The Casey Anthony Trial (Update: #1 on Caylee's Law) - Page 4 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#91 of 99 Old 07-15-2011, 06:17 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mulvah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

Quote:
Originally Posted by coffeegirl View Post

 

People always say that?! That is exactly what my mom told me when I saw the verdict and called to ask her about the possibility of her being re-tried.. I thought it was a mom "original". Sigh.

 

Anyhow, I have only heard (Court TV pundits and whatnot) that his behavior after Laci disappeared was a factor in their decision. At the end of the day though, the two cases are not exactly the same, even though they were both high profile circumstantial murder cases. As for SP receiving a fair trial, I have no reason assume otherwise.

 



I'm sorry to have disillusioned you.  wink1.gif    (I'm joking.)

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super~Single~Mama View Post

They would not be allowed to try her under Caylee's Law, but not b/c of double jeopardy.  It would be an "ex post facto" law, which is unconstitutional, and which basically means that you can't try someone for something they did, that wasn't a crime when they did it.  Does that make sense?  So, since Caylee's Law wasn't an actual law when Caylee died (or was in the care of her mother), CA can't be tried under it.  Only people who take an action against the law, after it becomes law, can be tried under that law.  It's not the same as double jeopardy, b/c that says that you can't be tried for the same crime twice.

 

Other claims, though, that are similar, would be barred by res judicata, which is "claim preclusion", and prevents a matter from being litigated after already being decided.  Then there's Collateral Estoppel, which refers to "issue preclusion", and prevents the re-litigation of a particular issue.  So, once an issue of fact has been decided by a jury, it cannot be re-litigated if the parties did not like the result (unless there are grounds for appeal, which I don't understand fully b/c I don't have any experience with appeals).  It's kind of complicated, and I'm not super great at all the little pieces yet, but its a starting point.

 

I generally don't like using Wikipedia as a source, but this page actually does a pretty good job of explaining what ex post facto laws are, and what it means.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law

 


 

The first paragraph is true if the OP is referring to Caylee's Law, which isn't a law at this time.  The OP said, "...Could the state or anyone else bring a charge of child neglect against her?", which I read to mean a charge of child neglect, not the proposed Caylee's Law.  

 

I do not know that res judicata would apply in this case, though I would have to research that.  It is possible it would apply because a charge of child neglect could have been included, but I'm not sure if that would apply in this particular case.  I do not believe collateral estoppel would apply to a child neglect charge. 

Mulvah is offline  
#92 of 99 Old 07-15-2011, 09:15 AM
 
coffeegirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: a glaxy far, far away
Posts: 839
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Thanks for the legal break down, SSM.

 

So on the news this morning: Casey Anthony is appealing the four convictions of lying to law enforcement.


caffix.gif
coffeegirl is offline  
#93 of 99 Old 07-15-2011, 10:40 AM
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cover letter he!!
Posts: 6,548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulvah View Post


 

The first paragraph is true if the OP is referring to Caylee's Law, which isn't a law at this time.  The OP said, "...Could the state or anyone else bring a charge of child neglect against her?", which I read to mean a charge of child neglect, not the proposed Caylee's Law.  

 

I do not know that res judicata would apply in this case, though I would have to research that.  It is possible it would apply because a charge of child neglect could have been included, but I'm not sure if that would apply in this particular case.  I do not believe collateral estoppel would apply to a child neglect charge. 



I believe that Collateral Estoppel would apply here, b/c all of the facts surrounding Caylee's death (including everything that CA did before, and during the month that Caylee was missing) have been litigated before a jury.  And, wasn't there an "aggravated neglect" charge included in the lesser charges that we were arguing about before?  If I'm remembering correctly, then res judicata could apply as well, and probably would.



Quote:
Originally Posted by coffeegirl View Post

 

So on the news this morning: Casey Anthony is appealing the four convictions of lying to law enforcement.


I'm not surprised - anyone convicted of a crime gets their first appeal as a matter of right.  So, pretty much everyone appeals.

 

Super~Single~Mama is offline  
#94 of 99 Old 07-15-2011, 03:24 PM - Thread Starter
 
Mulvah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

I can't link to it, but there is an article I read earlier from a retired Judge who believes the justice system typically works, the verdict was wrong (specifically on all lesser charges), and that the lack of understanding of circumstantial evidence is to blame for the verdict.  I thought it was an interesting perspective and I can't help but hope it changes the way future instructions are given.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super~Single~Mama View Post

 

I believe that Collateral Estoppel would apply here, b/c all of the facts surrounding Caylee's death (including everything that CA did before, and during the month that Caylee was missing) have been litigated before a jury.  And, wasn't there an "aggravated neglect" charge included in the lesser charges that we were arguing about before?  If I'm remembering correctly, then res judicata could apply as well, and probably would.

 

I thought we disagreed on the aggravated manslaughter charge.   I am away from home and cannot access my remote connection, so it takes for-e-ver for things to load, but if she was charged with aggravated neglect, then yes, clearly collateral estoppel would apply, as would double jeopardy. 
 

 

Mulvah is offline  
#95 of 99 Old 07-15-2011, 03:44 PM
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cover letter he!!
Posts: 6,548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulvah View Post

 

I thought we disagreed on the aggravated manslaughter charge.   I am away from home and cannot access my remote connection, so it takes for-e-ver for things to load, but if she was charged with aggravated neglect, then yes, clearly collateral estoppel would apply, as would double jeopardy. 
 

 



You're right, my memory isn't working right now, I blame ds.  Anyway, if she was charged with aggravated neglect, Res Judicata would apply b/c thats "claim preclusion" and would bar other neglect charges.

 

Collateral Estoppel bars the same issues of fact from being litigated again - and all of the events leading up to Caylee's disappearance, and all of CA's acts after Cayelee's disappearance have already been argued in a court of law, and so the issues of fact cannot be re-argued.  At least that's my understanding of it.

Super~Single~Mama is offline  
#96 of 99 Old 07-15-2011, 06:02 PM - Thread Starter
 
Mulvah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

Here is the article I mentioned earlier.  It's definitely something to think about (regarding circumstantial evidence) and in all his years, he only experienced two verdicts he deemed incorrect.  Interesting, considering he has had quite a bit of experience.  I don't necessarily agree that juries are wrong that infrequently, but I can't argue with his experience. 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super~Single~Mama View Post

You're right, my memory isn't working right now, I blame ds.  Anyway, if she was charged with aggravated neglect, Res Judicata would apply b/c thats "claim preclusion" and would bar other neglect charges.

 

Collateral Estoppel bars the same issues of fact from being litigated again - and all of the events leading up to Caylee's disappearance, and all of CA's acts after Cayelee's disappearance have already been argued in a court of law, and so the issues of fact cannot be re-argued.  At least that's my understanding of it.


 

Without researching the elements of res judicata, I would have to take your word for it because I'm just not sure.  It's moot if she was already charged with aggravated neglect.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you that collateral estoppel would apply on neglect charges if she were already acquitted of aggravated neglect.  A Judge can order a retrial (based on unusual circumstances involving severe errors), but that will not occur.  Federal prosecution will not occur, either.  This case is closed and the only thing to do is to learn and move forward.

Mulvah is offline  
#97 of 99 Old 07-19-2011, 07:03 AM
 
mar123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 582
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Question for the legal eagles out there:

 

Many people who convicted crimes against people during the Civil Right's movement were found not guilty when tried in their states. YEARS later, they were tried in federal courts and found guilty. I know they were tried under federal statutes, but how was the government able to do that, but has no recourse in this case?

mar123 is offline  
#98 of 99 Old 07-19-2011, 01:01 PM - Thread Starter
 
Mulvah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by mar123 View Post

Question for the legal eagles out there:

 

Many people who convicted crimes against people during the Civil Right's movement were found not guilty when tried in their states. YEARS later, they were tried in federal courts and found guilty. I know they were tried under federal statutes, but how was the government able to do that, but has no recourse in this case?


Generally speaking, the dual sovereignty doctrine would allow Casey to face federal prosecution.  It's pretty questionable and I do not believe it will happen.

Mulvah is offline  
#99 of 99 Old 07-20-2011, 05:49 PM
 
coffeegirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: a glaxy far, far away
Posts: 839
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

What I'm still unclear on is was CA ever actually charged with aggravated neglect? I'm pretty sure she was, to start with, after the interrogation at Universal Studios....(or maybe it was just neglect.) But what happened to those charges when they subsequently charged her with murder? Did the child neglect charge just go away, or was it "transferred" (for lack of a better/more correct word) into the murder indictment? Or was she charged, convicted and served her time on the child neglect thing while the murder investigation and trial process was underway?


caffix.gif
coffeegirl is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off