Imperfect Justice_ Prosecuting Casey Anthony - Jeff Ashton [149]
To my surprise, Dr. Rodriguez did show up in court on Monday morning, ready to testify. Before he could begin, I raised the issue about his deposition with Judge Perry. After some wrangling, the court recessed. A meeting with the judge and defense ensued in a back room. I brought up my conversation with the captain and the consequences of Dr. Rodriguez’s testimony. Jose went and spoke with Dr. Rodriguez, and when he came back it sounded like Rodriguez still wanted to testify. But not long after, Jose came to us and told us that Dr. Rodriguez did not want to lose his job, and the defense was withdrawing him as a witness.
A day or two later, Jose filed a motion asking that the charges against Casey be dismissed and accused me of engineering the employment action against Rodriguez, claiming that I had contacted his employer. He was accusing me of tampering with a witness, accusing me of a crime. I was upset, but Linda was outraged. She went to the defense and told them that if they believed this was what had happened, they needed to report me to the Florida Bar, and if they didn’t, she was going to report them.
“You can’t say stuff like this unless you can damn well prove it!” she told them. Linda told them that this was a serious allegation and if they were saying it to cause a little trouble and it wasn’t true, heads were going to roll. About two minutes later, one of Cheney Mason’s young assistants came over to us and said the defense was withdrawing the motion. The bickering behind the scenes was escalating. Even Judge Perry seemed to be at his wit’s end with Baez’s antics.
On June 21, the defense called Jane Bock, a forensic botanist who examined the crime scene on February 1, 2009. Bock testified that “leaf litter,” or fallen leaves, in the area of Caylee’s remains suggested that Caylee might have been put there as recently as two weeks before the discovery. I asked her if it could have been longer, and she said yes. When I pointed out a bone that was buried four inches in the mud, she suggested a dog could have buried it there. With great effort I stifled a laugh and moved on.
Richard Eikelenboom, a “touch DNA” expert from Holland, was the third defense witness to try and testify beyond the scope of his report. Eikelenboom analyzes skin cells left behind when a person touches something, and he was going to render an opinion on whether there should have been detectable DNA on the duct tape found on little Caylee’s skull.
Eikelenboom’s initial report had contained only one line, stating that at the time he had no opinion about the DNA findings to which he was an expert. He had not been set for deposition since he had no opinions, so when he showed up in the hall one Friday I was surprised. The next thing I knew, the defense was calling him. Now I objected to him taking the stand until I could depose him. As with Rodriguez, we hurriedly took his deposition. I was prepared to respond to his testimony as best I could, but I was wary of investigating witnesses in the middle of trial and pursued sanctions against the defense.
Judge Perry agreed with me, seeming really annoyed with Baez. He went as far as making a specific finding that Baez had “willfully” violated the Court’s order and the rules of discovery despite the number of his admonitions. This time, the judge allowed Eikelenboom’s testimony but went to the extraordinary step of advising the jury about the violations by the defense. He told the jurors that they could take into account Baez’s willful violations when they judged this witness’s credibility. Judge Perry told Baez he would address additional sanctions against him personally after the trial. As of this writing, Judge Perry has not addressed the additional sanctions. In the end, Eikelenboom’s contribution was that there “might” or “might not” have been detectable DNA on the duct tape found in the