On May 10, 2011, the defense team for Casey Anthony which claimed in open court the local media made a fair trial impossible for their client and beseeched the judge to bar the media from the courtroom granted a short interview to a local Orlando media station.
The comments of two lackluster attorneys may be seen and heard at the following link:
Jose Baez: “The court of public opinion is probably the most uneducated courtroom in the entire country.”
“probably” – The opinion of Mr. Baez is not a strongly held opinion on his part. This is a statement of what could be, not necessarily what is. The “court of public opinion” may be “uneducated”, but it may also not be “uneducated”.
Although the “court of public opinion” is most likely to be the “most uneducated”, if it is not the “most uneducated”, then what court is? Mr. Baez states there is a hierarchy of educational elevations among courtrooms in “the entire country”, but only presents one possibility for the least educated. How educated is the one in which he practices? Will Mr. Baez be educating his courtroom? In the first three minutes?
“entire country” – Not the “entire state” or “entire county”, which is where the defense team’s attention should be, but the “entire country” which is the potential audience for Geraldo, In Session, and 48 Hours.
Jose Baez: “The heart-shaped sticker. There is no sticker, even though it’s been clearly discussed in court.”
“There is no sticker” – What does Mr. Baez mean by this statement? “There is no sticker” anywhere? Or “there is no” heart-shaped “sticker”? Or “there is no” heart-shaped “sticker” in evidence? in existence? which ever existed? We do not know, we only know one thing about the “no sticker”.
What do we know about the “no sticker”? “It’s been clearly discussed in court”. Has the sticker been discussed clearly in court or has testimony by a lab technician who recorded seeing a sticky residue upon the surface of the duct tape found wound around Caylee Anthony’s head during testing of the tape which resulted in the destruction of the residue been the subject of discussion?
Cheney Mason: “It’s undisputed. They have no idea the cause of death. They don’t know how this child died.”
“They have no idea the cause of death” – Mr. Mason may not be following this case as closely as he should. Mr. Ashton has given a fairly detailed scenario of “the cause of death” in open court. It would seem “they” have a pretty good “idea”. The medical examiner is confident “the cause of death” is homicide.
“They don’t know how this child died” – Who is “they”? We assume the prosecution, but perhaps Mr. Mason refers to the jury. Does Mr. Mason “know how this child died”? Obviously, Mr. Mason is not a part of “they”. If “they” don’t know, then who does know? Those who are not part of “they”? Those like Mr. Mason?
“this child” – This is the manner in which Mr. Mason references the deceased daughter of his client. Her name is Caylee Anthony.
We have learned more than we want to know about both of these gentlemen and we will learn much more in the next eight weeks.