Casey Anthony Trial--it's ON

[_Jersey Girl]

I'm not as interested in the trial as Jersey Girl and others are, but I found this story VERY interesting:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/us/19casey.html?_r=1

Turns out there was one search on the Anthony computer for chloroform, not 84. The forensic computer analyst saw the mistake early and tried to alert the police and prosecution that they had the wrong information, but to no avail.

The designer, John Bradley, said Ms. Anthony had visited what the prosecution said was a crucial Web site only once, not 84 times, as prosecutors had asserted. He came to that conclusion after redesigning his software, and immediately alerted prosecutors and the police about the mistake, he said.

...

According to Mr. Bradley, chief software developer of CacheBack, used by the police to verify the computer searches, the term “chloroform” was searched once through Google. The Google search then led to a Web site, sci-spot.com, that was visited only once, Mr. Bradley added. The Web site offered information on the use of chloroform in the 1800s.

The Orange County Sheriff’s Office had used the software to validate its finding that Ms. Anthony had searched for information about chloroform 84 times, a conclusion that Mr. Bradley says turned out to be wrong. Mr. Bradley said he immediately alerted a prosecutor, Linda Drane Burdick, and Sgt. Kevin Stenger of the Sheriff’s Office in late June through e-mail and by telephone to tell them of his new findings. Mr. Bradley said he conducted a second analysis after discovering discrepancies that were never brought to his attention by prosecutors or the police.

Mr. Bradley’s findings were not presented to the jury and the record was never corrected, he said. Prosecutors are required to reveal all information that is exculpatory to the defense.

Blox! :-)

This was actually brought out in the trial by the defense. I addressed it here:

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=472722#p472722

Even after Defense Attorney Jose Baez brought this out, Prosecution Attorney Linda Drane Burdick continued to refer to the 84 hits for chloroform. As if the jury hadn't heard the alternative evidence!

[_Joseph]

Gee...., I would think [off-topic attack deleted] would be glad to see her found Not Guilty of the major crime.

[_Jersey Girl]

Bumping for general purposes of removing a certain poster's sn from the front page.

[_Jersey Girl]

It ain't over 'til it's over
or
It ain't over ;-)

Girly girl is due back in Orlando by noon Friday to begin serving a year's probation for check fraud. Her attorney's attempted to appeal wherein they tried to spin, I mean on the grounds that Casey Anthony served her probation while in prison, she's a-goin' home again.

Terms of the probation are as follows:

Under the terms of the probation order, Anthony will have to report to a probation officer every month and can't change her residency without permission from the probation officer. She is prohibited from getting drunk or using drugs, is required to find a job and can't associate with known criminals. She must submit to reasonable searches in her home and at her job by her probation officer.

http://www.wftv.com/news/28848077/detail.html

Now look, Baez. There is no possible way that she could have served her probation while in jail and remained in compliance with the terms of her probation.

Did she find a job?
Did she avoid associating with known criminals?

Come on!

I'm rather divided on how I feel about this. On one hand, I think that she probably won't live a year in Florida and remain, well, living. On the other hand, I think that I would've been okay if the probation could have been transferred to another (non-publicized) state. But is that realistic?

Even if it could have been transferred to take place in another state, I have to think that given human nature being what it is, someone-somewhere-someplace would have divulged her location thus creating the same circumstances and risks had she served her probation right in sunny Orlando.

Members of the public keep saying.."who will hire her?"

I think the answer to that is, "her attorney's".

Her attorney's already claim that she is back in Florida. If she needs to physically report in once a month or travel to/from work or her attorney's homes or what have you, I'm more than certain that some crackpot is going to try to do her in.

Is this a case of "you plays the game, you takes your chances"? In other words, hasn't she earned this reality via her own choices?

What think ye?

[_Bond James Bond]

If she can't find a job does she go to prison? Because I'd like to see one good thing come from this crappy economy.

[_Jersey Girl]

Here's the deal according to wftv.com (or wtf.com as I call it ;-)

http://www.wftv.com/news/28966575/detail.html

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey must report by noon on Friday to a Florida probation office to begin serving probation on her check fraud convictions. However, it is not known where she'll have to serve that probation.
A Florida appellate court on Tuesday denied her request to have a probation order halted.
Casey most likely will not be reporting to the downtown Orlando Probation Intake Office, if and when she checks in to start her one-year probation.
There are 156 probation offices across the state. The Department of Corrections said it won't disclose the one the convicted felon chooses because it will have to be in the Florida county where she plans to live.
The Department of Corrections said it's keeping information, which would normally be public, confidential, to protect state workers and Casey.
Casey could even ask to join more than 6,500 of the state's 123,000 probationers who serve out of state, but her state of choice would have to agree.
WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer said it's possible the defense will ask the Florida Supreme Court to consider whether it's too late to fix the clerical error that led the Department of Corrections to put Casey on probation in jail.
"The question would be, will the Florida Supreme Court, A: weigh in on it, and B: stay any sentence until they weigh in on it?" Sheaffer said.
If that doesn't happen, starting this week, Casey will have to do the following: report to a probation office once a month, pay $20 a month for the cost of supervision, find a job and tell the truth.
If she violates her probation, she could be resentenced and could face prison time.
Casey's attorneys were supposed to be back in court on Thursday because of another issue, but the hearing was delayed on whether Casey will have to repay local and state law enforcement for the half-million dollars they spent searching for Casey's daughter, Caylee.
It's now set for September 2.

So, she apparently doesn't have to report in at Orlando and can choose any one of 156 probation offices in the state. She also has an option of serving out of state if the state in question agrees to it.

As to violation of probation. Note the underlined portion. She "could" be resentenced and "could" face prison time.

Okay, whatever.

[_Jersey Girl]

Didn't I say it ain't over?

Due out in November:

Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony

by Prosecuting Attorney, Jeff Ashton

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/imperfect-justice-jeff-ashton/1104911872?ean=9780062125323&itm=1&usri=jeff%2bashton

[_JAK]

[quote="Jersey Girl"]It ain't over 'til it's over
or
It ain't over ;-)
----------------------------
I ask, what do you mean by “over”?

DEATH

That’s when it’s over. So you’re correct in a general way. There are many who should be in jail who are not. Conversely, there are many who are OUT of jail who should be in jail. Justice is relative to time, place, and wealth (or influence). "Relative" in situations is an indisptable reality. Fair is also a concept which is a perception by those who selectively observe.

JAK

[_Brackite]

Casey Anthony should've at least been found guilty of 2nd degree murder by her Jury. The Juries of America should Not confuse the statement, "beyond a reasonable doubt" to mean beyond all doubt. Unfortunately, the Casey Anthony Jury went by the standard of beyond all doubt. They should've used some common sense in their verdict. The Prosecution in the case made a big mistake in going after the death Penalty for Casey Anthony. They should've Never have gone after the death Penalty in this case. That might of confused the jury a little bit.

[_Dr. Shades]

There are many who should be in jail who are not. Conversely, there are many who are OUT of jail who should be in jail.

What's the difference between your first sentence and your second one?