WFTV's Legal Analyst Bill Sheaffer - Casey Anthony Blog

by Snaz Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:04 am

Bill Sheaffer has started his own blog to expand the analyses he does on the Casey Anthony case for WFTV. Take a look:

http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

by Tracey6434 Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:24 am

Thanks for posting this Snaz. I just love Bill Sheaffer. I can't wait to read this.

by Tracey6434 Sun Nov 15, 2009 10:39 am

http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

Legal Analyst Bill Sheaffer on Casey Anthony Case
Back again for effort number two!

Well, I must say, the initial response to my first blog has been both overwhelming and humbling. I am still sorting out this experience, but hope to answer some, if not most of the questions folks pose as we go forward. Don’t forget friends, I maintain a full time practice as a criminal trial lawyer, but will continue to do my best to provide what I hope is new insight. Also, please know that when I assert an evidentiary fact, I stand by the correctness thereof. Because of my obligation to my sources and my commitment to do nothing to influence the right of both the State and the Defense to a fair trial, I will not engage in on-line debate of the evidence.

Continued at link above

by FystyAngel Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:36 pm

Snaz, thank you for the link. I feel sorry for Bill. It seems that the trolls have taken over there. I just don't understand why people think they have to take over & be nasty. Sad

When there isn't any "new" news, go play a game of do something else. Why stay there & fight with each other? I cherish our members here. We have a great group. I can't imagine what that poor man is thinking right now.

by Dis Sun Nov 15, 2009 2:13 pm

Fysty~This, my friend, is what a real blog should be! I am glad that he started a blog and hope they can weed out the riff raff. There are people on the internet whose sole purpose is to incite anger and resentment, I wish the ones who are really there for the info would just ignore these sad few and just say a prayer for their souls. I too cherish the members here, we are a cut above the rest...IMO This is the first blog I have been on that isn't ripe with narcissism...God Bless you Fysty and J4A...Caylee is always in our hearts. its a beautiful thin

by Piper Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:54 pm

I've always looked forward to and respected Bill Sheaffer's commentary on this case. Hopefully they can squash the trolls.

Ditto to Dis on the RC 8)

by Snaz Tue Nov 17, 2009 11:51 pm

In case you haven't seen it, Bill Sheaffer has updated his blog:

http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

by Cali Wed Nov 18, 2009 12:22 am

Last night I checked Bill's second post, and agree with Dis. There were lots of "nasties" and here at RC we have high standards. We do not indulge in spiteful posts that are OT, and interrupt the topic and sincerity of bloggers.

I was a bit disappointed that on Bill's newer post he commented about the nasty bloggers but said that he does not want to establish rules on his blog site. He said he believes in freedom of speech.
Too bad that the nasty hate bloggers were coming back for the second round of throwing darts.

by Snaz Thu Nov 19, 2009 1:30 pm

New post by WJS.....

What Will The Jury Think If She Doesn’t Take The Stand?

http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

by Snaz Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:30 pm

I bring it for those who are interested in reading BILL SHEAFFER'S comments.... not all the nasty comments posted by the bloggers. WJS is a VERY respected attorney there in Orlando and can provide lots of insight.....

I personally read what Bill has to say and leave. Do with it what you will.

by Estee Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:55 pm

Snaz...Thank you for keeping us posted on Mr. Bill's Blog...I have enjoyed his introspect and legal explanations...You are a valuable member of Fysty's team and are greatly appreciated...Keep up the good work...

by Snaz Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Thank you, Estee..... I really do appreciate that.

by Snaz Fri Nov 20, 2009 11:25 am

New post by Bill Sheaffer:

Why Is State Attorney’s Office Not Charging Anthonys With Perjury?

http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

by Snaz Fri Nov 20, 2009 6:02 pm

Bill Sheaffer tells it like it is!!!

Does Casey’s Defense Have No Sense Of Decency?

http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

by Snaz Fri Nov 20, 2009 6:05 pm

Dis posted this (thank you, Dis) on the Roy Kronk Defense Motion thread, but I thought it worthy of also being posted here.

This is Bill Sheaffer being interviewed after the motion was filed.

http://www.wftv.com/video/21677312/index.html

by Snaz Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:45 pm

Criminal Defense Attorney Richard Hornsby, who analyzes legal stuff for WESH, has started his own blog...and blasts both Bill Sheaffer and Kathi Belich.

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2009/11/22/in-defense-of-the-casey-anthony-defense/

by Justice4all Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:34 pm

Snaz wrote:Criminal Defense Attorney Richard Hornsby, who analyzes legal stuff for WESH, has started his own blog...and blasts both Bill Sheaffer and Kathi Belich.

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2009/11/22/in-defense-of-the-casey-anthony-defense/

Hornsby sounds like he is on Casey's defense team. I though it was rather childish of him to constantly refer to Bill Sheaffer as Mr. Suspenders.

by Snaz Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:50 am

WESH analyst blasts WFTV commentator, reporter

posted by halboedeker on Nov 22, 2009 5:15:00 PM

The media coverage of the Casey Anthony case has taken another strange turn. Now one station's analyst is lambasting another station's commentator.

WFTV-Channel 9 legal analyst Bill Sheaffer dismissed the latest motion by Anthony's defense team as a media stunt. The defense team is pointing to Roy Kronk, the meter reader who found Caylee Anthony's remains, as a possible suspect in the child's death. Casey Anthony is charged with first-degree murder in the child's death. Sheaffer said the defense team's interview with Kronk's ex-wives are worthless because they weren't done under oath.

But attorney Richard Hornsby, who has been a frequent legal analyst on WESH-Channel 2, praised the defense team's motion. "This is the first significant and credible shot the defense has taken against the state. I think it has a high likelihood of success," Hornsby said on the air.

Now on his blog, Hornsby writes that he was "flabbergasted" when Sheaffer described the defense's "tactics" as "despicable."

Hornsby writes, "The very conviction with which Mr. Sheaffer blasts the Anthony defense on the motion makes me question when he last opened up one of those law books he is always sitting in front of." Hornsby says Sheaffer's "legal commentary" has been "completely cheap and false."

I had trouble reaching WFTV news director Bob Jordan this afternoon. But in the past, he has praised Sheaffer's skill and said the ABC affiliate is lucky to have the lawyer in an analyst's role.

In an e-mail later this evening, Hornsby told me that he has never been WESH's legal analyst. "They asked me to comment and I agree," he wrote. "I have also provided commentary for Fox 35 and CF News 13 whenever they asked. But I am not their legal analyst either."

About his blog, Hornsby wrote me: "My post is because I see another criminal defense attorney taking gratuitous and false cheap shots at the Anthony defense for what I can only imagine are headlines. So I responded in kind."

In blog comments posted today, Hornsby gives lengthy and detailed criticism in analyzing the defense motion. He describes Sheaffer as "Mr. Suspenders" and "an attorney who reeks of elitism." Hornsby also tells Sheaffer, "You are ... a sell-out to your profession."

Hornsby's main complaint is this: "I think it is time that someone puts WFTV-ABC reporter Kathi Belich and her sidekick Mr. Sheaffer to task for the pro-prosecution pandering to the anti-Anthony sentiment, rather than providing objective analysis of the legal issues in the case so that the Central Florida community can have an informed understanding of the legal issues in this case."

Hornsby says that he does all of his commentary for free while Sheaffer is on retainer with WFTV.

What do you make of this?

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2009/11/casey-anthony-wesh-analyst-blasts-wftv-analyst-and-reporter.html

by Snaz Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:35 am

Interesting that JB was getting his advice from Richard Hornsby...... note the advice he gave JB to tell the grandmother "to shut up"!! Love it....

I wouldn't be surprised if JB's new motion was the brainchild of Hornsby.... that would explain why he is such a staunch defender of it... and why he is blasting WJS for calling it despicable.

http://www.richardhornsby.com/Library/pdf/cases/casey-anthony/20080731-Email-Exchange.pdf

by Tracey6434 Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:41 pm

Richard Hornsby can say all he wants about Mr. Sheaffer. I don't take anything he says seriously now. He has the audacity to call Bill Sheaffer and Kathi Belich sell outs for being pro prosecution. Well he's a hypocrite! I have seen him many, many times, blasting Baez and Co for their defense, strategy and their incompetence on the talk shows. And I guarantee you his appearance's commenting on this case have been used to get attention for his firm. This made me angry! Mad

by Estee Mon Nov 23, 2009 1:06 pm

Just add him to the Anthony entourage...I'm surprised that George and Cindy didn't invite him on the cruise...I guess he feels that someone should be on their side since there are so many out there slamming them...I'm almost at the "live and let live" point...Karma will get them in the end...

by Justice4all Mon Nov 23, 2009 2:29 pm

I don't know why Hornsby insists on giving free advice to Bozo and the gang. I don't care if he feels bad because nobody is on the defense's side. I personally think that Caylee's mother should have been on Caylee's side. If that was the case, then we wouldn't be talking about this today, and Caylee would still be alive.

by Estee Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:15 pm

AMEN to that ...J4... WFTV's Legal Analyst Bill Sheaffer - Casey Anthony Blog 308578

by Dis Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:53 pm

I am very dissapointed in Mr. Hornesby.....I read his blog post and I'm guessing he is jealous by the way I read it....also, he got a lot of comments from other bloggers from other blogs....his post was to attack Mr. Shaeffer and I don't see the prefessionalism in it....Jose is an idiot, Casey might as well be her own attorney as far as I am concerned.

by Dis Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:54 pm

A lot of good his advice did...lol...they IGNORED IT...lol

by Snaz Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:08 pm

I thought Hornsby was very juvenile in his comments. He didn't sound the least bit professional to me.

by randilynn Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:19 pm

Dis wrote:I am very dissapointed in Mr. Hornesby.....I read his blog post and I'm guessing he is jealous by the way I read it....also, he got a lot of comments from other bloggers from other blogs....his post was to attack Mr. Shaeffer and I don't see the prefessionalism in it....Jose is an idiot, Casey might as well be her own attorney as far as I am concerned.

oh.. but dis.. bozo just won that case... he is a legal genius!!! ... okay .. i almost got that out with a straight face.. almost.. roflao

by Snaz Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:41 pm

WFTV's Bill Sheaffer says, 'I ... strive to consistently deliver sound legal analysis'

posted by halboedeker on Nov 23, 2009 5:05:36 PM

So a competitor blasts WFTV-Channel 9 legal analyst Bill Sheaffer over his comments in the Casey Anthony case. She is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her daughter, Caylee.

How does Sheaffer respond? Not by firing back or lambasting the critic by name, but by defending his actions.

Attorney Richard Hornsby, who has done analysis for several stations, complained on his blog yesterday that Sheaffer was "taking gratuitous and false cheap shots at the Anthony defense" and that Sheaffer was guilty of "pro-prosecution pandering to the anti-Anthony sentiment."

Sheaffer sent me this comment this afternoon: "I have been asked for, and strive to, consistently deliver sound legal analysis of this case, based upon my knowledge and experience gained from 30 years as a criminal defense attorney and my time as a prosecutor. I am honored to share my insights with the viewers of WFTV Eyewitness News and enjoy the free exchange of ideas that result. It is, of course, always easier to criticize than to create, and it is easier to denigrate than to develop one's own well-reasoned discourse on a topic. There will always be those who prefer to take that easier route. I think the public, the judicial system and the memory of Caylee are better served if the focus of the discussion remains on the facts of the case and the workings of our judicial system and not those who opine on these matters."

What do you make of the way Sheaffer responded?

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2009/11/casey-anthony-wftvs-bill-sheaffer-says-i-strive-to-consistently-deliver-sound-legal-analysis-.html

by Snaz Tue Nov 24, 2009 11:34 am

Witness for the Prosecution or Fall Guy for the Defense?

http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

by Snaz Tue Nov 24, 2009 4:36 pm

This is RH's response to BS's blog post. It is also posted on the "Andrea Lyon Calls Jurors Killers" thread, as it also pertains to that.

OMG! Bill – You did not do what I think you did?

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2009/11/24/omg-bill-you-did-not-do-what-i-think-you-did/

by Snaz Tue Nov 24, 2009 6:44 pm

Mr. Hornsby must be very proud of himself. I think he is a pompous a$$.

R.I.P. William J. Sheaffer, Esq.

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2009/11/24/r-i-p-william-j-sheaffer/

by Dis Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:15 am

by Estee Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:51 am

I'm glad someone other than myself uses that descriptive statement...The pompous a$$ one...It is soooo befitting...

by Estee Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:32 am

Regarding Mr. Hornsby...even the lowly cockroach has a purpose in life...What is Mr. Hornsby's regarding this??? Always the consumate gentleman, Mr. Sheaffer doesn't need an excuse...We know he's here to keep us informed of the legalities in this case and give us some insight into BOTH sides...I hope and pray that his involvement ( if he was involved) in the release of the Andrea Lyons seminar statements doesn't have an adverse action on his career...

by Snaz Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:42 pm

WFTV's Bill Sheaffer answers latest criticism from TV analyst

posted by halboedeker on Nov 24, 2009 11:02:58 PM

Orlando attorney Richard Hornsby has blasted WFTV-Channel 9 legal analyst Bill Sheaffer again. Hornsby does legal analyses for TV stations, too, usually WESH-Channel 2.

Via his blog, Hornsby suggests that Sheaffer passed private seminar materials to WFTV reporter Kathi Belich. Belich yesterday revealed what Andrea Lyon, a member of Casey Anthony's defense team, told a seminar of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Hornsby notes that Sheaffer is an association member and jumps to a conclusion by saying, "You do the math."

WFTV removed Belich's story from its Web site as a courtesy to the attorney who set up the seminar last year.

Sheaffer issued a statement to me tonight: "As your readers have seen over the past several days, one way to obfuscate the truth and shift focus from damning facts it to create a straw man upon whom to lodge false allegations. It is an unfortunate, but sometimes effective, way of creating a diversion orchestrated to cause confusion and to divert attention from the core issues.

"I have always been, and will continue to be, diligent in upholding my professional and ethical obligations, despite any false allegations to the contrary. As I had previously stated, the public, the judicial system and most of all, the victim of this unspeakable crime are best served if we remain focused on the facts of the case, the operation of our judicial system and those who work within it, and not those who opine on these matters. To do otherwise would do a disservice to the administration of justice."

On his blog, Hornsby writes: "So Mr. Sheaffer, I could care less if I am ever asked to provide my 'expert opinion' on television again because of my criticism of you -- I never asked one reporter to let me speak and I didn't get into criminal defense to be a local celebrity. I got into criminal defense because I love the fight. So know this, I will be on you like white on rice.

"You have sold out your colleagues (I hope FACDL kicks you out) and besmirched our profession."

It looks as if Hornsby has a fight, all right. What do you make of that?

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2009/11/casey-anthony-wftvs-bill-sheaffer-answers-latest-criticism-from-tv-analyst.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+entertainment%2Ftv%2Ftvguy+%28TV+Guy%29

by Cali Sat Nov 28, 2009 3:08 am

Seems to be an increase in the number of "entities" that are eager to assist the D-Team and sell their soul to profit from the murder of poor little Caylee Marie.

by Piper Sat Nov 28, 2009 1:44 pm

I agree with you, Cali.

by Piper Sat Nov 28, 2009 3:54 pm

He sure does love to fight, and he sounds quite foolish. He is on a mission to destroy WJS it seems. It will backfire on him. I wonder if there is a longstanding grudge between them or something. He sure seems awful jealous.

I see his carrot being...he really does want to be a "local celebrity". He's loving the publicity.

by Snaz Sat Dec 12, 2009 8:24 pm

Why are they doing this and what do these motions mean?

Posted in Latest Posts by William J. Sheaffer on December 8, 2009

There have been endless opinions and discussions regarding the recent spate of motions filed by Casey Anthony’s defense team. These motions seek, among other things, to declare sections of Florida’s death penalty statute unconstitutional, or, attack those sections of the death penalty statute wherein the jury, during the penalty phase, is called upon to weigh aggravating circumstances versus mitigating circumstances in reaching its recommendation of either life or death. Further, there has been considerable criticism of the defense team for even filing these motions. Some are distressed with the perceived waste of judicial time and justice system resources, in having to respond to what many consider to be frivolous or pointless motions. Others are very vocal in their concern that the trial judge might declare Florida’s statute in question, or some part thereof, unconstitutional. The latter is not likely to happen.

Read the rest:
http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

by Snaz Sat Jan 23, 2010 10:01 pm

MONDAY, MONDAY…

Posted by William J. Sheaffer on January 22, 2010

Judge Strickland had made it very clear on numerous occasions: the criminal check charges pending against Casey Anthony will be resolved via a trial or a plea, on or by Monday, January 25, 2010. A trial was widely anticipated by most observers. However, based upon reliable information and observation of the conduct of both the State and Defense, all indications now point to a change of plea as opposed to a trial.

If we are correct in our conclusion, let’s then examine the mechanics of a change of plea in Florida state courts. When a Defendant decides it is in his best interest to forego a trial on his charges, withdraw his plea of not guilty, and enter a plea of either nolo contendere (no contest) or, guilty, this change is generally accomplished in one of two ways. The defense attorney has negotiated a deal with the Assistant State Attorney assigned to the case, in which event both the State and the Defense will know exactly what the terms, conditions and the sentence and will be prior to the plea hearing. Or, should the defense attorney be unable to come to an agreement with the State that is satisfactory to his client, the other option would be to plead to the charges, (either guilty or no contest) directly to the judge and let the judge decide the appropriate sentence.

Obviously Defendant Anthony hopes to argue for a more favorable sentence than what has been offered by the State, assuming that one was even offered. It is more likely than not that a plea agreement was offered to Casey Anthony by the State, as historically, plea offers are made in the vast majority of cases prosecuted. However, if an offer was made by the State and rejected by Defendant Anthony, the defense lawyer must believe he can argue to the Judge for a better sentence than that offered by the State, or, failing to gain a lighter sentence, any sentence imposed by the Judge would not be any harsher than what had been offered by the State.

Several folks have asked me why doesn’t the Defense go directly to the Judge and work out a plea deal before the sentencing hearing? Judges do not engage in plea negotiations with Defendants. To do so would undermine the authority of the State Attorneys Office in its role as the representative of the people of the State of Florida. So, what then, is the most likely reason that the State and Defense could not reach a plea agreement in the instant case? I believe the failure revolves around the issue of adjudication of guilt. I do not believe the State would agree to, or recommend a withholding of adjudication for Casey Anthony. When one enters a negotiated plea of either guilty, or no contest, the Court, with the recommendation or agreement of the State, has the discretion to withhold the imposition of conviction to all, or any of the charges. “Imposition of conviction” in legal terms means to adjudicate (imposition of conviction), or, to withhold adjudication (not impose conviction.) We had discussed the significance of a conviction on the check charges in an earlier blog. (Please see the Nov. 14, 2009 post entitled “Back Again for Effort #2″).

Now, when Defendant Anthony enters her plea to the Judge on Monday, both the State and her defense lawyer will be afforded an opportunity to argue their respective positions regarding her sentence and the issue of adjudication. The State will likely argue for adjudication based upon the fact that although this is her first offense, it is not an isolated incident, but rather a series of criminal acts constituting a crime spree. Further, hers was not a crime of economic necessity (say, milk and baby diapers) but, a crime wherein the proceeds were used to buy frivolous items (i.e. sunglasses and lingerie). The defense will argue that it is her first offense that Miss Anthony has made restitution, and that the sentence should be designed to be rehabilitative not punitive, and that the Court should withhold adjudication of guilt. Both sides will have valid arguments. Normally I would expect the Defense to have a slight edge in its argument. But none of us live in a vacuum and it can go either way. aAs Yogi Berra said, ” it ain’t over till it”s over.” So my friends, stand by for Monday, you can’t trust that day.

O.K. this time, I will answer a couple of questions!

WJS

http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

by Snaz Wed Jan 27, 2010 7:17 pm

This is very interesting..... just goes to show, no matter what the charges are, you need a GOOD defense attorney.... IOW.... NOT JB nor apparently even AL!

No, Really… What Just Happened?

Posted by William J. Sheaffer
January 27, 2010

Now that Defendant Anthony has pled guilty and been sentenced in her 13 count fraudulent check case, and now that the cheering on the sidelines has died down a bit, let’s discuss the events. Monday evening I got a call from my niece, a big shot corporate attorney in Delaware who, like so many others, is following this story. On a personal note, she and her husband have two little girls (my niecelets). She wanted the 411 from the check fraud hearing. I told her. She was silent for a moment, and then she said, “No, really, what just happened?!” Keep reading to understand her query.

As we all know, Casey Anthony now stands as a six-time convicted felon. So what then does this mean in the grand scheme of things, the big show, her upcoming trial on the charge of the murder of her little daughter Caylee? A lot. We had discussed before that should Casey be convicted of any of the aforementioned charges, it will greatly affect her credibility should she elect to testify in her murder trial.

Casey now has a record of six, yes six, felony convictions, which follow her to the murder trial. And, as we had previously discussed, if she does take the witness stand, the prosecutors will indeed relish soliciting Casey’s admission to those six felony convictions. Her defense team, as one of her lawyers stated after Casey’s Monday sentencing, would, during jury selection, seek a jury that is more intelligent than to be swayed by a few convictions for writing a few bad checks. The defense game plan, we are to believe, would be the “it was really no big deal” deflection manuever.

Perish the thought, folks. Seasoned criminal defense lawyers know that once a jury learns that your client has a prior felony criminal conviction, not to mention six of them, it’s pretty much game over. Juries tend to view a defendant/convicted felon on the witness stand as a liar. Can Casey overcome that hurdle if she testifies in her own defense? Not very likely.

We have heard over and over that Casey has a good and reasonable explanation for declining to report the disappearance of her 2 1/2-year-old daughter. Well, guess what? At trial there is only one person that can sell that story and that is Casey Anthony. So, if Casey does take the stand, the state attorneys will have all the time in the world to review with her so many fun facts: her numerous, inconsistent statements for starters, possibly the videos of her shopping expeditions and visit to Blockbuster with her boyfriend, and let’s not forget the rock star party photos. Good times. The foregoing topics for cross examination, together with the six felony convictions that she will have to admit, gives a reasonable person cause to believe that Casey might encounter a serious credibility problem. A jury will not believe a thing she says beyond her name and date of birth.

Could Casey’s defense team have avoided these felony convictions coming into evidence at her murder trial? You bet. One option would have been to try the check fraud case. Go to trial, even though you know Casey will be convicted. What purpose would this serve you ask? Quite a few, actually. For one, you get to see whether you can get a fair and impartial jury in Orange County, in spite of the pretrial publicity. For another, you get to see how the community reacts toward the lawyers on the defense team, as well as how the jury, if you can seat one, responds to your client. Casey gets essentially a real life dress rehearsal to practice her acting skills before a jury. Those are just a few of the benefits.

If she is convicted, so what? You, her defense lawyers, would file an immediate appeal, and a motion to stay the judgment and sentence of the trial court. This motion is almost always granted by the trial court. The entire appellate process can generally take 12 to 18 months to complete. Meanwhile, Casey Anthony’s record remains clean and unblemished in the eyes of the law. This means that, even though Casey has been convicted of the fraud check charges, the prosecutors cannot bring these convictions into evidence, or even allude to them, should Casey testify in her murder trial. So, if she were to be asked if she has any prior convictions, Casey could answer, ‘No!’ Her answer would stand and the prior disposition in the check charges, all of those felony convictions, would never come into evidence.

But, would-have could-have should-have, that’s not what went down, is it? And, as I stated earlier, the above scenario is only one option that was available to Casey Anthony’s defense team to keep her felony convictions from coming out at her murder trial. In my next missive, I will tell you how Casey could have had her cake and eaten it too.

So, for all of advocates for justice, yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus. And, he has given us the Casey Anthony Defense team. Stay tuned. It’s bound to get more interesting.

WJS

http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthonyblog/index.html

by Justice4all Wed Jan 27, 2010 9:40 pm

The Anthonys probably wish they would have hired Bill Sheaffer to defend Casey at this point. Diane Fanning could probably write a whole book just about mistakes made by Casey's defense.

by Snaz Wed Jan 27, 2010 9:44 pm

Haha! I agree, J4A...... the A's could have hired ANYONE other than JB and they could have done a better job... and we wouldn't have to be subjected to all the 'ah's' and 'um's'. I swear, I find it VERY painful to listen to him....

by Dis Thu Jan 28, 2010 3:00 am

He likes to use frankly a lot too. I have never been impressed with Jose. I thought in the beginning he would have to step aside as her lawyer because of his lack of knowledge of the law. It is truly painful to listen to him in court. He is way too cocky and "frankly" I can't see why. Her goose is cooked, what would he have to be cocky about. Does he really think this will make him rich? I'll answer my own question, he knows it will. Pathetic. She will more than likely be found guilty of all charges and be sentenced to LWOP. He is not in this for justice or to defend his client. Jose has no moral compass, we see that in the fact that he was behind on child support. Again, Pathetic.

by randilynn Thu Jan 28, 2010 3:49 pm

aj... the answer is "no".. in short.

KCs defense team CAN appeal the sentence, but NOT the conviction. she plead guilty, there is no question that she committed these crimes, she has admitted to them, and has been adjudicated guilty.. that is why judge strickland asked so many questions before accepting her plea. to make sure she understood that there are no take backs.

IF the defense sees fit to appeal the sentence, they may do so.. but since she has been sentenced to time served, there is no reason to. has nothing to do with the felonies being ON her record for life.

IF she gets on the stand, it is all fair game. this battle is over.

by randilynn Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:21 pm

aj... how could she claim that it was part of her "have to" list to keep her family and caylee safe to buy her self hoodies, sunglasses, and lingerie??

i can imagine the beer and stuff.. she could claim it was for the "kidnapper", but it is hard to claim that when the video from her arrest had her wearing said hoodie AND sunglasses..

i must respectfully disagree aj.. there is no way KC will ever see the witness stand.. there are TOO many questions that will be asked that she cannot/will not answer. and she is far from a sympthetic witness.

the other thing that has recently occurred to me.. the state did NOT need these adjudications to be able to use the stealing in court. IF the defense calls even ONE witness to testify to KC's character as a wonderful daughter/loving mother, they will open the door for the state to call rebuttal witnesses. This means, that anyone KC has stolen from, lied to, cheated, tricked, or wronged in any way can be called to testify to her character..

in this senario.. i dont think the defense has much latitude of witness options. they can question the science, they can put on experts to testify to the forensics, but they better not dare asking anyone to attest to her wonderful character... because then the flood gates are opened for the state to do the same.. talk about pandora's box...

by randilynn Fri Jan 29, 2010 7:38 pm

lmao..

and that is all i have to say about that...

by Snaz Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:18 pm

awaiting justice wrote:Randi..

In response to....

aj... how could she claim that it was part of her "have to" list to keep her family and caylee safe to buy her self hoodies, sunglasses, and lingerie??

i can imagine the beer and stuff.. she could claim it was for the "kidnapper", but it is hard to claim that when the video from her arrest had her wearing said hoodie AND sunglasses.."

What i mean by the toodoo list is this...

As stupid as it will sound to the jury... I am thinking that the only way KC can try and explain away all the bad behavior (ugly coping..lol) is by taking the stand and saying that ZFG gave her instructions of things to do where she made KC look guilty. They tricked KC into thinking that as long as she complied with all the intructions, she wud get Caylee bak. KC wud say that they told her that she needed to a learn a lesson and these were the rules. KC never imagined or realized that the things they were having her do, were things that made her look like an uncaring iresponsible parent, who partied and didnt care that her daughter was missing...

It was only after the fact that KC came to realize that ZFG actually planned to kill Caylee from day one, and thats why they had KC do all these crazy things. They accomplished making KC look guilty of the murder.. They even put Caylees remains close by the house to help frame her.. ZFG came into the house with the key that they had and stole the dutape, the blanket, hamper, garbage bags and anything else incriminating..CA will attest to this as the blanket went missing after jun 15... She never noticed anything else.

KC came to realize how she was framed when Caylee wasnt returned by her 3rd birthday... ZFG had access to her computer and changed the passwords and it was ZFG who wiped the computer clean and removed all the pics, before LA took the puter from TL on jul 15. This is how they wud set KC up to be framed.

It was only in hindsight that KC realized what ZFG did do her to make her look guilty... It was all for a " leeson to be learned" KC realized only after, that had she contacted LE from the start and not tried to handle this lesson on her own, she wud never have done these crazy things and wud have been able to get Caylee back.. It was all for the love and protection of Caylee and her family that she chose to do this.. KC IS REALLY THE VICTIM...lol

They will then have TL take the stand and corrobotrate how KC wud wake up from nightmars and stare at Caylees pics and video on the computer in the middle of the night as in reality she was so scared for the safety of her daugh, that she had to play along and cudnt tell one person in the whole world to spare her daght..This is what kind of mother she was.. She wud lie, steal, and do anything possible, to do whatever it takes to get Caylee bak....

I am not thinking for one minute any jury will buy it...31 days and all her historical lies will never be bought.. I just done know what else she is gonna say... especially witrh Baez promising that she is innocent and wait till we hear what really happened...They are locked in the nanny zfg ...

AJ, as ludicrous at that whole scenario sounds (but I wouldn't put it pass the defense to try it...lol), they would first have to PROVE that ZFG did, indeed, exist and was Caylee's nanny. And since even the defense attorneys know she doesn't exist, they would truly be completely stupid to even TRY that defense.

by eva Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:40 pm

I find it fascinating that Andrea Lyons aka Casey's Court Mother Hen, "holds/braces" Casey's forearm as Casey listens to the prosecution in court.................

AND YET Andrea Lyons BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARELY visits Casey.

As my english teacher father has ALWAYS said, "Deeds, not words".

Lyons has no time for Casey. However, in court, Lyons is ready/willing/able to appear as Casey's Court Mother Hen.

by Snaz Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:27 am

AJ, I guess the defense could try to convince the jury there is a ZFG nanny.... but you can bet the prosecution will be able to shoot down anything they will try. The only thing they couldn't shoot down would be THE real ZFG.... but since we all know she doesn't exist.... the defense would not be able to prove it.

If they try to say DC found Zanny the nanny, they're going to have to SHOW her and put her on the stand to testify .... otherwise, no jury would ever buy it. They aren't going to be able to just say they found her without any proof.

I, also, have felt that the defense was locked into the Zanny story, but on the other hand, with some of the crap these defense attorneys have pulled, absolutely nothing will surprise me...

Jurors tend to use their common sense and take their job very seriously.... so I think anything the defense will try to come up with will be shot down in deliberations if not already completely destroyed by the prosecution on cross......

I just finished reading "We, the Jurors" about the Scott Peterson case. It blew me away how much the details resemble the Casey Anthony case.... and what the jurors spoke about during deliberations and how they conducted themselves gave me hope......

by Sponsored content