A motion has been filed of which we will soon learn its contents.
As rumors go, some say it is a motion filed by the attorney for George and Cindy Anthony which may call for a limitation placed upon the defense regarding allegations of sexual abuse against George and or Lee Anthony.
However, is there a law on the books in Florida that allows for hearsay evidence when it comes to child sexual abuse below a certain age, perhaps 8? We may not have to wait long to find out. However, there is something else to be observed here.
If this motion seeks to quell the defense from asking about sexual abuse of Casey, why would it be necessary? Or, sans a Florida child abuse law yet known, is this an attempt to force the Defense to "put up or shut up"?
How does it look to the public? How will it play out to the jury?
George Anthony testified in a manner which was, at times, straight forward.
But not always.
George Anthony, under cross, did not do so well, and it appeared, at times, as if he had something to hide. Many believe that George was truthful in his denial of sexual abuse. I believe that the denial was specific to the accusation, in particular, precisely what Casey said, through Jose Baez, that took place before Casey went to school. This was a strong denial and he appeared steadfast, without need for qualifiers, nor additional words. His testimony impressed many, including me.
But when he was called to the stand a second time, it was not the same.
In Statement Analysis, the shortest answer is best, particularly in a denial.
Question: "Did you sexually molest your daughter?"
Answer: "No, sir, I did not."
This is a strong answer, right behind, "No, I didn't." In Statement Analysis, we note that each unnecessary word becomes doubly important to us, and can weaken, severely, a denial to the point where the analyst questions the veracity of the response. In fact, stats point to deception when subjects enter a plea an add any words to "not guilty" that show much: "100% not guilty" is one that is often used by guilty parties. "Absolutely not guilty!" is another that often is heard among the guilty. Of course, this is just an indication, or even a 'hint' of which to note, and not a conclusion within itself.
Other phrases that are commonly found in deceptive people:
"Honest to God"
"I will tell you the real truth"
"Honestly...", "I swear to God" When "God" enters into a denial, it is often an indication of deception and the analyst should be on high alert.
Although transcripts are not yet available, these phrases should be noted, along with "actually" (which compares two or more thoughts), "really", "hardly", "practically", "just about", "mostly" and so on. We are hearing these phrases enter into testimonies. It is not so much that George Anthony pauses which is causing question marks, but it is the words he is choosing after the pause.
He is going beyond the simple "yes" or "no" responses that served him well in the first testimony about the drowning and sexual abuse.
What does George Anthony have to be deceptive about?
Is this motion an attempt to quell allegations of sexual abuse, and if so, why is it needed? Is it a ploy to make Casey take the stand, in order to have it established by testimony?
We may have our answers shortly.
No comments:
Post a Comment