tv The Daily Rundown MSNBC July 7, 2011 9:00am-10:00am EDT
defensive. they are messaging on this has been all over the place. but first, we take you down to the florida courtroom where just two days ago, casey anthony was cleared of murder charges in the death of her daughter caylee. she faces judge belvin perry one last time today to be sentenced on four lesser guilty verdicts that she lied to officials investigating the disappearance of caylee. nbc's lilia luciano is live at the courthouse and joins us now. i understand we've seen the prosecution come in with what could be a fairly long sentencing hearing today. >> that's right, chuck. it should take around an hour or so. this is the average time we've been told. however, our producers inside the courtroom tell us that there are at least two people waiting in the area where they usually keep witnesses. the speculation is those may be either psychologists or just some type of expert to tell or
testify that casey anthony may not be ready to incorporate herself into society. now that's inside the courtroom. outside the courtroom, chuck, we're seeing a group of protesters gathered around claiming what they call is justice. they say that caylee anthony did not get justice. now in terms of the police and law enforcement, we're seeing sheriff deputies y ies on horse foot, on bike, just previewing what might happen if casey anthony walks out, which is a likely possibility since she's already served some time in jail. if she gets just time served. we don't know what the plan is but there's a great deal of protest going on. and we hear one of the possibilities is she might be taken to a local airport and from there, flown somewhere undisclosed. >> how many people can you estimate that are standing out there today? >> earlier today, i was just around where we are standing, just back here i saw about 50 people. now that i'm looking back, i'm
seeing about maybe 100 or so. not good at that. the math of counting and being able to tell you. but certainly more than 50 people are out there. between 50 and 100 claiming for what they call is justice. i did hear this morning that it's most likely casey anthony handed her passport to authorities. if she's planning to go somewhere where people don't know her. i being from puerto rico, i speculate is the only place you can get into without a passport where most people are not tuned into the trial but i know that many are. so where her fate goes from now if she walks is a mystery from now. >> liliana outside the orlando courthouse, thank you. we're joined now by former federal prosecutor paul butler and criminal defense attorney david. we've heard that they -- the prosecution has brought in potentially brought in a couple of witnesses for the sentencing hearing. speculation being a psychologist. what would be the purpose of this?
>> well, it would be to establish that miss anthony is not ready to be introduced back into society. the most time she could get is about another year, year and a half because she's already served about 2 1/2 years. >> how much of that time -- she served 2 1/2. somebody was doing this math. forgive me of not -- i don't know the details of this case. but she had the check fraud conviction while she was serving time that took place in there and some of it was called time served. so i guess what's left? >> you know, chuck, none of us lawyers are really good at math. the judge is going to have to figure this out. i think what it will do is credit her -- she gets a year for each misdemeanor. the judge could do the misdemeanors concurrently which means she'd walk today or do it consecutively which depending on how he does the math would probably mean he could sentence her up to another year and a half. you can be darn sure the government is going to be asking for that. >> they are going for the max. what kind of defense do you
expect her lawyers to put up if this is the ask of the prosecution. >> well, i think the jury with its verdict has really repudiated the government's core of their case here. miss anthony never would have been locked up had she only been charged with lying to authorities. that just doesn't happen in a criminal justice system. so the defense would argue, what she was really incarcerated for was the murder. she's been acquitted of the murder. she should be let go. >> how do you explain she was sitting -- forget there's a lot of -- everybody has had their opinion about casey anthony, about how the media has covered this. how do you explain, though, somebody who is being put on trial, sitting in trial for over two years? >> there were concerns about whether she would show up for trial. she is someone who has now admittedly, her own defense is that i'm a liar. >> i've got to interrupt you. >> case number 20008-cf-156-06,
state of florida versus casey amary anthony. >> let the record reflect the defendant is present along with counsel for the defendant, assistant state attorney. both sides ready to proceed? >> yes, sir. >> i believe so, your honor. >> mr. mason, before we proceed to sentencing, mr. baez, you had asked me to reserve ruling on your motion for mistrial. >> i'm going to recall that, your honor. >> okay. >> that takes care of that. >> the defendant casey anthony is before the court for sentencing on counts four, five and six providing false information to law enforcement officer. mr. baez, do you know of any
legal calls why we should not proceed to singles at this time, sir? >> four, five, six and seven. >> and seven. >> and the only legal cause that we have would be the previously filed motions. you can't proceed to sentencing if the subsequent remedies if she takes them. >> would the state care at this time to present any matters relative to aggravation? >> not on that issue, your honor, no. >> state care to present any issues at this time concerning any other matter? >> your honor, yesterday i filed a motion to tax special caution of investigation and to reserve jurisdiction. the only reason that i would bring this up prior to the
actual sentencing has to do with the jurisdiction of the court. once sentence is imposed, if defense counsel intends to appeal the misdemeanor convictions, then this court would not be able to entertain a later hearing until that matter is resolved as it relates to cost of investigation. if, in fact, that is their intent, what we would ask is that the court bifurcate the sentencing hearing, proceeding to the matters of punishment first. the issue of cost of investigation is not intended to be punitive. and i believe can be handled at a later point in time in a bifurcated type of proceeding that would not divest the court of immediate jurisdiction to handle this matter so that this can be closed as expeditiously as possible. that is the only thing i wanted
to bring up at this time. >> mr. baez -- >> -- >> mr. mason? >> i do not object to the bifurcation process, your honor. they have not presented invoices to us and any accounting as of yet which we will be reviewing and then challenging as appropriate. so she asked for 60 days. and i have no problem with that. >> okay. the court will retain jurisdiction to deal with the issue of cost of prosecution and other costs pursuant to chapter 938. that's the statute that you are seeking those costs under? >> it is your honor. thank you. >> okay. mr. mason, mitigation.
>> may we proceed, your honor? >> you may proceed, sir. we have however, the legal argument regarding double jeopardy, your honor. >> go ahead. >> may it please the court. >> good morning. >> good morning, your honor. before sentencing, we respectfully request the court address the violation of double jeopardy at issue with respect to counts five, six and seven. because all four statements in the indictment arose during the july 16th interview between detective melich and miss anthony. all four counts of providing false information to a law enforcement officer were one continuous criminal act with a single intent. as such, each false statement separately charged violates double jeopardy and must be
reduced to one conviction based on one occurrence and course of conduct. in hamill v. state which we provided to the court, that's 934 southern second, 634. that's a florida second dca case from 2006, the defendant was convicted of 15 counts of using a computer to seduce a child. at issue was whether counts five and six among other things arose from a single criminal episode. in hamill, the court ortaiculatd to determine the defense arose from a single criminal episode. in that test, the court articulate audio. >> let me stop you for a second. >> yes, your honor. >> i don't seem to have benefit of what you provided the court. i apologize. i gave that to the clerk and i should have instructed that you needed to have that. >> okay. okay. go ahead. >> thank you, your honor.
this test requires a court to look to whether there was a separation of time, place or circumstances between the crimes because those factors are objective criteria utilized to determine whether there are distinct and independent criminal acts or whether there is one continuous criminal act with a single criminal intent. the court went on to say that the spacial and temporal aspects of the crimes looking at that criteria, a court can ascertain whether the defendant had time to pause, reflect and form a new criminal intent between the recurrences. your honor in finding that counts five and six in the hamill case were a violation of double jeopardy, the court pointed to the fact that there was no temporal break in the conversation or change in circumstances to warrant separate charges. the conversation in question spans several hours. similarly, your honor, the false statements miss anthony made to detective yuri melich occurred
during the course of a single interview. the interview was one continuous conversation and similarly, there were no temparal breaks or other objective criteria that would suggest the defendant had time to pause, reflect and form a new criminal intent as required so as to not run afoul of double jeopardy. we've also provided the court with two other cases. a case that is 511 southern second, 401 and that was out of the fifth dca. that's a 1987 case. and woe also provided the court with burke v. state. 475 southern second 252 and that's a 1985 case. it's our assertion that the hamill case is similar in that it touches on the temporal aspects present in this case as well. however, the hug decision, the double jeopardy was invoked when the defendant was convicted of five incidences of leaving one
scene because there were five people in particular who were left at the scene of an accident. burke on the other hand is a case that's invoked a double jeopardy where there were three convictions of the defendant based on one transaction of three altered bills. and those convictions were charged separately. however, because they were found to be one act, double jeopardy was violated in this case as well. your honor, in order to avoid a legal sentence, we respectfully request that the court sentence miss anthony only for one occurrence, one count of providing false information to a law enforcement officer. further, we reassert that there is an issue of materiality in these charges and should be read into this statute as legislative intent. thank you very much. >> just a second. >> yes, sir. >> let's look at count four. >> yes, your honor. >> providing false information
to a law enforcement officer. >> yes, sir. >> specifically, what is alleged in count four? >> count four alleges specifically that on the 16th day of july, 2008, that in violation of the statute 837.055 there was a knowing and willful violation, giving false information to yuri melich, a law enforcement officer. so that specific allegation was that casey marie anthony suggested that she was employed at universal studios. however, it arose during the july 16th, 2008, interview, as did every other charge, your honor. >> as a result of her telling the police that she was employed at universal studios, did the police have to take any resulting action with their investigation? >> they certainly did, your
honor. however if we are to charge her, we have to charge her for the crime. and the crime here arose out of all four incidences were a part of this same continuous act, even though there were several false statements. >> count five alleges she violated that statute by doing what? >> that during that same interview on the 16th of july, that miss anthony identified a person as zenaida fernandez gonzalez and suggested to detective melich that she left her child with this woman. >> and did that require a separate and distinct act on behalf of law enforcement to investigate? >> it did, your honor. however, i would assert that the reaction based on the violation isn't how we measure this. how we measure if there was one instance, one particular criminal act that wasn't broken
up temporally. we lock not at the resulting conduct of the police department. what we look at is the conduct of miss anthony and the temporal aspects of her statements. as required under this hamill decision. >> and count six? >> yes, your honor. >> what was she alleged to have done in count six? >> during the same interview on the 16th, with detective melich on the 16th day of july in 2008, the conviction is based on miss anthony informing detective melich that she identified a jeffrey michael hopkins and juliet lewis, that she had told them of disappearance of her child. however, we reassert that there's a materiality issue related to this particular charge and asserted this is out of the same instance of conduct.
>> and count seven? >> count seven, your honor, this is the same interview that we've been discussing to detective melich. and this allegation is based on miss anthony asserting that she received a phone call from caylee marie anthony. >> just a second. since you just provided these cases -- >> yes, sir. >> -- to me. let me read them right quick to see if i have any additional questions before i hear from the state of florida.
>> do they have a case on this whole idea of double jeopardy? >> oh, absolutely. if all of these statements occurred during one interview, they absolutely have a case. my belief, upon hearing the defense's argument that the judge should simply sentence as if there's only been one conviction on one count. >> what should we expect the prosecutor to respond. >> the issue is whether this is one big lie or four little lies. so what the defense is saying is it's kind of like, if you get -- if the case is you lied to a police officer about speeding, you said, oh, well i had to get to the hospital because my mother is dying of cancer. well, when did the doctor tell you this. he just told me that 15 minutes ago. he told me to get here as soon as i can. is that three different lies? the government is going to say, yes. each of those lies required a different action.
they took up more government time. they caused more delay from getting to the real investigation of this case. >> how did you -- how would you interpret the judge's questioning pushing back? >> my interpretation of that is -- at least based on the defense argument, he's not quoting the right standard. and the standard is not government reaction. otherwise, if, for example, let's say miss anthony lied and the government -- and the police didn't do anything -- >> let's hold down here a minute. >> are you saying that miss anthony did not have time to pause, reflect and form a new criminal intent for each one of those four separate acts? >> yes, your honor. as the test is articulated under the hamill decision, there has to be -- there was one single
interview. it can't be said that there was a break in either time, place or circumstances required to not invoke double jeopardy. >> thank you. >> thank you, your honor. >> response from the state of florida. >> like the court, i was only provided with this motion this morning. however ibelieve even under their case law as well as case law from the florida supreme court, specifically valdez, which i did not bring copies of, unfortunately. found it three southern third 1067, the florida supreme court case from 2009. >> 37 -- >> i'm sorry, 37 third, 1067, florida supreme court 2009 and anderson at 697 southern second 309, the florida supreme court
case from 1997, these are not the -- these are not single acts. this is different core conduct. it is our position that there is a temporal break between each of the lies and there ever several, not just the ones charged, but that these lies occurred over the course of three separate statements. the fact that they all occurred on july 16th of 2008 should be of no consequence. the court through the course of pretrial hearings as well as the trial knows that miss anthony gave statements at approximately 1:00 a.m., 4:00 a.m. and then 1:00 p.m. on july 16th of 2008. each of the lies are material to the issues that were investigated by the sheriff's office as a result of the lies, each were intended to mislead law enforcement and to send them, as miss anthony herself at
the end of the final statement indicated, on a wild goose chase. they are not degree variants of the same crime and are not a single criminal act. most of the time when we're not dealing with multiple punishments for a single act, what we are dealing with are whether or not a single act can be broken up into episodes. we typically see this in sexual battery cases, where there are multiple sex acts performed on a singhle victim at the same time. and then the issue is whether or not there is a break between the various types of penetrations in those cases sufficient to convict for separate acts and, indeed, the case law suggests that there is a sufficient break where an individual does have the time to pause and reflect as the court has already inquired. given the fact that there were
multiple statements over the course of 12 hours, it is the position of the state of florida that these separate acts as separately alleged do not violate double jeopardy. >> their cite was 330 7th. what page? >> 1067, if i have that right. >> 1067? >> 1067. i do have a copy. this is a situation where an individual was charged with two different counts for one act of shooting. would the court like my copy? >> just a second.
between statements made in an interrogation. if it's a 12-hour investigation, i mean, 12-hour interrogation, does miss anthony really have time to reflect and form different intents? the government also made some of the defense's argument by saying it was one intent to send them on a wild goose chase. all the statements are directed to the same intent. one continuous period. the interrogation. >> first of all, they said they didn't have time for this motion. they seem to have a response pretty quickly. obviously, they knew it was coming. >> it was a fairly predictable motion. this is kind of inside baseball. so the judge is going to have to make this very legalistic determination. to be safe he may just say i'm going to sentence on four one or two counts. we have to remember, though, we're in florida. the state that almost leads the nation in death penalty. it's a very conservative criminal jurisprudence. so the law might very well be on
the side of the prosecutor. >> in this case then, the judge, what is it exactly that he would be using there? look, the jury made the conviction. it happened there. you had your chance to sort of get different parts of the case thrown out and you didn't get it done? >> one might be a procedural issue that this came up too late. you knew this was going to be an issue. very predictable. you should have raised it five minutes before i sentenced miss anthony. if that happened in the superior court in the district of columbia, that's what the judge might say. he may not hear this motion. the judge is listening and probably is going to make his determination right now. >> is that the expectation? you expect him to make this -- he seems to be by doing all this contemplating now, he wants to make his decision now. >> he'll make the decision now. otherwise, he could be reversed on appeal. let's say this. no matter what he does if he sentences, unless he lets her go and sentences either concurrently or throws out the other counts there will be an appeal on those convictions. >> i want to go back to
something that the prosecution brought up earlier. they were trying to get it split. they were trying to get the -- they were trying to buy more time to come up with the cost issue. why is that? >> well, you know, basically, they want to hammer miss anthony. it sound like sour grapes. there will be complaints they are sore losers. they lost the big part of the case. now they are being petty and going after to her to try to punish her to get some money. so they want to know how much it cost to investigate this case. they'll make an argument because you lied, which you've admitted you've done -- >> and you were convicted of. >> your defense was i'm a liar. so sentence me for that. then, yeah, we're going to sentence you. we're going to make you pay every dollar you cost the state of florida. >> but which part of it mr. benowitz are we talking about here that they could realistically start coming up with the cost? >> does your client wish to say
anything prior to the court imposing sentence? >> no, your honor. >> the court will make the following finding concerning the defense motion to bar imposition of sentence on these four distinct counts as violating double jeopardy. count four of the indictment alleging providing false information to a law enforcement officer basically dealt with the follow i following conduct. it is alleged that the defendant
was employed at universal studios during the year 2008. this information was given pursuant to an investigation for a missing person's report. that information caused law enforcement in following up on that statement to go to universal studios to expend law enforcement resources to determine that, in fact, miss anthony did not, in fact, work at universal studios. count five, miss anthony informed authorities that she had left her child caylee marie
anthony at the sawgrass apartments with a babysitter which caused law enforcement again, as a result of a missing persons report, to develop and follow various leads trying to locate this babysitter commonly known as zanny. count six, again, dealt with the fact that she had informed two, quote, employees of universal studios, jeff hopkins and juliet lewis of the disappearance of caylee marie anthony. miss anthony in count seven,
indicated to law enforcement that she had received a call and spoke to caylee marie anthony on july 15th, 2008, at approximately 12:00 p.m., thus causing law enforcement to devote extensive resources. as a result of those four separate and distinct lies, law enforcement expended a great deal of time, energy and man power looking for young caylee marie anthony. this search for her went on from
july through december over several months trying to find caylee marie anthony. four distinct separate lies. just as the jury spoke loud and clear on counts one, two and three by their verdict, they also spoke loud and clear as to the remaining counts, four, five, six and seven. there being no legal cause shown why this court should not impose sentence, and the court having previously ajudged you to be guilty of the crimes contained
in counts four, five, six and seven, i will sentence you to one year in the orange county jail, imposing a $1,000 fine on each count. all four counts to run consecutive to each other, giving you credit for the time that you have previously served. mr. baez, mr. mason, we are going to spend some time this morning figuring out her credit for time serve d. and it's going to take us probably about an hour to sort of sort it out because the
previous sentences that she has been given. but with the good time and gained time, depending on preliminary figures, some time early august, maybe late july, but i can't say that until after i first determine time served and then the jail has to apply according to their figures their good time and gain time that she has gained in this. so if you want to wait around or we can communicate that with
you, and if you have a different figure, then we can get that taken care of. i will reserve jurisdiction for 60 days to determine the cost of prosecution and investigation. tell me when you'll be ready. >> i've been advised a minimum of 30, so any time after that would be acceptable. >> mr. mason? >> whenever they get around to providing and gathering up their invoices so we can check the validity of those and potentially conduct some discovery on it. so at least 30 days, i would
assume. depend on when she gets it to me. if she gets it to me on the 29th day, that's not going to be good. >> they have indicated they believe they can have all the documentation to me within the time frame that i have suggested and then that should give mr. mason ample time to review the validity of the affidavits of the sheriff's office. >> any time i ask for it, after she gives it to me. >> i'm trying to give you a date now. the week of august 15th, i will not be around. the week of the 22nd, i am involved in an evidentiary hearing on a 3851 case that's supposed to last three days.
i have some time on the 25th and the 26th. depending on how long you need, i can fit you in on the week of the 29th, but i would have to fit you in because i am, unfortunately going to have to take over judge adams division since he's leaving at the end of the month. i have -- again, the week of august 1st, but i have to fit you into that division's regular
wo work. the week of august 9th, with the same proviso except that friday. so when would you like the hearing, folks? >> any of those options is acceptable to the state, your honor. >> you can have the 25th or 26th. that should give you more than enough time to get the information, get it to mr. mason, mr. baez and have them digest the information. so you want to do it thursday or friday the 25th or the 26th, friday being the 26th? >> thursday is fine, the 25th. if that's acceptable to counsel.
and i don't know what miss anthony's status will be at that point. do they want to waive her appearance at that or have her present? i don't know if you want to address that issue now. >> the 25th, according to the preliminary calculations without going over, double checking some things, she won't be there. >> that's why i didn't know if we want to address whether the court would require her attendance. it's not a punishment aspect to the sentence. >> that's entirely left up to her and her counsel. as far as i'm concerned she, can waive her appearance or she can come. >> it would be our intentio to waive her appearance at those proceedings, your honor. >> i will also impose the statutory court costs.
miss anthony, you have a right, too peel the judgment and sentence that i rendered here in your case today provided you file a notice of appeal within 30 days of the today's date with the clerk of the court. if you cannot afford the services of an attorney to assist you with this appeal, the court will appoint one to represent you. bearing those rights in mind and after consulting with your attorney, do you wish to appeal? >> if we can have a moment, your honor? >> you may. >> your honor, we would like to reserve our right to make that decision at a later time. >> you have 30 days from today's date to file a notice of appeal or you forfeit, or give up your right to appeal. does she have the financial
wherewithal, mr. baez if she decides to appeal to pay for appellate counsel? >> no, your honor, but we would -- >> if she decides to do that, then please make sure that she fills out an affidavit of insolvency with the clerk of the court to timely bring that matter so counsel can be appointed. >> yes, sir. >> as you know if she does not file a timely notice of appeal, then she forfeits or gives up her right to appeal. if she decides to appeal and she wants appointed counsel, but it will be your responsibility to file the necessary appellate paperwork, that is the notice of
appeal, the statement of judicial acts to be reviewed and designation to the court reporter. it would be your responsibility before you are relieved of your responsibilities as far as this case to have those documents filed. are there any other matters on behalf of the state of florida? >> nothing from the state, your honor. >> are there any other matters on behalf of the defense? okay. court will be in recess. >> okay. mr. butler, we heard the judge sentence her to four years. and then we heard this issue of good time and gain time. that is up to, as he put it the jailer. so let's do the math here. she served 2.2 years, nine months. max she could serve is one year and three months? >> the bottom line is she's not
going home today. the judge threw the book at her but the judge didn't have a really big book to throw. >> he used every tool he had. he said if your defense is i am not a murderer, i'm just a liar then i'm going to make sure you go down for lying. so he gave her the maximum sentence. she got one year for every count. so that's a tough sentence. that's more than what most people would get in this situation. >> now mr. benowitz, you said, he did her a favor. why? >> well, first, we don't know what theicalalation icacalculao be. the department of corrections in florida may release her in six months or three months. it really depend on what the gain time and good time. >> and also the other conviction. that's a negative. there's all sorts of math that has to take place. >> exactly. >> probation in florida, which would have been an option for this judge is notoriously difficult. and particularly for someone like miss anthony. she never would have made it -- >> you are assuming she couldn't
have survived probation. >> she had a history of committing small petty crimes. >> that's right. so at this point, she's going to do her time. it may be as little as three months. and she'll be done. she won't be supervised. she won't have anyone looking over her shoulder. she can leave the state. she doesn't have to be certain places certain times or drug test. all these could be proposed by a probation officer. >> could she get released before the -- before we're done with all the 60 days here? >> well, it's possible. again, the -- >> sort of like get to go home for a few weeks before she starts her official sentence? >> no, that's very unlikely. the judge seems punitive. he never addressed her directly accept when he had to. he seemed somewhat dismissive. so it's very unlikely that he would let her go. she's been locked up for about 2 1/2 years. i think his point of view will be she might as well just do the time. and after she served her time, then she'll walk. >> anything left in the
defense's arsenal to reopen sentencing? is it worth it at this point? >> not necessarily to reopen sentencing. i think they are going to appeal the judge's ruling about whether or not each act of lying deserves a one-year sentence. so it's not really a singles issue. it's an appeal issue. i think they'll definitely appeal that. that's why they made the argument today. they made a record. without that, it would be very difficult for them to make that appeal. >> i want to go down to orlando and our correspondent down there, lilia luciano. how long did it take for the sentencing to leak out? could you tell when you saw the crowd figure out that she got the max that she could under the circumstances. >> by the looks of it, chuck, the crowd seems pretty calm. we've been hearing people chanting throughout not only today but since the verdict was given. and i'm looking back here. everybody is peaceful. the crowd seems to be coming
apart rather fast. i can see that police have not tried to keep anybody in control or tried to handle anyone. of course, this is exactly the best case scenario as of now for these people who are demanding justice. obviously, we know that they cannot appeal to the verdict. i mean, there cannot be an appeal to the verdict. so the justice, they demanded originally cannot be fulfilled. now this is the best case scenario. casey anthony will not walk today, which is what they were expecting to a certain point, i guess if they were looking at it from a negative perspective, according to their views of the case. so if everybody seems rather quiet. we're still hearing choppers, of course. police are still around. the orange county sheriff's deputies are still on horse. but casey anthony is not going to walk through that door. we did not expect her to either way. if she was to walk today, we never expected that she would just walk out that door.
she would be taken to a safe place. that's not the case so i guess the crowds are safe right now. >> lilia luciano, thanks. i want to go to a motion that the defense seemed to file, which is this idea that she doesn't have the resources to pay for a defense. but we kind of know there are going to be resources in this world that we live in. how can you make that filing with a straight face when you are the defense? >> well, i think today she doesn't have the resources. and i think that's why the government is looking to get an order from the judge or -- and get a judgment for a certain amount of money because the government knows, the prosecutors so know there is going to be money. in case there is, they'll have a means to go after her and to punish her financially. make sure she doesn't profit from this. >> in the state of florida, i know there's a -- there's something in the law that can essentially tax money you make off of your crime, which is essentially what some are going to argue that casey anthony is
going to do, even if it's technically the argument is, well, it's the crime of lying. you know, she was obviously found not guilty by a jury of her peers. what's the likelihood that the state will be able to pull that off? >> there's a lot of speculation here. people always say right after the verdict when someone walks and it's a high-profile case. this guy or woman is going to make all this money. usually they end up not making that much money. >> it's like a one-time deal. so at this point she's judgment proof. maybe she'll get a lot of money. maybe she won't. the government does this all the time, even when people don't have any money at all. they make them pay for the cost of their jailing. they make them pay for the cost of the investigation. and so they get out of jail. they get a minimum wage job and get sacked with these huge bills and that's when you talk about probation, revocation, violation. they can't pay so they end up back in jail. >> i want to go back to this issue. how does somebody who had not been convicted of anything yet sit in jail for over two years?
>> the criminal justice system for homicide cases -- let's say, for any, quote, crime of violence, just giving the example of district of columbia, 99% of people who are just charged with a crime of violence, you know, assault, aggravated assault, robbery, are locked up in jail until their case is resolved. that is common throughout the united states. >> i understand that it is common. but -- and this is sort of -- you hope that you get a lesson out of something, even something as, you know, not everybody believes this is the pressing matter of the day. but do we have an issue in our justice system where we're keeping people locked up too long? >> of course we do. we have 2.5 million people in prison. that's way too many. i think we have an equal justice questions here. being locked up before she was convicted of any crime, miss anthony was treated like lots of other defendants. but what happened at trial was
way different. in terms of equal justice, there are a lot of people terms of eql justice. there are lots of african-americans on death low convicted with way less evidence offered against miss anthony. so in terms of equal justice, we would wish that all of those defendants had access to a great lawyer. >> that's right. >> but this is an issue that is coming up with a lot of african-americans upset by the focus on this and saying, you know what, this is -- she's got extra media attention because it was a missing white girl. >> well, as a matter of fact, we know that's true. unfortunately, every year -- it's tragic when any child is missing and even more tragic, obviously, when the child dies. but unfortunately, people get more attention when it's a white victim. and there are statistics about that. you're more likely to get the death penalty if you kill a white person. miss anthony really got off here.
>> paul butler, former prosecutor, david helping me on the defense side of things, thank you for your patience with this. thank you for coming in. >> thank you. you've been watching msnbc's live coverage of the anthony sentencing. we'll be back right after this break. see if we can "stitch" together a better deal. that's a hint, antoine. ooh! see what anandra did? booking your flight and hotel at the same time gets you prices hotels and airlines won't let expedia show separately. book it. major wow factor! where you book matters. expedia.
well, as you just heard, casey anthony was sentenced to four years in prison for lying to a law enforcement official. the question now is how much of her two years and nine months will be credited towards that. there's good time, good behavior essentially during her time in jail. the question will be how much credit will she get? the big story being that she is not leaving the jail today. all right. let's move on. the big story here in washington, of course, is that
the president will gather the eight leaders of congress, two democrats, two republicans from each part of the senate and the house and they will meet with the president and vice president. the president is going to make this pitch when this meeting begins, which is, let's try one more time to "go big" when it comes to the debt and deficit in this debt ceiling. it's not the $2.5 trillion figure. it's the $4 trillion figure sitting out there over ten years. he's going to make the case that there are three existing plans to cherry pick from. his own plan, simpson bowl and what part of the entitlement. the white house is pushing back on the idea that it means big changes to social security. the white house has put republicans a little bit on the
defensive. yesterday senate republican leader mitch mcconnell pushed back on the idea that somehow they are not foreclosing loopholes. eric cantor all over the morning shows said, fine, you want to close some loopholes, i'll do it. he had to offset those with tax cuts elsewhere. this meeting is scheduled to go for an hour and a half today. the longer it goes, the better things are going. don't be surprised if the president says, everybody, come back here friday, come back here saturday, come back here sunday. we could have four straight meetings if this $4 trillion figure is something that everybody wants to aim for. that is it for this truncated edition of the daily rundown. we'll see you back here tomorrow. next up, chris jansing. she'll have reaction from casey anthony prosecutor jeff ashton.
of excellent nutrition and helpful resources. purina cat chow. share a better life. with new extra-strength bayer advanced aspirin. it has microparticles, enters the bloodstream faster and rushes relief to the site of pain. it's clinically proven to relieve pain twice as fast. new bayer advanced aspirin. [ male announcer ] introducing mio. a revolutionary water enhancer.