Terry Lennamon Blog?

When I was on Nancy Grace last week, talking about the Casey Anthony case….
First of all, let me just take this opportunity to say that I’m always honored to be invited to appear on the Nancy Grace show. Nancy Grace is a true star of the airwaves today, and a heroine to many. It’s very humbling to be appearing before millions in one of those little rectangular talking-head cameo boxes on screen, along with Sue Moss and the rest of the lawyers. I was proud to have been invited once and I’m always thrilled to be asked back again.

And, no – Nancy and I don’t agree on many things. Respecting your colleagues doesn’t mean you necessarily see eye to eye with them. This is especially true among attorneys, and exceedingly true among the criminal bar. Prosecutors and defense attorneys may fight viciously in the courtroom, but we’ll shake hands in the hallway. You know a good lawyer when you see one, even if they’re on the other side.

Now, back to the Casey Anthony case ….

Last week, I was on the Nancy Grace show for a couple of nights, because Nancy was talking about the death penalty as it applies in the Casey Anthony matter. Specifically, the fact that the prosecution had taken the death penalty off the table in the Casey Anthony case and Nancy Grace’s arguments that the “tot mom” should have a jury decide whether or not the death penalty should apply to her.

Now, before this goes any further let me reiterate: I will not discuss the Casey Anthony case, itself, in any detail or particular. As the attorney who represented Casey Anthony in the death penalty discussions with the Florida state attorney’s office, I cannot do that – it violates my work product privilege, attorney-client privilege … well, you get the idea.

That doesn’t mean that I can’t discuss generalities, and the law regarding the death penalty today. And with that caveat, there are lots of lessons popping up in the Casey Anthony matter.

The Casey Anthony case – it’s revealing many things. Here’s one.

One lesson that I’m learning from all this media coverage of the Casey Anthony case is this: the need to know WHY — why did a beautiful baby, Caylee Anthony, die? Why … why…why? A hundred questions come to mind.

Well, in all this questioning and need to understand, there’s a great many people that are looking at judgment. And that’s good. Our society, as with all successful societies, must have rules and judgments that are assessed against those who break those rules. Without this basic structure, we’d live in chaos.

But along with judgment, there must come mercy. At least, in America, we believe in the consideration of mercy before the imposition of judgment.

That is why we have things like probation and parole and personal recognizance. Mercy.

Mercy is my job.

That’s my focus, it’s the raison d’être of my practice. Death penalty considerations come in the sentencing phase of a defendant’s case. Whether or not to impose the death penalty is a decision made only after the defendant has been found guilty of the specific charges that bring with them the possibility of capital punishment.

Judgment and Mercy

In the Casey Anthony case, there’s a tremendous amount of airtime and forum group time (think Websleuths) with energies being placed upon judgment.

I’m not seeing much on mercy. Are there considerations that may explain and mitigate this woman IF (and that’s right: IF) she did the crime of which she has been accused?

Journalists are taught that to get the whole story, you must ask “who, what, where, when, why, and how.”

In the Casey Anthony case, I’m not hearing many people asking that question WHY.

And, to me, that’s the most important question. Why. Why did this death happen? Because that’s the real answer we all want to know, I think, in any crime. And, because that’s where mercy is found.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 10th, 2009 at 3:58 pm and is filed under Casey Anthony Case, Mercy, Nancy Grace. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site
http://swartzlenamon.com/deathpenaltyblog/when-i-was-on-nancy-grace-last-week-talking-about-the-casey-anthony-case%e2%80%a6

nj lawyer says:
March 11, 2009 at 10:52 pm
You write, “In the Casey Anthony case, I’m not hearing many people asking that question WHY.”

To the contrary, I think there has been enormous amounts of speculation about why Ms. Anthony might lie, fail to report an accident, or even murder her baby. Such speculation has included various aspects of Ms. Anthony’s environment, the way she was reared, the men she has dated, influence from friends, the effect of being a single mother, the possibility she was unduly influenced to give birth to her child, etc. etc.

You also write, “..that’s the most important question. Why. Why did this death happen? Because that’s the real answer we all want to know, I think, in any crime. And, because that’s where mercy is found.”

It may well be that the answer to “why” may be where mercy if found, but how can one expect mercy when there is no explanation about Caylee Anthony’s death? Not that Ms. Anthony needs to spill the beans 100% before “mercy” can be expected. But here we have the opposite - 100% lies (about the existence of a sitter, dates, addresses, EVERYTHING). One cannot reach the answer to “Why” (or even a guess) without SOMEONE being up front. Even Cindy, the defendant’s mother said at one point (to her own elderly mother) that Cindy and George had specific information about Caylee’s disappearance that they couldn’t share b/c it could jeopardize Caylee’s life. Well, Caylee is now clearly passed. Yet there is no willingness of anyone in the Anthony family to be forthcoming (either to the public or even law enforcement). That is why you do not have mercy in this case (yet). It is actually shocking you would expect to see it.

LizzySF says:
March 12, 2009 at 5:13 am
Most people that have followed the Anthony case, myself included, have continuously pondered the “why” question as to why this murder occured. The WHY is fairly clear…it’s just the HOW we are not quite sure of. A young and mentally unhealthy girl, disinterested and overwhelmed with the task of motherhood. No certain future or independence within focus. Add one over-bearing and mentally unhealthy mother to Casey, struggling with control over the child (and everything else for that matter), resulting in a climatic collision of the power struggle between them. And one dead child.
Where to find the mercy in this scenario? Mercy for Casey because she has rotten parents? Maybe they had rotten parents too. Despite the struggles we may find ourselves in or how bad our parents were as parents, murder is illegal and a morally reprehensible act. I personally am not for the death penalty. I can find mercy on souls to that extent, but life without parole for killers is appropriate. Victims of bad parenting or not. Prisons are full of poorly parented criminals.

sue says:
March 12, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Thank yuou for your post, Sir, very informative..

Why? IMO, because Cindy was trying to reel Casey in, and Casey resented it…Cindy was controlling Caseys social life, restricting her time out, hence the need for a pretend evening job. Check out the texts for the months of May and June and you’ll see “why”.

admin says:
March 13, 2009 at 4:47 pm
To lin, Kathleen, AshleyP, nj lawyer, Barbara, LizzySF, sue:

Thanks for being among the first to comment. You are raising some good issues. In response, I will be publishing more information on filicide in the near future.

- Terry

Filicide is the deliberate act of a parent killing his or her own son or daughter. The term can also be applied to the parent who has committed such an act. The word filicide derives from the Latin word filius meaning "son".

In some cultures, killing a daughter who is deemed to have disgraced the family is a common occurrence (see honor killing).

A 1999 US Department of Justice Study concluded that between 1976 and 1997 in the United States, mothers were responsible for a higher share of children killed during infancy while fathers were more likely to have been responsible for the murders of children age 8 or older. Furthermore, 52% of the children killed by their mothers were male (maternal filicide), while 57% of the children killed by their fathers were male (paternal filicide).
http://www.answers.com/topic/filicide