1 a : a thing contrived; especially : a mechanical device b : an artificial arrangement or development
2 : the act or faculty of contriving : the state of being contrived
Today’s hearing in the Caylee Marie Anthony murder trial is all about contrivance. Well, it’s about 911 calls, but both sides will argue their versions of what was contrived. Ever since the Anthony wagon train circled Casey Anthony – who has become everything to this family from beloved last female heir to the keys of the family shield of self-righteousness to their cash cow and some form of sneeze-induced code-talking shaman that blesses beads and has a direct line to “Daddy” – Cindy’s excuse for uttering the now famous line “I found my daughter’s car today and it smells like there’s been a dead body in the damn car” has been that she made it up for shock value to get the authorities to her house as quickly as possible. In other words, she claims it was contrived.
Interestingly, that’s what the state will be arguing today as well….the statement was made based on a contrivance, but not by Cindy – by Casey.
Just which side’s contrivance wins the day remains to be seen until after the honorable Judge Perry rules on today’s hearing. But my bet is that the State’s argument of Casey’s contrivance will win over the defense’s argument of Cindy’s contrivance. And the reason will be the very evidence that will be admitted today in order to rule whether it will ultimately be admitted during the murder trial itself.
Contrivance #1 – the State’s argument:
The State of Florida will be arguing today that Cindy’s statements in the third 911 call are admissible and of importance to their case because they are based on the evolving story of Casey Anthony once Cindy found her at Anthony Lazzaro’s apartment. Based on the evidence within the 911 calls themselves they believe it can be shown that Casey contrived the kidnapping story in between call #2 and call #3 made on July 15th. Their argument will include that because Casey did first share the contrived story of “Zanny the Nanny kidnapping of Caylee a month before” just before the third call, the revelation of the contrivance to Cindy Anthony caused her to become so panicked over the thought of 2-year old Caylee Marie being abducted that when she got on the third phone call and made the “dead body” statement, she was in an excited or panicked state . If they prove this position, under Florida Statute 90.803, the statement (in fact, the entire phone call, at least Cindy’s parts) becomes an “excited utterance” and therefore falls within the exception to the hearsay rule. The referenced statute reads as follows:
90.803 Hearsay exceptions; availability of declarant immaterial.—The provision of s. 90.802 to the contrary notwithstanding, the following are not inadmissible as evidence, even though the declarant is available as a witness:
(1) SPONTANEOUS STATEMENT.—A spontaneous statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or condition, or immediately thereafter, except when such statement is made under circumstances that indicate its lack of trustworthiness.
(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.
Contrivance #2 – the Defense’s argument:
The defense’s argument is based on Cindy’s repeated mantra that she “threw in” (i.e. contrived) the statement that the car smelled like a damned dead body in order to ensure law enforcement took the call as urgent and of a possible homicide in order to get them to come immediately to her home. In other words, she is saying she didn’t mean it really smelled like a damned dead body, but she was willing to “stretch the truth” (in verbal acrobatics that the entire Anthony clan have perfected – well, sans Lee, he’s not too polished) to get them to her house.
The Evidence for today:
Today’s hearing will include at least the following:
Now, the state has offered they don’t need all three 911 calls in the murder trial because they believe they can show the progression of Casey’s story and the effect it had on her mother, Cindy, with just two of the calls. I don’t necessarily agree that they should have made this offering. I believe the package of all three 911 calls brings home just how Casey spun the story that evening as Cindy, and Lee, increased the pressure on her to take them to Caylee. I also believe the extreme difference in Cindy’s demeanor and apparent state of mind in each call shows how what was being said to her in the periods between each call was of a revelatory nature and had an immediate impact on her psyche. I believe the audio of all three calls will have a similar effect on the jury.
Because…it’s not just the content of what Cindy says from Call #1 to Call #3…it’s how Cindy’s emotional state has changed and how she says those statements in Call #3 compared to the other two calls that brings home that Casey has just hit Cindy between the eyes with a story she had never heard before just prior to the last call.
The Content of the Calls:
Sticking to the mere contents of the calls, however, shows how the situation was fluid. In the first 911 call it’s not just what Cindy states to the operator, but what she states to Casey while she is waiting to be transferred that is of importance. First, Cindy’s demeanor is let’s get the job done. She states to the operator that she is sitting outside the Pershing Orlando Police Department station (which is closed at the time) and she wants to bring her daughter in to be charged for stealing money and her car. At this time Cindy does not mention that she hasn’t seen her granddaughter in a month, but merely mentions these potential charges of theft. The operator, after trying to get clarification on jurisdiction, begins to transfer the call to Orange County Sheriff’s Department. It is during this transfer time that Cindy states to Casey (which is picked up in the audio recording of the call):
Cindy: (speaking to Casey Anthony) Because my next thing will be down to child (inaudible) and
we’ll have a court order to get her. If that’s what you want to play, then we’ll do it, and you’ll
never
Casey Anthony: Well, that’s not the way I want to (inaudible)
Cindy: Well, then you have –
Casey: Give me one more day.
Cindy: No, I’m not giving you another day. I’ve given you a month.
Even though Cindy has not mentioned that she is trying to get her daughter to tell her where Caylee is, she clearly indicates in these side comments to Casey that is her intent and that she will take legal action in a family court to get it done. In other words, Cindy’s statements to Casey show that the statements made to the operator (i.e. I’m wanting to have her arrested for theft) are contrived. But these side comments also reveal something else at this time…Cindy is not appearing to be in an emotionally distraught state, but an aggravated state due to Casey not telling her where Caylee is. Her apparent plan is to get Casey before law enforcement on the grounds of having her arrested for theft and then use the situation she has gotten Casey into to pressure Casey into telling her where she can pick up Caylee.
In the second 911 call, made after Cindy, Casey and Lee arrive at the Anthony home, Cindy is still in her “let’s get down to business” state. She’s still aggravated but now not only at Casey, who still hasn’t told her where Caylee is, but at the authorities because she’s having to make a second 911 call from the residence per their instructions. This is most manifested by Cindy having on her “Cindy Anthony rude pants” during the phone call. She is terse, condescending, and rude to the operator who is attempting to get all required information to process the 911 call and determine the level of importance she needs to place on the response. This is rather important because if Cindy wanted to get someone out there immediately, this was the opportunity to do so and it wasn’t going to be by being an asswipe to the operator. But that, indeed, is exactly what she is.
It is, in fact, the disdain in Cindy’s voice when responding to the operator in this call that I believe makes it very important to the progression of all three 911 calls, and why I do not agree that it should be excluded, nor the first call for that matter. This is the first phone call in which Cindy states to the operator that she has a “3-year old” that has “been missing for a month”. Now, it should be pointed out that Cindy throws this in after her repeated statement from the first 911 call that her primary contrived reason for calling is to have Casey arrested for theft. She goes on to repeat that Casey has stolen her car and her money. In the middle of this is an inserted “side note” of a missing 3-year old (which, by the way, really bugs me because Caylee wasn’t 3 yet.)
Combining the first two statements of what is being claimed by Cindy from the second call shows this very graphically:
Uhm, I have someone here that I need to uhm, be arrested in my home…And I have a possible missing child. I have a three year old that’s been missing for a month.
Oh…and by the way, I have a 3 year old missing for a month. To this nonchalant delivery of this new piece of information the operator responds with…
A three year old? Have you reported that?
And this is where Cindy’s disdain comes into play to show the progression of her state of mind from these first two calls to the third one. Her response is “I’m trying to do that now ma’am.” Well, what rudeness, Val? She called her ma’am. Uh huh…I’ve got a character in my life that in the first few meetings I had with him (in a professional setting) called me “ma’am” as well. My boss was sitting in those meetings. To this date my boss laughs because this jerk’s delivery of “ma’am” was so condescending and disrespectful that my boss, to this day, can’t believe I didn’t come unwound like a spring in a broken clock. (The relationship with this man has since matured. I’ve earned his respect, and I haven’t been called “ma’am” in quite some time.) This is the same condescending delivery Cindy uses in this response. She is clearly more aggravated than she is panicked.
And then comes the “bombshell” call. The call the defense will be arguing vehemently today should be dismissed for (Lord only knows how many different reasons Baez will bobble-head his way through) – hearsay, inflammatory, she made it up…we just don’t like it! The third 911 call. The “let’s get down to business Cindy” is gone. Cindy is clearly emotionally distraught. She is panicked. She is in a heightened emotional state. The entire call is centered on Caylee being not just missing, BUT KIDNAPPED. And here are the statements that prove that this change in emotional state is because of an immediate reaction to information just passed to her by Casey:
“…And my daughter finally admitted that the babysitter stole her. I need to find her. That the babysitter took her a month ago. The daugh…my daughter’s been looking for her. I told you my daughter was missing for a month. I just found her today but I can’t find my granddaughter. And 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.
Cindy has clearly and admittedly just been told that Caylee was kidnapped a month before and that Casey has been trying to find her. And here is where Cindy’s claim of “contriving” the added information of the “dead body” statement in order to get the cops to her house faster falls through. Anybody in their right mind would think reporting the kidnapping of a 3 year old child who has been missing for a month as adequate enough to get a top priority rating on their 911 call. A car smelling like a dead body does not make this more urgent because a “possible missing dead body” does not require the urgency of a “missing and kidnapped child” needing rescue from a dangerous situation.
Lee will testify today. He will be asked about his statements to OCSO in his July 29, 2008 interview. They went like this…
LA: Oh, well she kind of went up. And I can tell you she. She, her eyes were watered. She had been crying. Now it’s not balling mind you, she had been crying. But when my mother came in and started, “What’s going on,” and when my sister said, “I don’t know where, where Caylee is,” again her voice escalates when my mom gets in the room almost combatively. Uhm, my sister, when she explains that to my mom, “I don’t know where Caylee is,” and then my mother immediately goes, “Who took her? Who took her?” And, and, and then Casey goes, “Uhm, the nanny did. She was kidnapped Mom.” And then that’s when my mother kind of hit her fist on the bed and said, “We could have found her a month ago. Why did you wait?” And at that point my sister is done crying. She’s, now they’re fighting about you know, this stuff in the past instead of trying to focus on the information that we need to get.
…So at this point in time I was, I ran out to the kitchen, hoping to grab a pad and paper, you know, a pad and a pen so I could start asking my sister who, where, what, why, so I can already have this info kind of ready to go, or I could even start myself looking into it. And by the time I got back with the sheet of paper my mother had already called 911 again. That was that, you know, that…other 911 ticket was released. Called it again to say, you know, she just admitted that you know she’s kidnapped. We have to find her, you know, whatever. When my mother is in the other room on that call that’s when I was sitting there with my sister with this pad and paper and saying ok, so give me something, you know. And then the first thing that I asked her is, “Where have you been staying?” I don’t know why I asked her that question first. It was just the, it was the first thing that popped in my mind.
And that will be that. State’s argument that Casey’s contrivance immediately before the last 911 call placed Cindy Anthony in a panicked state that she immediately acted and spoke within…the statement will be proven to be an excited utterance and the development of Casey’s contrivance will be allowed to be audibly presented to the jury, along with the fact that what was bearing on Cindy’s mind at the moment of that third 911 call was…
the connection between the just revealed kidnapping of her granddaughter and the fact that car smelled like a damned dead body.
Valhall.
Related posts:
- Caylee Anthony case: Magpie reports on 03/03/11 hearing
- Caylee Anthony case: Magpie reports on 03/04/11 hearing
- Caylee Anthony case: Today’s Hearing 01/03/11
- Caylee Anthony case: Hearing today 03/02/2011
- Caylee Anthony case: Frye hearing beginning 03/23/11
Click here to join the discussion
