Return to Transcripts main page
Joy Behar Page
Casey Anthony to be Released on Wednesday; Interview with Jeff Ashton
Aired July 07, 2011 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
VINNIE POLITAN, HLN HOST, "PRIME NEWS": Hello, I`m Vinnie Politan outside the Orange County courthouse in Orlando, Florida. Joy Behar will be with you in just a minute.
But first, I want to give you the latest on the Casey Anthony story tonight. The headline right now is that Casey Anthony will be a free woman in six days. Judge Belvin Perry making a statement today by giving her the maximum sentence based on the jury`s verdict.
But despite getting a four-year sentence today, Casey Anthony will be a free woman this time next week due to credit for time she has already served. She`s set to be released from the Orange County jail on Wednesday, July 13th.
There`s still a lot of questions. Where will Casey live once she`s released from prison? What will she do?
Live coverage of all the breaking details right here on HLN. Joy Behar picks up our coverage right now.
JOY BEHAR, HLN HOST: Casey Anthony, acquitted of the murder of her 2- year-old daughter Caylee, was sentenced today for lying to the police. Her release date is next week. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The defendant was given credit for 1,043 days and at this time, her release date has been calculated as July 13th, 2011.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEHAR: Here now with more are Ryan Smith, host of "in Session" on TruTV who has been recovering the case in Orlando; Stacey Honowitz, Florida prosecutor; plus Jayne Weintraub, criminal defense attorney.
Ok. Ryan, Casey walks free next Wednesday. Why so soon? Walk us through today`s sentencing if you will.
RYAN SMITH, HOST, "IN SESSION": Well, what happened was the judge in this case really wanted to give her consecutive sentences for the lying to police charges. That ended up giving her four years but she`s already served close to three years in prison. That means she gets time served, so she gets credit for the time and she also gets credit for good behavior while she was in prison.
He also seemed to let these sentences run concurrently, which means at the same time with her previous check fraud case. And so all of that combined to make it so that she gets out next Wednesday. So in a sense Joy, it`s because she`s already spent so much time in prison and because she got credit for good behavior --
BEHAR: Right.
SMITH: -- she gets out so quickly.
BEHAR: So is this sentence the most the judge could have done?
STACEY HONOWITZ, FLORIDA PROSECUTOR: Absolutely.
JAYNE WEINTRAUB, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: It absolutely. He couldn`t have given her one more day.
BEHAR: Ok.
Now Stacey, her daughter is dead, she didn`t report her missing for 31 days, she lied to the police and now she walks free next week. Is that it? Is that it? Can she be charged with anything?
HONOWITZ: No. She is done. And I know everybody is thinking, what more can we do? Let`s find another charge because everyone is kind of outraged with this decision. But there`s nothing more. She`s been tried on the charges and really that`s the end of it.
She`s going to walk out of jail next Wednesday unless somebody brings some kind of civil suit for some kind of investigative cost which she`ll get from the state anyway. She`ll have to pay back investigative costs but other than that, she`s done.
BEHAR: You know, her appearance and her mood in court surprised many. Her hair was down. She was giggling and winking and everything. Ryan, what do you make of that?
SMITH: You know, a lot of people out there are saying she doesn`t have to impress a jury at this point. She`s in front of a judge. She can dress how she wants.
I think in front of a jury a lot of defense attorneys would say, you want to have that hair pulled back. You want to have more of a more conservative appearance. In this appearance she walked in, she was all smiles. She chatted with her lawyers. When Jose Baez walked in she was very friendly to him.
And in reality, when you step back for a second, she can do this. This isn`t the first time I`ve seen a defendant come to their sentencing and realize they are not in front of a jury anymore so they can be more of themselves. I think you saw the real Casey there being relieved. I mean she`s very happy that she was found not guilty of those murder charges.
BEHAR: Ok. So Stacey that means that the one we were watching was not the real Casey. This one with the hair down is the real Casey? Stacey.
WEINTRAUB: Yes.
HONOWITZ: Well, I mean of course, that would be my opinion. Certainly her attorneys wanted her to look young and no makeup and kind of conservative. And certainly today I think she was dressed all prepared to walk out the door. Maybe her lawyer said to her, we`re going to argue hard enough and you might be released today.
But, you know, absolutely people think that they saw a different Casey -- they see a different Casey now. Even when the jury was in and out of the courtroom people were saying that it was a different Casey. So I have to agree with you.
BEHAR: Jayne, you seem like you`re going to jump out of your blouse.
WEINTRAUB: Can she be charged again? No. This is double jeopardy, you know. This is it. We need to learn to respect and preserve the integrity of the system, otherwise we don`t have a system.
BEHAR: Yes. Well, we all know all that but we`re still quarterbacking -- Monday-morning quarterbacking here.
WEINTRAUB: Well, exactly. But even the lawyers have taken the high road. I mean Jose Baez in his statement said there are no winners here. And he`s right.
Because think about it. I mean this young woman is going to go out of jail any day and she has to start all over again, with the notoriety, with everything else. She`s been presumed not guilty. She`s been found not guilty. And those 12 people, we just can`t go behind that verdict.
BEHAR: I understand that.
WEINTRAUB: Because those 12 people were sequestered, thankfully and kept away from the lynch mob mentality and really evaluated this on the evidence.
BEHAR: Of course. That`s the way the system works and I accept that. I still don`t feel great about her. I don`t feel great about this girl because the child goes missing and she doesn`t report it for 31 days. Come on.
(CROSSTALK)
WEINTRAUB: There`s nothing to feel good about.
HONOWITZ: Nobody is going to feel bad about that she has to start over. Nobody could really care less and I think Jeff Ashton said it best this morning. He said the smartest thing to do is just to totally ignore her. Don`t show up at the jail. Don`t start protesting. That might even be something that she welcomes. Just ignore it.
I mean, you know what, Joy? People are outraged by this verdict. Nobody wants to second-guess the jury but it`s human nature to do that. Because you want to say to yourselves, were they looking at the same things as we were looking at? But it`s the jury system and it`s the best system in the world and we have to abide by it and that`s the bottom line.
BEHAR: Yes.
WEINTRAUB: And the bottom line is that the state didn`t have evidence that was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she committed the crime. And we keep acting and talking about it as if this is a girl who got away with murder. No.
HONOWITZ: That`s not true.
BEHAR: That`s a matter of opinion.
HONOWITZ: That`s not true. That`s a matter of opinion. You as a defense attorney will say that, Jayne and we have gone round and round on this many nights, you know that. I, as a prosecutor, will tell you I thought the indictment was proper and I thought it was proven beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt and I absolutely do.
WEINTRAUB: Stacey, wait. When was the last -- you and I have tried a lot of murder cases in the same place. When was the last time you saw a prosecutor -- even you wouldn`t do this -- indict her for lying to a police officer in the same indictment as a murder. Stacey in 27 years I`ve never seen it. Have you?
HONOWITZ: I`m not even talking about the lying portion of it.
(CROSSTALK)
WEINTRAUB: A little vindictive?
HONOWITZ: We`re talking about the fact that -- I`m going to rehash the evidence. It`s my belief that jurors tend to think that you have to prove it beyond all doubt, 100 percent. We always are going to have a doubt.
(CROSSTALK)
HONOWITZ: We were not there. We weren`t there and that`s the issue.
BEHAR: Give me a second here. Let`s talk about the jurors because they`re slowly starting to speak to the media.
Juror Number Three, Jennifer Ford, spoke to GMA defending the jury`s decision. Watch it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JENNIFER FORD, CASEY ANTHONY JUROR: I`m not convinced she didn`t. But I also couldn`t exclude the possibility of it being an accident. So I can`t find her guilty of a crime if I`m not sure a crime was committed.
So it was just that not knowing exactly what happened and not knowing if we made the right choice. We don`t want to set someone free if they killed their beautiful daughter.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEHAR: Ok. So she`s talking about the possibility, Jayne, that it was an accident. Is that the reasonable doubt that was created?
WEINTRAUB: Absolutely.
BEHAR: There it is.
WEINTRAAUB: Absolutely. Not only did he create the reasonable doubt he gave you the imagery. He showed the pictures in the pooling. He showed you Caylee with the door, getting ready to open that sliding glass door. In Florida the biggest cause of death, sad to say, still is drowning of kids.
BEHAR: Really. Well, because there`s a lot of pools there.
HONOWITZ: Well, she believes --
BEHAR: Go ahead, Stacey.
(CROSSTALK)
HONOWITZ: Jayne, of course, I understand that, believes that it was an accidental death. And the fact of the matter is, that`s what Jose Baez said in his opening statement and I think it`s very important for people to realize that what the lawyers say is not evidence. I know we continue to say that.
But there was no evidence of an accident. I think the fact of the matter is, they went back there and they discounted any -- she`s right about this -- they discounted any involvement she had with this child or else they would have come back with a lesser. They sincerely believe for some reason without any evidence that it was an accident. So that where we disagree on.
SMITH: Yes. But here`s the thing.
BEHAR: Let Ryan get in there. Go ahead Ryan.
SMITH: Here`s the thing. Here`s the thing. When you talk about reasonable doubt, the burden is high. That`s not a low burden. That`s a very high burden for people to meet.
So what Jose Baez kept pointing out which I thought was very good of him was to say folks, if you see another alternative other than what the state has presented to you. If you think it could have been anything else, if you think it could have been an accident, if you think that somebody else could have done it, anything else that you see here that`s reasonable doubt.
And that`s what this jury did. They went back into that jury room and they said, you know what, I get this evidence. Yes, maybe this could work out, but maybe it could be something else. And when you feel that way that`s when jurors start going with reasonable doubt.
(CROSSTALK)
BEHAR: Ok. Ryan -- let`s go to something else. There was a petition today to have the jurors` names released. What happened with that -- Ryan?
SMITH: Well, the judge decided that in this case he would give what`s called a cooling off period. Sounds like he`s going to wait about seven or eight days and possibly release those names. I`m not sure he`s ready to release them.
It looks as if he was saying that he was going to. But he`s definitely going to give it a cooling-off period of seven or eight days. Now, this was tough for him because in high-profile cases it`s not rare to avoid releasing jurors` names.
Why? These jurors are getting threats. He read some of these threats in court and, you know, we`re worried about their safety. I think what he`s trying to do right now is give that cooling off period. I don`t know if he`ll change his mind but it will be at least another seven days before we hear their names.
BEHAR: Ok. Now yesterday we found out that George and Cindy Anthony were getting death threats. Casey is obviously going to be getting death threats. Does the state -- one of you can answer this -- does the state have an obligation to protect these people at all?
WEINTRAUB: No.
BEHAR: Nothing.
WEINTRAUB: To protect Casey? No. They`re not going to protect her, unless there`s an imminent threat like any other citizen and she calls the police and she seeks police protection. I can`t imagine any other protection that she would get from the state.
BEHAR: Wow.
STACEY HONOWITZ, FLORIDA PROSECUTOR: And I have to say that I have to agree with the judge in one respect. You know, we are 00 I`m upset. I don`t know how Jayne feels. But I know most people are upset at this verdict but the bottom line is, if you allow these jurors to be mobbed, the jury system is not going to work because nobody is ever going to want to sit for jury duty.
SMITH: Agree.
HONOWITZ: Nobody is going to feel like if they make the wrong decision or if they feel they make a wrong decision.
(CROSSTALK)
SMITH: Agree.
BEHAR: Right.
HONOWITZ: -- we don`t want to be responsible. So I think there needs to be a cooling off period before anybody talks to these individuals.
BEHAR: Ok thank you very much, everybody.
I`ll talk to Casey Anthony prosecutor, Jeff Ashton next. So don`t go anywhere.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BEHAR: Prosecutor Jeff Ashton spent three years of his life working to get Casey Anthony convicted of killing her daughter. But it all came to an end two days ago when the jury acquitted Anthony of murder. As we know now, she`s going to be a free woman as of next week.
Here with me now is Jeff Ashton, prosecutor in the Casey Anthony trial. Welcome to the show, Jeff.
JEFF ASHTON, PROSECUTOR, CASEY ANTHONY TRIAL: Thank you.
BEHAR: You know, I have to ask you because I saw you on "The View", I`ve seen you on several shows. I mean, you`re retiring. Why are you doing all this television? What are you doing it for?
ASHTON: Because people are interested.
BEHAR: Yes.
ASHTON: I mean, people have invited me. And you know, I`m a -- I`ve always planned to retire at the end of my career and I actually extended it a bit to -- to finish the case. And everyone is so fascinated and they want to talk to me --
(CROSSTALK)
BEHAR: Right.
ASHTON: -- so I`m like, ok, why not?
BEHAR: Ok. Yes. I mean the defense attorney, Joe Baez has only been on one show that I could see.
ASHTON: Right.
BEHAR: So maybe he doesn`t want to explain too much.
ASHTON: I don`t know.
BEHAR: How are you going to feel next week? The girl is going to walk out a free woman on Wednesday.
ASHTON: Well, you know, it`s not -- as the judge said many times. It`s not my first rodeo. It`s not the first time that a jury hasn`t -- saw the case the way I did. So it`s something you just have to get use to as a -- as a prosecutor. You`re in -- in a case that depends on juries and you have to rely on them and accept what they do.
BEHAR: I know. It`s sort of like that`s the way of the world.
ASHTON: Sure.
BEHAR: Now, I`ve been noticing, I noticed today that she has a whole new look. She`s got a whole swirly hair -- look at the picture of her.
ASHTON: Yes, yes.
BEHAR: She`s all done up there.
ASHTON: She`s dolled up a bit.
BEHAR: Yes, I mean, when you were doing the case she was like Mother Teresa.
ASHTON: Well, she was -- she was very school-marmish looking. And I always noticed that they kept her chair really low.
(CROSSTALK)
BEHAR: Why -- why did they do that?
ASHTON: To make her look -- to make her look tiny. I think, yes.
BEHAR: Make her look smaller. Yes.
ASHTON: It is -- you know those things go on in courtrooms. I just - - it`ll -- it`ll be interesting to see if she ever actually mourns her daughter because that`s one thing we`ve never seen.
BEHAR: We haven`t seen that, no.
ASHTON: No.
BEHAR: We did see her cry when she -- when the verdict was being --
(CROSSTALK)
ASHTON: Right. And she cried -- she cried some when the photos of the remains were shown. So whether -- whatever that means, she did. But I don`t know that we`ve ever seen what we would call mourning but --
(CROSSTALK)
BEHAR: But she was actually coached to look like more saintly and more petite by her defense people, I think. And then, but why didn`t she keep that going? You know? She`s getting the sentencing and she lets her hair down. Why not keep it going?
ASHTON: Well, I think she knows she`s going home. So it -- she doesn`t need to -- I mean, her -- her demeanor in the pre-trial hearings was -- was much different than in trial and sometimes that`s just the reality of a trial.
BEHAR: Yes.
ASHTON: So I don`t want to make any assumptions that she was coached but there definitely was a difference in her demeanor.
BEHAR: Definitely.
ASHTON: Yes.
BEHAR: And I think people are noticing that. Now the jurors are speaking out. Jennifer Ford spoke to ABC`s "Nightline". Let`s watch that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JENNIFER FORD, CASEY ANTHONY JUROR: We had a lot of discussions. We started to look through stuff but none of it -- how did she die? If you`re going to charge someone with murder don`t you have to know how they killed someone or why they might have killed someone or have something, where, when, why, how? Those are important questions and they were not answered.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEHAR: And another juror told the "St. Petersburg Times". She said, quote "I swear -- I just swear to God, I wish we had more evidence to put her away. I truly do, but it just wasn`t there".
Do you take responsibility for that at all, Jeff?
ASHTON: Well, I mean in a sense we do. But we can only present the evidence we have. We can`t create evidence. We can`t manufacture it. So I believe that we presented everything that the investigators gave us. And I really believe that they found every piece of evidence that existed.
So, you know, no one in this case, I don`t think from the investigators or our office, has any regrets or anything that we wished we had done differently, because we gave it all to them. If it wasn`t enough for them we respect that, but everything we had we gave them.
BEHAR: The child was -- she`s -- was missing on the day of was it June 16th.
ASHTON: June 16th was the last time they saw her.
BEHAR: June 16th and yet, we don`t know what happened that day, why not? There is no e-mail or information. The phone calls, nothing that day. What -- what happened that day?
ASHTON: Well, I mean, we know some of what happened that day.
BEHAR: Well, tell me what we know.
ASHTON: Well, we know that she left the house approximately 1:00 in the afternoon. We know that she was back at the house by about 2:00, 2:15. Her father says that he wasn`t there and his work schedule would be consistent with that. We know that she was in the vicinity of her house until about 4:00 that afternoon, based on cell phone records which weren`t really put into evidence but weren`t definitive anyway.
And we know after that she went to her boyfriend`s house where she stayed for -- through the next day, renting a movie, et cetera. So we do know something about where she was during those -- that period of time.
BEHAR: And -- and she went to the boyfriend`s house the day that the child was missing.
ASHTON: Correct. The first day.
BEHAR: And what does the boyfriend say happened?
ASHTON: Basically she -- and he testified at this she basically showed up at his house, late that afternoon.
BEHAR: Was she crying, was she upset?
ASHTON: No.
BEHAR: No, so the child goes missing and we don`t hear -- there`s no response from her really?
ASHTON: No, the evidence that the jury heard was basically that she left the house with Caylee and that she showed up at the boyfriend`s house that evening in good spirits, just fine. They went out and rented a movie. And they --
BEHAR: No discussion where is -- the boyfriend never said -- where is Caylee?
ASHTON: No, I think -- I think if I recall if not that evening soon thereafter she would basically tell him well, she`s at the nanny --
BEHAR: And starting -- she`s starting the nanny -- the nanny lies.
ASHTON: Right.
BEHAR: I think those are lies because I mean the child now is missing 31 days and the first day she`s already saying she`s with the nanny --
ASHTON: We thought that was pretty persuasive but I guess it wasn`t.
BEHAR: It wasn`t persuasive enough. It`s unbelievable.
ASHTON: I guess.
BEHAR: More with Jeff Ashton in just a minute.
Stay there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BEHAR: I`m back with the Casey Anthony trial prosecutor, Jeff Ashton. You know, she never took the stand, Casey. I asked you this question on "The View" and I don`t you were able to answer it that day. So I`m asking you now.
If she took the stand, exactly what would you have asked her?
ASHTON: It had been planned already that if she took the stand Linda Burdick who was actually lead counsel in the case was going to cross- examine her because she`s really good at it.
We had a series of questions ready for her and basically, to explain the actions. What you just said. You know, on the 16th, what were you thinking? Why did you do that? The various lies she told.
Basically ask her to explain all of them over that 31 days. It was going to be a long cross-examination.
BEHAR: And you never got to the chance. Could you have said to the jury, Miss Anthony is not taking the stand but this is what I want to know?
ASHTON: No, we`re prohibited under --
BEHAR: You can`t do that.
ASHTON: No. The constitution gives every defendant the right not to testify and under Florida law and, in fact, most jurisdictions it would be reversible error to comment on the failure of someone to testify because that goes against that principle of the right to remain silent.
BEHAR: It seems that the system is not rigged but it`s in the defendant`s favor.
ASHTON: Well, it`s --
BEHAR: In this country.
ASHTON: -- appropriately so. It should be. Our system is very well- balanced between the rights of the defendant and the rights of the prosecutor and the right to the state.
And as Alan Dershowitz was saying on one show I saw, "We would rather see guilty people go free than convict one innocent person."
ASHTON: Well, that`s -- yes. That`s a saying and as a prosecutor, I agree with the principle of that though each individual case is a little tougher.
BEHAR: Not every country has this.
ASHTON: Exactly
BEHAR: I don`t think Britain has it. Isn`t it true in Britain that you`re guilty until proven innocent? I believe that`s true.
ASHTON: No, I think in France it is. They have an inquisitorial system. But I think in England it`s similar to ours, presumption of innocence, burden on the state, that kind of thing.
BEHAR: Now, you know, there`s an Internet petition going around for something called Caylee`s Law which would require parents to immediately alert authorities about a missing child. I`m surprised that there`s no law already. I can`t believe it.
Now we have a lot of different laws about children. Can you believe there is no law like that already on the books? If a child is missing, that day, June 16th was it?
ASHTON: Yes.
BEHAR: she should have called the police and called 911. That child is missing. 911 and she would have been -- maybe she would have gotten convicted if there was such a law.
ASHTON: Well, she might have been convicted of law but I think it`s so inconceivable to anyone that a parent wouldn`t do that.
BEHAR: Exactly.
ASHTON: So, I don`t know any legislature would have ever thought of it because who would think they wouldn`t?
BEHAR: But the jury -- you said -- probably didn`t watch every single minute of the case, if you said to them why didn`t she call 911 that day? Did you say that?
ASHTON: We said that over and over and over again.
BEHAR: And it wasn`t enough for them. I find that incredible. I just find it incredible and a lot of these jurors are now, as you say, doing the Monday-morning quarterbacking and saying we wanted to convict this girl but we just couldn`t do it.
ASHTON: And if that`s how they genuinely felt under the rule of law, I respect that, I do.
BEHAR: And there was no cause of death ascertained. Meanwhile, in Lacy Peterson`s case there was no cause of death ascertained and that man is on death row.
ASHTON: Yes. You know it`s a question of what jurors want to hear. We felt that the evidence we had combined with the photograph of how Caylee was found was pretty strong evidence of how she died. They didn`t see it that way and you have to respect their decision.
BEHAR: You know what, Jeff, you did the best you could do. And I wish you luck in your retirement.
ASHTON: thank you very much. Thank you very much.
BEHAR: Thanks for doing this. Ok.
We`ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BEHAR: Jurors in the Casey Anthony trial say they delivered a not guilty verdict because the prosecution failed to present good enough evidence for a murder conviction. But does that give enough credit to what the defense did right? Lead defense attorney Jose Baez spoke to Barbara Walters last night about the win in his first network interview. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARBARA WALTERS: Not guilty. Not guilty, not guilty. What did you think? How did you feel?
JOSE BAEZ, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Really, the happiest moment came after the first not guilty, because I knew I had saved her life, and that was really my biggest fear. And I -- once I got through that, I grabbed Casey`s hand and I held it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEHAR: Here to talk about this and more is Andrea Lyon, former co- lead defense for Casey Anthony and law professor at DePaul (ph) University.
Were you expecting a not guilty verdict at all there or were you expecting guilty?
ANDREA LYON, FORMER CO-LEAD DEFENSE FOR CASEY ANTHONY: Well, you worry. You know, you`re always frightened when you have a death-qualified jury. They tend to be pro-prosecution. There was so much hatred and character assassination here. You worried, but you hoped that the jury would pay attention to what the evidence was, what the evidence was not, and to the very, very good work that Jose Baez did, and that they would see through the emotions to the facts. There was no murder case there. There was no murder case.
BEHAR: Where was the character assassination you are referring to going on?
LYON: Well, the character assassination was how the prosecution tried the case. She, you know, salacious photographs of her with another woman. They didn`t have to put those photographs in, you know, Ms. Behar. They could have just said she was out partying and had a witness testify to that. You know, many talks about her lying about things that were not relevant to the case. All of it was, she`s a bad person. She`s a bad mother. She`s a bad -- she lies all the time. And, therefore, she`s a murderer. And that was a leap that they wanted the jury to take, which the jury did not take, which they should not have, although an awful lot of people in the public have taken that leap and are furious about this verdict.
BEHAR: So I`m assuming that it`s your opinion that Jose Baez won this case not because of luck, but because of skill?
LYON: You know, luck is -- I`d always rather be lucky than good. But one of the things that -- when you have a quick verdict like this, every time I`ve gotten an acquittal, and particularly in a death penalty case, it`s happened quickly. If the jury isn`t convinced by the state`s evidence, they decide that pretty fast, No. 1.
But No. 2, he worked so hard. You know, he was a young lawyer getting a very complicated case, and I worked with him for 14 months and I consulted with him at various times after I was unable or not allowed to continue on the case anymore. And what he didn`t know, he learned. He, I have a great deal of respect for Jose Baez. I really do.
BEHAR: OK. Well, he went on to tell Barbara Walters the following. Let`s watch this.
LYON: Sure.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BAEZ: I think Caylee would never have wanted her mother to suffer this way. And Caylee certainly would never have wanted her mother to die. And I don`t think we could have dishonored Caylee`s memory with a false conviction, and that`s what would have happened if she were found guilty of her murder.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEHAR: Is it appropriate, really, for him to assume what outcome poor little Caylee would have wanted? I thought that was a little odd. How does he know?
LYON: Well, he doesn`t know, but it`s how he feels. This work, trying death penalty cases -- you know, I run a death penalty clinic here and I teach students and I tell them, you know, it`s kind of like trying to describe childbirth. No one thinks you`re lying, but unless you`ve done it, it`s very hard to explain what the pressure is like and how emotionally draining it is to be the person that`s standing between a defendant and death. And so, some of the things that happen are that you begin to find emotional places to stand and to gain strength from. And that might be members of your client`s family. It might be members of your own family. It might be faith, it might be a number of different things. But the best (inaudible) is hard work.
BEHAR: A lot of the jurors, a few of the jurors, I must say, I should correct that. A few of the jurors are now saying that they felt that Casey was guilty, but that they couldn`t convict her because of the facts, you know, what we`re saying, that there wasn`t enough forensic evidence to convict her. What do you make of that? That they`re now saying all of that?
LYON: Well, there`s a lot of different ways to look at that. A lot of times a jury -- juries don`t like to hurt anybody`s feelings. So they don`t want to tell the defense if I lose a case, say, they don`t want to tell me I screwed it up, even though maybe I did. If the prosecution loses the case, they don`t want to tell them that they had a terrible case, but they have to vote one way or the other. So sometimes it`s sort of, for lack of a better word, almost a form of buyer`s remorse, to say we thought she might have done it, but they just didn`t prove it.
Maybe they thought that and maybe they didn`t. The point is that the prosecution overreached in this case. They charged a first-degree murder with no cause of death, with a medical examiner who had to admit that this death could have been accidental, with no direct evidence that there was any homicidal action by anyone.
BEHAR: But there was no direct evidence that it was an accident either, zero. And yet the defense came up with that theory, so everybody was throwing in their theories here, right?
LYON: But there`s a difference between the prosecution`s burden and what they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, and the defense, whose only duty is to the court, of course, to be an officer of the court, and to their client. And that`s to present the best possible case that they can for their client. And if it is equally likely that she died accidentally, even if it is 15 percent, 25 percent, whatever percentage you want to put on it, that she died as a result of an accident, that`s not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. And that is what the jury did.
What the jury did, God bless them, is they paid attention to the law and they didn`t let the heat, the light and the mob mentality that`s been on this case overwhelm them.
BEHAR: OK, thanks very much, Andrea.
LYON: Very nice to meet you.
BEHAR: You, too. OK.
Now, Casey Anthony may have cleared her biggest legal hurdle, but she still faces plenty of litigation. Zenaida Gonzalez filed a defamation lawsuit against Casey after she says she was falsely accused of kidnapping Caylee as Zanny the Nanny, remember that? Joining me now to talk about it are Zenaida Gonzalez and her attorney, John Morgan. Welcome to the show.
Now, Zenaida, we learned that Zanny the Nanny doesn`t even exist. Have you ever even met Casey Anthony?
ZENAIDA GONZALEZ: No, I have not.
BEHAR: You never even met her. So where did Casey get your name?
GONZALEZ: My personal opinion, I think it`s from the Sawgrass apartments.
BEHAR: Where?
GONZALEZ: Had to -- from the Sawgrass apartments. I had to go and apply for an apartment over there I was looking at.
BEHAR: Oh, for an apartment?
GONZALEZ: Yes. It`s the same apartment complex that she says she had dropped the baby off at.
BEHAR: So she happened to see your name and she just used that, is what you`re saying. I mean, it`s odd that she picked that particular name. It`s not exactly what I would call a common name.
GONZALEZ: No, it`s not. Not very common at all.
BEHAR: It`s not common. What country are you from? May I ask?
GONZALEZ: No, I`m from Puerto Rico.
BEHAR: From Puerto Rico. It`s maybe it`s a common name in Puerto Rico?
GONZALEZ: It is a common name in Puerto Rico.
BEHAR: I see.
GONZALEZ: But not so much over here.
BEHAR: So tell me, how has being associated with this whole trial affected your life? You were doing nothing.
GONZALEZ: Oh, wow. Well, it affected me a lot. And it changed our lives completely. It changed mine and my daughter`s life. We had to change our whole way of living. We went through a lot. When this whole case started, I lost of lot of things. And I lost my job. And I had no place to live. They kicked me out of everywhere I went to. A lot of things -- it hurt us in a lot of ways. It did a lot of damage to my family.
BEHAR: So, John, let me ask you this, if this civil suit goes to trial, could Casey be called to testify?
JOHN MORGAN, ATTORNEY: We served Casey in the Orange County jail. The deposition is scheduled for July 19th. She gets out July 13th. And we plan on taking her deposition on July 19th of this month.
BEHAR: Let me ask you, John, how do you respond to people who say that Zenaida is trying to just cash in on a high-profile murder case here, because she might make some money on this?
MORGAN: I tell them, you know, it`s baloney. Remember this, when we filed this lawsuit, we weren`t ever thinking there was going to be any money. We filed this lawsuit because the police came to her house. They said you`re a suspect in a murder disappearance of a child. They knew her name. They knew her children`s names. They knew the name and make of her car and the color of her car. She was ripped out and made a suspect. And when she came to me, she was a basket case. And I told her, I said, Zenaida, there will probably never be any money here, but the only way that you`re ever going to get your good name back is to push back and to push back hard, and you file this defamation. The best offense is a good defense. And that`s what we did. Money was never even a thought.
BEHAR: You know, now--
MORGAN: Not one time.
BEHAR: OK. Now, you know that yours is not the only lawsuit Casey is facing. Do you think she`ll eventually have to -- you know, Casey -- what do you think, will she have to come up with the money for other lawsuits?
MORGAN: I think she`s going to have to pay for a defense, no matter what. The other lawsuits I think that she`s facing aren`t that worrisome for her. I think there`s an outrage, I mean, but like, the people want her to pay for her defense. That`s not going to have to be done. This Equusearch, I don`t think that`s going to have to be done. I think this is really the only lawsuit that she`s going to be facing.
(CROSSTALK)
BEHAR: OK. Thank you very much, you guys. We`ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BEHAR: While in prison, Casey Anthony kept herself very busy by writing letters to other inmates. And while her writings aren`t exactly the letters Einstein sent to FDR, they may shed some light on what she was thinking and what she plans to do when she`s released next week.
So here to discuss that are Judge Alex Ferrer, host of "Judge Alex," and Robi Ludwig, psychotherapist and contributor to Care.com.
Judge Alex, before we get to these letters, I want to get your take on the sentencing today. People are angry that Casey is getting out next week, but didn`t the judge do his job by giving her the maximum amount of time?
ALEX FERRER, "JUDGE ALEX": He did. He did, Joy, you`re absolutely right. He couldn`t have given her one day more than he did. He did everything he could. The problem is, there`s a certain calculation she`s entitled to, and that is credit for the time she`s been in, and she is entitled to gain time of five days every month for good behavior. That would have only got her out in December or January, but it turns out that trustees, the people who mop up, who mow the lawns on the roadway, or whatever, who are prisoners, get 10 days a month. She`s obviously not a trustee, but since she was in protective custody, the jail says she could not have even been considered for trustee status, and therefore they feel they have to give her the full 10 days. That gets her out next week. It`s bizarre. That`s what it was.
BEHAR: There`s something that always annoyed me about this whole jury selection thing, because I read that one of the jurors said, that quote, she doesn`t like to judge people. Isn`t that what you do on a jury? And why was she allowed to be on the jury -- or he, I don`t know if it was a woman or man. I mean, the prosecution tried to expel her, but the judge said no. What`s that about?
FERRER: The reason for that is, you cannot exclude a juror on a basis of race. You have to give a race-neutral reason. The prosecution came in and said, Judge, she`s an African-American woman like the defense is objecting, but we`re not excluding her because of race. We`re excluding her because she says she has trouble judging people.
BEHAR: Right.
FERRER: The problem, if I remember, if I remember correctly, the problem was that there had been another juror who had said he or she had difficulty judging people, and the prosecution had kept that juror, and that juror was not African-American. So the defense said, this is a pretext. This is a pretextual reason. They`re excluding her because of race, and the judge said, look, if you`re keeping one that says the same thing as the other, then I have to force the seating of this juror. That`s the way I remember it, although admittedly, it`s been a long time.
BEHAR: Really? So in this case, so it`s not a good idea to use it to get out of jury duty? It didn`t work this time.
(CROSSTALK)
BEHAR: Not at all.
FERRER: No, Joy. That won`t get you out.
BEHAR: OK. So let`s talk about the letters that Casey wrote to a fellow inmate. There were many where she writes about getting out and changing her look. Here is one, I`ll read for you. She says -- quote, "So should I go red or blonde? I`m trying to decide how extreme I want to go with my makeover. I will get colored contacts so I can change up my look from time to time."
Robi, it sounds like she`s planning a makeover.
DR. ROBI LUDWIG, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: It does, or like she`s talking about going to the prom. Should I wear my red dress or my blue dress? And if you think about it, if a normal person had lost their daughter, and let`s say they really were not responsible, don`t you think the letters would take on a different tone?
BEHAR: I would think so.
LUDWIG: There would be self-guilt. There would be like oh, my God, it must be my fault. I miss my daughter so much. I wish things were different. It wouldn`t be, should I be red, should I be blonde? What color contacts? That`s very superficial and lacking any kind of emotionality.
BEHAR: That`s the one hallmark of this girl. She seems to be -- has no emotions, except she cried when the verdicts came down and she was not guilty. Then she`d start crying.
LUDWIG: They have emotions for themselves. But if you notice, if you read some of the letters to her inmate friends --
BEHAR: Yes, I`m going to read another one.
LUDWIG: It`s very charming, very seductive. She`s very likable. It`s a very kind of light, complimentary conversation. And you can definitely see where Casey Anthony can suck somebody in, because she`s easy to be around.
BEHAR: Oh, yeah. Well, Ted Bundy, I don`t want to compare her to Ted Bundy, but a lot of these sociopaths, as you always point out, or sociopaths even, they are very charming.
LUDWIG: Very charming.
BEHAR: That`s part of the thing.
LUDWIG: And even for someone who`s trained, they can get sucked into that web.
BEHAR: Listen to this one, Judge Alex. She writes -- "Who is this Casey Anthony you speak of?" This is something she`s writing as if -- it`s like she`s referring to herself in the letter. "If you could change your name, any name, what would it be? I`ve been thinking about that a lot lately."
First of all, will it be that easy for her just to change her hair color and her name when she gets out?
FERRER: I think that`s what it`s about. I think she was anticipating when she gets out -- I think she was anticipating acquittal and I`m sure her lawyers were telling her you`ve got a good shot at that, and she was anticipating I`m going to have to change my look. Everybody is going to recognize me. There`s going to be an awful lot of hatred, which there is, and I think she was thinking I`m going to be blonde, I`m going to be redhead, I`m going to change my eye color, I`m going to change my name. I don`t really think she can change her name because she`s a convicted -- she`s been convicted of a crime. And --
BEHAR: But it`s only a misdemeanor, right?
FERRER: -- it`s one of the questions that are asked.
BEHAR: But the crime was only a misdemeanor, so --
FERRER: It is.
BEHAR: It`s not exactly that serious. She writes about going to Target, wearing flip-flops, hats, underwear that fits, coloring her toenails, using conditioner. Personally, if my child was dead, I wouldn`t be able to do that sort of thing.
LUDWIG: And I think that`s what`s so striking. And that really indicates her personality deficits, her developmental deficits. I mean, when you listen to this person and you read these letters, it sounds like somebody who`s a teenager.
BEHAR: She`s such a liar, too. I mean, one of the letters, she says, "you want to know something? I know that Caylee`s nanny, the real Zenaida, the girl who was my friend for four years --" baloney. I just interviewed Zenaida Gonzalez on this show. She never met her, she doesn`t know who she is.
LUDWIG: Well, I think you have to remember that anything that Casey is writing in these letters, she knows everybody is going to be reading, looking at, watching, analyzing. And so there`s manipulation in these letters.
BEHAR: The real scary thing is the one about having more children. When we come back, I`m going to read that. We`ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BEHAR: And we`re back with my guests continuing our conversation about Casey Anthony`s jailhouse letters. Now, regarding having children, this is what she wrote. Quote, "I had a dream not too long ago that I was pregnant. It was like having Cays" -- she calls her Cays -- "all over again. I`ve thought about adopting, which even sounds weird to me saying it, but there are so many children that deserve to be loved." Who is going to let her adopt a child?
LUDWIG: I don`t see that happening, nor should it happen. But it`s very interesting. There are people who like the idea of being pregnant and don`t necessarily like being mothers. There`s something about being pregnant where you feel like you have a purpose, you get attention.
BEHAR: Oh, yes.
LUDWIG: It fills up a void. But actually being a parent takes a different level of maturity. And I also think anything she`s saying is manipulative. See, I want to be a mother, I want to adopt children, how could somebody who wants this actually kill a child.
BEHAR: At the very least, Judge Alex, you`ll probably agree with this, even though she was not convicted of murder, we do know that she never reported that the child was missing, and that she was partying for 30 days. So would she be allowed to adopt a child?
FERRER: No, not in any country I`m aware of. But that`s certainly not going to prevent her from getting pregnant and having her own child, which I think she`s also mentioned in the past. It`s kind of sad that we make people get driver`s licenses to drive a car, but anybody can get pregnant and ruin the life of a child. But there`s no way around that.
(CROSSTALK)
LUDWIG: From a psychological standpoint, it is very possible that in a bizarre way she kind of misses being a mother. Maybe at one moment, if she deliberately did it, she wanted to get rid of her child. Or if it was an accident, she kind of liked the idea of being single and free, but it`s almost like have you ever gotten rid of something in your closet, you thought you didn`t want it anymore and after you got rid of it, you say, wow, I think I really miss that.
BEHAR: You mean like blouse remorse?
LUDWIG: Exactly. Dress remorse.
BEHAR: I think I`m going to buy another hat (ph) like that too.
FERRER: You know what the funny thing is? You know, Joy, the funny things is, that`s probably exactly how she looked at Caylee, like something in her closet. Because I believe from my experience that she is probably sociopathic, and sociopaths can like you and be charming, but the minute you become inconvenient, you`re like the t-shirt that they don`t want anymore.
BEHAR: It`s a little different from Munchausen by proxy syndrome, isn`t it?
LUDWIG: Very different.
BEHAR: It`s a little different, but they have a similar thing, that they just want the attention on themselves.
LUDWIG: Well, Munchausen by proxy I think is where you contribute to making somebody else sick so that you can get attention.
BEHAR: Attention on yourself.
LUDWIG: With the sociopaths, it`s more that they`re the queen of their own country and they can make rules, and then they might regret it, but the depth of feeling just is not there. If you don`t have empathy, then how do you control your primitive impulses?
BEHAR: So do you think this girl would benefit from any psychiatric counseling of any kind?
LUDWIG: Well, I`d like to say yes, but this is what we know about sociopathy, we don`t know of any cures. But there are certain treatments, which maybe they`re helpful, maybe they`re not. We just don`t have the answer to that.
BEHAR: What do you think, Judge Alex, about that, and then I have to go? Do you think she can get some help?
FERRER: Personally, I would certainly encourage anybody who has got a mental health problem to seek therapy. I don`t know how effective it would be with sociopaths. I know with for example sexual offenders, there are some that you can waste your time your whole life and you will never cure them. The doctor would know better than me, but I certainly -- anybody who has got mental health issues like this, I certainly encourage it.
BEHAR: OK. Thank you guys very much. And thank you all for watching. Good night, everybody.
END
