Prosecutors argue jury should hear 911 calls

Prosecutors argue jury should hear 911 calls


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-casey-anthony-911-callls-20100609,0,709258.story

Defense Motion re: Cindy's 911 calls
http://www.wftv.com/pdf/22797784/detail.html

Defense says, on pages 9 - 10 the calls should not be
allowed in as evidence because the call was not made when the child was
first missing, but thirty-one days later, meaning it was not new information;
Cindy was aware for over a month that Caylee was not in the house that she
lived in.

First 911 call: http://blogs.discovery.com/criminal_report/files/caylee911orlando.mp3

Second 911 Call: http://investigation.discovery.com/blogs/criminal-report/audio/01CayleeAnthony911.mp3

Third 911 call: http://investigation.discovery.com/blogs/criminal-report/audio/02CayleeAnthony911.mp3

Cindy calls 911 three times – July 15^th
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=2717459&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,430481,00.html
Aug 10, 2008
Cops, Cases & Clues: Search for Caylee
Greta’s in-depth look at the search for missing tot
Greta talks to George and Cindy
Cindy tracked down Casey
Cindy wanted to take Casey in for grand theft for stealing her car and money [ nothing about Caylee until 3rd 911 call]

Cindy called 911 first time; July 15, 2008 09:56 into the Greta video
(8:08pm)
Grandmother: Hi I drove to a police department here on Pershing but you guys are closed. I need to bring someone in the police department, can you tell me where I
can, the closest one I can come into?

Police: What are you trying to accomplish by bringing them to the station?

Grandmother: I have a 22-year old person that has grand theft sitting in my auto with me.

Police: So the 22-year old person stole something?

Grandmother: Yes

Police: Is this a relative?

Grandmother: Yes

Police: Where did they steal it from:

Grandmother: Umm my car and also money

Police: Ok is this your son?

Grandmother: Daughter

Police: Ok, so your daughter stole money from your car

Grandmother: No, my car was stolen we retrieved it today we found out where it was retrieved it I’ve got that and I’ve got affidavits from my banking account I want to bring her in

[They didn’t know which jurisdiction Cindy was in – she was sitting in station parking lot. Cindy drove back to the house with Casey. Lee came and they talked to
Casey for 45 minutes. Cindy wanted to know where Caylee was.]

Cindy Called 911 - 2^nd time
(8:44pm)

Police: 911 what’s the address of happening?

Grandmother: Umm I have someone here that I need to umm be arrested in my home. I have a possible missing child, there’s a 3-year-old that’s been missing for a month.

Police: A 3 year old?

Grandmother: Yes

Police: Have you reported that?

Grandmother: I’m trying to do that right now maam

[Cindy heard Lee and Casey talking, Casey crying. Casey said Caylee was kidnapped]

Cindy called 911 3^rd time
(9:41pm)

Police: 911 what’s your emergency?

Grandmother: crying .... I called a little bit ago, ...... the deputy – I found out my granddaughter has been taken, she has been missing for a month, her mother finally admitted that she’s been missing – get someone here NOW –

Police: OK, what is the address that your’re calling from?

Grandmother: We’re talkin about a 3 year old little girl – my daughter finally admitted that the babysitter stole her – I need to find her!

Police: your daughter admitted that the baby is where?

Grandmother: that the babysitter took her a month ago – that my daughter has been looking for her – I told you that my daughter was missing for a month – I just found her today, but I can’t find my granddaughter – she just admitted to me that she’s been trying to find her herself – there’s something wrong – I found my daughter’s car today, and it smells like there’s been a dead body in the damn car

State's response to theory regarding inadmissiability of 911 calls

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/23858915/detail.html

DEFENSE MOTION DENIED....NEXT!!!!!

It seems the issue at law is whether or not
Cindy's 911 statements are classified as "EXCITED UTTERANCE" legally.
And Prosecutor LDB laid out the reasons quite clearly, supported by LAW, as to
why the 911 statements are admissible.

Prosecutor LDB said the State will NOT use the 2nd 911 call because it was not
made in the presence of the defendant.

excerpts: http://www.wftv.com/pdf/23858915/detail.html
Statements made by Cindy Anthony that immediately precede Casey Anthony's
statements are relevant to show Casey's state of mind when making
her statements to her mother or to the police. The fact of the calls as well as
the content of the calls give context to the defendant's responses and set
forth the circumstances in which the defendant "created" the
kidnapping story after denying there was any problem locating Caylee Marie
Anthony. These fabrications demonstrate consciousness of guilt on the
part of the defendant, guilt being the ultimate material issue

(2) EXCITED UTTERANCE - A statement or excited utterance relating to a
startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of
excitement caused by the event or condition.
(1) regarding an event startling enough to cause nervous excitement;
(2) before there was time to contrive or misrepresent;
(3) while the person was under the stress or excitement caused by the event

The disclosure by Casey Anthony that Caylee was
kidnapped by the nanny and missing for thirty-one(31) days, revealed just
before the final 911 call was a sufficiently startling condition or event to
meet the requirements of section 90.803(2). The statements were made while the
event was ongoing, rather than being related after the event, negating the
likelihood that Cindy Anthony had time to contrive or misrepresent; and
the statements were made while Mrs. Anthony was under the continuing stress or
excitement caused by the event. Mrs. Anthony's statements at a later
date - for example that the smell in the car was from garbage or a pizza - are
prime examples of what occurs when someone engages in "reflective
thought."

However, there can be no question from her tone of voice, the content of
her statements relating to the event in question (the alleged kidnapping of
Caylee), her own description of her state of mind at the time of the call, and
the time elapsed since Casey's "revelation", that Cindy Anthony's
statements made during the last 911 call were made under the stress caused
by the event.

------------------------------------------

The calls were "minutes" apart ....
covering the time it took Cindy to drive from the parking lot of a closed
police station, to her home, with Casey FINALLY revealing what has happened ...
or Casey's version of what has happened.

The Defense is trying to say it was not "new info", but it clearly
was.
As you pointed out - Cindy says her daughter "finally admitted"
(Cindy had no knowledge previously).
Cindy also said she(Casey) "just admitted to me" (this
knowledge came to Cindy within the past few minutes, before Cindy called 911).
And Cindy says "I found my daughter's car TODAY" (this
IS clearly "new" information to Cindy).

IMO this is clearly an "excited utterance" by Cindy.

I guess the Defense have to give it a try though......