Caylee/Casey Anthony Case: All Rise- Judge Perry Takes The Stand

Orlando, FL– This morning, The Honorable Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr, has his first hearing presiding over the case against Casey Anthony.


At 9:30am, Jose Baez, J. Cheney Mason and team will appear with the prosecution led by Linda Drane Burdick and Jeff Ashton for a case management meeting called by Judge Perry.

Watch it Live Here.

In the week since the scheduling of this hearing by his Honor, the prosecution has released an additional 300 pages of discovery and filed a motion of supplemental discovery.

Camp Casey has resubmitted correctly filed motions already heard by the court under Judge Strickland, notified the court of impending vacations, filed a motion to withdraw an attorney no longer licensed to practice law, and filed a motion to seal the visitor logs of the Orange County jail.

Casey Anthony is serving time in the OC jail for her convictions in the economic charges, and while she awaits trial for the murder of her 34 month old daughter, Caylee Marie.

Check back to for this mornings developments.

Related Posts:


  1. Joan(Canada) says:

    Re: the Anthony’s foreclosure. Remember last year Judge Strickland had pronounced that the Trial would begin Jan. 2010. This is just my thoughts, but what if the A’s figured they would stop making the mortgage payments because as soon as the trial was over they would be raking in the big money. But surprise… trial until next year.

  2. Leslee S. says:

    I have a 3 yr. old granddaughter that I sometimes take to the nursing home to visit my mother. My granddaughter is extremely outgoing with non-stop talking but the moment we enter the nursing floors & she sees the nurses, patients & beds, she does not open her mouth hardly. Same thing happened the couple of times I took her to a hosital with me. I think that it was just the environment Caylee was in.

  3. Bees Knees says:

    The sun’ll come out
    Bet your bottom dollar
    That tomorrow
    There’ll be sun!

    ~ (ANNIE)

  4. Leslee S. says:


    Has the pic of Caylee with the Pooh blanket at Ricardo’s been listed as evidence? Wow, that’s big to me!

  5. Bees Knees says:

    It’s not often you see a three-year-old cuddle up so nicely with someone they don’t know too well. I wonder if I’m going on bad information. I was sure I’d read she didn’t see him often but that could be wrong ~ maybe she did, regularly.

  6. Kleat says:

    “…. and we have no idea what they are…in this case…”

    Quoting Andrea Lyon in the last hearing, re: the defense’s knowledge of any aggravating circumstances that the state has based it’s decision to ask for the DP.

    The defense wants the response by the state, listing the aggravating factors, struck from the record. Says the judge ordered that the state also explain the aggravating factors.

    What DID the judge actually say in his ruling? Remember Ms. Lyon asked the judge in her argument about gender bias as a reason to have the dp thrown out, ‘let’s put Mr. Ashton and Mr. Lamar under oath and take their deposition, and find out why they decided to go for the DP” (paraphrasing Ms. Lyon’s argument in the hearing… Pt 2 about 30 minutes in– she’s looking for impermissible motives” such as gender bias).

    The judge said, about the notice of aggravating factors… he agrees with the defense re the due process argument.

    Judge Perry did NOT specify anything in his ruling, about the state giving their theory, that the defense now wants. Judge Perry only ordered that within 10 days… the state ‘LIST’ persuant to Steel, the aggravating factors that it intends to prove’.

    The judge, ‘at this time… will deny the state’s request for a list ‘WITHOUT PREJUDICE’ … reciprocal mitigating factors.”

    “They said new circumstances have come to light”… Ms. Lyon repeating what she says the state claimed when they changed their mind about the DP.

    Which aggravating factors specifically, and what basis, through what evidence,…. ‘how do they intend to prove this’, Ms. Lyon asks. There is something ‘sepcific’ that caused them to change their minds about the dp, and ‘in fairness’ they should tell us what their theory of the case is. “How about, your honor…. ” that’s all we are asking… have them tell us”.

    Citing Steel– before Steel, legal theories are ‘work product’ protected by discovery rules and protected by common law. The court has the discretion, if defense can’t ‘figure out what the aggravators are, to give them some help figuring it out.

    “Should the court order us to reply, of course we will.” Ashton makes an important point– and will this come back to bite the defense in their motion to strike… ‘reciprocal’ idea– the defense may just have to give something up if they get the state to give up its case theory.

    Will the defense be forced to give the state what their mitigating circumstances is? This is every bit as important, Ashton argues, in the state’s duty to rebut mitigating circumstances. Lucas vs State. Ashton argued that this concept is not new– he appeals to the court “if you are going to tell us…. they cant’ possibly figure out from… the Mt. Everest of discovery… which of the six aggravators may apply… put yourself in our position. We have to figure out from an unlimited list, what non-statutory mitigation will possibly be argued. Imagine if the defense were in that position, how much they would complain.”

    Ashton goes on– “judge, you don’t have to grant the motion, I don’t believe the defense needs it. I’m willing to use my experience and the facts as I learned them in discovery…. if you do require a response, it should be reciprocal.”

    So– now that the defense is reopening this… will the judge give them what they ask for, plus the requirement for them to reciprocate with the mitigating circumstances that THEY intend to present?? WITHOUT PREJUDICE… the Judge can still require the defense to reciprocate, if he requires the state to give away their work product/theory.

    Kleat, I don’t see a precedent for the Judge to grant this motion. As usual, not even a citation in the motion. The Steele case only supports the “notice”..

    I have a favor, if you have it, I need the OCSO dye stain print report from the items taken from the Anthony home, it has vaporized.

    If anyone has that , I would appreciate it.

  7. Kleat says:

    (mitigating circumstances ‘are’– of course the defense has an endless list to choose from, and probably already has a long list to use already, as their mitigation specialist has been working hard for a long time already)

  8. Thinker says:

    The Medical Examiner’s report of the duct tape being place before decomposition (could have been placed before … or after death) … does not rule out … or specifically rule in…. the duct tape as the murder weapon ….,2933,527469,00.html

    excerpt from Caylee’s autopsy report
    “….”This duct tape was clearly placed prior to decomposition keeping the mandible in place.”"

  9. Thinker says:

    Good question Leslee S !
    I’m not sure if that particular photo of Caylee with her WTP blanket, at Ricardo’s apartment is IN evidence YET?? It was not shown to Cindy, George, Lee in their State depositions.

    We don’t know if the State will ask to enter that particular photo into evidence, or not? I agree that it sure seems important!

    We know that this particular photo has been published on the CBS/48 Hours site, and also in the “PEOPLE” magazine October 2008 issue.

    So, the Prosecutors could potentially subpoena CBS and/or PEOPLE and get the info on who sold those photos to them, and the history behind the photos….. to get the specific timeframe of when Caylee had the WTP blanket with her at Ricardo’s apartment.
    Leslee S. says:
    May 20, 2010 at 9:05 pm


    Has the pic of Caylee with the Pooh blanket at Ricardo’s been listed as evidence? Wow, that’s big to me!

  10. Leslee S. says:


    Thanks! Boy, those Anthonys are so stupid that they might as well have gift wrapped it & put a bow on it! That applies to all of the evidence that they have provided the state.

  11. Ragdoll says:

    I have a favor, if you have it, I need the OCSO dye stain print report from the items taken from the Anthony home, it has vaporized.

    If anyone has that , I would appreciate it.
    B, I’m looking but not finding anything. Is this ‘dye stain’ used by forensics or are we talking about stains in the trunk?

    From memory, it is an OCSO supplement, I believe after March 5, 2009, that outlines the fingerprint analysis of the hair straightner, mattress and pump and some dvd’s.

    Not related to trunk or Dna


  12. Ragdoll says:

    Thanks B….I’ll take another boo.


    I cant find it either, I get the boo too!

  13. Ragdoll says:

    I’m still on it. It’s out there somewhere….unless purposely removed?

  14. Ragdoll says:

    B, if it’s not in here, it’s not anywhere.

    I’m radomly searching each link from the link below:

  15. Ragdoll says:

    Cindy’s statement on straightner:

    Still looking. I’ll try not to tie you up with postings if I can help it xo

    Thank you my good friend, I may need to put out the bat signal to my gal Val-

    It is the dye stain latents from the materials mentioned, I cannot remember if they just provided exclusionary results or not.

  16. Ragdoll says:

    Good grief woman! Do you EVER rest?

    I see some references (link to follow) that might be what your looking for:

    Q307 – Q308 – swabs from male portion of cord from flat iron (hair straightener)

    Q305 – Q306 – swabs from pump of inflatable bed

    (I know their swabs….I’m just putting it out there. Nothing on dvd’s…..yet!)

    Here’s the link:

    Hope this is a start xo

    Those are the right items, sans the DVD’s, but they were submitted to OCSO first for latents, that is the FBI submission for the DNA lab.

    I have a feeling, even though I checked already, I wrote in this specific issue and I am going to kick myself.
    I always have the head injury to blame, lol.

  17. Kleat says:

    Ashton’s points… he suggest there’s a way to figure out how to balance the field.
    In penalty phase, defense has a burden to prove something. In DP cases, execption to rules, to create a process, where defense has to tell us what their mitigation is. Not new to the law, Hickson applied to battered spouses, Lucas vs state, required the mitigation list– allows the court to do it’s duty.

    Ashton says it’s important to have the opportunity to rebut the mitigation evidence.

    Lyon wants the statutes the state is relying on but she doesn’t repeat wanting the state’s theory to back up those statue lists. That’s what the judge gives them and that’s what they got. But the dictates of Steele include the state’s theories behind each of the aggravators? If so, the judge does not use that in his decision specifically, but this judge is taking ‘death is different’ concept, very seriously, and is generous to the defense.

    Point taken Kleat, but I do not see him giving them the latitude they are looking for.

    I think if he moves at all, he may balk at the wording “may rely”, but even then, I think further dilution of that smells of work product.

    I thought it was brilliant that Ashton brought up the absence of any mental issues in the last hearing, because if the defense was forced to provide, as a concession, the “mitigators” that would have been their empty proffer, imo.

  18. dee says:

    this is an oldee but goodee, Cindy is incredible

  19. dee says:

    opps and forgot to mention Cindy says June 14th…was the last day Caylee was seen….damn liars

  20. westsidehudson says:

    Maybe it is just me, but what happened to the hinky meter? I went there yesterday to say hello, because I like the people there too, and I was back in a March article. I tried to post, but I don’t think anything happened.

    I dunno, I emailed Valhall on another matter this morning, I will find out. Working on Caylee thread now.

  21. Jan says:

    Valhall is moving..maybe there are some glitches going on.

  22. cherylz says:

    Bees…I distinctly remember CA stated that Caylee did not visit w/ her G’GPa much.
    Thank you Thinker for the link Re: duct tape being placed prior to decomposition.

  23. Ragdoll says:

    Blink, I searched high and low for latent prints regarding dvd’s. Nothing! I worded my search criteria in every possible way I could think of. I searched your site and other blogs. The only hits I got involved the flat iron and the duct tape. The link I left for you had something on the air mattress I believe, but as you know, no dvd’s.

    I’ll keep it up but you definitely have better connections. Good luck!

    Courtesy of my Gal Val.. Hall.

    Thanks so much for checking Ragdoll.

  24. Ragdoll says:

    I’m so happy you found what you were looking for B. Thanks for posting the link and sorry for missing your cue. xo

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment