Judge Strickland Accused of Inappropriate Relationship with Blogger 'Marindade Dave'; Removes Himself From Case

Julie, I hope all the jokes and snickering stop! It's been sickening! A little precious child lost her life and was left to rot in the woods and was eaten by scavengers! There is nothing funny about this case and no one involved in it should make light in any way!

Judge in Casey Anthony Case Steps Down

http://www.wftv.com/video/23202478/index.html

Hey, Lottie...and anyone else that wants to read this...take a look here...for Standards of Qualifications for Attorneys to Handle Capital Cases on Behalf of Indigent Defendants
Florida: Rule 3.112 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure (2000)...outlines the minimum standards for attorneys in capital cases

http://www.ncsonline.org/WC/Publications/KIS IndDefMemoPub.pdf

Baez definitely does not meet the requirements..He'd better put Mason in first chair or he'll be unseated!!!

Judge Strickland Steps Down From Casey Anthony Case

Tuesday, April 20, 2010 11:12:11 AM
Reported by Amanda Evans and Jacqueline Fell

ORLANDO -- Judge Stan Strickland has recused himself from the Casey Anthony case. But it doesn't appear it was a move he was happy to make.

In the order, signed Monday, Strickland states until now, enjoying his work has never seemed to pose a problem.

The move comes after Anthony’s attorneys said Strickland had an inappropriate conversation with the man who blogs about the case.

Dave Knechel said the judge had noticed his writing and told him, in person, he thought his blog was fair. That conversation took place in October.

Strickland said it wasn’t a secret meeting. The conversation happened right after court ended, while cameras were still rolling, microphones were still open. Strickland called the conversation "unremarkable."

The judge added some sarcasm in his motion. He said the defense has known about his brief discussion with the blogger for many months, but only now has lost confidence in the court's ability to be fair and impartial.

Legal analyst Will Jay said if Strickland hadn't removed himself from the case, every motion could have been argued again, especially if Anthony is found guilty.

On the same day Strickland stepped down, the defense filed more motions, some regarding the death penalty.

One claimed gender bias. Another claimed prosecutors asked for the death penalty after learning how much money Anthony had for her defense.

Jay doesn't think the motions will go far.

"I expect the motion to be denied. Almost every death penalty motion challenged gets denied at the trial level,” Jay said. “But what they're doing is preserving and making it in their record because it's going to be on review for the next 15-20 years, however long if she gets a death sentence.”

Jay said any lawyer representing Anthony would have to file any motion they could because they are fighting for her life.

Strickland had a strong message for Anthony's defense attorneys. He said their intent was to maximize exposure.

"At its core, defense counsel's motion accuses the undersigned (judge Strickland) of being a "self-aggrandizing media hound" Indeed. The Irony is rich," Strickland wrote.

Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. will now rule over the case.

http://www.cfnews13.com/News/Local/2010/4/19/judge_strickland_removes_self_from_casey_case.html

Bill Sheaffer Analysis of Casey Judge Stepping Down

http://www.wftv.com/video/23200720/index.html

OMG... i get back, the monkeys have stolen the BUS and the CHIT has all hit the fan!!!!

sad to see him go, but looking forward to some "tough justice" from a new no-nonsense judge!!

When an Angel Pees down your Touch-hole

Posted on April 20th, 2010 by Valhall

There is an old German proverb…

All skill is in vain when an angel pees down the touch-hole of your musket.

It is said to have been modified and used on the battlefields of the American Civil War in the form of “don’t let an angel pee down your touch-hole”. Now, to be clear on the meaning here, the touch-hole in a muzzle-loading musket is the vent hole through which the spark ignites the charge packed into the gun. And you can be the best marksman with a muzzle-loading musket in the world, but if your target’s angel pees in your touch-hole, you better just praise God and pass the ammunition on to someone else – because you’re out of the fight.

In my personal opinion, what we have seen happen in the past few days and culminating yesterday with Judge Stickland’s resignation as presiding Judge over the Caylee Marie Anthony murder trial, has been some type of God-sent mystery – we’ve watched SOMEONE’S angel pee in SOMEONE’S touch-hole. And it is my personal opinion that someone’s angel was Judge Strickland’s…and that SOMEONE’s touch-hole was Cheney Mason’s and Casey Anthony’s.

But wait, you say, Cheney’s not out of the fight? Judge Strickland is. Yep – that’s why I think it was his angel. I think we just witnessed the Big Guy doing two things:

* Answering a prayer that someone is going to regret they submitted (i.e. the defense thinking this would benefit them).

* Making sure Judge Strickland has been removed from the massive ejecta radius of the killer volcano known as Casey Anthony’s life.

In the movie Armageddon there’s this great opening scene where the astronomer, Karl, who has discovered the massive asteroid that is headed straight for Earth is on the phone with the NASA dude Dan Truman (played by Billy Bob Thornton). Karl has just reported his finding and his calculations – the world is fixing to get the life-obliterating crap smacked out of it. The following exchange takes place about the naming of the planet-killing asteroid:

Karl: …The person that finds her gets to name her right?

Dan: Yes-yes that’s right, that’s right.

Karl: I wanna name her Dottie after my wife. She’s a vicious life-sucking bitch from which there is no escape.

Read the rest:
http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2010/04/20/when-an-angel-pees-down-your-touch-hole/

Legal Analyst Bill Sheaffer on Casey Anthony Case
LET IT BE.

Posted in Latest Posts by William J. Sheaffer on April 21, 2010

Now that the dust is starting to settle from the volcanic reaction to recent events in the Casey Anthony case, this seems the appropriate time to take stock of same, try to decipher meaning and motives, and hopefully calm the troubled waters.

Let’s start by taking a look at the precipitating event which leads us to where we are today, the now infamous invitation by Judge Stan Strickland, subsequent to an October 2009 hearing, to one David Knechel to approach the bench. At that time, in open court, with television cameras rolling, Judge Strickland offered recognition and a compliment to Mr. Knechel (known to most as Marinade Dave) for some earlier blogs Mr. Knechel had published about the subject case.

For those who do not know this, Mr. Knechel, under the pseudonym of Marinade Dave, regularly writes and publishes a WordPress blog about a range of topics, but primarily about missing and murdered women and children. So, a trip to the bench for a brief public exchange seems harmless enough, right?

Well, not really. The problem seems to lie in that several of the blogs to which the Judge referenced his compliment contained remarks by Mr. Knechel critical of the Defendant and the Defense team.

Whether the criticisms had merit is not the point. The issue is really quite narrow: could a reasonable person construe the Judge’s remarks to Mr. Knechel as a ratification of his criticisms of the Defendant and her Defense team? And, if so, would a reasonable person then conclude that such ratification evinced a prejudice or bias either for the State of Florida, or against the Defendant and her lawyers? Again, if so, then the conclusion could be drawn that the Defendant could be deprived of her constitutional right to a fair trial. The upshot is that the beliefs and any conclusions drawn here lie not with anyone but the Defendant, herself.

That leads us to a discussion as to the propriety of the Defense attorneys filing a motion to disqualify Judge Strickland. Upon learning of the above incident, the Defense had no alternative but to disclose it to their client, Casey Anthony, and discuss with her the effect of same on her, and, whether she still held the belief that she could receive a fair trial with Judge Strickland. If Casey Anthony reasonably feared that she could not, her Defense counsel is left with no other choice but to file a motion to disqualify the trial judge.

Why is there no choice? Because, in the event that Ms. Anthony is convicted of murder and sentenced to death, and lose her first round of appeals, then subsequent appellate lawyers would attack the competency of her trial lawyers for their failure to raise the issue. Ultimately, if this attack is successful, it would result in a reversal of her conviction and a new trial for Casey Anthony.

This inexorably leads us to discuss the contents of the subject motion to disqualify trial judge. Therein lies one’s sense of disappointment and a cause to levy criticism and rebuke. The motion to disqualify trial judge needed only to have addressed the narrow issue which I earlier defined. The evidence offered in the motion on that issue alone would have been found to have been legally sufficient and should have achieved the desired result.

However, it is the inclusion of all of the rest of what can only be described as vicious, scurrilous, vituperative, condemnatory and patently mean-spirited, together with unsubstantiated and untrue allegations that subjects this pleading to the harshest of criticism. What is it about this case that causes otherwise good people to act with such toxicity and attack, with utter disregard of the consequences, the character of a man like Judge Strickland? I don’t have an answer, perhaps some of you do.

At this point, we have to address Judge Strickland’s order. Usually when a judge grants a motion to recuse or disqualify, it is done without comment or opinion. This order, granting the defense motion, however, contained an opinion, causing some in the legal community to wonder about, if not view with a critical eye, the prose contained in said opinion.

In ruling on a motion to disqualify, a judge is only to pass on the legal sufficiency of the motion and cannot defend, dispute, or put into context the allegations contained in the motion. He cannot call a press conference to do this either. In this instance, the judge, granted the motion with an opinion, which obviously was in defense of his character.

Certain law school instructors leveled some criticism at Judge Strickland for that. But perhaps it would serve those to remember that Stan Strickland is not only a circuit court judge, but also a husband and a father, whose children live, go to school and work in our community. Judge Strickland has given back to and served the citizens of the state of Florida not only through his civic contributions, but also through public service and sacrifice of financial gain, in the furtherance thereof.

I would assert that he should be expected to respond to a wholesale attack and vicious characterization that goes to the very essence of his being. Perhaps these same law school instructors might want to consider how they would react if they, themselves, were the subject of such a personal attack, and it was instead, their wives, children, parents, friends and colleagues who had to deal with the consequences and the aftermath.

Finally, in looking back, should we castigate Marinade Dave for blogging? Judge Strickland for extending a compliment? The Defense for filing the motion to disqualify (which, again, they were obliged to do)? Or, Judge Strickland, again, for the content of his order?

No. The prosecution of Casey Anthony will not be impacted by this series of recent events, nor will the ends of justice be subverted and, in the end, the jury will reach a just verdict based upon the evidence presented at trial. So, in the words of Paul McCartney and the Beatles, “Let it be.”

WSJ

http://billsheaffer.wordpress.com/2010/04/21/let-it-be/

"I rue the day that I wrote about it," Knechel said while seated in front of his laptop at the Seminole County Library. "I'd rather be remembered as a writer," he said, not the guy who played a role in Strickland's recusal.

Pulleeeze! I'm calling BS on that one! IMO he's secretly enjoying the power trip.

You know what AJ? I just don't see where 'EX-marinade turned Writer- Dave' interfered with this case at all. I don't know why he'd be blaming himself for Judge Strickland having to take himself off the case either. Wanna hear my deep thoughts on why?

OK! LOL

So long as the prosecution has credible evidence and presents their case and evidences in a comprehensive way at the trial, then it doesn't matter who the judge is so long as said judge runs his courtroom according to legalities. Assuming both Strickland and Perry would do this, and assuming the prosecution is competent, Dave has done nothing to effect this case.

He's just feeling bad for ratting out Strickland who he 'over'-thought was his buddy. He probably just feels like he betrayed Strickland is all. But he didn't, and I'm sure Strickland couldn't care less since he didn't intend anything he said to be a secret between himself and Dave in the first place. If anything, Strickland is laughing at the defense for making a big deal of nothing and consequently stepping in Strick(T)LAND of a different sort! :)

Objection to Court's "Order on Defendant's Motion to Disqualify Trial Judge"

http://wdbo.com/common/pdf/orlando/casey_4_30_motion.pdf

Casey's defense mad about judge's insult-filled motion

By Bob Hazen @ April 30, 2010 10:54 AM

Defense attorneys for Casey Anthony are upset about the insult-filled order signed by Judge Stan Strickland before he stepped down from the case.

In a motion filed today, J. Cheney Mason objected to Strickland's criticism of the defense.

"The judge, in filing his order, chose to utilize that opportunity, even though improvident and innapropriately so, to insult defense counsel and do so by either serious mistaken recollection of the facts or worse," Cheney wrote.

"The defense has labored and, frankly, suffered anxiety over filing this Objection since receipt of the same on the 19th of April. However, in the mean time, many other members of the judiciary, members of the Bar, the media, and the general public have been misinformed regarding the judge's order and the misleading content, as set forth above."

Judge Strickland removed himself from the case after the defense complained about his contacts with a blogger.

Read the documents:

Defense objects to insults
Judge Strickland's Order to Disqualify Himself


http://wdbo.com/localnews/2010/04/caseys-defense-mad-about-judge.html

I see this was filed October 21, 2010...Wonder who sent this??? Probably some disgruntled blogger that has it in for MD...I shall not elaborate, as I'm sure folks that frequent his site know of whom I am referring...Wonder what kind of repercussions this will have???