The Check Fraud Case
On Monday, January 25, 2010 Casey Anthony pleaded guilty Monday to 13 counts of check fraud. At the time of her plea, she was also being held in jail without bond on charges of murder, manslaughter, and lying to police.
Judge Strickland or Judge Solomon
In what can only be described as recognition of the chess game the State was playing with Ms. Anthony’s life by demanding the check fraud case go to trial first, Judge Strickland did not formally convict her on all 13 check fraud counts and instead threw her a lifeline by withholding the adjudication of guilt on 7 of the counts. (As I had predicted he would prior to the sentencing.)
By withholding guilt on 7 of the counts, Casey Anthony was only considered a six-time convicted felony; as opposed to a 13 time convicted felon. At the time, the felony convictions were extremely valuable to the State Attorney for impeachment purposes should Casey Anthony testify or her self-serving statements somehow be admitted (which Jose Baez almost opened the door too).
The “Catch”
But by withholding adjudication there was a legal catch. Under Florida Statute 948.01, a judge cannot withhold adjudication of guilt on a felony UNLESS they also place the person on probation.
And that is exactly what Judge Strickland did, even though everyone knew she was being held in jail on No Bond for the murder case, Judge Strickland ORALLY pronounced that she was sentenced to the 412 days she already spent in jail on the check fraud charges, but for each count he Withheld Adjudication of Guilt on, he also placed her on One Year of Supervised Probation to be served “once released.”
An Indefinite Sentence?
Almost immediately after Judge Strickland explained his sentence, Assistant State Attorney Frank George raised his concerns that such a sentence would be considered an “indefinite” sentence under Florida law (which is illegal) because Ms. Anthony would obviously be held in jail and therefore could not begin her probation for the foreseeable future.
Judge Strickland stuck with his original pronouncement and stated that if the State could think of a better idea, they should file a motion seeking the better idea. They never did.
The Confusion
While Judge Strickland’s intentions were clear, there seems to have been some confusion because the sentencing minutes that were generated after the hearing, and which Judge Strickland signed, simply stated credit for 412 days jail followed by one year of supervised probation. Notably, the sentencing minutes never contained the magical words “upon release” at the end of the sentence – not that they needed to.
And because the sentencing minutes lacked the magical words “upon release,” the Florida Department of Corrections unilaterally decided that her probation began running while she was in jail and her probation ended on January 24, 2011.
Presumably, the reason they interpreted it this way is that she was in jail awaiting trial, as opposed to serving a sentence. (Never mind she was ultimately sentenced to all the time spent awaiting trial and then some.) Thus by giving her credit for the time she spent in jail towards her probation she was allowed to double dip and essentially get a two for one.
And since nobody brought the Department of Corrections oversight to the court, no clarification was ever provided from Judge Strickland’s office.
Which brings us to the heart of the matter, was there a discrepancy between Judge Strickland’s oral sentence and the sentencing minutes in the first place. If so, did it even need to be clarified?
The Legality of Judge Strickland’s Sentence
To begin, the Florida Supreme Court has held time and time again that “a court’s oral pronouncement of sentence controls over the written document.” State v. Jones, 753 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 2000) This principal was recently reaffirmed by the Florida Supreme Court in State v. Akins, 36 Fla. L. Weekly S215a (Fla. May 26, 2011) (“when there is a discrepancy between the written sentence and ‘the oral pronouncement, the oral pronouncement prevails.’)
As a result, even if there was a discrepancy between Judge Strickland’s oral pronouncement of sentence, where he said the probation was to begin “once released” and the written minutes that omitted these “magical words,” the oral sentence still controls – irrespective of how the defense or the Department of Corrections wants to interpret it.
Did Written Order Actually Conflict with Oral Sentence?
Nonetheless, even if the written sentencing minutes did not contain the magical words “upon release,” Judge Strickland did not legally have to even include them in his oral pronouncement for Casey Anthony’s probation to have begun “once released.”
This is because the general rule is that when a person is sentenced to incarceration followed by probation and the person completes the custodial portion of the sentence, but nonetheless remains incarcerated on another offense, the probationary portion is tolled (meaning does not begin) until the person is released from incarceration in the other case being held on. See Brooks v. State, 762 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). This means that absent specific language stating that Casey Anthony’s probation was to run while she remained in jail, her probation was tolled by operation of law – Judge Strickland was not required to include any magical language stating “upon release.”
Does the Defense have a Legitimate Double Jeopardy Argument?
Actually, the defense has TWO legitimate Double Jeopardy arguments.
Argument 1: Being Supervised Twice
The first argument is that requiring Casey Anthony to report to probation now amounts to double jeopardy since the Department of Corrections already “supervised” her for one year while she was in jail.
The problem with this argument is that Casey Anthony never actually did anything; a probation officer visited her at least one time and then verified her continued incarceration for the next twelve months (thus accounting for the “contacts” DOC references – read look her up online). My gut feeling is that a Court of appeals would not be to sympathetic to Ms. Anthony, because she was not actually reporting to probation and there was no impediment placed on her liberty.
I think an appellate court would say that one that the Department of Corrections actions did not amount to supervision and two, they could not supervise someone without lawful authority. And as explained earlier, a person cannot serve probation while in jail (unless the jail is made a specific condition of probation).
Argument 2: “Clarification Order” is Void
The second argument is that Judge Strickland’s Clarification Order amounts to double jeopardy because Casey Anthony had already served her sentence and the Judge’s jurisdiction to clarify the sentence had long since expired. Therefore, once a sentence has been imposed and the person begins to serve the sentence, that sentence may not be increased without running afoul of double jeopardy principles. Ashley v. State, 850 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 2003)
Scrivener’s Error
On its face, this argument is correct. As a Judge only has 60 days from the date of a sentence to correct a scrivener’s error, which refers to a mistake in the written sentence that is at variance with the oral pronouncement of sentence or the record but not those errors that are the result of a judicial determination or error. Rule 3.800 Fla.R.Crim.Pro.
In Ms. Anthony’s case, the judge’s 60 days of jurisdiction expired on March 26, 2010. As a result, the “Clarification Order” entered by Judge Strickland is void, illegal, and unenforceable. Stang v. State, 24 So. 3d 566 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); rev. denied. State v. Stang, 41 So. 3d 206 (Fla. 2010).
Warren Stang and Casey Anthony Sitting in a Tree, Dou-ble Jeop-ar-dy
Stang is an important case because on its face it is very similar to Ms. Anthony’s case. In Stang’s case, he was sentenced to consecutive sentences on multiple counts in a violation of probation case and given a total of 27 years in prison. Notably, the oral sentencing pronouncement intended for him to get credit for 1,915 days towards the 27 years; meaning he would have about 23 more years to do.
However, his sentencing minutes appeared to give him 1,915 days credit towards each count. The net result was that he only had 2 more months on his sentence, not 23 years. The Department of Corrections noticed this and asked the judge to clarify his sentence. So 67 days after the sentence was imposed, the court entered a “Clarification Order” (sound familiar) saying that the credit was towards the total years, not each count.
The appellate court upheld the two month interpretation, finding that the Court lacked jurisdiction to clarify the order because more than 60 days passed and finding that based on double jeopardy, once credit has been awarded, it cannot be rescinded – even if granted in complete error.
What is notable about this case is that the State Attorney’s Office never challenged the defendant’s post-conviction motions on the merits. Because if they had, the transcripts of the oral pronouncement shows that the credit was only given towards the years, not each count.
And this is notable, because the case went all the way to the Florida Supreme Court; and the Florida Supreme Court denied review of the case specifically because the State Attorney did not provide the transcripts until after the case had been affirmed by the District Court of Appeal (meaning the State simply argued the case based on the sentencing minutes and did not get the hearing transcribed). See State v. Stang, 41 So. 3d 206 (Fla. 2010).
What the clear indication of this procedural defense means is that had the transcript originally been provided to the lower courts; the Florida Supreme Court would likely have agreed that the oral sentence controls and Mr. Stang had 24 more years in prison to complete.
The Current Situation
This brings us to the current situation in Ms. Anthony’s case. It is understood that the defense will first file a Motion to Disqualify or recuse Judge Strickland. I have no doubt that Judge Strickland will grant his request and the case will then be turned over to a new judge.
Can the Successor Judge Vacate Judge Strickland’s Clarification Order
The Defense will have 20 days to file a Motion for Reconsideration asking the successor judge to vacate the Clarification Order entered by Judge Strickland. See Rule 2.330, Fla.R.Jud.Admin.
It is my opinion that the new judge will likely agree to vacate Judge Strickland’s Clarification Order, as it is clearly Void and unenforceable under Stang v. State, 24 So. 3d 566 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)
Coming Full Circle
However, just because Judge Strickland’s Clarification Order is void and unenforceable; it does not mean his original sentence is unenforceable.
To the contrary, Judge Strickland’s original sentence still controls and the Department of Corrections – as a member of the executive branch – has a duty to enforce it. This is because, by operation of law, Ms. Anthony’s probation was tolled while she was in jail awaiting trial on the murder case.
If the defense wants to then argue that she was supervised in jail and thus double jeopardy prevents her from being supervised again; by all means, they should argue it – I know I would.
But that has been my point from the very beginning, it is not for the State Attorney or the Department of Corrections to decide whether requiring Ms. Anthony to report to probation as Judge Strickland intended amounts to Double Jeopardy – it is up to a court to decide.
Have Some Balls Lawson Lamar; Defend Strickland’s Sentence
I know next year is an election year and you want to distance yourself from Ms. Anthony and the boondogle of a prosecution you put on lest a formidable opponent emerge to run against you.
But seriously, the Very Honorable Lawson Lamar needs to grow a sack and defend Judge Strickland’s sentence and provide this community with some sense that you aren’t afraid of big bad lawyers like Mike Snure, Donald Lykkebak, and “gulp,” Cheney Mason, who make mince-meat our of your high profile cases.
If you thought she was such a danger to society that you were committed enough to have her executed, I think you should be committed enough to at least try and have the Department of Corrections execute a simple probation sentence on her for one year.
If you don’t, the irony is indeed rich that Jose Baez and Cheney Mason ultimately made you their Bitch.
Plessinger said it is not unusual for some inmates to serve probation while in jail awaiting final disposition on separate charges.
“Not only is it common, we’ve never heard of a case where probation stops because someone is in jail awaiting trial — remember there’s no conviction at that point,” Plessinger wrote her e-mail.
Mr. Hornsby..I would like your opinion in regards to how..after equating
all time served…20+ days after an NOT GUILTY verdict of the highest
profile case Orange County Fl has seen..and extending World Wide..Nearly
2 wks after the World..televised the release of Casey Anthony..FOLLOWED
her by helicopter down Orange Ave Orlando Fl…Watched til the wee hours
of the morning to see her board a jet plane..to fly off into the sun rise..FAR
FROM FLORIDA…Did someone to just realize she needs to come back for
probation???? A little far fetched eh?
Not only that..but a probation that was already served in jail..COMPLETED
Jan 24, 2011?
Did strickland spend some recent time in blog world again? Or as a matter
of fact..Ashton…was asked about that VERY TOPIC in one of his $$$$$
interviews..which I don’t recall his response..I am trying to find it..and the
date.
For those haters whom would be willing to give up our Constitutional Rights, to see KC get the lethal injection..I am quite sure they are
thrilled.
For me, I would like to retain my rights.
YOU SAY:::If you thought she was such a danger to society that you were committed enough to have her executed, I think you should be committed enough to at least try and have the Department of Corrections execute a simple probation sentence on her for one year.
____________________________
I am a little skeptical about the State implying they want
nothing to do with this. Whats really behind this?
Another trip down memory lane?
IMO
Strickland signs it ..and leaves town..The State not backing it..
at least in the public eye…Risk bringing her back here…for
probation already served..Which I would be hard pressed to
believe that it was completely overlooked. hmmmmmmm
makes you wonder!
However, can’t be any worse than them bringing this case
to court as first degree premeditated murder with at DP attached..
With junk proof..they tried to make fit the charge!
Bravo Snoop! Perfectly stated!!
To me this whole probation thing looks like the judicial system is being a sore loser. Baez and Mason won, live with it.
Kim, lol. I’m still stuck on Krop’s assessment of her. He maintains that she’s mentally healthy (falls within the “normal” ranges) whereas SHE and her defense team now insist she’s being treated for her mental illness? Which is it? Is she ill or isn’t she? It cracks me up!
Also, I’m anxious to see how this probation matter plays out, as well as Mason’s insistence that JS recuse himself. The way I understand it is that Strickland filed the original motion (2010?) which explains why it says that Casey appeared with counsel, Andrea Lyon. He merely added the words regarding her probation to start after her release from jail. Do you know more about this? I haven’t seen the motion as it was filed yesterday.
Judge’s orders to appear 2011 &2010
http://www.wftv.com/pdf/28728234/detail.html
http://www.wftv.com/pdf/28728002/detail.html
Autumn, I also find it interesting Dr Krop made the rounds on Dr Drew etc. Soon after the verdict he was stating how “normal” she is. Kind of interesting her Dr would be out there stating how “normal” she is around the same time Baez is meeting with media executives. How marketable would she be if he stated she had some real issues and would need intense therapy? Now that ABC/CBS/NBC have pulled the plug and boycott is prevalent on social media Baez is reportedly saying all of a sudden she needs therapy.
Three weeks ago her Dr said she was “normal” now her attorney says she needs therapy. Can you say $ympathy card?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w2Uw2RTtBs
Ah-Ha-It would appear that Ms Anthony’s psychaitrist did what he was asked and it would also appear that he was happy to do it. He reported to all viewers that his patient was “normal” and that she had no known mental illness. He’s submitting his billable hours and is anticipating payment once his client is gainfully back into society manipulating, deceiving and separating others from their money-a concrete look at how to rob peter to pay paul.
Poor fellow. I can’t decide if he’s a stooge or a chump.
Oh deal with Anonymous…You were wrong. I knew you’d say that. It’s just too bad that Dr. Krop is a well-respected, forensic psychologist in the state of Florida and his assignment was to help Casey in the penalty phase iF she were convicted so obviously saying that she’s “normal” wouldn’t help her IF that was the case. It would have been in Casey best interest to say she has some type of mental illness not normal, you silly goose.
Again Anonymous you were proven wrong just like I said you would be.
I suggest you take a good look at who you think you are. If you want to sing the praises of Ms Anthony you go right ahead and do so. Leave me out of it.
I think the therapy thing buys her time. not only with the public but the media and the lawsuits against her. Not that she shouldn’t get some type of therapy because that kind of “normal” is lacking something . Also with an emotional health diagnosis, Baez can assist her in applying for medicaid and disability, so she can have money coming in. Maybe make some extra money with photo sales. The civil attorney cannot have Casey talking/interviewing at all right now due to all the civil suits. Would be kind of hard to envoke the 5th if one was out blabbering in the media.
Autumn,
I don’t think anything in this case surprises me anymore. The defense has been consistent with vacillating. Caylee missing/kidnapped, Someone else killed Caylee, Caylee drowned. Telling the nation they need to respect and accept the jury verdict emphasized with a one finger salute, but we’re going to appeal the lying convictions. Baez the criminal defense lawyer, but maybe also the agent/media lawer(might be hard to remain objective and focus on the client’s best interest).
I don’t know any more than anyone else on the probation issue, other than Mr. Hornsby’s explanation and hearing another Florida lawyer who stated that it is not uncommon for some inmates to serve their probation in jail(usually in drug cases where the inmate is undergoing substance abuse treatment). I don’t know if Casey was undergoing any type of extensive treatment/therapy program in jail.
I agree and nobody paid attention to Jose Baez contradicting himself in his opening-and-closing defense statements either; like Strickland’s order was ignored also! Baez’s opening trial statement was, “Caylee was a case of an “accidental” drowning, in Baez’s closing statement he states, “NOBODY” knows how Caylee died and NOBODY probably ever will” so which is it?
the defendant has a right of appeal…the state does not.
Cheney Mason has a right to free speech…whether you like it or not.
you really need to get over this stuff and move on.
are you going to waste the rest of your life on this case? Is this what you do now that Oprah is finished?
steve,
LOL. Wow that was Tough Luv. But some people need to hear it. Some have a Huge Emotional Investment in Casey’s Case but it’s time to ‘Let It Go’ and reclaim their lives. I wonder how much emotional baggage Perry is carrying — we’ll find out tomorrow.
Wow TJ and Steve,
Apparently you guys don’t have a life either, because you keep checking & posting on here like the rest of us-LOL
you got me! I just hang around here so i get to talk to girls. Maybe even hot ones.
Are you as hot as Casey?
Awww Steve,
Probably not, I have a daughter Casey’s age and I’ve never lost track of one of my kids….does that make me hot???-LOL
A daughter Casey’s age!?!…Are you retired? or just in a job that gives you lots of free time…like Human Resources?
Yeah Steve,
A daughter Casey’s age, she’s much hotter than Casey with a full time job. I’m not retired, I just don’t have to work anymore. I lived and worked in NJ since I was 14, saved my money, paid off my home, sold it and moved to a less expensive state. Own my house with 7 acres and a rental property, I have no car payments or credit cards, only utilities and cell bill so I have tons of free time until school starts(I volunteer a few hours). Won’t hit the big Five-O for another 3 years. Life is great for me! I get to read and write as much as I want.
Autumn, Winter, Summer & Spring..whoever you are today??
You really should read further..In Dr. Krop’s report he says he see signs of PTSD, that’s Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
You really crack me up.
Well why don’t you people hand Casey the key to the state of Florida, because she has been such a model citizen? Nobody has served probation while in jail and if thats the case her probation ordered her to stay away from criminals, get a job to earn at least 20.00 per month, so than if served in jail that was a violation of probation! Where are the documents that a probation officer ever even seen her in jail?! Another problem with this judicial system; how do you get time off for good behavior when you are not even incarcerated in population; was Casey planning to have a confrontation with herself in protective custody?! Seems to me that Casey is Florida’s God, because she walks across water without being made to accept responsibility for her actions! If she walks without having to do probation, as Casey and Baez clearly stood in front of Strickland and heard him say, “following her release, if she was acquitted of murder charges” Than those people in seats now will not see a vote from me later!
Judge Strickland has recused himself.
http://www.clickorlando.com/download/2011/0803/28751996.pdf
Motion to quash.
http://www.clickorlando.com/download/2011/0803/28750502.pdf
http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/28752422/detail.html#ixzz1TzBgdYTw
Casey expected to report to probation office Thursday by 10am
Casey will not have to return for court appearance, hearing on issue set for Friday.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/03/casey-anthony-will-not-have-to-return-to-florida-for-court-appearance/
What good is going to come from having her serve probation? Will it WILL give the media some hype, it will let others feel the thrill of gotcha.
Will it make her a better person, probably not. Will it rehabilitate her, probably not. Will it alter the chances of her re offending, probably not, And, it wont bring back Caylee..
It WILL cost the taxpayers a lot of money. Seriously, the taxpayers paying for probation for $300 in bad checks on what I believe was a family members account?
It was bad checks on her friend Amy’s account. Casey almost cleaned out her friend’s account while Amy was on vacation & Amy let Casey use her car because Casey’s stinky car got towed. How’s that for gratitude?
You’re right, Florida taxpayers are probably tired of paying for anything more concerning Casey Anthony. I don’t think probation will alter her chances of re-offending either.
Annetteaa1-It was Amy H. account for which she was convicted of economic crimes and served 412 days and sentenced to one year probation. (see videos of her signing and cashing checks and her appearance before Judge Strickland in January 2010).
One has to look at Casey Anthony’s behavior not as a one time event but as a lifestyle-a mindset. She lies, steals and is a sexual predator. Presently those who are in “control” of Ms Anthony are at least attempting to mitigate these behaviors and hope for the best. Ms Anthony, like others before her who have been charged with killing family members, is a dangerous person. Why anyone would fuss over the costs to taxpayers relative to the cost of probation is almost laughable if it were not so serious. At some point in time you will have to make an effort to connect the crime and the criminal.
How do you square Judge Strickland’s actions as described in Ms. Anthony’s Motion to Quash with canons 2 and 3 of Florida’s Code of Judicial Ethics? Judge Strickland’s appearances on Nancy Grace and on local news stations are shocking. Lawson Lamar would be doing himself no favors by throwing his support behind this judge. Your arguments are sound–except in regards to your belief that an appellate authority would disregard DOC’s supervision and termination of probation–your seeming belief that it is in the State of Florida’s best interests to continue this charade is absurd.
*Sigh. I guess Richard is limiting my wordiness (it’s okay, Richard. I understand) so I’ll just provide a few links and those who will can read and draw their own conclusions.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evil-deeds/201107/did-casey-con-her-forensic-psychologist?page=2
Sociopaths are professional liars. Con artists. Masters of persuasion. So much so that sometimes even trained and experienced psychologists and psychiatrists can be taken in by them. Could that conceivably have happened here? Did Casey convince Dr. Krop, like she did her defense team and, through them, the jury, of her innocence and normalcy? Did Dr. Krop’s prolonged relationship with Casey become more of an advocacy for her than an objective and accurate assessment of her psychiatric symptomatology? Possibly. But it is equally likely that, upon careful forensic evaluation, Ms. Anthony simply did not warrant a formal psychiatric diagnosis. This sometimes happens. Not everyone accused of committing some crime merits a mental health diagnosis. Nor should it ever be automatically assumed by any forensic evaluator that they do. Nonetheless, Dr. Krop’s findings are somewhat surprising, to say the least. Especially for those who remain convinced of Casey’s guilt in this case. And it begs the question: Could Casey Anthony–or any criminal defendant–be such a charming and proficient liar that she completely conned Krop? In providing his clinical impression of Casey Anthony, Dr. Krop described her mainly as “immature.” But was Dr. Krop seeing exactly what Casey wanted him to see? Was she selling him her naive, innocent little girl act? And did he buy it?”
___________
From the DOH:
http://www.doh.state.fl.us/mqa/psychology/min_01-25-08.pdf
See Page 6, Tab 2, Harry D. Krop case …. “Restriction from performing future custody evaluations”
And this little ditty, for those who remember Danny Rollings:
http://www.alligator.org/app/pt2/specials/rolling/krop.html
It’s always a pleasure to see you, too, Anonymous!
Ohhhh dirt…. That is totally scarey that Juliet lewis is part of that. wierd
Juliet Lewis never existed.
Right Autumn
..and none of these doctors have interviewed Casey Anthony…so who am I to believe? Them or Dr. Harry Krop, the doctor who actually met with Casey Anthony several times while she was behind bars?
I’ll go with the good doctor who actually met her in person before writing a psychological report as opposed to a bunch of whoever’s who haven’t.
BTW, Thank you Richard… (wink)
Oh and btw,
Dr. Krop, like most psychiatrist are held to secrecy due to HIPPA laws.
He was put in a bad situation.. and he wasn’t the first doctor either faced with such a situation. Remember the Mendez brothers?
Autumn,
You’re asking if Dr. Krop was conned by Casey Anthony??? Wow!
I seriously doubt it. Dr. Krop has 20 years experience so I think he’d know if were being conned.
Personally, I find your reaction to Dr. Krop’s report to be a tad bit paranoid. Perhaps it’s because you and Anonymous’s fantasy psychological evaluations of the past 3 years didn’t match the professional report that Dr. Krop provided.
That’s the only thing I can see. Believe it or not, had I read a report that matched your’s and Anonymous’, I would have finally been convinced. I wouldn’t dare take it that far as to argue one doctor’s report is wrong when there are no other psychological reports released to compare.
It’s really kind of silly the way you are sticking to your guns no matter what’s being presented. If you are wrong, you’re wrong.
“I seriously doubt it. Dr. Krop has 20 years experience so I think he’d know if were being conned.”
With all due respect, you say “I think”. That’s you’re problem JB. You “think”, but you don’t know.
You dismiss whatever information is offensive to those things you think, such as you “think” that due to his 20 years of experience Krop couldn’t be fooled. I disagree, and offer you this challenge, SHOW ME whatever evidence/proofs there be that PROVE a psychopath/narcissist is unable to “con” such a Phd. who possesses 20 years experience, after a mere 20 hour assessment, and I’ll eat my words along with my boots!
The consensus is clear. Narcissism is difficult to diagnose, and more difficult to treat, and many an experienced psychologist has been fooled. Show me information to the contrary.
“Expert” Krop, in his initial assessment, did not detect psychopathy in Rollings and was ready to walk out the door with his “normal” diagnosis until Rollings stopped him and confessed. Granted, Krop may have learned much from his mistaken assessment, but many more years doesn’t make him infallible. No body is. Not even you.
Krop’s report doesn’t agree with what Krop is now saying, which should have been included in his report, but had it been he wouldn’t have done the defense such a good service, now would he? He can’t have it both ways, JB.
“I find your reaction to Dr. Krop’s report to be a tad bit paranoid. Perhaps it’s because you and Anonymous’s fantasy psychological evaluations of the past 3 years didn’t match the professional report that Dr. Krop provided”.
Fantasy? You really should think before you speak, JB. I, for one, couldn’t care less at this point about what Krop has to say. He has well destroyed whatever credibility he has with me in contradicting himself and his own biased report.
Aside from that, I’ve a few family members who have been in the field far longer than Krop (one has held a Master’s for more than 30 years, more than a few of which were spent running an entire mental health facility, another teaches criminal behavior and psychology at a well known University) who have endlessly harped about the psychopathy of Casey Anthony throughout the course of the past three years. It’s often been said that they would so love to get their hands on Casey Anthony, to STUDY her, for even among psychopaths, she’s “unique”. So perhaps I am a bit biased, trusting the opinions of those KNOWN to me with proven track records, none of whom would have offered their services to the defense!
Tell me, if you know, JB, how many experts did the defense have to go through (kick off emails to as they did with Simms?) before they received a favorable response from Krop? Do you know how many turned the defense down? Maybe, if you kick off an email to Baez he’ll tell you, and maybe it will be the truth he speaks.
As for you comment about HIPPA let me say, if given the choice between exposing a mass murderer and my license to practice, I’d have to forfeit my license. That’s how I roll.
By the way, I am quite honored to be likened to Anonymous! Thanks, JB!
Hi Richard,
I am hoping that you can explain to me why the State Atty’s have stated that they will not be attending the hearing tomr. I am totally confused about their position on this. Casey did plead guilty to the felony check fraud charges. If I were Amy Huizenga, who had her bank account completely drained by Casey, I would expect that Judge Strickland’s oral pronouncement placing Casey on One Year of Supervised Probation to be served “once released” to be upheld.
I don’t understand how “probation” can be served while in “protective” custody where your every move is being monitored. I thought the terms of probation are to determine whether you are able to behave yourself, with restrictions, while out in the real world facing everyday challenges. Casey did not look for a job nor did she pay any court ordered court costs or pay for the monthly probation supervision costs. She did not submit a DNA sample or submit to random drug and/or ETOH testing. She basically did jail time and got a 2fer credit for one year probation.
Whether Judge “Paper Tiger” Perry decides in agreement with Strickland’s oral pronouncement or not, I maintain that it would be the fairest judgment for him to do so. When I consider the sentences that he handed out to the “crazy lady”, the single finger salute guy and the well behaved legitimate protester outside the court building, any other decision other than upholding a year’s probation for Casey’s 6 felonies will be an injustice to the victim as well as all of us “regular Joe” citizens, who you well know would definitely serve the full year of supervised probation.
But back to my question to you Richard. I will be very disillusioned and angry if the SA’s are no-show at the hearing. I can imagine that Amy will be too. How dare they have so little interest at this point in time of representing the victim of Casey’s fraud? If what is being reported on TV is accurate and they truly have no further interest in this issue, then I will have lost all of the abundance of respect that I have formerly held for these individuals. WHY would they not be supportive of Judge Strickland’s motion? I truly do not understand what their motivation would be to basically diss Casey’s victim. Please enlighten me, Richard. Thanks in advance.
Looks like the Judge is on his own this time. SAO not interested, Amy not interested. I don’t think the victim ever went without her money in this case. I think the bank covered it IIRC. I believe the victim was dragged into this mess by the State. She got her money back and probably would have never guessed in a million years that someone would spend 3 years in prison for stealing 650.00,,, It prolly cost us more than that in taxes to keep her in jail. I could understand the victim being very angry if they never got their money back. I am not saying the victim should forgive the perp, just saying 3 years in prison for someone never losing their money is way too harsh. Not sure if it is out of the ordinary though… My opinion only
Notthatsmart-Ms Anthony was in prison awaiting her murder trial. It just so happens that someone came forward and said, “Hey, you have someone in jail who I believe stole $650.00 from me. I loaned her my car and she drained my checking account. Can anyone help me?” They certainly did. Eighteen months later, while awaiting trial for Felony Murder in the First Degree, Ms Anthony is charged and convicted of Economic Crimes (see the court records). She is a convicted felon and to the best of my understanding Mr Baez reimbursed the BOA (the BOA was duty bound to reimburse Ms Amy H.) “….just saying 3 years in prison for someone never losing their money is way too harsh.” As always NTS you never seem to be able to connect the dots-but by the gods you’ve got a hairbrained explanation for everything you don’t know about Fl v Anthony. Get it straight-we are discussing CRIMES-laws that were broken. Who gives a crap about what it costs Florida taxpayers to maintain safe neighborhoods and the protection of the good and decent people who want to live there.
Casey Anthony was NOT in prison at that point in time. She was in custody at the Orange County Jail awaiting trial. One can only be sent to PRISON after being found guilty of a crime and sentenced to PRISON. At the time that you reference in your comment, Casey Anthony had NOT been convicted of any crime.
Hey NTS, nice to see you!
As I recall, Casey made full restitution to Amy before the check fraud hearing…And you’re right, the State did drag the victim into this case. It was all to attack her credibility if she were to take the stand in her own defense in her murder trial. To the State it was imperative that Casey be a convicted felon, a 6-time convicted felon at that.
The total of her economic crimes were close to $700 which is unbelievable for a 1st time offender to wound up with 13 felonies. Unheard of! Casey actually signed her own name to a check at Target IIRC. I’d like to know, at which point are the merchants who accepted these checks responsible? Did they not ask for ID? Did Casey have AH’s driver’s license? Does Casey really look that much like AH?
I’m not trying to blame Target, I’m just amazed that it was so easy. I seldom write checks to department stores so I don’t know how that works. With that said, if these were my stolen checks, I would be very angry to find out that the merchant didn’t ask for ID.
As for verbal orders superceding written orders? In the medical field, written orders win out over verbal orders every time. Ask any lawyer who’s ever represented a doctor or hospital in a malpractice case? I think in the realm of Law it should be the same just as in medicine and other professions.
JBM,
How do you figuire that the state dragged Amy into this case? The state didn’t introduce Amy to Casey. The state didn’t text Amy to say Caylee is missing. The state didn’t make Casey steal Amy’s checks.
All to attach her credibility? What credibility, she was lying about her “missing” child, her job,her nanny, her education. So you think people who steal/forge shouldn’t be convicted. How do you know if Amy didn’t want to press charges? I’m sure Amy was ticked off and felt betrayed by a friend she trusted and entrusted her car. Have you ever been a victim of theft? It leave you feeling violated.
Just because someone makes restitution before their court date doesn’t mean that charges are dropped, especially when it’s a felony charge. Casey didn’t make restitution to Amy, she made restitution to the bank.
How many times did you want her to offend before you consider it valid to convict her? Commiting even a single offense can result in multiple charges, that is not unusual and not all 1st time offenders get off easy.
Judge Strictland adjuncted her guilty of six charges with a sentence of 412 days, much less than what he could have given her.
It is easy to do this at many department stores and Casey knew it. These stores rarely check IDs, but that doesn’t give Casey the green light to do it. She had been doing it for quite some time with her mother’s own checks and credit cards. Not to mention stealing from her own grandparents’ account.
It might make you happy to know that if the bad check is reported to the store, the cashiers that accept these checks usually gets fired.
I am interested what it was that Amy wanted to say on the stand when she was stopped. I wish wesh would have asked.
What the hell difference does it make to you what Amy H. wanted to say? Knowing that her reputation took quite a hit is enough for most viewers but not for you. Let these young people alone and allow them to gather themselves together and march on beyond the horror of knowing an acquaintance killed her beautiful daughter.
Do you ever realize that the only person you have never said a discouraging word about is the defendant? You act as if LE plucked her out of the air and in so doing they inadvertantly threw her child in the swamp and regretably the poor mother was reduced to lying about her child’s whereabouts. Had it not been for the actions of LE, the prosecutors, the death investigators, Dr G, forensic experts, scorned boyfriends and hapless and witless friends, Ms Anthony would not have been charged. Why? according to you a murder never took place.
ooohhh Anonymous…snippy, snippy…You really should check yourself. Your true colors are showing and it’s not pretty.
What the “he-LL” is not very nice or respectful. If you can’t join in discussion without being so combative perhaps you should take a Xanax and call your doctor. Maybe Dr. Krop has an opening? just saying..
Strange. I’ve never seen anyone more combative than you, JB.
@ notthatsmart- she spent three years in jail further to endless delays by the defense team. They kept trying to avoid actually going to trial because even they knew she was guilty and were trying to put off the inevitable. All the nonsense J. Baez is screaming about started with him refusing a publication ban, sticking his face in the media when it suited him and then crying the blues that they needed a jury outside of Orlando. He gets a judge to recuse himself and then cries that she sat in jail for three years? And advises that Caylee died in an accidental drowning but let his client sit in jail for three years? What a buffoon! Have read your comments on OS and methinks you are not that much better. Your screen name is well picked. Good luck to you and to the whole sleazy, filthy bunch of them – Baez, Mason, Casey and her godforsaken parents.
Ditto, Teresa! Well said!
Steve-One of the funniest comments I have ever read on a blog “devoted” to Fl v Anthony. Thanks.
Mr. Hornsby, your reliance on Brooks v. State for the proposition that probation is tolled while a defendant is in jail is completely misplaced. That case and the other cases in that line are all clearly dealing with situations where a defendant is serving a prison sentence in another case. Casey Anthony was not. Once she was constructively released on the jail portion of the check case, she was not under any other sentence, so there was no sentence to toll the start of probation. Having read through Florida case law and statutes, I can find no authority for either the judge or DOC to decide that probation would wait and then start after she was released from a pre-trial detention.
Even if I was wrong, which I am not, Judge Strickland’s oral pronouncement that her probation is not to start until she is released from jail controls the start of her probationary period. You thow around the term “constructive release.” There is no such thing as constructive release from jail, you are either in jail or out.
How are you not wrong? Those cases all address situations where a defendant has more than one active sentence, which was not the case here. The term “constructive,” as any lawyer ought to know, applies in a situation where the legal reality is different from the physical reality. So she was not physically released from jail because she was still on a no bond hold, but she was legally released from the jail portion of the check sentence. Aren’t indefinite sentences illegal? So how could Judge Strickland order her to be on probation at some indefinite time in the future if and when she ever got out after resolving the murder charge? You can’t order a sentence to run consecutively to a sentence that doesn’t exist yet.
Thank you Mr. Hornsby for the clarification, I was thinking along the same lines as Sarah. But what about the Double Jeopardy issue, if the probation department considers her probation served and she has a letter releasing her, is that technicality enough to have the oral and ammended order vacated? During the time she was considered on probation in jail, if she cooresponded with another inmate, would that be a probation violation?
I just have a feeling that the Judge is not going to place her back on probation. I assume Judge Perry will follow the law….which law, I have no idea.
At this point, whether she violated her probation is a moot point. She’s been terminated off probation, so any allegations of violations can no longer be made.
And I would fully agree that since she has completed probation per DOC’s letter, it would be a Double Jeopardy violation to have her serve it again.