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?
Simon Barrett
Loading ...
4 users commented in " Casey Anthony Trial – The Prosecution Rests, But Hardly Stops! "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackThe prosecution rests and now comes the second guessing. Relax. The prosecutors presented a logical, methodical, and detailed case. It spoke to the logic of the jurors. Their case did not pander to the sympathy of the jurors, nor did it talk down to the jurors. It challenged the jury to use their heads and logic. Perhaps, as a society we’re so used to having things served up to us on a silver platter that we kind of freak out when we must use our own best judgement. Everything I saw in this presentation was appropriate, intelligent, controlled, and not at all about razzle/dazzle. Just the facts. I’m glad the prosecution showed restraint and didn’t attempt to overwhelm the jury by calling unimportant witnesses to the stand. Kronk and the baby-daddy are not important to the murder of the child. If there’s one thing Kronk and the baby daddy have in common, it’s a lack of contact with Casey Anthony. Their testimonies would be nothing more than anecdotal clutter in the minds of the jury.
Right out of the gate the defense presented an inplausible scenario that will be cut down with relish by the prosecutors. The prosectuors need not do anything more. Just sit back and cross examine the ridiculous theories presented by the defense. It should be a good show! In the end, the jury will be alienated by the defense for being asked to suspend reality, and trying their patience. They will find Casey Anthony guilty.
MassMom, I agree, the jurors are not idiots. The opening statements of the defense team reminds me of “my dog ate my homework” yes, it could have happened, if you had a dog. The defense’s dog is just like some of Casey’s friends…..it just doesn’t exist. So what really happened, dead bady in backyard, dead body in trunk of Casey’s car, dead human hair with DNA relating to female Anthonys (only one of which is dead), dead child hidden near the home (Casey’s choice for pet funerals)….and the list goes on! There was no need for more. There is no doubt who did this nor is there any doubt of premeditation. “Accidents” often occur after certain searches on the internet, just as “accidents” often happen after one spouse decides to file for divorce.
The only thing that the defense is going on is that “nobody saw Casey do these things”, but the ONLY plausible explanation is that SHE WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO COULD HAVE, especially because of the fact that she admits to driving the stinking car and that she made excuses for her child’s absence the whole time to cover up for it and that she had no remorse or grief for her death. Innocent until proven guilty does not mean that if you cannot prove that someone has killed someone that they did not do it. It only means that it cannot be proven. In this case it is SO OBVIOUS that this woman killed this poor child that if the state wanted to behead her in the town square I would not have a problem with that.
prosecuton did a fabulous job laying the foundation. I believe there is more to come in their rebuttal phase after Baez finishes telling this farce story.jmo
Leave A Reply