Confusing Testimony, Mistrial Motion In Casey Anthony Trial
After an abrupt halting of Saturday’s trial proceedings by Judge Perry, rumors were rife that there was new evidence or a major surprise witness, or even that a possible plea deal by Anthony’s legal team was in the works. All of these rumors were proven untrue today.
Questions about Casey’s competency arise
First thing Monday, Judge Belvin Perry let it be known that in fact Casey Anthony’s defense team had filed a motion on Saturday for their client to have her mental competency examined, based on “a well-founded concern” that Ms. Anthony might not behave in a manner that would help her own defense. Defense attorney stated these concerns based on “confidential communications” between Casey and the defense team.
In response, Judge Belvin Perry ordered Casey to be examined by three psychologists through the weekend. Reports were issued, and today it was revealed that Casey was indeed found to be mentally competent to continue standing trial for the 2008 murder of her two year old daughter, Caylee Anthony.
Casey Anthony has plead not guilty, and could face the death penalty if convicted.
Another mistrial motion - third time is a charm?
This morning - Ann Finnell, the defense’s mitigation expert, was in the court room, the first time she has made a courtroom appearance since the jury selection was finalized. Finnell will be key if Casey is indeed found guilty, doing her best to remind the jury of any mitigating factors involved with the case, in a likely bid to gain life in prison for Casey, vice the death penalty.
Judge Perry began by handing each side a large yellow envelope, likely holding jury instructions or closing statement orders. It was noted that Casey looked upbeat, as did her parents and the defense team.
There were back and forth exchanges, private meetings and sidebars first off, followed by a report that Finnell had filed a motion for a mistrial - the third time a do-over has been requested by the defense. This time the motion was filed due to a ruling last week in Miami by a Federal district judge on a 1991 overturning the death penalty sentence of Paul Evans, said to be based on Florida violations of the Constitution’s Sixth Amendment.
The Sixth Amendment provides the right to a speedy trial by an impartial jury, to be informed as to the nature of the charges, to have a right to face witnesses and provide witnesses in defense, and a right to legal counsel.Continued on the next page