This morning we heard the words “we rest”. The State has concluded their part of the presentation. Three years and countless sums of money ride on those two simple words “we rest”. I have no idea how many hours that my Jan and I have invested in this case. We have read thousands of pages of depositions, watched countless hours of video coverage of pre-trial hearings, jail tapes, and news coverage.
There is little doubt that Jan and I would make for poor choices to have on the jury. We know too much! As a result it is very hard to be objective about how well the prosecution did in presenting their case.
I can not fault them on the approach they took, play the time line. Play the 31 days that Caylee Anthony was missing and mother Casey Anthony did not think it was important enough to call 911. Play the science card, the car smelled of a dead body. Play the damning Tattoo card, it speaks volumes about Casey Anthony. But have the prosecution proved the case?
Sure there is much that can be ‘inferred’ from their presentation, but they also left some dots not joined. I wonder why?
They had no problem parading what seemed like an almost endless list of ex-lovers to the court, but one was mysteriously missing. Why?
Of equal interest was the manner in which they introduced the finding of the skeletal remains of Caylee Anthony. Just about everyone except the sales rep for the gloves worn by the CSI folks were invited, but the discoverer of the remains was not. In some ways this sends up a bit of a red flag. I have to wonder why they opted to leave him out?
Do not get me wrong, I think the prosecution did a wonderful job, but is it good enough?
This morning we heard the ‘required’ legal ramblings concerning having the entire case thrown out. Cheney Mason was his usual acerbic self, and scored a big fat zero. Jan offered a few thoughts in this article.
I will however grudgingly give Chaney Mason some points, he spars well over previous cases. I have trouble just remembering my phone number, this guy seems to be able to quote every court case number in the past hundred years.
It will be interesting to see what happens tomorrow. The defense team needs a starting point. Will they attack the ‘junk science’ or somehow find a way to start on the sexual abuse angle? If they have a really ballsy start they could always begin with the ‘Morally Corrupt’ meter reader Roy Kronk?