Casey Anthony to Be Freed Wednesday, Juror Wants Cash for Interview

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:04:28 PM EST
Tags: Caysey Anthony (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Casey Anthony was sentenced to four years for lying to police and will be freed Wednesday, with credit for time served.

Juror No. 6 is willing to tell his story, but only for a price. He even has a publicist. Here's the letter. [More...]

Florida legislators are introducing a bill called Caylee's law. It would make it a felony for a parent not to report a child is missing.

Online petitions for a federal law are going viral.

Laws named for specific crime victims are almost always a bad idea. They reek of vigilante justice. Laws should not be passed in response to singular events, no matter how tragic. Cooler heads are needed.

If we must have a "Caylee's law," how about making it one that prevents jurors from cashing in on their service?

Other news that doesn't sit right with me: Child crime victim Elizabeth Smart, now all grown up, will join ABC News as a commentator on missing persons cases. It's not quite as offensive as Beth Holloway getting her own talk show (at least the news networks are finally done treating her as news so she's far down the channel list on Lifetime), but it's close.

< Thursday Morning Open Thread | Dominique Strauss-Kahns Attorneys Rule Out Plea Deal >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Casey Anthony to Be Freed Wednesday, Juror Wants Cash for Interview | 49 comments (49 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I can understand (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by nyjets on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:37:34 PM EST

While I can understand you not liking Elizabeth Smart as a commentator, calling it offensive is a bit harsh. I mean,at least give her a chance to say something first.

I agree (5.00 / 2) (#6)
by CoralGables on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:37:50 PM EST

that a juror, a judge, a lawyer, or the victim's family trying to cash in after television hyped cases is all equally offensive. Take television out the courtroom and the stink would likely be solved.

What would happen is a juror hired a publicist (none / 0) (#7)
by republicratitarian on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:40:36 PM EST

before the verdict was rendered?


: It would certainly be grounds for a new trial (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by magster on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:44:47 PM EST

had Casey been convicted.

Who's pays for Casey's legal fees in a case (none / 0) (#1)
by republicratitarian on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:21:31 PM EST

like this? It would seem she has more than just a public defender and I would assume for the length of time this case has gone on that the cost would be considerable. Does the state pick up the complete cost of lawyers and specialists or is she on the hook for as much of that amount that she can pay?

I believe it's a typo on the title.

: Since Baez is now a "superstar" (none / 0) (#4)
by magster on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:27:00 PM EST

I would guess or suspect that he'll waive a lot of fees and consider his time and efforts an investment of sorts. Maybe he'll settle for a cut of whatever book or tv deals Casey can manage to make.

: She sold rights (none / 0) (#11)
by rdandrea on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:20:23 PM EST

to her family videos to ABC for $200K.
That's pretty much what paid for Baez and his team.
He worked cheap.

Read today that Casey's a high school dropout (none / 0) (#2)
by magster on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:24:05 PM EST

Now that she's thrown her family under the bus and has all of America against her, she's going to have an awfully tough time out on the street. Judge might have done her a favor keeping her in jail a bit longer so that she can try to line something up before she's on her own.

She needs to get an agent fast to get a book or TV interview deal going, or she'll have nothing.

A favor?... (5.00 / 0) (#13)
by kdog on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:24:48 PM EST

chains and cages are never no favor, leaving aside whether she belongs in one or not.

I'd rather the hardest of hard times on the street than 3 hots and a cot in a cage...no brainer.


Just Because You & the Florida Nutz... (5.00 / 2) (#26)
by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 04:40:53 PM EST

... hate her, don't toss me in the "has all of America against her". I'm not fan, but I don't hate her, fact is, I don't know what to think about her. I'm certainly not going to curtail her ambitions because I watch a couple hours of coverage on the Today show. Level heads will prevail and I am positive this will blow over and she will be just fine.

As far as tossing people under the bus, one could easily argue, that family tossed her under the bus long before she had a kid. It's been my unfortunate experience, that people who lie to that degree, do it as a mechanism to hide gigantic secrets at home. It's not something that pops up because the police come knocking.

And +1 as to what kdog, said.

It's weird, because my opinion of her is being changed by the haters. Not sure if I am really comfortable with that, but the more hate I read and see, the more I feel for her. The more it makes me think. I once thought she did it, but they came up short, now, I don't know.

I keep thinking 'was the coverage I watched as lopsided as the reactions'. Theses cases... the truth gets so buried and regurgitated that even if it manages to emerge, no one can recognize it.


Easy (none / 0) (#30)
by magster on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 06:33:07 PM EST

America does hate her mostly, with about 80% polled saying she got away with murder (can't remember where I saw that, or I'd link), and she did throw her family under the bus and maybe the family deserved it.

Fact is, many people think she did it, and her family won't stand by her now, and she has no education, and it's gonna suck for her.


80 % of America probably (5.00 / 1) (#32)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 06:38:05 PM EST

doesn't know anything about her other than the media is making a big ruckus over her acquittal, and couldn't care less. I know nothing about her or her family (as I wasn't interested in the case.)

I don't doubt that 80% of those who followed the case think she's horrible. But I don't think that's the same thing as "America hates her."


Do the Math (none / 0) (#52)
by ScottW714 on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 01:22:11 PM EST

20% of 300M(rough US population estimate) is 60,000,000 people.

To put that in perspective, GWB won in 2000 with 50,456,002 votes.


And on More Thing (none / 0) (#53)
by ScottW714 on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 01:22:49 PM EST

Not one of those people actually know.


: I happened to see the Today show today, FWIW (none / 0) (#56)
by magster on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 07:11:56 PM EST

where a panel said what I said in absolute terms "that America hates Casey!"
So, I concede to your's and Jeralyn's statements. If the Today show panel says somethin, believe the opposite.

She and Baez (none / 0) (#20)
by Amiss on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 02:06:21 PM EST

have both reportedly signed with the William Morris Agency.


I can't blame her or him. (none / 0) (#21)
by jeffinalabama on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 02:20:10 PM EST

What kind of job is she going to get given her notoriety?


: she needs to change her name (none / 0) (#22)
by desmoinesdem on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 02:31:08 PM EST

and appearance, ideally to get a fresh start in some new city, but (to put it mildly), she seems pretty lacking in life skills. Hard to see how she could get things together.

HUGE Typo in the headline, Jeralyn (none / 0) (#3)
by Anne on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:26:39 PM EST

and in the body of the post: it's CASEY who is being freed; CAYLEE was the dead child.

Further on, CAYLEE is misspelled twice - once as "Cayley" and also as "Cayly."

Fixing it now, thanks (none / 0) (#8)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:41:44 PM EST

: While you're at it (none / 0) (#12)
by rdandrea on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:22:05 PM EST

you might touch up "Wednessday" in the headline as well.

They shoulda made OJ a (none / 0) (#10)
by observed on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:45:40 PM EST

crime commentator. He obviously had the expertise, and he was acquitted of a heinous crime.

Not another dumb law... (none / 0) (#14)
by kdog on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:28:23 PM EST

passed in haste post-tragedy...will we ever learn? Can't wait to see how that one gets misused, abused. and misapplied...cuz ya know its gonna pass, what legislator could vote against anything named Caylee's Law and survive the attack ads in their next campaign? Caylee's Law could be about legalizing murder and the dolts would vote for it.

Did I miss a change to the site? Grey background (none / 0) (#15)
by jawbone on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:29:27 PM EST

was behind everything, sides and subject line, except for the actual comment box.

It was hard to read, couldn't see subject line easily.

A change here? I hit some key I shouldn't have?
Whassup? Anyone else seeing that?

This thread is...normal...right now....

When this happens on my computer (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by MO Blue on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:49:44 PM EST

the site is not processing the command for the site meter in a timely manner.


I get that occasionally - happened last (none / 0) (#16)
by Anne on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:38:55 PM EST

night, for me, at home - main page was weird, but once I clicked into a post, it looked fine.


If you're using IE 8.... (none / 0) (#17)
by kdog on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:48:41 PM EST

hit the "compatabiity view" button next to the address bar...you'll be right as rain.


Huge T/U, kdog, for the compatability view tip! (none / 0) (#50)
by jawbone on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 01:01:28 PM EST

: De nada... (none / 0) (#51)
by kdog on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 01:06:54 PM EST

it's rare for my luddite-esque arse to find such a helpful nugget.

it happens when some (none / 0) (#29)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 06:32:15 PM EST

element is hanging and causing the site to load slowly. I know it's very annoying but there's really no way to fix it. I've checked with Colin at Scoophost many times about this. Sorry for the inconvenience. Usually it doesn't last too long. If it starts happening more frequently, please let me know and I'll have Colin take another look.


: It started for me... (none / 0) (#34)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 07:20:36 PM EST

when BTD broke the margins the other day. To paraphrase my Mother--"this is why we can't have nice things".

Still saddened (none / 0) (#19)
by jeffinalabama on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 02:04:58 PM EST

by the death of a lovely child. So many die, either from accidents, cancer, injuries, or murder.

What does it say about a country, though, that automatically assumes guilt over every parent, day care provider, etc.?

Now I would not hire Ms. Anthony to babysit Little Saber 6, but too much press by too many sqwawking helicopter-parent types has helped ruin critical thinking in this country.

: That Wasn't the Case 30 Years Ago (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 04:47:48 PM EST

Ditto for spouses.
But then investigators started realizing the odds are if you get killed, someone you know did it. That assumption is a fairly recent phenomena based on past cases.
To me that sad part is when we can't find the will to back off that assumption after the facts clearly indicate that we should.

About that new Florida law (none / 0) (#25)
by Makarov on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 03:33:56 PM EST

This part of the proposed Caylee's Law seems flawed:

fails to make contact with or otherwise verify the whereabouts and safety of a child 12 years of age or under for a period of 48 hours, and to immediately thereafter report the child as missing;

So, if divorced parents have joint custody and an agreement for one to have custody most of the time but to spend a long holiday with another, the first parent must contact and speak to the other every 48 hour or face jail?

Camping trip with the scouts? Jail. The list goes on.

Sounds like a terrible law created by politicians seeking to gain attention and popularity on the corpse of a dead little girl.

i'm a bit confused. (none / 0) (#28)
by cpinva on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 05:30:48 PM EST

ms. anthony was found guilty of lying to the police, and sentenced to the max. of 1 year in jail, plus a $1,000 fine, per charge. per the presiding and sentencing judge, it was because of her lying that the police spent time uselessly searching for the child.

my question:

ms. anthony was acquitted of the charge of murdering her child, and attempting to cover that murder up. logically, if we assume the jury had it correct, then ms. anthony shouldn't have been convicted of lying, because she truly didn't know what happened to the child, and she didn't intentionally send the police off on wild goose chases.

the prosecution asserted, but failed to prove, that ms. anthony had anything to do with either the death or hiding the body. defense counsel asserted that the father hid the body, not ms. anthony, after the terrible drowning accident that happened on his watch, and that she wasn't aware of.

what did i miss here?

here are your four false statements (none / 0) (#31)
by CoralGables on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 06:36:54 PM EST

leading to conviction on four counts.

that she worked at Universal Studios
that she left Caylee with a babysitter named Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez
that she had told co-workers Jeffrey Hopkins and Juliette Lewis about Caylee's disappearance
that she spoke to Caylee by phone on July 15, 2008

The defense never asserted that she drowned (none / 0) (#37)
by Joan in VA on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:34:00 PM EST

on his watch. The drowning was asserted to be on Casey's watch and that he found Caylee in the pool and was angry that Casey had let her drown.


She told police that she did (none / 0) (#47)
by gyrfalcon on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 02:02:22 AM EST

know what happened to the child, that she'd been abducted by a baby-sitter, who turned out not to exist. She made up a whole host of people, as well as a job at Universal, an entire family for the non-existent baby-sitter, non-existent friends and co-workers (at a job she never held) who had recommended the baby-sitter and whose children were also cared for by her, and on and on and on.

And then probably the worst lie of all, that she'd even spoken to her daughter by telephone while she was being "held" by the "baby-sitter."

The police spent countless hours, days, weeks trying to track down all these various leads to a missing child. And when one would turn out to be a definitely blind alley, she changed the story to send them off in yet another direction.

If you weren't following this in the early days, it's hard to fully grasp the extent of the elaborate lies she told (not just to police but to friends and family for months and years before that).


This need to be said (none / 0) (#33)
by loveed on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 07:04:39 PM EST

What if the accusation of sexual abuse by her father is true?

people are so uncomfortable talking about this subject.Children are preyed on by predators all the time. Incest is unimaginable. But it happens.

Kasey will be released wednesday. Into a world of hate by a small group of people magnified by the media.

Imagine this:

She's daddy girl. He gives her baths, tuck her into bed at night. Maybe even read her a bedtime story. He more than happy to babysit while her mother works.

This is when they have there special time together. Uninterrupted,no chance for discovery.She sits on his lap (she 2-3yrs old). He smiling and holding her so close. He touches her in private area (she does not know this wrong.To her he looks pleased and happy.
He fondle her and teaches her to fondle him.As the years go by, she becomes and expert at pleasing him. She happy to do this. He tells her"this our secret, no one must know".This is the way she is introduce to sex.
He loves her, after all this is her father.

As she get older, and realize this is wrong. He forces her with threat. Reinforcing no one will believe her. Why would he let her go. He's trained her to do things just the way he wants.
Sex with her father is part of her life. The sex becomes normal.Plus it makes her father so happy. And we know children likes to please there parents.
When she is confronted with the body of her dead child,by her abuser. The threats return " You did this" "your going to jail" "your mother will hate you".
The he soften " I will take care of this" "Go ,and act like nothing has happen". He takes care of the body.
As she grieving. She must do as he says.After all, this is her father.
News break about the missing child. Her father
points the finger in her direction. Why not,he's use to using her.
He realizes he can make a lot of money (Cindy pays the bills),his own money. He's adored by the public and the media. Women wants to sleep him and give him money. He's living the good life, while his daughter is in jail following orders.

He can't have her out of jail,she might tell someone the truth. So he buys a gun, which is a violation of her bond.
She watches him on TV from her cell, knowing he knows the truth. She realizes no one will believe her. He was right.

The prosecution knew about the acquisition of abuse by George. But they ignored it, and vouch for his credibility.
The jury realize early George was a liar. It tainted there case.

I want to hear her story.

The sexual abuse accusation (5.00 / 1) (#38)
by Joan in VA on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:52:31 PM EST

was baseless and never supported by any evidence. The judge disallowed it to be offered as a reason for her behavior in closing for exactly that reason. Casey chose not to testify, as was her right, but without her testimony regarding sexual abuse, it is nothing more than a vile smear of her father. She also accused her brother of fondling her. It is just a wonder that she did not accuse her mother of some sort of aberrant behavior as well.


: not baseless (none / 0) (#54)
by loveed on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 03:18:09 PM EST

Biaz had to offer a profer of good faith,to even mention this is his opening argument. This is why Ashton thought she would testify. Ashton also said this charge did not surprise him. He knew this 2yrs ago,and so did George Anthony,Cindy,and Lee.
All the jurors who has spoken out. And the ones to come,will tell you George is a liar. He bent over backwards to convict her.
George was there that morning. And he is the only person who saw Kaylee in the too small clothes. Cindy testified she had never seen those clothes before. There are pictures of Kaylee in these clothes when she was 18month. The police never obtained Georges cellphone records or his EZ pass records. We know where Casey is,but not George. He also lied about having a job.
George Anthony had mistress.She gave him $4000.00
because he did not have a job. She also had to ban him from her home.And changed her number,because he was harassing her. Three day after Kaylee body was found. He texts her" I need you in my life".
But the most disgusting thing he did,was the fake suicide. The police was closing in on him. Who write a 8 page suicide letter? He called everyone to tell them goodbye even Baez. He says when he see Kaylee in heaven (suicide is a mortal sin). The bible he started bring to court, should have brunt his hands.
He made tons of money. Flying first class all over the country.
George took care of the body. This will come out.
I have always thought Lee saw him abusing his sister. The way he was sobbing on the stand,along with Kasey, it something going on.
George Anthony is a user of women.
When this secret come to light.I want you to remember that post.

What an appalling load of (none / 0) (#46)
by gyrfalcon on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 01:55:23 AM EST

absolute made-up fantasy **.


: We will see (none / 0) (#55)
by loveed on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 03:18:45 PM EST

watching Hannity (none / 0) (#36)
by loveed on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 08:16:40 PM EST

Hannity agrees with the jury. He thinks the child drowned. He was also impressed with the defense closing argument.

Judge Napolitano thinks the judge was the fourth prosecutor.

Fox by far had the best coverage.

I would like to see Hannity vs Nancy Grace.

Uh, if it's "Caylee's Law, (none / 0) (#39)
by Joan in VA on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:56:24 PM EST

shouldn't it make it a felony to report a child as missing when you actually know that child isn't "missing" at all?

John Walsh (none / 0) (#40)
by CoralGables on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:57:24 PM EST

that was the name I couldn't come up with earlier today. Was he the first to make big bucks off a highly publicized case?

: In all fairness (none / 0) (#41)
by nyjets on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:07:44 PM EST

Walsh did help capture a number of people suspected of crimes. An argument can be made he did a lot of good.

Cheney Mason (none / 0) (#48)
by Lacy on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 07:09:41 AM EST

Casey's lawyer Cheney Mason's attacks on his fellow lawyer/pundits were put in an interesting light on Anderson Cooper last night when a tape of Cheney Mason himself (before he represented Casey} was played....And he predicted a life sentence for Casey.

When is doubt "reasonable"? (none / 0) (#49)
by Lacy on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 08:25:46 AM EST

I have noted here many claims that there was obvious "reasonable doubt" in this case, but these statements are almost invariably followed by justifications such as not knowing exactly "how" or exactly "when", exactly "where" or precisely "why". Some badly misguided soles have even claimed that the defendant's failure to testify somehow gives her protection from the implications of the lies she told to conceal the death of her child, and the fabrications to explain her absence. [But of course the 5th amendment does not retroactively protect from what has already been said OR ITS IMPLICATIONS...It's true that had Casey refused to say anything to anyone from the beginning we could not assert that silence implied guilt. BUT, since she gave false and deceptive explanations freely and repeatedly, we are completely free to consider if it is reasonable that those lies would have occurred in the absence of criminal conduct.]

Under the circumstances created by the defendant's own dishonest acts, the only real consideration of what is reasonable with respect to her guilt ir innocence is this: Is there any reasonable or rational alternative to the accused's culpable involvement in the death of her child (at least manslaughter)? I have not heard any alternative explanation offered that was even remotely reasonable that comports with the facts and circumstances of this case. If anyone has one, please offer it up.

[Ref: Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that precludes every reasonable hypothesis except guilt and is inconsistent with any other rational conclusion.6]