Hayden and Vickie were former high school sweethearts. With Miller gone they decided to renew their relationship. Hayden moved in. And according to Miller’s family, he was soon signing his name to Miller’s checks.

 “He stole my brother’s home, wife and child, and money,” said Charlie Miller, the youngest of six in Miller’s family.

Sgt. Miller gave the interloper a beating and threw him out of his house. Vickie opted to go with Hayden, packed up the baby and moved out. Humiliated, Hayden told Miller he would get revenge with an M-16.

Miller had lost two daughters in a previous marriage and had no intentions of losing another one. He began to build a custody case against Vickie and a criminal fraud case against Hayden. He gave the alleged evidence to a neighbor for safekeeping.

On Sept. 16, 1972, Miller received a call from his estranged wife to meet him on Western Boulevard. Less than 20 minutes later, Miller was found dead in the street, shot twice with rounds from an M-16. A few days later, Hayden showed up at the neighbor’s house and took the alleged evidence Miller had collected against him. Detectives suspected Hayden of killing Miller, but couldn’t gather sufficient evidence for an arrest.

For nearly 40 years Miller’s murder remained unsolved. During that time Hayden did quite well for himself. He married Vickie. They later divorced, but kept in contact after the split. He retired from the Marine Corps and joined the Carteret County Sheriff’s Department. He went on to be police chief in CapeCarteretand Belhaven. But he couldn’t shake local, state and federal investigators who came around every few years asking the same question: Where were you the night William Miller died?

Sharron Aguilar, Miller’s sister, refused to let the case die. She spent years compiling documents in the case and eventually turned them over to a local newspaper. The Daily News ran two cold case articles in the summer of 2008 that resulted in new information from a witness previously unknown to law enforcement. A whirlwind investigation by the Onslow County Sheriff’s Department, Naval Criminal Investigative Services and the North Carolina SBI, resulted in the arrests of Vickie, Hayden and Rodger Gill, another former Marine and friend of Hayden, on first degree murder and conspiracy charges.

The charges against Vickie and Gill were subsequently dropped. But relying heavily on circumstantial evidence, prosecutor’s brought Hayden to trial on the murder charge. Chief Assistant District Attorney Ernie Lee told the jury, “Miller survived two tours inVietnam, then returned toOnslowCountywhere he was not killed by the enemy with an AK-47, but by a fellow Marine with an M-16.”

Nearly 38 years after the murder and after three days of deliberations, the jury convicted Hayden of first-degree murder. On May 26, 2010 he was sentenced to life in prison. .

Following the conviction and sentencing, a jubilant Sharron Aguilar said, “I never lost hope; I always knew we’d get here.”

But the relief the Miller family felt at having received justice for their loved one was relatively short- lived. Hayden appealed and on June 7, 2011, theNorth Carolina Appeals Courtreversed the conviction, stating in its ruling, “Accordingly, we hold that the State failed to present sufficient evidence from which a rational juror could conclude that defendant was the perpetrator of the victim’s murder.”

Onslow Countyhas submitted the case to the North Carolina Supreme Court for review. Hayden remains behind bars pending a decision by that body. If they agree with the ruling of theAppeals Court, he could be a free man in a matter of months.

I recently spoke with Sharron Aguilar about her experience so far in dealing with the justice system. Her comments are below.

“Our family waited thirty-eight years for justice. We fought a long, hard, uphill battle.  Finally, on May 26, 2010, we heard the word Guilty. And George Hayden was given life in prison. Our prayers were answered.   We started to breathe easier knowing he was locked up. And then, to our horror, on June 7, 2011, we heard that the Appeals Court reversed the conviction.

“We put our case in the hands of twelve men and women who were selected to the jury, giving up their time to see justice carried out. Now those twelve people are told they were wrong to convict. The Court stated that, ‘A rational juror could not conclude that the defendant was the perpetrator of the victim’s murder.’  The jury verdict was unanimous, so all twelve jurors are irrational according to the Court.

“The ruling also states that a weapon was never produced. Yet defendants are convicted every day without the murder weapon being introduced into evidence. It further states there was not sufficient evidence to convict. That means the trial judge must also be irrational or incompetent because he denied the defense’s motion for a mistrial due to insufficient evidence.

“I remember not long ago another murder trial with pretty much the same evidence.  Scott Peterson was convicted and given a death sentence. His case was stated as purely circumstantial. No crime scene, murder weapon or cause of death. Yet his conviction stands.

“And I find it very strange that this appeal was heard and decided so fast. Most convicts have to wait years for their appeal to be acted on. 

“I want to believe in our justice system. I know it has flaws, but I never knew what a nightmare it is for the victims’ families. How hard they have to fight to be heard. They have no rights, they cannot appeal a verdict, they cannot get a court appointed attorney. The list is endless. They have experienced the violent death of a loved one and their lives have been changed forever. 

“September 16^th will be the thirty-ninth anniversary of my brother’s death and we are still fighting for justice. Please pray that it is not denied.”

Patrick was a sergeant in the Army’s 10th Mountain Diviaion headquartered at Fort Drum near Watertown, New York. He survived deployments toIraq andAfghanistan, only to die mysteriously right here in his own country, not far from where he was born.

Patrick went missing from a bar in Watertown on March 16, 2007. Six months later his remains were found in a farmer’s field approximately three miles from that tavern. It is unknown how he got to that location. He didn’t have a car and it’s doubtful he’d have walked there on a cold March night. There was no evidence of robbery and his remains showed no trauma. The cause and manner of Patrick’s death remain undetermined.

On behalf of the Rust family, Bill Sullivan, owner of Forensic Consulting Specialties in Syracuse, New York, and investigator Denny Griffin are seeking explanations to the questions the autopsy couldn’t answer. They will join Simon and the panel to discuss the history of the case and the current status of their investigation.

On January 1st 2009, Sheena Morris was found dead in the shower of her hotel room inBradenton Beach,Florida, She was hanging by her neck from her Yorkie’s dog leash. The authorities quickly labeled Sheena’s death a suicide.

Sheena’s family didn’t buy into the suicide ruling, however. There were too many disturbing circumstances and unanswered questions for them to accept that Sheena had taken her own life. For example, Sheena placed a call to 911 the night before her death reporting domestic violence by her boyfriend, a man with alleged organized crime connections. She even took pictures of her injuries, cuts on her neck and ring finger. And the people in the next room had also called 911 that night to report a domestic disturbance and sounds of violence next door.

And prior to that Sheena had obtained damaging evidence of possible illegal activities involving her boyfriend. Shortly before she died someone took the keys to her apartment and she was physically attacked. You might think that the 911 call she made to police would have had an impact on their investigation, but apparently not. Not even the four banker boxes full of files, copies of ledgers, etc., that witnesses saw carried from the apartment by her boyfriend, the last person to have seen Sheena alive, seem to have had an impact. Nope. To the police this was a clear case of suicide.

But Sheena’s family decided not to roll over. They are fighting what they believe is an injustice and they are scoring some victories. Join the Crime Wire Team as we welcome Kelly Osborn, Sheena’s Mother, and Dr. Michael Berkland, the Forensic Pathologist who, along with Dr. Michael Baden, re-examined the medical examiner’s reports and both agreed that Sheena’s death was not a suicide.  The family has since been able to have the manner of death changed to “undetermined.”

 But the authorities in Bradenton Beachare still not willing to re-open the investigation. And until that happens, the battle will continue.

You can hear Crime Wire Investigates beginning at 9 p.m. Eastern.

Also, please visit our Crime Wire Website.

Together we can make a difference.

Listen LIVE:   Crime Wire Investigates

Jacque Waller, a mother of five-year-old triplets, has been missing under suspicious circumstances from Jackson, MO., since June 1, 2011. On that day, Jacque and her estranged husband Clay Waller attended a court hearing. Afterward she agreed to meet with him at the marital home. According to Clay, during that meeting an argument developed and Jacque stormed out of the house. She hasn’t been seen since.

Joining co-hosts Denny Griffin and Susan Murphy Milano for an in-depth discussion surrounding the possibilities in this case, will be Monica Caison of the CUE Center for Missing Persons and family members of Jacque Waller.  Representatives from CUE conducted a massive search for Jacque over the weekend of July 16-17.  Nothing was turned up to give clues to Jacque’s whereabouts.

For more information:  CUE Center for Missing Persons: Jacque Waller

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/crimewire

In one of them it is even mentioned that the defense floated the “terrible accident” theory back in November 2008, just before Caylee’s remains were officially found, but around the time private investigators Casey and Hoover were snooping around the area where they were eventually recovered. But at that time the accident involved an overdose of chloroform or a sedative.

These events could be pure coincidence. On the other hand, a skeptic might think the location of the remains had been divulged to Cindy, George or Baez, and the defense strategy was all ready being put in place. I’m a skeptic.

I’ve pasted three of those old posts below if you’d care to take a look.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Posted 9/18/08

Points to Ponder

By Dennis Griffin

Have you ever watched any gangster movies? If you’ve seen enough of them you have probably heard lines like these: “Don’t worry about Joey, they won’t get anything out of him.” Or, “Relax boys, I didn’t tell ‘em nothin’.” Statements such as these are made by the criminal associates of a gang member who is undergoing questioning by the police, or the suspect himself after the cops turn him loose. They mean the hoodlum’s cohorts don’t think he’ll admit to any wrongdoing himself, and neither will he rat them out.  When released, the man who had undergone the interrogation could brag that he toughed it out and gave the cops no information about himself or anyone else. Surviving a session with the law without admitting to anything or squealing on his pals, earned the mobster an enhanced reputation for toughness and loyalty. 

I heard those same words Tuesday night, but I wasn’t watching a mob film; I was tuned in to the Nancy Grace show. A clip was played in which Casey Anthony’s lawyer, Jose Baez, lamented his client’s treatment at the hands of detectives after Caylee was reported missing on July 15. He said the police investigators questioned Casey for hours without an attorney and “they got nothing.” To me, those words were uttered as a boast to Casey’s ability to stand up to the bullying of several veteran cops.

From what I know, Mr. Baez was right: Casey Anthony provided absolutely no credible information as to what happened to her missing daughter. But remember, in this real-life scenario Casey started out as a mother whose daughter had allegedly been kidnapped, not as a suspect in a crime. You’d think someone in her position would at least have been upset, if not frantic. You’d think she would have told the officers anything and everything she knew that would have helped to find Caylee. You’d think they’d have had trouble shutting her up. It was after Casey’s entire story proved to be a lie that the detectives began to question her as a “person of interest.”

The Anthony forces — including Baez — maintain Casey is completely innocent regarding her daughter’s mysterious vanishing. If they truly believe that, it’s my opinion that Baez’ words were poorly chosen and would have been more appropriate when talking about a criminal suspect rather than an innocent mother. And is refusing to cooperate when the safety of a three-year-old child is at stake something to be proud of? It sounded to me like Baez thinks it is. The lawyer also said that the tactics being used by police and prosecutors have not intimidated him, and they won’t.

In a move I thought took a lot of gall, Baez even tried to rally the taxpayers to stand up to the authorities and demand that they stop wasting money by continuously re-arresting his client. 

I think Baez is setting the table for his public relations efforts should Casey end up being charged in Caylee’s death: A powerful and out of control law enforcement system is picking on a young mother who has suffered a tremendous loss. Americans generally like to root for the underdog, so maybe he’s on to something.

Nancy then mentioned some things that may provide a clue as to Baez’ legal strategy. According to motions the lawyer is filing, he’s challenging the quality of the forensic testing being done; and raising questions as to whether the lab personnel involved have their own agenda. He is alleging that for unexplained reasons, they may not want the truth to come out about the evidence and are only interested in seeing Casey prosecuted and found guilty. His client may be the victim of a frame.

I can understand Baez’ logic. If Casey is prosecuted on a homicide-related charge — and especially if Caylee’s body isn’t found — the results of the forensic tests will be crucial; they have to be discredited. And although I find his initial contentions somewhat incredible, there is no certainty that they won’t work. Here’s why I say that: OJ Simpson.

Those of you who remember that trial in which Simpson was accused of killing his wife Nicole and her friend Ron Goldman, will recall that the DNA evidence against him was thought to be overwhelming. And then we heard from the Dream Team the phrase, “Garbage in, garbage out.” We also heard about incompetent lab techs, rogue cops and planted evidence. Simpson was acquitted and ever since has spent his time searching for the real killers.

Maybe something similar will happen with Casey. If it does, much like OJ, she can resume her own investigation into finding Caylee.

Posted by:

DennyGriffin

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Posted 11/7/08

Are Casey’s lawyers hedging their bets?

By Dennis Griffin

Last night on Nancy Grace it was said that attorneys for Casey Anthony are preparing papers in which they state that “if” Caylee is dead, it would be as the result of a terrible accident, possibly involving an overdose of a sedative or chloroform.

Up until now the Anthonys - Casey, her parents, and lawyers – have maintained that Caylee is absolutely alive; and in the custody of dangerous people. Casey’s lack of cooperation with authorities is due to her fear that if she breaks her silence the girl will be harmed.

If the Anthony side really believes that, why now raise the possibility that Caylee is deceased? Is it possible the the lawyers know – or at least suspect – the little girl is dead and her body may be found? Therefore, they are getting the “accidental overdose” defense out there ahead of time.

Tim Miller is leading a huge search over the weekend that will hopefully find Caylee’s remains. I certainly pray that effort is successful.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Posted12/9/08

Denial or Strategy?

The term that someone is “in denial” is often used to explain the actions of a person going through a traumatic time. It has been applied to George and Cindy Anthony numerous times during the investigation of Caylee’s disappearance. And looking at the pair as parents and grandparents that have suffered a granddaughter who has gone missing,  and whose daughter is allegedly involved in the incident, I think it is tough to argue that Cindy and George don’t qualify to be in denial. However, when I look at the case in its entirety, I can’t help but question the “in denial” explanation as it applies to them.

The reason for my doubt is fairly simple: As more and more investigative details have been made public – particularly tapes and transcripts of law enforcement interviews with George and Cindy - I see changes in their stories. In my opinion, these changes along with the Anthony’s  actions, can be perceived as part of an intentional strategy to assist in Casey’s defense, rather than simply attributed to their not accepting reality.  

Particularly troubling to me is Cindy’s initial statement during her 9-1-1 call that something dead had been in the trunk of the car Casey had been using. After Casey’s arrest, Cindy changed the cause for the smell of death she had originally been so emphatic about, to rotting pizza or a dead squirrel stuck to the bottom of the car’s frame. Denial or strategy?

Even more disturbing to me is what George said in his FBI interview as opposed to his public posture. He told the agents in no uncertain terms that as a former lawman, he had experienced the odor of a decomposing body before; and that it is a smell one never forgets. He said that was the same smell that came from Casey’s car when it was retrieved from the tow yard.  He even said that he was so fearful of finding a dead body – possibly Caylee or even Casey – in the trunk that he asked a tow yard employee to be with him when he opened the lid. George’s description of the strength of that stench was confirmed by Lee Anthony during his police interview. You’d never know that from listening to George’s public statements, though. Denial or strategy?

 At one point, Cindy Anthony even tried to explain the odor away by alleging that persons unknown had planted a corpse in the trunk after the car was at the yard; and then they removed it before George claimed the vehicle. When that explanation literally didn’t pass the smell test, it fell by the wayside. Denial, or a lame attempt to explain the unexplainable?

I’m becoming more inclined to look at George and Cindy as defenders of their daughter not because they don’t believe that Caylee is dead, but because they do.  And now they are doing whatever they can to prevent their daughter from possibly spending the rest of her life behind bars.

 Anyway, that’s how I see it and why. Your thoughts?

But on July 5, 2011, in a courtroom in Orlando, Florida, the justice system failed Caylee in my opinion.

To be fair, I have to make an admission. After the story of Caylee’s disappearance broke in July 2008, and during the next several months as Casey’s falsehoods and bizarre behavior were exposed night after night on the cable shows, I came to despise her as a person. Her seemingly never ending lies, her failure to cooperate with police by giving them an honest account as to the circumstances under which she had last seen her daughter, and stealing from friends and her own family, were all contributing factors in my anti-Casey attitude.

And during that same time frame I learned a lot about the rest of the Anthonys and developed a dislike for them as well. Cindy was at the top of my list, followed by George and then Lee.

So as the trial began, Casey was guilty in my mind. For me, the burden had shifted from the prosecution proving guilt to the defense proving innocence. And in order for them to convince me, they’d have to address three facts in the case:

Caylee Anthony was dead;

Casey Anthony was the last person known to have had custody of Caylee; and

Casey had refused from July 15, 2008 to the present day to provide an honest explanation as to what happened to her daughter on or about June 16, 2008.

Obviously the fact that Caylee was dead couldn’t be changed. But the other two could. Casey, directly or through her lawyers, could place a live Caylee in someone else’s hands and explain who that person was and why or how he/she gained control of the little girl.

I promised myself that I’d listen as long as the evidence was credible. It couldn’t be another version of the Zanny the Nanny story. And it certainly couldn’t just be Casey’s word or that of her lawyers. That was my mindset as testimony began.

Jose Baez actually addressed those issues in his opening statement when he announced that Caylee had never really been missing. She died as the result of an accidental drowning in the family pool on June 16, 2008, when only Casey and George were present.

He further said that Casey and her father entered into a conspiracy to cover up the accident and that Casey’s ability to act as though nothing was wrong was the result of George having sexually abused her from the time she was eight years old.

And then Baez added yet another villain to the mix in the form of meter reader Roy Kronk, the man who reported finding Caylee’s remains in August and again in December, 2008. According to Baez, Kronk was a morally bankrupt individual who had somehow gained control of Caylee’s remains. He planted them at the location they were found in an attempt to collect reward money.

To me, this was a trial about Caylee’s death and Casey’s involvement in it. In that regard, whether George was an abuser or not didn’t concern me. What George and Kronk did or didn’t do were peripheral issues that could be addressed after the death itself was resolved.

So my focus was on who was with Caylee when she died and under what circumstances. In order for me to change my mind about Casey’s guilt, Baez had to produce credible evidence to support his claim of an accidental drowning. I looked forward to the defense presentation, wondering what proof he’d present, who his witnesses would be, and whether prosecutors would be able to impeach them.   

But the defense’s case came and went without providing any evidence to show there was an accidental drowning. My opinion was unchanged. It was clear to me that Casey Anthony was complicit in her daughter’s death. As the trial wrapped up I had doubts as to whether there would be a finding of guilt on the charge of premeditated first degree murder with a possible sentence of death. However, I felt a conviction of manslaughter was likely and would be appropriate.

On the afternoon of July 5 as I heard the final “Not Guilty” on the death-related charges, I was surprised and disappointed. I hadn’t believed the jury would be able to reach a unanimous decision of not guilty on each and every major charge in so short a time, and  without asking a single question of the judge or requesting to have any testimony read back.

Almost immediately analysts and trial followers brought up comparisons between this and the OJ Simpson criminal case. Both had seemingly overwhelming evidence. And yet the prosecutors in each case apparently were unable to convince even a single juror that the defendant was guilty.

So when was the case lost? One possibility is that it happened when Baez made his drowning and sexual abuse claims during his opening. Under this theory, Baez never had any intention of calling Casey to the stand or putting on any other supporting evidence. He simply used his opening to get those ideas into the minds of the jurors. To plant the seed if you will and make the prosecution play defense. If true, what many thought was a major error on his part could actually have been a brilliant strategy.

Or maybe the jurors related better to the defense team than to the prosecutors. Jeff Ashton may have come across to them as a bully during what I thought were his skillful and highly effective cross examinations of defense witnesses. And his laughing during the closing by Baez may have turned some jurors off.

Could it be that when the jurors looked at Casey Anthony sitting only feet from them day after day, they came to see her as an innocent young mother incapable of harming her own daughter?

Or are we now in the CSI era where jurors expect every case to be solved conclusively in 40 minutes plus commercials? And is it now unacceptable for any question to remain unanswered or unproved?

The answer could be one of the above, none of them, or a combination.

The bottom line is that we may never know for sure what happened to Caylee Anthony or what took place in the minds of the jurors. The verdict is in and must be accepted.

During the closing by Jeff Ashton, he said that the defense was asking the jurors to go down a rabbit hole and accept their outrageous theories that had no basis in fact, and made no sense. And Ms. Burdick said her biggest fear was that common sense would become lost during deliberations.

In my opinion, the jury did accept the defense invitation to go down that rabbit hole into Wonderland. And when they did, they in fact left their common sense on the surface, just as Ms. Burdick feared. And in doing so they deprived Caylee Anthony of her one shot at justice.

The speculation is that Casey will leave jail,  make big money from book and movie deals and enjoy the beautiful life.  But I’m not so sure that is her destiny. 

Consider these facts:

The IRS says Casey owes thousands of dollars in back taxes. And they aren’t known as an agency that is easy to get rid of;

The civil defamation suit filed by Zenaida “Zanny the Nanny” Gonzalez can now move forward. Casey and the whole gang can be deposed. And yesterday’s acquittal may prevent her from taking the Fifth when uncomfortable questions are asked. 

Tim Miller of Texas Equusearch has announced that his group is considering filing suit against Casey, and possibly Cindy, George and Jose Baez, for the over $100,000 they spent searching for Caylee when one or more of them knew she was dead;

Others are considering lawsuits as well. If any of them are successful, Casey may have to share her riches; and

Will she actually get all the lucrative offers we’re anticipating she will? One XXX movie company has already withdrawn their offer to Casey citing that they underestimated the public backlash to the verdict. From a publisher’s perspective, Casey will no doubt ask for at least a six figure advance for her story.  Before they write that check they have to look at the book’s marketability. If a reader is looking to learn the truth, would he buy something written by a known and in fact convicted liar? And there will be a large segment of the public-including me-that followed this case and won’t spend a dime on any product or project from which Casey would make a profit.  I’m not saying a book won’t happen, but it isn’t necessarily automatic.

So Casey may be out of jail, but not necessarily out of the woods.

Inside the Courtroom

The mystery surrounding the cancellation of court proceedings on Saturday was cleared up on Monday morning. Judge Perry announced that the defense had filed a motion alleging that Casey Anthony was not competent to assist in her own defense. The defendant was examined by three mental health professionals over the weekend. Based on their reports, Perry ruled that Casey is competent and the trial could continue.

The defense called Dr. Kenneth Furton to challenge the opinions of Dr. Vass regarding the presence of chloroform and the source of odors in the trunk of Casey’s car. On direct the defense seemed to make some headway in that regard. However, on cross Jeff Ashton continued his pattern of neutralizing the testimony of defense experts and/or turning them into prosecution witnesses.

Late in the day two witnesses were examined in an attempt to illustrate that Caylee’s remains were not present at the location where they were eventually found when the men searched the area in November.

The witnesses were private investigators who had first worked for Jose Baez, and then George and Cindy Anthony in 2008.  James Hoover and Dominic Casey claimed they conducted the searches based on information provided by a psychic and found no human remains. The inference being that Caylee’s remains were placed there sometime afterward, when Casey was in jail. The prosecution’s position is that they did not search in that specific location. No doubt this issue will come up again in rebuttal and/or closing arguments.

I must say I found that bothHooverand Casey were not particularly credible. What matters though, is what the jurors think.

Tuesday started out smoothly, but when one of the people involved in the search for Caylee mentioned exercising his Fifth Amendment rights in front of the jury, the prosecution objected and the jury was excused while the judge sorted things out.

That was followed with several witnesses making brief appearances, including a trio of Anthonys, Cindy, George and Lee. Baez asked George whether he’d had a romantic relationship with Krystal Holloway or borrowed any money from her. George had to struggle with his answer, but said no. To me, he didn’t seem as forthright as during previous testimony.

And then came one of the more anticipated defense witnesses: Roy Kronk. The meter reader was on the stand for several hours, most of them sparring with Cheney Mason. If the defense needed to hit a home run with Kronk, I think they fell well short. In fact, based on the claims Baez made in his opening statement, Mason’s interrogation fell flat in my opinion. I’d call the round a draw, or maybe even a win for the prosecution.

The day ended with a discussion of legal issues and proffered testimony after the jury was dismissed. Overall, I think the fireworks were the lack of fireworks.

Cindy Anthony was back on the stand for a brief period Wednesday morning. She was followed by a rather contentious session between Baez and George Anthony. Baez appeared to be trying to get George to admit that he had prior knowledge of the location of Caylee’s remains and that he threw Casey under the bus in his cooperation with law enforcement. There were numerous objections from the prosecution.

However, the State failed to object when Baez raised the issue of George’s alleged suicide attempt. On cross, when Jeff Ashton asked George about having purchased a gun, Baez objected. Judge Perry eventually ruled that the defense had opened the door and allowed Ashton to pursue that line of questioning. George then explained that he had obtained the gun with the intent to force friends and acquaintances of Casey to provide him with information he believed they were withholding regarding what happened to Caylee. But law enforcement confiscated the weapon before he had a chance to carry out his plan.

George was very emotional during his testimony and broke down multiple times. He may have outdone Cindy as being a sympathetic figure.

Later in the day Roy Kronk’s son testified that his father told him in a November 2008 phone call that he knew where Caylee’s remains were located. But on cross he admitted he couldn’t be sure of the date of that call. He only knew it was sometime in November because his wife and mother said so.

Roy Kronk was called back to the stand where Baez tried to show he had made inconsistent statements. That line of questioning didn’t seem to do any major damage to Kronk’s credibility.

The last witness of the day was a defense grief expert. In my opinion she did little if anything to help Casey, and may have actually hurt her.

After the jury was dismissed, Baez told the judge he hoped to be able to conclude his case on Thursday. Perry asked the State to have rebuttal witnesses available Thursday afternoon if needed. He also raised the possibility of working through the weekend if the jury is willing.

Krystal Holloway was the opening defense witness on Thursday. Her testimony on direct was that she had a romantic relationship with George Anthony and that he told her that Caylee’s death was an accident that snowballed out of control.  

On cross, Jeff Ashton pointed out that Holloway had denied having a relationship with George in a sworn statement to police. He also brought out that she received payment from the National Enquirer for her story.

The statements Holloway alleges George made to her were interpreted differently by the opposing sides. The jury will have to decide how much credibility to give her testimony. They were instructed by the judge not to consider her statements as proof of how Caylee died or Casey’s guilt or innocence.

The defense next called George, Cindy and Lee Anthony again and questioned them about how they disposed of their deceased pets. The point appeared to be that the animals were placed in plastic gags and duct tape was used, indicating George was in the habit of getting rid of dead things in a manner similar to how Caylee’s remains were handled.

Cross examination revealed that Casey herself had been involved in at least one of the animal burials. This line of questioning didn’t appear to advance the defense case to any great degree.

The defense then rested its case without putting Casey on the stand.

After the jury left the courtroom the judge heard arguments about the State’s rebuttal case. Perry ruled the work records of Cindy Anthony can be introduced to impeach her testimony regarding her whereabouts when the chloroform searches were conducted on the Anthony’s home computer in March 2008. He also ruled that the jurors will not be allowed to open the cans that allegedly contain the smell of death during their deliberations.

The day ended with a 28-year-old spectator being sentenced to six days in jail for giving Jeff Ashton the finger during open court.

It was thought that the State’s rebuttal case would begin the first thing on Friday. But that was not to be. Before the jury could be brought in, Baez made multiple complaints about the rebuttal witnesses and discovery violations. A seemingly frustrated Judge Perry sent the jurors back to their hotel while more depositions were taken.

When court finally got into session the State addressed the issue of Cindy Anthony’s work records. Relative records from Gentiva and Cindy’s supervisor from March 2008, seemed to prove conclusively that Cindy was in fact at work on March 17 and 21, 2008, and not at home conducting chloroform-related searches on her computer. To me, that was the most important aspect of the rebuttal case.

The prosecution rested just after 4:30. That was followed by an announcement there would be no court on Saturday so the lawyers could prepare for their closings on Sunday.

Jeff Ashton was first up for the State. I’m going to assume that most of you reading this post listened to his presentation live or via playback. Therefore, I won’t go into great detail. I’ll just say that for me, he brought the whole prosecution case together in a coherent and logical manner. I found his argument to be compelling. And he did it in a little over an hour.

The defense countered with Jose Baez taking the lead. He used the bulk of the four hours allotted, with Mason mopping up. There may have left a few minutes on the clock. But there couldn’t have been many. 

Baez did what he could to raise reasonable doubt. He attacked the science the prosecution relied on and their witnesses. Although I thought the four hours would never end, I give Baez credit for raising issues that could be a lifeline for a juror looking for something to hang his/her hat on for a not guilty vote. And he was passionate in his delivery.

The animosity between Baez and Ashton reared its head again when Ashton covered his face with his hand to conceal a laugh or grin while Baez was talking. The latter made a seemingly angry remark referring to Ashton as the “laughing man.” But he didn’t make his complaint to the judge as he should have done. This episode resulted in a lengthy suspension of proceedings and both of the participants being chastised by Perry.

Baez and Mason finished their presentation a little after 7:00 p.m. and the State was due for their final rebuttal. But the judge must have felt the jurors had put in a long enough day and recessed until Monday morning.

Jeff Ashton was at the helm first thing Monday morning. Again, he was coherent and logical as he debunked defense claims and tied the prosecution’s case together. He was followed by Linda Burdick, who was equally or even more powerful. I believe they provided a very strong finish for the State.

Outside the Courtroom

I’m sure there were a lot of disappointed trial watchers when the defense rested without calling Casey to the stand. I thought their case ended on a flat note with testimony about how the Anthonys buried their dead pets. Except for the regular defense spinners who with straight faces claimed it was a powerful finish, the majority of the analysts seemed to share my opinion.

I believe all the Anthonys – Cindy, George and Lee – gave less than truthful testimony at various times during their multiple appearances on the stand. As I’ve said many times here and in other venues, I am not a fan of the Anthony family. I don’t particularly care for or trust any of them. Their breakdowns on the stand aside, any sympathy I had for them ended long ago. And I’ve never held Casey in anything but total contempt.

And one courtroom observer continued to focus on the actions of juror #4. This particular juror reportedly only takes notes when the defense team is asking the questions. And she made a lot of them when Krystal Holloway testified. Presumably, that doesn’t bode well for the prosecution.

As brilliant as Ashton has been in his presentations and examination of witnesses, his antics of making facial expressions while Baez was speaking on Sunday was disappointing to me.

Another person I am less than pleased with is Dr. Michael Baden. For years I’ve been a Baden fan and looked forward to his TV appearances and comments about criminal cases. But in this case I think he should have skipped the TV circuit because he does in fact have a dog in the fight. His wife Linda was a former member of the defense team and continues to be an avid defense supporter.

When I’ve heard him discuss the Anthony trial I’ve come away with the impression that he is completely in the tank for the defense.  

Conclusions

As we near a verdict, I imagine the fat lady is lurking somewhere inOrlandowaiting to make her appearance. If I were able to communicate with her, I’d like to ask her opinion on what for me are the three basic elements of this case:

Caylee Anthony is dead;

Casey Anthony is the last person known to have had custody of Caylee; and

Casey Anthony has from the beginning and continuing to today, refused to provide an honest explanation of what happened to Caylee.

The defense did nothing – absolutely nothing – to change or explain away those facts for me. I wonder what the fat lady thinks.

 Segment One: The Sandra White case

 On April 10, 2006, 65-year-old Sandra White of Weaverville, North Carolina was murdered by her 73-year-old husband Ray. He staged the house to make it appear that the death was the result of a robbery gone bad. He went so far as to drive down the highway and throw Sandra’s purse out as a robber may have done. However, after several days of questioning by the police, Ray White confessed to the murder. He was subsequently charged with involuntary manslaughter and posted $100,000 bail.

And then things turned a bit weird. The judge released White to the custody of his brother, David White, inFlorida. Sandra’s family believes that today Ray is living inSt. Petersburgand enjoying life as a free man. The now 78-year-old has yet to stand trial in aNorth Carolinacourt. The family’s efforts to get answers fromNorth Carolinaauthorities have met with non-responses, inaccurate information and stonewalling.  

Joining us to discuss the case will be Gene Cervantes of Citizens Against Homicide and Sandra’s nieces, Tamara Cramer and Heather Snyder.

Segment Two: The CUE Case of the Month

Jessica Lowery disappeared fromLumberton,North Carolinaon December 20, 2005. The then 25-year-old left her residence at approximately 3:00 a.m. and has not been seen since.

Monica Caison and Jessica’s father Jimmy, will be on hand to talk about the disappearance and investigation.  

You can hear Crime Wire Investigates beginning at 9 p.m. Eastern.

Also, please visit our Crime Wire Website.

Together we can make a difference.