June 21, 2011 Perry slams Baez for evidence violation

[MADeline]

By Anthony Colarossi and Walter Pacheco, Orlando Sentinel 12:26 p.m. EDT, June 21, 2011

State prosecutor Linda Drane Burdick said an investigation into an Orange County Jail inmate indicates the woman had a daughter who had drowned and whose body was found by her grandfather.
It is not clear if this information was conveyed indirectly to Casey Anthony, Burdick told Chief Judge Belvin Perry. It does not appear the inmate, April Whalen, spoke directly to Casey Anthony.
It could become a relevant issue before the end of the case, she said.

Earlier, Perry has found that Casey Anthony's lead attorney made substantial and willful evidence-sharing violations related to one of the experts who is testifying today in the murder case.
Perry finds the failure to inform expert Richard Eikelenboom of the need to provide his opinions in a report amounts to a substantial violation because it involves a critical subject matter.

Perry decided not to allow Eikelenboom to testify at this time about the possibility of testing decomposition fluid from the trunk of Casey Anthony's car for DNA.
He may later allow that testimony; however, after a special hearing is conducted regarding the admissibility of Eikelenboom's scientific methods.

"It is a remedy short of exclusion," Perry said.
Baez got in trouble because he didn't tell Eikelenboom to prepare a report about the DNA recovery. The report, including his expert opinion, should have been shared with the state.

Meanwhile, the expert witness is being permitted to talk about other findings right now. But Perry read special instructions stating that his report was not provided to the state until Saturday and that matter may be considered in evaluating the credibility of the witness.
Perry's move came after testimony from another defense witness.

Forensic botanist opinion
Forensic botanist Dr. Jane Bock offered a sometimes confusing testimony about the length of time Caylee's skeletal remains were placed at the east Orange County crime scene before officials recovered them.

Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton had Bock agree that Caylee's body could have been placed at the scene far longer than the two weeks she previously estimated based on photos and other evidence she reviewed for the defense.

"I don't know exactly when it was placed there," she told Ashton.
Her earlier opinion was based on the "pattern of leaf litter" at the scene, which she visited after Caylee's bones were discovered.
At another point, when he said a hip bone was found 4 inches deep in the muck, Ashton again asked Bock if that was an indication the body was there much longer than two weeks.
The forensic botanist suggested a dog or coyote could have buried in the dirt. Ashton slightly giggled then responded: "We are not blessed with coyotes."

Earlier Ashton asked if roots could grow through a laundry bag in just two weeks during December. Bock said they could.
When he asked if they could grow through bone and the skull in that period of time, she said, "I suspect so, but I'm no expert on bones."



http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...,7984860.story

[jpcamaro70]

The defense is turning this into a circus. I followed a lot of trials on insession and this is by far the most poorly defended.

If anyone saw the botonist testify for the defense will know what i mean, she almost convinced me she had no experience in this.

[MADeline]

Don't you just love the Judge though? He on Baez every time he tries something. I read somewhere that Baez is doing all this on purpose to ambush the State.

[jpcamaro70]

Yeah, I heard that too.

Things like "he's in too deep, trying for a mistrial" sometimes it looks that way.

[MADeline]

A mistrial wouldn't help him, it would have to be done all over again wouldn't it? If it comes to that, Casey should get a better lawyer.
Can they use all the evidence if they start a new trial?
I wish I knew more about law.

[jpcamaro70]

I really don't know if a mistrial would help, but I found this bit of law which people may be talking about:

"A mistrial in a criminal prosecution may prevent retrial under the Double Jeopardy provision of the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits an individual from being tried twice for the same offense, unless required by the interests of justice and depending on which party moved for the mistrial. Typically, there is no bar to a retrial if the defendant requests or consents to a mistrial. A retrial may be barred if the court grants a mistrial without the defendant's consent, or over his objection. If the mistrial results from judicial or prosecutorial misconduct, a retrial will be barred. In United States v. Jorn, 400 U.S. 470, 91 S. Ct. 547, 27 L. Ed. 2d 543 (1971), the Supreme Court held that reprosecuting the defendant would constitute double jeopardy because the judge had abused his discretion in declaring a mistrial. On his own motion, the judge had declared a mistrial to enable government witnesses to consult with their own attorneys."

Now, i don't think this is the case as I believe Baez already asked for a mistrial???

Or maybe after that nightmare of an openening statement he needs a complete do-over.