Judge Perry went too far. He fucked up. The video was impoverished as evidence, but rich for inflaming passions. His own questions to the witness demonstrated as much. And if he thinks “the positioning of the duct tape” is a “highly relevant” issue, when no one can even say whether it was a pre-mortem or post-mortem addition, he’s either stupid or so reflexively pro-prosecution that he doesn’t really think anymore. Either way, with a judge making rulings like this the fundamental fairness of the trial is already too far compromised:
Questioned by Judge Belvin Perry, Warren stated that he could still testify based on his knowledge without the animation but he felt the illustration of the science would be more helpful to the jury. Perry ultimately allowed them to see the video, noting that the positioning of the duct tape was a “highly relevant” issue for the jury to determine.
Defense attorney Baez said the video was “disgusting” and “a fantasy”, which is true enough; the fact that it was admitted as “evidence” is disgraceful. As was the testimony of the celebrity medical examiner (h/t to commenter Alison) that “100% of accidental deaths are reported” and “homicide is the only logical conclusion”, which is in reality an opinion about the “ultimate issue”, beyond her expertise, never allowed into evidence, and by itself as much a cause for a mistrial as if Baez got up and accused the judge of being bought off by the prosecution in front of the jury.
There is no coming back from the taint here. If Judge Perry has any integrity of mind or character left, he will stop this circus now and assign it to someone else who has some capacity to be fair to both sides.
Update: Here is one blogger’s take, Exhibit “A” for this post:
Until today I was against the death penalty. Even though Caylee’s tiny skull was blocked from our view, it did not lessen the impact of the gruesome pictures that were being displayed. I wonder how many people besides me felt like wrapping their hands around Casey’s throat today. I doubt if I was among a minority.
Lawyers on Strike 
Sometimes I wonder if they teach law in law school. I suppose the critical thinking vacuum that would lead a mere medical examiner to proclaim that 100 percent of accidental deaths are reported (huh?) is somewhat excusable; Judge Perry’s tacit approval of such nonsense is outrageous.
This defendant has countless appeals opportunities already, in week 3 .. but how comforting is that if she’s convicted and spends years in prison awaiting their outcome?
Frankly I’m hoping the jury steps up here as the only adults in the courtroom, and acquits her. Just as with CA v. Simpson, the crime becomes irrelevant when the prosecution is bungled.
LikeLike
Agreed, the trial has become a circus. I happened to see the Warren video because of a glitch on the live streaming video. I am blown away that it was allowed in. These experts are so incredulous. I was embarrassed for the medical examiner (who souned a lot like Cindy Anthony). The outrage in her testimony, the self righteousness, the personal and emotional answers that had no objectivity! Her facial expressions were so obvious. Good Grief!
LikeLike
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
These 2 comments are HILARIOUS. The judge is allowing THE TRUTH into the courtroom which the appellat court WILL NOT overturn. If the video wasn’t played Bozo would have said that there is no “evidence” that the duct could have even covered Calee’s nose and mouth at the same time. Dr. G OWNED Mason like he was her BITCH and MADE IT CLEAR THAT DROWNING VICTOMS 100% of the time DON’T END UP IN PLASTIC BAGS IN THE WOODS WITH DUCT TAPE AROUND THEIR HEADS. GOOD GRIEF INDEED!!
READ MY LIPS: THERE WILL BE NO MISTRIAL OR RETRIAL
LikeLike
You are almost surely correct, unfortunately, but that is quite different from asserting that there shouldn’t be a mistrial or retrial. And as for appellate courts not overturning anything, that too is a safe prediction because they almost never do. I hardly think that, or anything about this is a matter for levity or glee.
LikeLike
Well, I’ll have to respecfully disagree. Judge Perry has let NOTHING in that should be overuled by a higher court. If anthything he’s blocked a couple of things as related to MOTIVE that in my opinion should have been let in (The Cindy Anthony Myspace post and some very specific text messages she sent regarding Calee putting a major cramp in her night plans)
Bozo has made 2 HUGE blunders IMO. The first was not getting the jail house tapes edited to eliminate the “slander” against him by Lee and Casey. Also when he objected to the Calee/Skull video he didn’t object to Casey being in the video which is the part that could be construed as prejudicial.
My “glee” was only towards the top 2 comments as I thought they were absolutely ridiculous. I mean this comment “Just as with CA v. Simpson, the crime becomes irrelevant when the prosecution is bungled” is ABSURD.
LikeLike
I’m sure Baez has made some blunders. I think you have to weigh that against the incredible difficulty of what he is trying to do. The defense lawyer’s job – how can I put this in a way that would properly convey it to you? – is thousands of times more difficult than the prosecutor’s. There is really no comparison. The prosecution has an army behind it, and an extremely valuable ally in the judge who will favor them heavy handedly, yet still present a veneer of neutrality that only trained observers can see through – and none of those trained observers are on the jury.
The defense has no army behind it. They stand there, alone and lonely, trying to stop a freight train carrying prosecutorial excess, mere pretenses of law and fairness, the unanimous antipathy of politically powerful law enforcement, and the madness of crowds. Until you’ve gone through it, you just can’t really imagine what it is like.
It takes a special kind of bravery to undertake what Baez is doing. It takes none to prosecute someone.
LikeLike
I hear ya….
LikeLike
I agree thank you for having common sense. I guess if you are a child her in the usa you have no voice, especially when mommy kills you and lies and blames her father and brother of molestation. talk about fantasy and disgusting.
LikeLike
You’re an idiot!
LikeLike
First of all-judge Perry has done a fantastic job so far. Jose Baez is completely out of his league and is making himself look like an ass and making his client look guilty. no one else has done this for him including the prosecution. it’s pretty clear he has no law skills, is just as low of a person as his client (take a look at the man’s background) and has given up on this case. this posting makes no sense. all it’s doing is insulting a judge (try to fill his shoes for one day and see how you do) and expresses hatred towards casey anthony (who’s biased now?). this posting sounds like jose baez venting about his loss in court since its obvious he has no chance. this post is rediculous and makes no sense.
LikeLike
iamme: I deleted another post of yours that seemed to be a duplicate. I gather from the tone and quality of your comment that you are not really qualified to make a judgment about any attorney’s skills. Although that doesn’t prevent you from doing so. You are entitled to your half-baked and ill considered opinions, but that’s what they are.
LikeLike
In the link you provided for blogger Exhibit A above, the picture of Caylee looks remarkly like George Anthony to me.
LikeLike
I think there is plenty of room here for reversible error–not only on the Warren video. I have tuned in on this trial and heard the objections from defense counsel as well as motions for mistrial. I am very frusterated with this Judge and shocked at the latitude he has given the prosecution while keeping a strong arm on the Defense. I think the Judge knew allowing the video was wrong and did it anyway.
LikeLike
One reason I have been posting on this is that the judge’s conduct, while certainly deplorable, is not in the least bit shocking to those who have worked in the system. Except for the insane level of notoriety, what is happening is typical.
I encourage you to read the Gerry Spence piece linked to my most recent post, which expresses the thought better. Thanks for the comment.
LikeLike
I will, thank you for the suggestion. I have only just stumbled on to your site and am still looking around. I am a lawyer too, although only two years out into solo practice since graduating and passing the bar. I practice criminal law too (really minor things so far) so I am very unhappy about what I have seen in this trial so far!
LikeLike
Welcome, then. Good to have you around and commenting knowledgeably. Don’t get discouraged. You can always do that later, like I have.
I’m kidding. Sort of.
LikeLike
Trails can turn around in ten minutes. Baez knows what really occurred. He does not appear to be a really good Defense Lawyer but I bet he has got an Ace up his sleeve. I think the body was moved in Caseys car after it had been decomposing and that is when the scent the Dogs hit on came about. Casey is probably guilty of at least manslaughter of some form in my opinion but it appears to me the State is “dirty” some way.
LikeLike
The judge is too too bias in this case. he actually asked the state if the were going to object to a question asked by the defence. im not a law person but should this happen???
LikeLike
This and the Simpson and Charles Keating trials illustrate three things fundamentally wrong with our system of justice.
1) It is not a search for truth. It is the presumption of innocence unless proven guilty beyond shadow of doubt. That simply means that a guilty person may go free if the prosecution fails to show beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the defendant, who in fact may be guilty.
2) If you can afford the best possible defense against a mediocre prosecution, you may go free despite guilt.
3) As in the case of California, judges are elected not by their peers but by the public. This invariably introduces politics into the courtroom and politics and justice cannot coexist in a court of law. It is like trying to have matter and antimatter in the same space at the same time.
Whenever there are all three elements of flawed law present in a trial, witness the consequence. Two examples:
Was Simpson innocent?
Was Charles Keating innnoent?
There are alternatives and that doesn’t exits in this country. The best system would be a combination of the adversarial and the inquisitional system of law, which makes no presumption of innocence or guilt but is focused on getting to the truth. In that kind of system, the judge is a participant and can participate in the investigation, can select witnesses, can interrogate witnesses, can interrogate the defense and prosecution counsels, and can even summon the defendant to testify.
LikeLike