Casey Anthony Probation: Sour Grapes or Proper Court Order?Posted: August 3, 2011
Sour grapes or a proper court order by Judge Strickland to require Casey Anthony to now serve 1 year probation on her check fraud case?
Last Friday, the judge amended,”nunc pro tunc’d” (now as then) the January 2010 sentencing order to retroactively add the words “upon release“. So, the initial order now reads, ” 1 year probation upon release” thus, requiring Casey Anthony to report back to Florida to serve out the one year probation term.
WHAT says the defense! Go back to Florida, her life will be in danger. Order amended 180 days is well beyond the 60 day rule. Casey got a letter of her completion of probation in January 2011. Judge Strickland is prejudiced. He was DQ’d off the murder case. No due process was given. There was no hearing and no notice to the defense.
I would add: (although I am not a fan of Casey Anthony, but a fan of the constitution)
1) The amended order also states that Casey and her attorney were present in court this past Monday when the order was “filed in open court”. What? They were not present. That’s odd.
2) As reported, according to the Florida Probation Department & State Attorney’s Office, probation was completed while she was in jail. What about the letter Casey received from the probation department stating her probation “was completed”? What about the probationary contacts with Casey while she was in jail for allegedly killing Caylee? Doesn’t double jeopardy apply here? She already served probation, they might argue.
3) Judge Strickland, with all due respect, does appear to be prejudiced towards Casey. He was DQ on the murder case. He has spoken out against the acquittal several times to the media (highly improper, in my opinion) but said nothing about the probation condition. Everyone knew she was acquitted July 5th and would be released July 17, could he have called probation prior to or on July 17th, the day of her release? We all watched Casey and her attorney walk out of jail and reportedly leave the state. Yes, Judge Strickland did sign the original order and has jurisdiction as the sentencing judge but does it seem proper to you? Could he have recused himself? After all, he did amend the order and go on vacation.
4) What’s the cost to the taxpayers, especially in a state devastated by real estate meltdown? Maybe, justice still needs to be served at whatever the cost?
Look, as a former prosecutor of child abuse, I am no fan of Casey’s but put Casey and the acquittal aside for just one moment. We are talking about higher principles here. Principles involving our constitutional rights of due process, liberty and whether there was proper judicial action. These are weighty questions that deserve our attention regardless of WHO the defendant is. What if this had happened to your son or granddaughter? I bet you’d fight it, too.
No question, many people are upset with the verdict and the horrible death of Caylee, but is this how justice plays out in our country?
Sour grapes or proper court order, WHAT SAY YOU?