Prosecutors lied and withheld information in Ms Casey Anthony Trial !!!!!

[Contumacious]

Software Designer Reports Error in Anthony Trial


MIAMI — Assertions by the prosecution that Casey Anthony conducted extensive computer searches on the word “chloroform” were based on inaccurate data, a software designer who testified at the trial said Monday.

The designer, John Bradley, said Ms. Anthony had visited what the prosecution said was a crucial Web site only once, not 84 times, as prosecutors had asserted. He came to that conclusion after redesigning his software, and immediately alerted prosecutors and the police about the mistake, he said.

The finding of 84 visits was used repeatedly during the trial to suggest that Ms. Anthony had planned to murder her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee, who was found dead in 2008. Ms. Anthony, who could have faced the death penalty, was acquitted of the killing on July 5."

.

 

[R.D.]

This all came out in the trial.

 

[Contumacious]

This all came out in the trial.

"Mr. Bradley’s findings were not presented to the jury and the record was never corrected, he said. Prosecutors are required to reveal all information that is exculpatory to the defense. "

.

 

[R.D.]

No need to shout.


First of all, the defense team was notified of the discrepancy by me as I was in Orlando during the trial and gave Jose Baez the questions to use to clear it up once it came out in testimony...

The CacheBack error was substantial in that it presented evidence that would have substantial impact on the understanding of the jury as to the facts in the case. The expert's job is to assist the triers of fact in understanding the evidence. That means that the expert has to make sure that the triers of fact hear evidence that is accurate, independent of the impact on the case.
CLICK


Again, brought out in the trial. The defense did a good job of and produced compelling evidence that the searches were misrepresented.

Also, it was not until after the Prosecution rested that the error was detected

 

[Contumacious]

No need to shout.

HUH?

Of course there is a need to shout.

Firstly, Ms Anthony could have been found guilty and forced to seek a new trial. That takes years.

Secondly, she could have been injured by Nancy Graceless goon squad;

Thirdly, the US Supreme Court has adopted the nazi common law which means that litigants can not sue judges or prosecutors.

It would be nice if Mr. Baez or one of his staff members clarifies this matter.

 

[Contumacious]

No need to shout.

HUH?

Of course there is a need to shout.

Firstly, Ms Anthony could have been found guilty and forced to seek a new trial. That takes years.

Secondly, she could have been injured by Nancy Graceless goon squad;

Thirdly, the US Supreme Court has adopted the nazi common law which means that litigants can not sue judges or prosecutors.

It would be nice if Mr. Baez or one of his staff members clarifies this matter.

"Mr. Bradley, fearing that jurors were being given false information based on his data, contacted the police and the prosecution the weekend of June 25. He asked Sergeant Stenger about the discrepancy, and the sergeant said he was aware of it, Mr. Bradley said. He waited to see if prosecutors would correct the record. They did not.

“They needed to get that right,” Mr. Bradley said. "

.

 

[George Costanza]

First of all, the defense team was notified of the discrepancy by me as I was in Orlando during the trial and gave Jose Baez the questions to use to clear it up once it came out in testimony...

Excuse me?

 

[Contumacious]

First of all, the defense team was notified of the discrepancy by me as I was in Orlando during the trial and gave Jose Baez the questions to use to clear it up once it came out in testimony...

Excuse me?

He is a kidder.

.

 

[R.D.]

No need to shout.

HUH?

Of course there is a need to shout.

Firstly, Ms Anthony could have been found guilty and forced to seek a new trial. That takes years.

Secondly, she could have been injured by Nancy Graceless goon squad;

Thirdly, the US Supreme Court has adopted the nazi common law which means that litigants can not sue judges or prosecutors.

It would be nice if Mr. Baez or one of his staff members clarifies this matter.

I'll take your points last first.

He did and he did, very well in fact during his direct. In fact I beleived him, it didn't sway me but it rang true.

State’s response to comments made by Mr. John Bradley, designer of the software
CacheBack, in today’s New York Times article

HERE at 10:50 it is brought up by JB again hoping to get the Judge to order the State to mention the error in their final rebuttal

The "false" testimony he is referring to is actually a corrected report brought to attention after the State rested and after Cindy lied under oath on cross. Bradly has corrected his timeline (from June 16-19) on his website, it was Sgt. Stenger's testimony the 23rd that made him research again.

As the Judge ruled, file the proper motions and it will be dealt with. As far as I can tell this article is just a ruse to stir controversy. The defense as of yet has not filed to my knowledge.

NG goon squad?? Puh-leeze

Appeals are a part of the process and we still don't know the legal facts here. Just the other side of the anti NG goon squad shifting into high gear

 

[R.D.]

First of all, the defense team was notified of the discrepancy by me as I was in Orlando during the trial and gave Jose Baez the questions to use to clear it up once it came out in testimony...

Excuse me?

He is a kidder.

.

 

[Contumacious]

No need to shout.

HUH?

Of course there is a need to shout.

Firstly, Ms Anthony could have been found guilty and forced to seek a new trial. That takes years.

Secondly, she could have been injured by Nancy Graceless goon squad;

Thirdly, the US Supreme Court has adopted the nazi common law which means that litigants can not sue judges or prosecutors.

It would be nice if Mr. Baez or one of his staff members clarifies this matter.

I'll take your points last first.

He did and he did, very well in fact during his direct. In fact I beleived him, it didn't sway me but it rang true.

State’s response to comments made by Mr. John Bradley, designer of the software
CacheBack, in today’s New York Times article

HERE at 10:50 it is brought up by JB again hoping to get the Judge to order the State to mention the error in their final rebuttal

The "false" testimony he is referring to is actually a corrected report brought to attention after the State rested and after Cindy lied under oath on cross. Bradly has corrected his timeline (from June 16-19) on his website, it was Sgt. Stenger's testimony the 23rd that made him research again.

As the Judge ruled, file the proper motions and it will be dealt with. As far as I can tell this article is just a ruse to stir controversy. The defense as of yet has not filed to my knowledge.

NG goon squad?? Puh-leeze

Appeals are a part of the process and we still don't know the legal facts here. Just the other side of the anti NG goon squad shifting into high gear

From your Link:

"We are dismayed at the suggestion made by the defense that prosecutors would withhold exculpatory material. Court records show that the defense was completely aware of the issues, utilizing these facts at trial."

Someone is not telling the truth.

I can not believe that the NYT would publish the story without confirming the facts.

We shall see......

.

 

[R.D.]

HUH?

Of course there is a need to shout.

Firstly, Ms Anthony could have been found guilty and forced to seek a new trial. That takes years.

Secondly, she could have been injured by Nancy Graceless goon squad;

Thirdly, the US Supreme Court has adopted the nazi common law which means that litigants can not sue judges or prosecutors.

It would be nice if Mr. Baez or one of his staff members clarifies this matter.

I'll take your points last first.

He did and he did, very well in fact during his direct. In fact I beleived him, it didn't sway me but it rang true.

State’s response to comments made by Mr. John Bradley, designer of the software
CacheBack, in today’s New York Times article

HERE at 10:50 it is brought up by JB again hoping to get the Judge to order the State to mention the error in their final rebuttal

The "false" testimony he is referring to is actually a corrected report brought to attention after the State rested and after Cindy lied under oath on cross. Bradly has corrected his timeline (from June 16-19) on his website, it was Sgt. Stenger's testimony the 23rd that made him research again.

As the Judge ruled, file the proper motions and it will be dealt with. As far as I can tell this article is just a ruse to stir controversy. The defense as of yet has not filed to my knowledge.

NG goon squad?? Puh-leeze

Appeals are a part of the process and we still don't know the legal facts here. Just the other side of the anti NG goon squad shifting into high gear

From your Link:

"We are dismayed at the suggestion made by the defense that prosecutors would withhold exculpatory material. Court records show that the defense was completely aware of the issues, utilizing these facts at trial."

Someone is not telling the truth.

I can not believe that the NYT would publish the story without confirming the facts.

We shall see......

.

Well I can beleive it.

This all came out in the trial, that's why I gave you the one link. JB even argued it.

 

[oldsalt]

HUH?

Of course there is a need to shout.

Firstly, Ms Anthony could have been found guilty and forced to seek a new trial. That takes years.

Secondly, she could have been injured by Nancy Graceless goon squad;

Thirdly, the US Supreme Court has adopted the nazi common law which means that litigants can not sue judges or prosecutors.

It would be nice if Mr. Baez or one of his staff members clarifies this matter.

I'll take your points last first.

He did and he did, very well in fact during his direct. In fact I beleived him, it didn't sway me but it rang true.

State’s response to comments made by Mr. John Bradley, designer of the software
CacheBack, in today’s New York Times article

HERE at 10:50 it is brought up by JB again hoping to get the Judge to order the State to mention the error in their final rebuttal

The "false" testimony he is referring to is actually a corrected report brought to attention after the State rested and after Cindy lied under oath on cross. Bradly has corrected his timeline (from June 16-19) on his website, it was Sgt. Stenger's testimony the 23rd that made him research again.

As the Judge ruled, file the proper motions and it will be dealt with. As far as I can tell this article is just a ruse to stir controversy. The defense as of yet has not filed to my knowledge.

NG goon squad?? Puh-leeze

Appeals are a part of the process and we still don't know the legal facts here. Just the other side of the anti NG goon squad shifting into high gear

From your Link:

"We are dismayed at the suggestion made by the defense that prosecutors would withhold exculpatory material. Court records show that the defense was completely aware of the issues, utilizing these facts at trial."

Someone is not telling the truth.

I can not believe that the NYT would publish the story without confirming the facts.

We shall see......

.

Yeah, like cindy georgie and casey.