Jose Baez continues to accuse the State of Florida of prosecuting his client through nefarious means such as conspiracy with other governmental agencies and elected officials, as well as motives other than the quest for justice for murdered two-year-old Caylee Anthony.
In this article, we will explore an accusation made by Jose Baez and Andrea Lyon about the State’s intent in seeking the death penalty against Casey Anthony, who will stand trial for the murder of Caylee Anthony. We will examine the defense’s Motion to Preclude the Death Penalty Procedures filed September 30, 2009.
The motion may be found at the following link. We will focus on numbered section 4.
“4. This lack of evidence and gross disproportionality strongly indicate that the State is not seeking the death penalty in a good faith effort to implement its capital punishment scheme but rather is attempting to use death penalty procedures to gain a strategic advantage.”
“This lack of evidence” – Ms. Lyon and Mr. Baez are comfortable with a “lack of evidence”, they wish to be close to a lack. No evidence is good evidence for the defense. Is there a lack of evidence? Earlier in the motion, Ms. Lyon and Mr. Baez state “there is insufficient evidence as a matter of law”, a qualified definition of “insufficient”. There is evidence and there may be sufficient evidence, which leads the defendant’s counsel to tiptoe around the definition of “lack of evidence”.
“and gross disproportionality” – Order is important. Most important to Ms. Lyon and Mr. Baez is “lack of evidence” followed by “gross disproportionality”, which refers to the death penalty being too severe a punishment for the crime of murdering a two-year-old helpless child. “Disproportionality” is sensitive as marked by use of “gross”. The death penalty is not just too severe, it is beyond too severe. The sensitivity indicates the death penalty may not be too severe, otherwise the defense would not feel the need to exaggerate the claim of disproportionate.
“strongly indicate” – Not just indicate, but “strongly”. Another sign of sensitivity and exaggeration. The claim the defense is about to make may not be indicated by the “lack of evidence” or the “gross disproportionality” or at all. “Indicated” does not mean the accusation is true, merely a possibility.
“that the State” – Sensitivity and distancing indicated by use of “that”. The following claim may not be true.
“is not seeking” – The defense describes what the State is “not” doing, indicating deception or fabrication. This is similar to the defense producing witnesses who did “not” see Caylee’s body in the woods during the TES searches.
“the State is not seeking the death penalty” – A false statement. The State does seek the death penalty. The language of deception is revealed by stripping away the excess wording. This is the crux of the sentence. Building a conditional statement upon a false premise causes the statement to be meaningless.
“in a good faith effort” – Implies the State is seeking in a bad faith effort. The defense does not have the gumption to state in an unequivocal fashion the State is seeking in a bad faith effort. The defense does not stand behind their claim. If the defense cannot support their own claim, neither can we.
“to implement its capital punishment scheme” – The word “scheme” implies the State’s use of capital punishment is nefarious.
“but rather” – Sensitivity indicated by the use of two words of similar meaning.
“is attempting” – A change from what the State is not seeking to what the State is “attempting”. The State has not performed the action of which they are about to be accused, they are “attempting”, trying, but not accomplishing.
“to use death penalty procedures to gain a strategic advantage” – The State has not done this, they are “attempting”. The defense is careful not to accuse the State of an actual action.
“strategic advantage” – What is the “strategic advantage” the State attempts to gain? Ms. Lyon and Mr. Baez define the advantage later in the motion as the seating of a death-qualified jury, which Ms. Lyon argues will be more likely to find her client guilty than a non-death-qualified jury.
We have learned Ms. Lyon and Mr. Baez accused the State of Florida of seeking the death penalty to ensure a death-eligible jury was seated, which the defense feels would be more prone to finding their client guilty, even if the death penalty was not imposed.
The real problem with a death-qualified jury for any defense team is if the prosecution is able to seek the death penalty, they must have a strong case. Does the increased number of guilty verdicts in death-penalty cases indicate death-qualified juries are “more likely” to return a guilty verdict? No, it means the percentage of strong cases more likely to result in a guilty verdict when tried before any jury is increased due to the inherent prosecutorial strength of death-penalty cases. Death-qualified juries are not more likely to return guilty verdicts, but death-penalty cases are more likely to result in guilty verdicts because they are strong prosecution cases.
We have learned the accusation leveled by Ms. Lyon and Mr. Baez against the State is official court documentation of the fears of the defense. The defense believes their client will be found guilty by a death-qualified jury. Their fear of a death-qualified jury is the intensification of their fear about any jury. Although a death-qualified jury may be more likely to bring a guilty verdict against any random defendant, if the defense’s case had the merit to win a not guilty verdict for their client from a regular jury, the chances would be decreased, but not hopeless, for the same outcome from a death-qualified jury.
Bull Stopper Stops Bull 
Like the state was just waiting around for casey to murder her daughter so they could “implement their scheme”. It only took the one qualifier for the death penalty; a child.
The defense team already knows she will be found guilty, they are spending a lot of their efforts on the penalty phase.
Exactly.
And they are terrified of the penalty phase.
Especially Mason.
Did you watch the 8 minute video of Jose acting the loon I posted on the hat article?
The pressure is wearing them all down. Jose has cracked.
I read all of your posts’, but don’t remember a hat one! but I can’t load video’s right now anyway.
They should be terrified, I don’t think they will be able to portray any “medical” or psychological issue’s pertaining to casey to sway anybody. They are going to go thru the trial portraying her as the “good mother” who took good care of Caylee (as claimed all along) & then suddenly jump into mental issue’s afterward?! She is her own worst enemy by all of her actions, expecially during the 29 days on the loose. They can’t have it every way they want for different phase’s of this trial.
Do you think baez is gonna make it thru the trial if he is getting worn down now? Mason seems to have hostility towards the press & their questions also. They don’t act like the claim of their “innocent” client & how all will be explained at trial is real. If they don’t believe it, nobody else is gonna either.
When you can load videos, go here:
This is must see video of Baez having an 8 minute meltdown.
It’s worth stealing someone else’s computer to watch this one.
Be prepared for laughter.
I do believe Jose is going to try some kind of medical pull-put just before the trial.
I have always thought Mason is going to pull a diagnosis of early onset Alzheimer’s just before the verdict to get a mistrial.
If Bozo and Mason want to avoid the death penalty and know Casey is guilty (duh), I just don’t know why they don’t get her to own up to it. Wouldn’t her doing so preclude the death penalty and automtically mean a life sentence (which is the best they could hope for anyway)? This whole ordeal could be over and done with, except of course for Cindy doing the national talk show circuit, writing a book, etc., etc. Of course, if Cindy is prosecuted afterwards for obstruction, then the “fun” part of all this could begin.
The problem is that Miss delusional casey keeps insisting that she’s innocent. I don’t think she’ll give in on that one, she’s got to keep up the game.
Actually, I don’t think KC herself has ever once claimed she is “innocent”. However, even I can’t keep up with everything in this case, so if you have documents or video where she says it, I would love to see it.
Her comments from jail to her family concerned terms like something I didn’t do.
On the affidavit she completed to verify Baez did not have rights to sell her story, she wrote in a line about her belief the prosecution was mad she did not take a plea deal for a crime she did not commit.
To say “I am innocent” is saying you did nothing.
To say “crime I did not commit” is not the same. Was another crime committed? But not this crime?
Bull, thanks, I’ve saved it. that’s a new one!
Let me be more clear. I don’t think casey will deviate from the story of the nanny took her unless she changes the story to some other dark figure took her. The nanny story therefore distants’ casey from the death of caylee.
No, I have never heard her state the words I am innocent either. but I don’t think she will ever admit to any wrong doing in this or take a plea deal where she would have to admit to anything either.
I agree. She will never admit she murdered Caylee.
I am flabbergasted she copped guilty to the check forgery charges. I felt she was going to fight it out until the end.
I can’t believe she pled guilty to the check charges too! I thought she would deny it to the end even with the video evidence…. surprise! surprise! I don’t think she’ll ever plea on the murder charges. She almost chocked on her words admitting her guilt in the check charges. I can’t see anything coming out of her mouth admitting guilt to murdering Caylee. Time will tell…. Great article! I love the “hanging my hat” video… hahahaha Baez is a basket case!
P.S.
Yep, they are definitely worried about ANY jury!!! And rightfully so…..