Contact
Subscribe


The Caylee Mob's Law May Be Different Than What You Learned In Law School

Aug 4, 2011
By .
Law, Politics & Current Events

Oh, angry mob of Casey Anthony haters, will you ever be right?

Last time I introduced you to @nocaseyanthony, one of the activists who rail against Casey Anthony — and people insufficiently exercised against Casey Anthony — via Twitter and blog.

For some time, the mob has been howling for a federal prosecution of Casey Anthony, having seized upon the Dual Sovereignty Doctrine. The mob's grasp of federal law is . . . creative. Now @nocaseyanthony has drafted a letter and is embarked on a great crusade to persuade citizens to bombard various justice department officials with it. I used to get letters like this as a federal prosecutor. Often they were in crayon.

In case @nocaseyanthony yanks the letter, here it is for your review and comment. Here are my comments:

Caylee Marie Anthony, a child who was born a naturalized United States Citizen, was deprived of her right to her life, liberty and the eventual pursuit of happiness on or about June 16, 2008.

Being born a naturalized citizen is a neat trick.

The Supreme Court has ruled that "the dual sovereignty doctrine . . . compels the conclusion that successive prosecutions by two States for the same conduct are not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause."

This is true, as far as it goes. Take, for instance, the federal prosecution of the cops who beat Rodney King, which took place after their state acquittal. But there, the feds had a specific applicable federal law to charge. What federal law did Casey Anthony violate? She'll get to that. But first, let's stop in Crazytown:

The fact that Caylee Marie Anthony was a child and not an adult may have played a part in the Florida jury’s decision to acquit Casey Marie Anthony. Similarities exist between this case and the case of California v. Scott Peterson. The victims in both cases did not have a cause of death; and in both cases, the manner of death was HOMICIDE. In addition, both cases were entirely circumstantial. Although the Anthony case had a great deal more evidence than the Peterson case, the latter case resulted in a conviction and penalty of Death for the defendant while Casey Anthony was acquitted. Children should not be viewed as disposable. I question whether a subconscious discriminatory factor was applied toward Caylee Anthony that did not exist for California victim, Lacy Peterson. Children have a right to non-discrimination especially when they are victims of crime. Although discrimination by the Florida jury may have been unintentional, federal prosecutors may wish to explore this issue.

Yes, she appears to be suggesting that the jury acquitted Casey Anthony of the murder of her daughter because they were prejudiced against kids. Huh.

There are multiple federal statutes/laws under which Casey Marie Anthony could be prosecuted including but not limited to the following:

18 U.S.C. 1111 – First Degree Murder (of a child)
18 U.S.C. 115– Murder of a Family Member
18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 245, 247 – Criminal Violations of an Individual’s Civil Rights
18 U.S.C. 113B – Terrorism (Domestic Terrorism upon individual with use of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Chemical of Interest – Chloroform)
Laws relating to manufacture of poison or drugs as it relates to Chloroform
Laws relating to illegal disposal of a human corpse
Laws relating to abuse of a corpse
Laws relating to Failure to Report a Crime or Failure to Report Knowledge of a Death

Yeah, here's where @nocaseyanthony fails to understand federal law even a little. Federal law doesn't work like that. Federal crimes are limited to federal jurisdiction.

Take the federal murder statute she cites:

Within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States,
Whoever is guilty of murder in the first degree shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for life;
Whoever is guilty of murder in the second degree, shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

That doesn't mean "within the territory of the United States." Not all murders in the United States are federal crimes. Only murders within the United States' special jurisdiction fall under the murder statute. That means murders on the high seas, on U.S. property, in embassies, and on designated islands containing bat guano (don't ask). There's no indication whatsoever that Caylee Anthony was murdered within the special jurisdiction of the U.S.

And "murder of a family member?" Let's look at that statute:

115. Influencing, impeding, or retaliating against a Federal official by threatening or injuring a family member

I was previously unaware that Caylee was the family member of a federal official and that she was killed to retaliate against that official in the performance of their official duties. Maybe @nocaseyanthony could explain? She could ask a passing orderly for help.

How about this?

18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 245, 247 – Criminal Violations of an Individual’s Civil Rights

Once again, that's not how federal law works. Murder might violate your rights, but not every murder violates federal civil rights law. Section 241 applies to conspiracies to injury people to prevent the exercise of a right (like voting or speech). Section 242 applies to actions under color of law — that is, under pretense of official authority, as when police officers abuse citizens. Section 245, again, applies to attacking a person because they have been engaging in a protected federal right (like voting) or because of their race or religion and their participation in that right. Section 247 applies to attacks on religious property and obstruction of the free exercise of religion. On their face they clearly don't apply to a parent killing her kid.

18 U.S.C. 113B – Terrorism (Domestic Terrorism upon individual with use of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Chemical of Interest – Chloroform)

No. Just . . . no. Section 113 deals with assaults within the special territorial and maritime jurisdiction, described above. But @nocaseyanthony is probably referring to Chapter 113B of Title 18, which is actually at 18 U.S.C. sections 2331 et seq. That chapter applies to acts of domestic and international terrorism, both of which require acts intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or the government.

Finally, there's this:

Laws relating to manufacture of poison or drugs as it relates to Chloroform
Laws relating to illegal disposal of a human corpse
Laws relating to abuse of a corpse
Laws relating to Failure to Report a Crime or Failure to Report Knowledge of a Death

I'm not going to do her research for her, but I've seen no federal law that would apply. Cite one, @nocaseyanthony.

The one federal law that might apply is the one she ignores — 18 U.S.C. section 1001, making it a federal crime to lie to the federal government. If Casey Anthony made a statement to the FBI, and the government believed it was a lie, they could pursue it. Lord knows the feds make chickenshit 1001 cases all the time. But it strikes me as highly unlikely. And it certainly doesn't support the raft of other charges that the Caylee mob is demanding.

Now, you may ask: Ken, why are you pointing out a meaningless misguided crusade by one legally ignorant activist? Ken, why are you feeding the troll? Ken, why are you engaging the crazy?

Because I hate the police-fluffing, law-scorning, deliberately-pig-ignorant mob. I hate the deliberate promotion of ignorance and propaganda about the legal system. I hate people who make themselves the willing tools of the prosecution-is-always-right police, and promote canine devotion to law enforcement.

That's why.

Last 5 posts by Ken

34 Comments
Tags ,

34 Comments

  1. Scott Jacobs  •  Aug 4, 2011 @3:37 pm

    Ken, you are the wind beneath my wings…

  2. Ariel  •  Aug 4, 2011 @3:49 pm

    An "A" for enthusiasm and an "F" for every other possible thing I could think of including proper hygiene (they obviously can't just wash their hands of something they're obsessed over). I believe that the "chloroform" charge, besides stretching the word "terrorist" into meaninglessness (thank you my Government and the Patriot Act, as well, for making that word meaningless), shows a singular inability to keep up with the facts of the case (the prosecutor knew what he was claiming about chloroform and searches was not true, but why let that get in the way).

    The prosecutor overcharged and could not make his case. End of story.

  3. R. Raymond  •  Aug 4, 2011 @3:50 pm

    Sorry, that should not have been "Ariel", an old moniker.

  4. Ken  •  Aug 4, 2011 @3:52 pm

    I'm sorry R. Raymond. Based on the legal precedents set down by the Caylee Mob I must now report you for federal prosecution for identity fraud, rape (of names), and nameslaughter.

  5. R. Raymond  •  Aug 4, 2011 @4:08 pm

    Before I write anything more, may I see my lawyer? Hey, why are you pushing that yellowpad and pen at me…let go my arm…it won't match my handwriting…stop hitting me, Stabler…Benson, I thought you cared…

  6. Grandy  •  Aug 4, 2011 @5:00 pm

    It is enough that Franklin, Jefferson, and Adams would approve of standing up to such a mob.

    Joshua Norton I, Emporer of these United States and Protector of Mexico, would as well. That too is plenty of reason .

  7. firehat  •  Aug 4, 2011 @8:20 pm

    Ohhhh, an elusive Grandy sighting!

  8. G Thompson  •  Aug 4, 2011 @11:43 pm

    Maybe all these letter writers do come from one of these specially designated US Federal jurisdictional islands..

    Because they all seem Bat ShitGuano Crazy to me

  9. Corporal Lint  •  Aug 5, 2011 @8:49 am

    FWIW, it's bird guano islands. The confusion shows how we tragically forget the great Millard Fillmore and his successful resolution of the Peruvian Guano Crisis, and Franklin Pierce's guano campaign that triumphantly culminated with the Guano Islands Act of 1856.

  10. David  •  Aug 5, 2011 @8:52 am

    @R. Raymond: You have a sockpuppet you call "Ariel"?

  11. Ken  •  Aug 5, 2011 @8:54 am

    Corporal Lint, was that to secure material components for any fireball spells necessary in our fledgling nation's defense?

  12. Corporal Lint  •  Aug 5, 2011 @10:11 am

    "Corporal Lint, was that to secure material components for any fireball spells necessary in our fledgling nation’s defense?"

    Yes! It was used for gunpowder (and fertilizer), and a Parrott rifle in a harbor fortress chucking shells at an ironclad is the steampunk equivalent of a wizard in his keep casting fireballs at a hill giant. You have to roll a 6d6 for damage and everything.

  13. mojo  •  Aug 8, 2011 @10:50 am

    "The one federal law that might apply is the one she ignores — 18 U.S.C. section 1001, making it a federal crime to lie to the federal government."

    Which is why, when talking to Feds, you should (as somebody once said) JUST SHUT UP.

  14. ATL  •  Aug 8, 2011 @2:02 pm

    Why were federal charges brought against Cyrus Casby after his LA State aquittal?

  15. Ken  •  Aug 8, 2011 @2:07 pm

    Why were federal charges brought against Cyrus Casby after his LA State aquittal?

    Because he was charged with arson of a building affecting interstate commerce under 18 U.S.C. 844(i). The allegation that the building affected interstate commerce provides the putative federal jurisdiction. That distinguishes it from the federal murder statute.

    Next?

  16. Melissa  •  Aug 14, 2011 @1:55 pm

    http://www.change.org/petitions/the-us-supreme-court-try-casey-anthony-in-federal-court

  17. Kathy  •  Aug 14, 2011 @9:22 pm

    To Whom It May Concern,

    I as a citizen of the United States of America am writing to you in regards to Case of The State of Florida vs. Casey Marie Anthony in the Ninth Judicial Circuit Court in and for Orange County Florida, Case Number 48-2008-CF-015606-O.
    This crime committed against this innocent child and the resulting verdict are repugnant to the conscience of mankind on every level. In the American system of jurisprudence, a murdered child should receive the justice for which the system demands, pursuant to ideals of our founding fathers. Justice was not served in this case.
    It is a well-settled principle of law that the Fifth Amendment's Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar the Federal Government from prosecuting an individual on similar or exact acts formerly tried in a State Court following acquittal or conviction. The Dual Sovereignty Doctrine allows for prosecution by one or more agencies and is not considered double jeopardy under these circumstances.
    This defendant was indicted and tried on murder charges pursuant to the Florida Statute 782.04 (1)(a)(1), a general provision forbidding the unlawful killing of a human being. She was subsequently acquitted by a jury on murder charges even thought the jury's decision was in direct opposition of the evidence presented.
    Due to the many newly-enacted laws designed for the intensified safety and protection of children all across this country, both on the State and Federal levels, it is our contention that the United States indeed has a "compelling federal interest" to apply these standards to Caylee Anthony's untimely death in determining who or what caused her death and bringing forth that person responsible.
    If the Federal Government is serious about enforcing laws designed to more adequately and more sufficiently protect our country's children and to provide proof that the attorney General of the United States, Mr Eric Holder's statement was not political rhetoric when he said, Quote:
    “We are signaling that, when it comes to keeping our children from harm, a new era of collaboration has begun.” We need Federal prosecution of this case is to ensure all of the above to be true and correct.
    The violations of federal law that I contend she committed and request prosecution of, are as follows:

    TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 51 § 1111 Murder
    As defined(a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Every murder perpetrated by poison, lying in wait, or any other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing; or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, any arson, escape, murder, kidnapping, treason, espionage, sabotage, aggravated sexual abuse or sexual abuse, child abuse, burglary, or robbery; or perpetrated as part of a pattern or practice of assault or torture against a child or children; or perpetrated from a premeditated design unlawfully and maliciously to effect the death of any human being other than him who is killed, is murder in the first degree.
    Caylee Anthony death meets the requirements of the statute.
    (2) the term “child” means a person who has not attained the age of 18 years and is—
    (A) under the perpetrator’s care or control; or
    (3) the term “child abuse” means intentionally or knowingly causing death or serious bodily injury to a child.
    it is our contention that based on the evidence Casey Anthony did unlawfully kill this child and the over 400 pieces of evidence concretely prove that to be true.

    Secondly,
    18 U.S.C. § – Section 1001: Statements or entries generally The False Statement Act, Federal law establishes a possible penalty of 5 years in prison for making a false statement to the federal government or its agents:
    (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -
    (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
    (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
    (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years

    In a statement to FBI agent Nick Savage on October 14, 2008 Ms. Anthony said, "I as a Mom I know in my gut, there's feelings there, you know certain things about your child you can feel that connection and I still have that feeling, that presence, I know that she is alive. Whether you have a bucket load of evidence downstairs that contradicts that and says otherwise or all you have is speculation, or nothing at all. These statements were made after she knew the child to be deceased. Hundreds of federal agents and NCIS members were disposed to search for and review tips in regards to this childs whereabouts. The defendant aserted that the "nanny" kidnapped the child but in the defense owns statements at trial conceded that there never was a nanny and that it was all "a pack of lies".

    Third,
    42 U.S.C.A. § 5106g The Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA)

    "Any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation"; or
    "An act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm."
    While CAPTA provides definitions for sexual abuse and the special cases of neglect related to withholding or failing to provide medically indicated treatment. If the defense argument has any ttruth to it and the child did drown in the pool, Casey Anthony failed to get medically indicated treatment by calling 911 she violated this statute as well.
    In a report released On August 8, 2011 the The Florida Department of Children and families released a report stating quote "It is the conclusion of the Department of Children and Families that [Casey Anthony] failed to protect her child from harm either through her actions or lack of actions, which tragically resulted in the child's untimely death"
    If true justice were to be served, the monetary costs to us as U.S. taxpayers is a small price to pay. There were so many egrious errors, unconscionable and unethical acts committed by the defense in this case that a trial by the federal government is truly warranted. Additionally, the jury did not listen to or obey the Judge's jury instructions, in fact they have been noted as saying, "We could not determine the punishment without knowing what the crime was." The jury was instructed specifically no to consider the punishment in their deliberations. The jurors did not ask to review one single piece of evidence in their delibertions, nor did they have even one question for the Judge.
    When addressing the scrivner's error in regards to a recent the probation hearing Judge Belvin Perry is quoted as saying that the defense attorney in this case Jose Baez' action or lack thereof, “strikes at the very foundation of our justice system.” The point he makes is well founded, as this attorney through has scoffed at the judicial system throught the entire trial.
    The honorable Judge Perry threatened Mr. Baez with contempt of court and halted testimony by defense witness William Rodriguez when it became apparent that Mr. Rodriguez was offering testimony which wasn't in a report submitted to the prosecution. The omission of his opinion regarding duct tape on 2-year-old Caylee's remains violated procedural rules implemented by Perry at the outset of the trial. The attorney Beaz did this time and time again throught the course of this trial, delibertely violating the Judges orders. In even more unbelievable behavior after the trial he continues to violate ethical standards by hiding her in a secret location and seeking to gain paid interviews with news agencies and relationships with public relations firms for himself and his former client, all behavior outside the realm of his duty as her counsel and certainly against the rules of the Florida Bar Association.
    In closing we respectfully request that Casey Anthony be duly prosecuted for the insidious crime she committed against this innocent child which are in direct opposition of the standards of decency that mark a progressive society. The verdict in the Casey Anthony trial set justice for crimes against children back hundreds of years.
    This verdict makes a mockery of the American legal system. It is a slap in the face to all Americans who expect and deserve the legitimate functioning of justice when criminals commit horrific crimes, especially against children. We need this prosecution to restore our faith in our system of justice. We the people seek nothing less than justice to be served in this case and respectfully request that our voices be heard.

  18. Kathy  •  Aug 14, 2011 @9:22 pm

    can you please pick my letter apart so I can do better research? Thanks so much

  19. Karen Scharps  •  Aug 14, 2011 @10:52 pm

    Are you sure that you aren't Chaney? Aw, come on, Chaney, stand up and be counted.
    You should be intelligent enough to not generalize about people. Every e-boycotter that I have met has different reasons for protesting the violent death of a child who was then trashed like garbage. We realize that the decision was wrong, and we care about the moral decay of a country that is now being asked to take part in the exploitation of her death. Perhaps our knowledge of law is naive, but at least we have the courage to stand for something. What do you stand for?
    It's easy to take pot shots when you lack the guts to make a stand. A cowards way out. I found this paper abusive and it was an intellectual pontification that used "glittering generalities" of 95% of the American public.

  20. Ken  •  Aug 15, 2011 @9:12 am

    can you please pick my letter apart so I can do better research? Thanks so much

    What would be the point in that, when you've ignored what's in the post already?

    Take your torches and pitchforks elsewhere.

  21. Ken  •  Aug 15, 2011 @9:14 am

    http://www.change.org/petitions/the-us-supreme-court-try-casey-anthony-in-federal-court

    That's unusually incoherent even for this crowd. Does the United States Supreme Court have a power to indict people that I've missed?

  22. Ken  •  Aug 15, 2011 @9:14 am

    I found this paper abusive and it was an intellectual pontification that used “glittering generalities” of 95% of the American public.

    It's very thoughtful of you to put scare quotes around your own insipid turns of phrase, thus sparing me the trouble.

  23. james scruggs  •  Aug 16, 2011 @8:26 pm

    i to beleave that casey anthoy needs to be put to death she has made a mockery of the police and the judge and the goverment as of the state of florida and has broke a ton of federal laws as well and thanks that she can keep runing up bills for the state of florida and never pay and murder her little child and get away with it no more judge perry should put awarrnt out for arrest and have her charged with murder and all 7 charges plus inter state flight please gov rick scott due some thing think you james

  24. Ken  •  Aug 17, 2011 @9:23 am

    QED

  25. SPQR  •  Aug 17, 2011 @11:21 am

    Mockery is now a death penalty offense. Thanks for telling me that "james scruggs".

    Can I start a petition here, Ken, to collect money to buy Scruggs a shift key?

  26. Charles  •  Aug 17, 2011 @12:38 pm

    No dice, SPQR. The funds raised will first go toward the purchase of a period key.

  27. SPQR  •  Aug 17, 2011 @7:50 pm

    Clearly, Charles, a shift key is far more important and will save more children than a period key … even if you count the angle bracket as an additional benefit.

  28. Maxine  •  Aug 26, 2011 @9:37 am

    Instead of criticizing people who want to do something in a Postive way..why not try helping them out..or is it beneath you intellectual hub do to so…..

  29. Ken  •  Aug 26, 2011 @9:40 am

    Mobs seeking to tear apart the rule of law are not doing something positive.

  30. Lee Wells  •  Sep 20, 2011 @8:07 pm

    Mob mentality really? If the Feds want to charge Casey Anthony, they will. I, for one, am hoping they do. Something has to be done to stop crazy parents from killing their kids an getting away with it. If they don't indict her for lying about the kidnapping, then it should not be against the law. Take lying to the Feds off the books. Now, that's not going to happen. Sooner or later there will a law suit for lying to the Feds and they will say that Casey Anthony lied to the federal government about her own child and squat was done. Oh let freedom ring!

  31. Ken  •  Sep 20, 2011 @8:09 pm

    The quality of anti-tot-mom-mob legal analysis remains constant — that is, less than Lionel Hutz, slightly more than a dead gopher.

  32. Marc  •  Sep 20, 2011 @8:29 pm

    "How about that! I looked something up! These books behind me don't just make the office look good, they're filled with useful legal tidbits just like that!"

    – Lionel Hutz (RIP Phil Hartman).

  33. Rachel  •  Oct 1, 2011 @4:00 pm

    Ever studied Heath vs. Alabama? Heath thought he beat the death penalty too; why don't you ask him his opinion? Oh, wait, you can't the Federal Government put him to death.

  34. Ken  •  Oct 1, 2011 @6:53 pm

    Gee, @Rachel, thanks for the comment that really had nothing to do with the issues in the post.

    Ah, yes, Heath v. Alabama. Heath lived Alabama with his wife. He went to Georgia, hired two killers, and brought them to Alabama, where they kidnapped his wife, drove her to Georgia, where they killed her.

    He pled guilty to murder in Georgia in exchange for a life sentence. But that wasn't good enough for the fine people of Alabama, who thirsted for his blood, just as Jesus would have wanted. The Supreme Court said that Alabama could prosecute him, too, and they did, eventually executing him.

    That has nothing to do with the issue discussed above, which is whether Casey Anthony committed a federal crime under which the feds could prosecute her under the dual sovereign doctrine. You're just arguing that the dual sovereign doctrine exists, which is already established in the post.

    Of course, even when you prosecute someone in two jurisdictions for the same thing, sooner or later someone hated by the Nancy Grace crowd will be acquitted by both. Then the sub-normal blood-lusting hausfraus of the Caylee Mob will be agitating for a rule that the defendant can also be prosecuted and executed by the county, or the town, or the freaking Disney Store or something, until the mob gets the result they demand.

    Thank God we have due process of law to protect us from the mob.