her shoes. 16:52:10 (continues naming people). 10 different state experts we had to call so you could get all the evidence. so you could see that evidence either inculpates someone or exculpates someone. the reason they couldn't prove this case is because it isn't true. look at all these... 16:53:05 look at all the tests they ran. no fingerprints on the duct tape at the scene or on the gas can. no fingerprints on duct tape at scene. no fingerprints on laundry bag. no dna on duct tape. if it suffocated here, why is there no DNA? Degradation? that's not enough. two experts testified, the fbi searched for this, found nothing. that 17 marker excludes casey and excludes caylee. if caylee had decomposed all over that duct tape there would be cell evidence. 20-30 years later we solve cases. 6 months, we can't solve a case? 16:54:51 no DNA on the paper towels, no DNA in trunk. no blood in trunk. no sticker near scene. no chloroform in the bones, they did all kinds of tests, nothing to match their case, nothing that adds to their hopes. remember what they called it. 16:55:30 their air tests,their chloroform, no qualitative exam. negative negative negative... 16:55:44 no prescription or over the counter or illicit drugs in the bones. soil examinations, shovel. everything came back negative. the greatest crime lab in our country found nothing. she's dumb enough to leave her child 19 feet outside, but smart enough to outsmart the greatest crime lab in the country. 16:57:09 talking about maggots and bugs in car. and remember that paper towel had marijuana on it. how ridiculous can you get. no discloration inside the skull. 16:57:40 you'd be hard pressed. we were fortunate to have someone as qualified as he was to come testify about this issue. if someone dies of suffocation you'd have that. no trauma, no fractures. no prior injuries. no cause of death. 16:58:14 it adds up to one thing. if you look at all the evidence, it adds up to one thing. and that is, she died by an accident. this was an accident that snowballed out of control. 16:58:39 now again, the defense has no burden. we didn't have to call these people. in the presentation you got from prosecution, it included this person, this person... (friends of casey). 16:59:11 i'd be willing to bet most of you don't even remember them, but they failed to call this person. (roy kronk) 16:59:28 do you remember what these people talked about? But the person who found the body, they never called him. OBJECTION, SUSTAINED... 16:59:50 defense called roy kronk to show you there were very suspicious circumstances regarding his discovery. we never suggested that he had anything to do with casey's death. we never said he packed up her remains and took them home. there's one thing we did say, and uncontroverted. he knew where she was and had control of that for at least 4 months. 17:00:32 this is what i showed you at the beginning of the trial, and this is what actually came out. at 1 pm he's there w/ coworkers on aug. 11. hey i think i see a skull here. but they're distracted by the snake. never says a word about it to coworkers again. calls 911 at 4:28 in afternoon. tells them i see something round and white. they don't find anything. so he calls again. on 8/12. gives even more comprehensive description. you have the 911 calls you heard them. 17:01:46 he says there was a tree there that looked like someone had cut it. if he's 30-40 feet away, how would he know so much detail. 17:02:07 there was a white board hanging over it. there was no white board recovered. this i may submit is a marker. 17:02:31 how heavy is this tree? too heavy for someone who weighs 105 soaking wet? or a man who weights 250, who's 6'2". 17:02:58 from the side of the road for 6 months, there is this white board, no one finds/photographs for 6 months. where'd it go? who moved it? not casey. she was under house arrest. someone moved that white board, and someone moved that tree. at the very least, you must reject whatever was found there, the conditions of which it was found. as all CSI say, you never get a second chance at a crime scene. it cannot be contaminated, it cannot be staged. 17:04:06 it's pointless. you must reject it. that's what happened there. deputy kane comes out to see where the bag of bones are. they didn't find it. she was not found on august 13. all kronk could say was it's 19 feet away from the street. as mr. murdoch said, there was 6.5 feet of grass. if you're that close, how can you not say it's THERE, it's right there! 17:05:07 no the cop was rude to me. why not grab the bag and go down the street to the media and say "i found it, i got a story for you". why not point it out? 17:05:30 something is wrong here. something very shady, and 255 thousand dollars is a motivation for someone. i asked about the award, i said i won the lottery, he said all these things. he also called his son in november. you heard his son say, my dad told me he found caylee. brandon sparks had no reason to come here and lie to you, to testify against his father. he wanted to have a relationship with his father. 17:06:25 they were estranged and they were trying to build that. he completely impeached his father's testimony. roy kronk also impeached himself. 17:06:46 when he's urinating the second time, he find her remains. told the cops he lifted the bag up 4 feet off teh ground, and the skull dropped out. that's not consistent with what the cops found. he said it, i changed my story. what's glaring and missing here is on the 11th, so do you have anything else you want to add, he doesn't say YES i called you 4 times 4 months ago, and you never came, etc. 17:07:49 they've got those previous crime line tips, my story is different, i better play ball. the skull didn't drop out, it was there. now i submit to you, how can you trust this. how can you trust anything at that scene if it's staged. any of it? we know by dr. spitz has proven that it was not as they found it. we have kronk lying about the skull rolling out. and in august, he's talking about a skull, yet on dec. 11, it drops out of the bag. well who put the skull back in the bag? it's back in his sworn statements. they are etched in time, there's nothing that can be done. you know now those remains were hidden. 17:09:18 this man is lying. how can you rely on any of this evidence. in your deliberation you cannot trust this evidence. you just can't. there's somethign not right here. reasonable doubt is living in this case, and right down to where they found her. 17:09:52 if it weren't for defense finding brandon sparks, his own son, you wouldn't haev had that information. if we didn't get kronk, you wouldn't hear that info. 17:10:15 when trying to make the decision to take someone's life. for murder, agg. child abuse, manslaugther. you'd haev none of this info, and it's clearly critical. 17:10:56 we keep getting back to that one central question, and that is how she died. now as you sit here, you must certainly have more questions than answers. and the judge will intruct you on what the law is and how it must be proven. and there's no way in looking at all these circumstances you can say it's beyond a reasonable doubt. 17:11:43 it started wtih part of the coverup, and the investigation leading to finding, you find her guilty, you must have an abiding conviction of guilt. you have to know they were proven. however tragic this case is, you cannot continue it. you are the ultimate decider of what the facts are. mason will tell you how law will be applied and how we suggest you look at it. 17:12:38 i thank you all collectively and individually for all the attention you've given us, and kept an open mind, despite every reason not to. i know it's not been easy. this prosecution knows as well. there have been times when emotion's gotton high. but you're here to fulfill an oath. you've labored tremendously over this journey. we will ask you to give a verdict of not guilty because they're simply not proven, and simply not true. look at what they have and don't have. all the fantasy doesn't make it so. all the lies dont' get you closer to the truth. 17:13:49 can't get more serious than this, stakes cannot be higher. we ask you use the law as your guide. thank you. 17:14:19 10 MINUTE STRETCH BREAK BEFORE MASON STARTS ============================== 17:14:34 RECESS ============================== 17:25:47 BOTH SIDES READY TO PROCEED? LET'S RETURN THE JURY... (JURY RETURNS) 17:26:57 MR MASON YOU MAY PROCEED 17:27:01 i know you'd like to spend another 10-12 hours listening to lawyers, at least not from me. but will spend a few minutes. i will begin thinking of where we've come from since may 9, in clearwater, about to put on your shoulders the solemn responsibility harder than you have ever had to face. 17:27:45 you agreed to be able to do it, i hope you can do it. 17:27:55 i begin my comments, just want to invoke a little philosophy, very dear friend of mine... 17:28:17 may 19, 1790, the skies turned... (mason blabbing about philosophy and history) 17:28:55 the day of judgment is approaching or its not. 17:29:02 i wish therefore that candles be brought. today is judgment day in the US as to this constituion. tomorrow will be judgment day according to the constituion. every day an american is arrested or stands trial. every day a voice is raised or brought in song. every day a lawyer asked to defend an unpopular man, or cause, is judgment day for the constitution. 17:29:57 let us light some candles. on the eve of the 4th of july. 17:30:19 the constitutional rights and protections afforded to everyone in this room, interpreted with special rules for casey anthony. 17:30:35 now when i finish, state will stand and present arguemnts to you, and when they're done, probably tomorrow morning, judge perry will read to you the instructions of law that you're required by oath and law to follow. i can tell you now that there are going to be some questions asked about those, because in truth and fairness, we haven't been finalized on that, working hard on it. 17:31:33 you will be given 12 sets of these typewritten instructions, understand them, read them. i know you'll be able to, despite how long it's been, i remember all the process of jury selection, and i believe you all have the cumulative and individual abilities to analyze and resolve your questions on those instructions. 17:32:14 i'm gonna tell you about some of them. 17:32:33 there are some that control the major lighting of candles in this case. that is, Casey is not required to present evidence or prove anything. you may remember that concept was discussed in clearwater. not just by the lawyers asking questions, but judge perry looked to the side to each one of you and discussed it with you. everyone one of you agreed, i accept that. each of you accepted the constitutional principle that's a cornerstone of our freedom. 17:33:31 i'll say it again. the defendant is not required to prove anything, and you must remember that concept with every issue you discuss back in the jury room. you can get caught up in emotional rhetoric, or positions amongst you, but no matter what it is, the defendant is not requried to present evidence or prove anything. said another way, you must carry with you in every discussion, the burden of proof of proving every element in this lawsuit rests with the state attorney. 17:34:34 never forget no matter what the issue is, they have all of the burden and there is none over here. that's what separates our constitutioanl government from so many others in the world. 17:34:57 your duty to absolutely ensure those rules are followed and honored in every stage of those discussions. 17:35:12 that every element of the offenses is required to be proven beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. Every reasonable doubt. if state fails in that burden of proof as to any element, then you are required, like it or not, emotional or not, it is your solemn sworn duty, you are required to find the defendant not guilty. that goes to every single element and charge in this case. 17:36:06 only if it can be said in your conscience, in your intellectual honesty, ... can you find the defendant guilty. 17:36:28 that will help you get through it. court is gonna tell you it's your job to weigh the evidence. not the sparring between lawyers, not the 300--something pieces of something. whatever else. you, jurors, are the ones who weigh the evidence and decide what evidence is reliable, what evidence you're skeptical about, what evidence you don't trust. it's out of the lawyers hands. this is for you to decide . 17:37:20 court will give you some guidance. not gonna say that guy is too old, can't hear, etc. you look to rules to guide you. 17:37:38 did witness have opportunity to see or know things about which the witness testified? 17:37:58 (lists other weighing the evidence rules) 17:38:08 did witness have some interest in how the case should be decided. like, being able to make money, or something like that. Hmm. 17:38:27 did witness tesitmony agree with other testimony in the case. did the witnes at some other time make a statement that conflicted with another statement. 17:38:53 you heard about impeachement, that's what we call it when someone changes their story under oath, in a deposition. 17:39:11 you have the right to believe or disbelieve all or any part of the evidence of any testimony from any witness. 100% of the people sitting in that chair, you have a right to believe all or none. that's what a jury is about. 17:39:43 maybe we won't even have jurors who are humans, there will be machines... 17:40:02 court's gonna give you instruction on expert witnesses... however, also gonna be told that like other witnesses, you may believe or not believe all or part of an experts testimony. just because they may have met the criteria or threshhold to be annointed as an expert, that doesn't mean you have to buy it. 17:40:55 thinking back to your oath, in clearwater, we're gonna talk about the elephant in the room, and you know what it is. 17:41:20 my client, casey marie anthony, with advice from counsel, made decision to not testify in this case. i didn't try cases this long to not know it's on your mind. but you swore an oath to rise above media impact, etc. 17:41:52 constitution requries state to prove it's accusations against the defendant, not the defendant to disprove anything. defendant exercised a fundemental right to not testify, don't view it as admission of guilt or be influenced in any way by her decision. it's a promise you made, and a promise that must be kept if we're lighting candles for our constitutional rights and freedom. 17:42:59 burden of proof, don't dare think you can consider the fact she did not testify. as fundemental a right as we have. born in the constitution, since we've had it. 17:43:38 counts you didnt hear a lot about, 4-7. you may remember from clearwater. reading of the indictment, allege that casey made false statements to yuri melich. she made some false statements to him at different times and places. court will tell you that instruction on law is, you must determine from evidence that defendant's alleged statement was knowingly, voluntarily and freely made. you should consider the total circumstances. 17:44:49 whether when defendant made statement she was threatened, or if she was promised. if you find out the statement was not freely made, you should disregard it. 17:45:12 you may remember a recording made where she was questioned by 3 detectives in a small room, 6x8 room, remember if you will hearing those detectives yelling at her, not allowing her to answer. berating her, arguing. so, you may also remember an ininitial part of it, dispute among law officers. say she was handcuffed, etc. then another says I did it, put her in cage of sgt. acevedo's car. 17:46:19 but she was free to go right? bottom line is, when you consider those counts, consider whether the law has been met if she voluntarily made those statements. she made a statement, the law says if she was not freely and voluntarily making those statements, you should disregard them. and if those statements are gone, so are all the counts. 17:47:07 initial charges, the main ones, are first degree murder, which requires gov't to prove things that are obvious. the death was caused by the criminal act of casey. now, caused by her. well, what act? 17:47:57 what act? you will also hear and read instrctions that it was done by premeditated killing, and or alternatively, whether it was a felony murder, underlying that, have fun reading the instructions. we're trying to make them as clear as we can. there's 2 theories. the main thing: what act? 17:48:41 the judge will describe and take the time, what is premeditation mean? i'm not gonna belabor it. also will be given instructionon felony murder of first degree. once again, that caylee marie anthony is dead, and that the death occured as a consequence of and during when casey was engaged in aggravated child abuse. 17:49:29 where, what, how, when, and why is the evidence of aggravated child abuse? all the witnesses who took the stand who know anything about casey said she was a loving, doting mother, she was young, only 22, my shoes are that old. 17:50:18 no abuse, no fractures, pulling of bones, nothing. or death occurred while casey was attempting to do child abuse. and that casey was the person who actually killed caylee. all the motion and suspicion in the world doesn't prove it. 17:50:59 burden of proof, no burden beyond and to exclusion of reasonable doubt. you will get instruction hoping to help you understand by what is meant by agg. child abuse. 17:51:31 one of the parts of that is a definition of willfully. not unintentionally or accidentally, but willfully causing child abuse on caylee. 17:51:56 i may not indeed have been able to hear everything, you may have noticed we have special computers, that sends me what's being said, i'm sitting there trying to read it. i never heard nor read any evidence of any child abuse of any kind. 17:52:35 i'm not gonna further belabor those instructinos, but i'm not done. not that easy. 17:52:46 the instruction will tell you you can find a reasonable doubt based on evidence, or lack of evidence. now mr. baez went through a lot of things with you and forgive me if i repeat some of those, but i had made a list of issues that i thought were not proven in this case. 17:53:19 you can disagree with me. and, to think of some others on your own, which i know you will. but i'll run through on lack of evidence. this is a criminal case, no finger prints on bags, anything seized by warrant from home. interesting enough, the infamous gas can with duct tape no duct tape had been wiped clean, no prints. toxicology tests, dr. goldberger, part of forensic team doing autopsy studies for dr. g, charged with duty of finding chemical evidence of chloroform and several other poisons. found zero. 17:54:42 there was no DNA, it's 2011. the case occurred in 2008. that's not new! the only profile you heard excluded .... 17:55:09 dna evidence if you heard how much fun it was to listen to is to try to say this DNA evidence is a statistical probability. if there are these markers, the more there are, the higher the probability. the general rule is that when there are those 13 markers, the probability of that person who gave the DNA not being the person is one in 14 quadrillion. that's 14 zeros. but if DNA has just one marker that the subject does not have, that means it's excluded. it cannot be. the FBI confirmed that the profile they got from that tape excluded casey marie and the child. 17:56:46 there was no evidence of decomp at the recovery scene. entomologist said she must have decomposed somewhere else. no bugs, etc. 17:57:08 only in the trash. issue of chloroform was from teh beginning. what a media baby this was. dr. michael sigmund extracted 2 bags of air from the trunk of the car at the same time in the same way at the same place. took 1 to his lab and sent 1 to dr. vass's lab. dr. sigmund's lab says major compound was gasoline. and some trace of chloroform, which he said is everywhere, everywhere. other says we had this shockingly high level, not know how much, but shockingly high. 17:58:23 search warrants at house 3 times. they are issued constitutionally, to surprise. they searched the anthony residence, they searched everything. no chloroform, no bottles of ingredients, no papers related to it, nothing. so the issue was, what does chloroform mean? at some point was it used to knock her out and kill her? or was it from teh decomp suspicions from the trunk of the car. but it sounded sexy to the media. 17:59:32 the heart shaped sticker deal. a CSI said she saw a heart shaped sticker outline on the duct tape but when she took a picture of it, poof it was one. then they brought this evidence, a thick item, on cardboard, found across from the school in the distance. 18:00:17 baez talked about numerous other things, comparing shoes, shovels, let's talk about some others. not even a hint of a claim that there was any sort of admission of wrongdoing attributable to this defendant. no evidence she did anything wrong to this child. none. why would she kill this child? no evidence of a motive to kill this child. she wanted to party? She did that anyway. 18:01:14 why in the world would a mother so devoted wake up one day and say i think i'll kill her. you learned about trace evidence, all the scientific stuff. what we didn't learn about was anything to link any wrong doing as example to the inside of the car. the steering wheel cover, the car seat, anywhere inside at all. yet we're told that somebody did like that, no cells, this chloroform, some weapon somewhere, none. 18:02:13 i suspect that you individually and collectively can make a much longer list than i did of the things there's no evidence of. i don't know what the odor was and what it wasn't. but i was intrigued to learn that at least 7 officers on the hunt did not smell any decomp or strong odors in that automobile. 18:03:03 i remember mr. simon birch said he had a history of 6-8 prior experiences of decomposing humans he had repossessed, but in this one, well it may have been a little odor he said, and talking to george about everything, but nobody called the cops. instead he takes the trash out, says this is your smell, and flips it over the fence. 18:03:54 all these things mount up to reasonable doubt. 18:04:12 on the guess of probabilities, how many times did you hear some one say might be, could be, may be, and you heard ashton say "in all likelihood", the characterization he made himself. that doesn't quite make it. 18:04:48 let's talk about what burden of proof really requires. (puts up burden of proof chart) 18:05:28 if you have an absolute abiding thought that she's not guilty, that's easy. if it's highly unlikely , then good. 18:05:54 unlikely, possibly not, may not be, perhaps, i'm not sure, maybe not guilty, perhaps guilty, also means perhaps she's not. suspected, you might suspect she's guilty, possibly guilty, in all likelihood, probably guilty, moving up the scale. probably guilty of what? still not guilty. guilt likely you may say, but i'm confused i'm befuddled, but that's not beyond a reasonable doubt. strong belief of guilt. unless the state has proven to you beyond and to the exclusion of reasonable doubt, there's only one answer: not guilty. it's not guilty becuse the state hasn't proven guilt. 18:07:47 a few things that are subject to clear proof in our life experience, very few. people can talk 100% this and that, the only thing i know 100% is people are going to die. We used to say taxes but we know better than that now. that's why we haev this system, the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. no matter what you think, strong belief likely, etc. your obligation , they haven't proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then they're not guilty. 18:09:06 i don't know the answers to a lot of things. mr. baez is talking about mr. kronk. why would an uninvolved citizen after callin police about finding the skull, in a situation that's just 100s of feet down the road from all the cameras, nationwide lookout, why in the world would a man sit silent for 4 months? 18:10:03 i do not know how it is he testified he took his meter reader stick and put it in the right orbital socket...embedded in the leaves and muck. or was that some repositioning, some posing. dr.schulz said no tape on the nose. dr. g. said tape in the vicinity of the mouth. she concluded manner of death was homicide on totally circumstantial evidence because no child should have tape on their face. 18:11:11 dr. warren who did the superimposition stuff said it could have. in all likelihood, may have, in vicinity. this is not a could have sort of thing. this is a charge of murder in the first degree. and serious other charges of agg. manslaughter and child abuse. 18:11:51 we all know and accepted, and i'll close with this. we have a duty, i have been doing this for many years. i'm an idealist. i believe firmly in the integrity of our courts and this system. the court is no better than each of you sitting before me on this jury. it's only as sound as this jury and the jury only as sound as the people who make it up. i have confidence you will review the evidence you heard and restore casey to her freedom, and do your duty. 18:12:58 i will not claim origination for that, that's some atticus finch to kill a mockingbird. i do not get the chance to talk to you. pay the same respectful attention to my colleagues, realizeing that we got to sit over there and squirm because we can't get up and say "no but" so i ask you to say this. any time an issue raised that peaks your curiousity and it hasn't been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, say what would mr. mason say about it? what would he object to? then do it. 18:14:17 light your candles.... they have not proven casey guilty. thank you. 18:14:30 FIVE MINUTE BREAK BEFORE REBUTTAL BY STATE. ===================== 18:14:39 RECESS ===================== 18:35:14 LET THE RECORD REFLECT.... LET'S RETURN THE JURY (JURY COMES BACK INTO ROOM) 18:36:16 MEMBERS OF THE JURY, TIME IS 6:36, COURT DEPUTY INQUIRE,I'M GONNA MAKE A DECISION TO RECESS FOR THE EVENING. SOME OF YOU ARE FINE, SOME ARE TIRED. I WANT ALL OF YOU BRIGHT EYED AND BUSHY TAILED. LONG DAY, LONG DAY YESTERDAY, AND LONG DAY TOMORROW. WE'RE CLOSE TO THE END. AGAIN GONNA ASK NOT TO DISCUSS AMONGST YOURSELVES OR ANYTHING ELSE. WILL START AT 8:30 TOMORROW MORNING. JURY YOU ARE EXCUSED. (JURY LEAVES ROOM) 18:37:48 WE NEED TO COMPLETE CHARGE CONFERENCE.I NEED TO READ OVER FINAL COPY WHICH SHOULD TAKE ME ABOUT 15 MINUTES. THEN WE'LL COMPLETE CHARGE CONFERENCE. REQUEST FROM STATE OF FLORIDA, I DON'T WANT TO GUESS AT THE ANSWER, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER. SHOUDLN'T TAKE US LONG TO DO THE CHARGE CONFERENCE, WHATEVER AUTHORITY YOU HAVE FOR A PROPOSITION, EMAIL IT TO ME BY 9:30PM TONIGHT. I WILL LOOK AT IT. 18:38:48 OK WE ARE AT EASE UNTIL I CAN GET THE INSTRUCTIONS THEN WE'LL COMPLETE CHARGE CONFERENCE, AT EASE. ================= 18:39:08 AT EASE ================= 19:17:07 LET THE RECORD REFLECT..... 19:17:21 PAGE 1, INTRO TO FINAL INSTRUCTIONS, ANY OBJECTIONS? none by either side. 19:17:40 PAGE 2, INTRO TO HOMICIDE, LOOK OVER THAT PLEASE. 19:18:11 MAKE SURE YOUR MICROPHONE IS ON. GO TO PAGE 3, JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE AND EXCUSABLE HOMICIDE. no objections either side. 19:18:31 GOING TO PAGE 4, MURDER FIRST DEGREE, NOTE ADDED LANGUAGE THAT STATE HAS REQUESTED THAT DEFENSE HAS OBJECTED TO, CAN OBJECT TO THAT PORTION, THEN INDICATE WHETHER THERE ARE ADDITIONAL OBJECTIONS. 19:19:03 we object to the deviation from standard jury instructions, other than that no objections. 19:19:16 THAT WILL BE NOTED, STATE ANY OBJS? no. 19:19:22 PAGE 5 FELONY MURDER FIRST DEGREE. we'd ask for a special interogatorry, etc. 19:19:41 STATE? no objections. 19:19:46 GOING TO PAGE 6, AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE? no objections. 19:20:02 GOING TO PAGE 7, AGGRAVATED MANSLAUGHTER OF A CHILD. ONE THING YOU WILL NOTE, IN THE STATUTORY LANGUAGE, I CHANGED THE NAME OF THE INSTRUCTION TO COUNTER THE INDICTMENT. 19:21:07 LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU FINISH REVIEWING THAT I KNOW IT'S A LONG ONE. IF YOU WANT TO LOOK IT OVER TONIGHT JUST LET ME KNOW IN THE MORNING. BUT LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU'VE MADE YOUR QUICK REVIEW AS OF TODAY. 19:21:39 no objections. DEFENSE? we'd object on this simple neglect instruction. the problem is it references the death of someone under age 18, includes....that's a flaw in the standard, culpable negligence should be standard. 19:22:21 ANY ADDITIONAL OBJECTIONS? no additional no. 19:22:29 PAGE NINE, STILL HAVE YOUR REQUEST FOR MATERIALITY? yes. STATE? we object to any modification that doesn't reflect the statute as written. 19:23:03 PAGE TEN... 19:24:30 PAGE TWELVE AND THIRTEEN MANSLAUGHTER? no objections. 19:24:48 PAGE 14, LOOK CLOSELY AT THIRD DEGREE FELONY MURDER, WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT THE SECOND PART OF 2, DEALING WITH THE ATTEMPT OF COMMITTING CHILD ABUSE BECAUSE IT NECESSITATES A READING OF THE ATTEMPT INSTRUCTION, IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR INSTRUCTIONS, THERE ARE TWO ALTERNATIVE THEORIES TO PROVE THE CRIME OF ATTEMPT, OR YOU GIVE THE SECOND ONE. YOU MAY WANT TO TURN TO YOUR STNDARD JURY INSTRUCTION BOOK. TELLS YOU WHICH ONE IS APPLICABLE OR NOT APPLICABLE. SO LET'S FIRST LOOK AT FELONY 3RD DEGREE MURDER. IF YOU WANT THE SECOND ONE I MAY NEED TO FIND ATTEMPT UNLESS YOU FEEL YOU DON'T NEED TO DO THAT 19:26:11 whatever they want to do with that is fine with us. LONG DAY FOLKS. 19:26:50 ALRIGHT MS. FRYER YOU REQUESTED THE FELONY MURDER 3RD DEGREE? yes your honor. THE ONES WE TALKED ABOUT WERE 2(A) OR 2(B), THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF ESCAPING OR BEING AN ACCOMPLICE. DO YOU WANT 2(A) AND (B) OR JUST 2(A)? you have it printed, we agree your honor, but we'd also request a special interoggatory to find instances of child abuse to avoid merger doctrine. I WILL DENY THAT. 19:28:03 ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT DEFINITION FOR CHILD ABUSE? IT IS BASICALLY THE DEFINITION CONTAINED IN THE STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTION. just discussing if we'd add the definition of willfully as well. we request you add willfully. YOU WANT ME TO DEFINE WILLFULLY? yes your honor. ANYTHING ELSE? no your honor. 19:29:29 DO YOU WANT THE ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME? IF YOU HAVE YOUR LITTLE GREEN BOOK, TURN TO 5.2, I MEAN 5.1. YOU WILL SEE A PREAMBLE TO PROVE THE CRIME FOR ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CHILD ABUSE, ATTEMPT IS USED IF CHARGED OR A LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE. THAT SHOULD BE THE ONE IN ORDER TO ATTEMPT TO PROVE A CRIME. ONE HAS TO GO, THE FIRST OR SECOND ONE? 19:30:59 may i have a moment? YES MA'AM YOU MAY. 19:32:00 the issue is defendant attempted to commit, we're going to add there child abuse, we need to find multiple counts of child abuse... 19:32:20 YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH INSTRUCTIONS. I'M GONNA GIVE WHICH ONE YOU WANT. CAN'T HAVE BOTH. IF THERE IS ERROR, YOU'RE MAKING IT AND NOT ME. 19:32:57 ALRIGHT THE SECOND ONE... YES YOUR HONOR. 19:33:29 ALRIGHT ANY PROBLEM WITH 15? DEFENSE? no your honor. ALRIGHT GOING TO PAGE 16, CHILD ABUSE. none from either side. 19:34:07 GOING TO PAGE 17, READING NOT GUILTY, BURDEN OF PROOF. none from either. 19:34:18 PAGE 18, WEIGHING THE EVIDENCE. YOU GET 1-8. no objections. 19:34:30 PAGE 19, THE DEFENSE REQUESTED INSTRUTION THAT THE DEFENSE MODIFY. no objections from either. 19:34:59 PAGE 20, EXPERT WITNESSES? no objections 19:35:07 PAGE 21, DEFENDANT NOT TESTIFIED? no objections 19:35:19 PAGE 22, DEFENDANT STATEMENT? YOU RENEW THAT REQUEST? yes. SAME PREVIOUS RULING. 19:35:47 PAGE 23, RULES FOR DELIBERATIONS? no objection either side. 19:35:57 PAGE 24, CAUTIONARY INSTRUCTIONS? no objections. 19:36:08 PAGE 25, VERDICT? no objections 19:36:21 PAGE 26, SINGLE DEFENDANT MULTIPLE COUNTS? no objections 19:36:33 PAGE 27, SUBMITTING A CASE TO THE JURY? no objections. 19:36:43 ALRIGHT LETS GO BACK AND TAKE UP THE DEFENSE SPECIALLY REQUESTED INSTRUCTIONS ON THEORY OF DEFENSE. THE FIRST ONE WE'LL TAKE IS LONG ONE, JURY INSTRUCTION THEORY OF DEFENSE, WHICH IS 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 PARAGRAPHS. STATE ANY OBJECTIONS? 19:37:19 yes sir, this is a factual statement, no legal proposition, and it would be an improper comment from teh court to give this instruction. OK IT STILL SUFFERS FROM THE SAME PROBLEMS BASED EARLIER TODAY ON STEVENS CASE THAT I CITED. GOING TO THE SECOND ONE. THEORY OF DEFENSE JURY INSTRUCTIONS, 3 PARAGRAPHS. 19:38:06 it's a shorter one, but still factual argument that the defense has eloquently made. MS. FRYER ANYTHING ELSE? 19:38:39 this is being asserted under the guidelines of the court, it's being asserted just as the indictment is the theory of the prosecution, the defendant is entitled to her theory of defense. 19:39:09 STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS ADEQUATELY COVER, THIS AGAIN CITES ADEQUATE LEGAL THEORIES. MR BAEZ AND MR MASON QUITE ELOQUENTLY POINTED OUT WHAT THOSE THEORIES WERE AND HOW THEY APPLIED TO THE LAW. MR MASON WAXED QUITE WELL ON THE BURDEN OF PROOF, REASONABLE DOUBT, WHAT A REASONABLE DOUBT WAS, GAVE SOME POIGNANT AND EXQUISITE QUOTES THAT NEVER SEEM TO DIE. AND BROUGHT THEM TO LIFE. 19:40:24 ALRIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE? NOW HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE VERDICT FORMS? I WILL FILE THESE TWO REQUESTED INSTRUCTIONS WITH THE CLERK SO THE RECORD WILL BE ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT EVERYTHING COMPLIED WITH RULES, ETC. 19:41:01 GOT COPIES OF VERDICT FORMS? yes. VERDICT AS TO COUNT 1? just a moment your honor. 19:42:44 DEFENSE READY? VERDICT AS TO COUNT 1, FIRST DEGREE MURDER? not as to the first one. VERDICT AS TO COUNT 2, AGG CHILD ABUSE? THIS IS WHERE YOU WANT TO COME IN WITH .... THE CASE DEALING WITH THE MULTIPLE ACTS. that's Brooks, your honor. I THINK YOU WANTED YOUR OBJECTION WAS THE FORMS SHOULD HAVE INTEROGGATORY FORM SPECIFYING NUMBER OF ACTS? yes. SAME PREVIOUS RULING. 19:44:19 ANY OTHER OBJECTIONS TO THE JURY VERDICT FORM? we'd also ask for an attempted charge as an underlying. ATTEMPT TO WHAT? just a moment. 19:45:13 no objections your honor. 19:45:19 VERDICT FORM COUNT 3, AGG MANSLAUGHTER OF A CHILD? READ OVER THOSE TWO AND SING OUT WHEN YOU'RE FINISHED DEFENSE. 19:45:56 neglect of a child was left in there, i thought you were not going to do that. WHICH COPY? the main verdict form. 19:46:27 READING THE VERDICT FORM.... 19:46:55 MY ONLY CONCERN IS IN ORDER TO HAVE AN AGGRAVATED HOMICIDE YOU GOTTA HAVE 2 THINGS. THERE'S NO FINDING SHE WAS A CHILD. two special verdict forms, special finding two. YEP YOU'RE RIGHT I'M SORRY. THAT ALLEVIATES MY CONCERN. 19:48:15 DEFENSE SING OUT WHEN YOU GET TO VERDICT AS TO COUNT 3 AND THE TWO SPECIAL FINDINGS. THOSE WILL TAKE CARE OF ANY APPRENTE ISSUES. your honor we don't have the special findings. 19:50:35 we have no objection as to the jury instructions and special findings. 19:50:46 ALRIGHT VERDICT AS TO COUNT 4, 5, 6, 7. MADAM CLERK PULL OUT COPY OF INDICTMENT SO THEY CAN COME UP AFTERWARDS TO INSPECT IT. I WANT BOTH SIDES TO LOOK AT IT. 19:52:26 ON THE FIRST PAGE IF YOU LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL INDICTMENT.... THAT DOES NOT APPEAR ON THE INDICTMENT THAT WILL GO BACK. IT DOES NOT INCLUDE PAGE 5, WHICH GOES TO THE CASE NUMBERS, ETC. 19:53:05 ANY OBJECTION FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA? no. AFTER DEFENSE HAS HAD CHANCE TO PERUSE IT, ANY OBJECTIONS FROM DEFENSE? OK RETURN IT TO CLERK. I WILL MAKE WHAT SMALL CORRECTIONS WE NEED TO MAKE. ANYTHING ELSE ON BEHALF OF STATE OF FLORIDA? no. DEFENSE? no. 19:54:11 WHEN THE CASE GOES OUT, I WILL CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING 2 CASES ON JUNE 30. BALLARD V. STATE, NO CITATION NUMBER, SCOTT V. STATE. BALLARD V. STATE. DUCT TAPE CASE, NO BODY, DEALS WITH PROPORTIONALITY. SAME THING WITH SCOTT V. STATE. ANOTHER PROPORTIONALITY CASE. YOU MAY FIND IT INTERESTING READING. PUBLISHED THURSDAY AT 11 O'CLOCK. ANYTHING ELSE? 19:55:21 RECESS UNTIL 9 A.M. TOMORROW MORNING.
Archived Unity File
}