Defense Wants Party Pics, 911 Calls & Other Evidence Blocked

You're probably right, but we can wish can't we!!!!

The Two-edged Sword of Hearsay

Posted on March 10th, 2010 by Valhall

Casey Anthony’s defense team has submitted a list of statements made by Casey and others that they are wanting declared as hearsay or as prejudicial and omitted from being entered into evidence during trial. The defense has basically bunched these statements in categories that they believe show they are prejudicial or hearsay. Those categories are:

* Characterization of Anthony Family Relationships
* Characterization of Casey as liar
* Hearsay
* Contents of Trunk
* Double (dammit) Hearsay
* Characterization of Casey as bad mother
* Characterization of Casey as thief
* Remains of Caylee
* Jesse (Grund) as father of Caylee
* Casey pregnancy
* Roy Kronk tip
* Characterization of Casey as drug user
* Characterization of Casey as frequent partier
* Hearsay (psychic) – (which must be a special subset of double dammit hearsay when a psychic is involved)
* Casey stealing (versus Casey being characterized as thief?)
* Casey’s second pregnancy
* Finding of Caylee Remains

Now, the ones that are “characterizations” or about Casey’s pregnancies pretty much boil down to – they don’t want anybody saying anything about Casey, or the Anthonys. UNLESS, that person is going to say that Casey was a good mother and the Anthony family was a good, wholesome family, and they were all fine, upstanding individuals. I think we can all see the problems with the defense trying to make that play out. While I have no doubt they can find SOMEONE who will make these statements about Casey and/or the Anthony family, the problem is they are going to get cross-examined. I don’t see that part of the witness-box time going well for the defense. In other words, the defense can’t put Amy Huizenga or Maria Kissh on the stand and ask “Did you think Casey was a good mother?” to which they probably would answer yes, without the prosecution getting up and asking “Did Casey take Caylee to parties where there were [fill in the blank - drugs?, smoking?, drinking?, etc.]? Did Casey leave Caylee unattended? (to which the answer is going to be yes)

Read more:
http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=1962

let me get this straight.. they want EVERYTHING that may be damaging to their case thrown out..

i can see the courtroom now:

baez: "judge, i object to this line of questioning/witness/evidence"
strickland: "and what is the basis of your objection"
baez (in a whiny tone): "it is devistating to my case, therefore it should NOT be allowed."

this guy is such a doof.. you cannot exclude evidence soley because it doesnt paint your client rosey!!

IF they want everything that KC ever did wrong to be thrown out, this trial is going to contain no more than birth to age 5 (of KC)... cause since then .. she has become a liar and a theif.