CNN CNN


 

Return to Transcripts main page

DR. DREW

Countdown to a Verdict in Casey Anthony Trial

Aired July 1, 2011 - 21:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

VINNIE POLITAN, HOST (voice-over): Day 33 in the Casey Anthony murder trial, the prosecution`s resounding rebuttal. Cindy`s stunning testimony last week left a question mark hanging in our minds.

JOSE BAEZ, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Do you recall you doing any types of searches that might include chloroform?

CINDY ANTHONY, CASEY ANTHONY`S MOTHER: Yes.

POLITAN: Also, death in the chamber, life in prison, or eventual freedom? What`s Casey`s fate? It`s not as simple as you think.

All that and more, straight ahead on DR. DREW.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

POLITAN: Tonight, countdown to a Casey verdict. Will we know her fate by the end of this weekend?

I`m Vinnie Politan, sitting in for Dr. Drew, live in Orlando.

Watch this, then we`ll talk.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Casey Anthony murder trial, another monumental day in court, as we`ve been listening to the prosecution`s rebuttal case.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How to make chloroform was an original search.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: By these e-mail and work records from Gentiva Health Services, Cindy Anthony was at work.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did Ms. Anthony have the capability to work from home?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was Casey Anthony at home on the computer.

SUNNY HOSTIN, LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR, "IN SESSION," TRUTV: Premeditation back on the table.

JUDGE BELVIN PERRY, ORANGE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT: This concludes the presentation of all evidence. We will convene on Sunday for closing arguments.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

POLITAN: Tonight, the very last witnesses are called to the stand and drop some huge evidence on this jury. Did Cindy Anthony lie to save her daughter?

You remember when she fell on this sword? Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

C. ANTHONY: And I started looking up chloroform -- I mean chlorophyll. And then that prompted me to look up chloroform.

LINDA DRANE BURDICK, PROSECUTOR: Were you home on March 17th of 2008 between 1:43 and 1:15 p.m.

C. ANTHONY: If those computer entries were made, then I made them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: Cindy`s old boss is sworn in today and testifies that records show Cindy was logged into her work computer during the time she says she went home and Googled "chloroform." Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BURDICK: March 17, 2008, was user "cmanthon" entering information into Gentiva`s unity system at a workstation?

JOHN CAMPERLENGO, CHIEF COMPLIANCE OFFICER, GENTIVA: Yes.

BURDICK: Was entering information into the patient records on March 21, 2008, between 2:00 and 3:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time?

CAMPERLENGO: Yes, that`s correct.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: All right. How will that testimony affect one of the strongest pieces of evidence in this case?

Plus, is Casey turning on her family, cursing at her father, George, as he testifies on the stand? More on that in a moment.

Attorneys Mark Eiglarsh and Anne Brenner are live with me tonight in Orlando.

Welcome to you both.

And today was a day -- she didn`t take a stand, but it was really about Cindy Anthony, the mother of Casey. And so important is the chloroform. It`s the road to first degree. We know that. Premeditation or felony murder linked to the chloroform.

But for Cindy Anthony, I mean, I think we all knew -- right -- we knew that she was trying to save her daughter. You saw Cindy today. You bumped into Cindy today.

MARK EIGLARSH, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I did. I`ve been very vocal about what happened by her committing what I think is a miscarriage of justice.

You know, getting on the stand and lying in a criminal case of this magnitude is enormous. And I said she has to be prosecuted for it.

And then, while I`m not changing my position, I just happened to see her right in front of my hotel room today. And I walked up to her, not knowing how she would react, and I didn`t know what I was going to say either.

And I just walked right up to her, and everything that she had done in the courtroom, everything that happened went out of my mind. And I just looked at her and I saw a grieving grandmother who didn`t do anything to deserve this, no matter what you think of her.

And I looked at her deep in the eyes, and I just said, "Look, I`m sorry for your loss. I`m a father of three and I can`t imagine what you`re going through." And so I feel for her, Vinnie.

POLITAN: Did she know who you are?

EIGLARSH: She did.

POLITAN: So she`s watching?

POLITAN: She`s definitely watching every night, all these shows, apparently.

POLITAN: And Anne, how about this -- if she`s watching these shows every night -- people analyzing the case talking about, how do you prove first-degree murder here?

ANNE BREMNER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Right.

POLITAN: She knows the significance of chloroform --

BREMNER: Chloroform, exactly, Vinnie.

POLITAN: -- if she`s watching this stuff at night, because people like me and Mark and you, we`re all on the air analyzing the law and how it applies to the facts here.

BREMNER: That`s right. And the one thing that we get death in this case, and first-degree murder, is all the Internet searching, and chloroform and chloroform especially. So, I mean, she`s watching this, probably, and thinking, this could save my daughter.

And Mark, what you saw, I mean, I could see the anguish with her, thinking I have got to do something. I can fall on my sword and say I did the search, but look what happened in the last few sessions.

POLITAN: And by doing what she did, if you think about it -- because she absolutely loved and adored Caylee and wants the truth, but I think she can -- she`s smart enough. I mean, she knows everything about this story and this case, and is trying to figure it out just like we`re trying to figure it out. But she knows that the chloroform is the thing that could get her daughter on to death row.

EIGLARSH: She does. And let me just say this. After I met with her, I went up and spoke with her attorney, because apparently he knows me and likes watching this show, and wanted to meet with me.

POLITAN: Another Eiglarsh fan.

EIGLARSH: I`m just saying that I had to go up and meet with him. We spoke for quite some time.

And I asked him point blank, "Why is she watching these shows?" Obviously, there`s a lot of bashing of her family going on. This can`t be good for her. So I wanted to know why.

And ultimately, just like all of us, she shares a common goal in try to figure out how this all happened. She doesn`t know -- to this day, no one knows, including the grandmother of this child, how she died.

POLITAN: But she does know how her daughter could die as a result of all this.

EIGLARSH: Correct.

POLITAN: And it comes back to that.

Anne, do you think the jury understood it, and this was sort of like a piece of evidence today in this rebuttal case from the prosecution, these records from work that prove that -- presumably prove -- that Cindy was at work? Do you think the jury needed that? Even though we all looked at what she testified to and said it doesn`t seem to make sense?

BREMNER: Right.

POLITAN: Well, now the jury has it, you know, on paper.

BREMNER: They have it on paper. And ouch.

I mean, I think they all thought like we did, like, no way was she doing the search. Especially, what about neck breaking? What about acetone? What about all these other things that she was searching for? Oh, shovels -- or shovel?

She can`t come in and just choose the one thing and then say, I did it. But what about everything else? I didn`t.

And so I really think this in a way, with the lying George, lying Cindy, lying Casey, I mean, it`s a whole web of lies that may make this case quite --

POLITAN: That could help in some way, because it kind of goes along with Jose Baez`s story about this family and how Casey learned to lie and live a different reality. But on the other hand, I`ve got to talk about what this does with the relationship between Casey Anthony and her mom, Cindy. Does she realize what her mom is doing for her?

BREMNER: Or doing against her. Doing to her now.

POLITAN: Is she?

BREMNER: Well, with the rebuttal now. I mean, they could look at this case as, they think Casey did it, and they will do anything to save her, including lie, because if anyone knows, they know. And so that`s why mom came out and lied.

POLITAN: I want to do this, because George Anthony`s also in the mix, and our pal Nancy Grace from HLN here, saw a clip of Casey Anthony while her father was on the stand, and is interpreting what she is doing. Casey Anthony is cursing at her father.

I want you to take a look at it then we`ll all figure out what was going on here. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NANCY GRACE, HOST, "NANCY GRACE": What`s this about Tot Mom apparently calling her own father a son of a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) in open court?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Some people said that they thought it looked like Casey Anthony mouthed those words, son of a b, while they were arguing about her father`s testimony.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: I`m not a lip reader, but let`s try to do it. Let`s show everyone what exactly we`re talking about here.

Whatever she`s saying, it doesn`t look like it`s a positive thing, Mark. I mean, I don`t know what she`s saying. I can`t read those lips. But it doesn`t look like she`s happy with her father.

EIGLARSH: You know what? OK.

POLITAN: And it could be because she`s a victim. I don`t know.

EIGLARSH: She`s playing a role here. Either it really happened -- I`ll give her that. I don`t know anything 100 percent sure. Or she`s got to play the role of someone who was molested by her dad.

This is the role that she`s playing. And the father who`s not coming out and announcing that he really was involved in disposing the body, and it wasn`t me.

POLITAN: So you think this is someone who`s showing disdain because that`s what a victim of abuse would do.

Anne, are you buying that?

BREMNER: I do a little bit.

POLITAN: Are you an Eiglarsh fan, too? That`s what`s happening here.

BREMNER: I am an Eiglarsh fan. All of us. Right.

EIGLARSH: Let me say this before you respond -- before you respond, you look fabulous tonight. Go ahead, darling. Go ahead. Say whatever you want. You can disagree if you like.

(CROSSTALK)

BREMNER: No, but I think in some ways, the camera`s always on her. We`re always watching her. I mean, the world`s watching her.

And so she needs to do those things. When her dad says, I didn`t abuse her, I didn`t do this, or whatever else, we expect that. Don`t we? I mean, if you`re abused by your father, and he`s on the stand --

POLITAN: Not going to be smiling.

BREMNER: -- you really -- in a case about your life, you`re not going to be smiling and you`re going to look like she did.

POLITAN: All right.

Coming up next on DR. DREW, little Caylee`s skull. What clues does it really hold?

And what`s next for Casey? Could she get the death penalty or could she actually walk free?

Stay with us.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PERRY: Is it your decision not to testify based upon consultation with your counsel?

CASEY ANTHONY, DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.

PERRY: You understand that your decision to testify or not testify is solely your decision and your decision, alone?

CASEY ANTHONY: Yes, sir.

PERRY: And it is your decision not to testify?

CASEY ANTHONY: Yes, sir.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

POLITAN: Tonight, the state ends its rebuttal and both sides prepare for closing arguments on Sunday.

It was a battle over bones today. The prosecution`s final witness talked more about little Caylee`s skull. A forensic expert testified today that he did saline washes to test what kind of substances were inside.

Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEFF ASHTON, PROSECUTOR: Is it in your profession considered best practice to saw open a skull in a skeletal case?

DR. MICHAEL WARREN, FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGIST: No, sir. That in fact hasn`t been discussed among the Scientific Working Group members or any other groups that I`m aware of.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: All right. What they`re basically doing here is trying to discredit the defense`s medical examiner expert witness, Dr. Werner Spitz.

Attorneys Mark Eiglarsh, Anne Bremner are back with me.

And this is how they finished the rebuttal. And I didn`t think it was the most important part of the rebuttal, but it was important, because it went to attack Werner Spitz, who was the expert for the defense, who attacked Dr. G., who was a key witness for the prosecution.

Were they successful here in trying to rehabilitate Dr. G. through this witness?

EIGLARSH: Yes, I think he was very effective. This guy tells me that, God forbid one of my family members needs some type of surgery, I`m thinking they probably need it. This guy is very credible, he was honest, he was scientific.

I liked everything about him. And when you have a defense expert who has the academic pedigree and the experience of a Dr. Spitz, who worked on the JFK assassination autopsy, the Martin Luther king, Adam and Eve, for all we know.

POLITAN: You bring that up. You talk about experience. Does he have a little too much experience, Dr. Spitz?

EIGLARSH: Oh.

POLITAN: Do you think he`s past his prime, is what I`m saying here, Mark?

EIGLARSH: I didn`t love his demeanor. The guy was a little ornery for me. But ultimately, when he calls the government`s or the state`s autopsy "shoddy," you have got to come back with a good gun. And this guy was very good.

POLITAN: Let`s take a look at what he did. Dr. Werner Spitz on the stand, a key witness for the defense in their case, because he went after Dr. Garavaglia, the medical examiner for the prosecution.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. WERNER SPITZ, PATHOLOGIST: If an autopsy was done in corresponding to what I think every forensic pathologist will tell you, where the head is not opened, that tells me about a shoddy autopsy. Excuse me the expression, but you provoked it. A shoddy autopsy, because if the head is not opened, what else wasn`t examined?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: You couldn`t have two experts that were more opposite, Dr. Spitz and Dr. G. But he calls her shoddy, her examination shoddy.

BREMNER: Right.

POLITAN: Will this jury -- which does a jury want more -- do they want the young, vibrant, she`s got her own TV show, she`s very smart, or do they want the guy who`s been doing this for 40, 50, 60 years, who`s rolling up his sleeves, doesn`t speak the perfect English, but shoddy -- shoddy?

BREMNER: You know, it depends on the juror, don`t you think? I mean, we`ve got people like my mother who loved the medical examiner. She was -- the whole case.

And then you have people who say, you know, if you`ve got the experience -- and don`t say long in the tooth or over their prime around me, Vinnie. But anyway, I`m just saying that when there`s age and experience, a lot of jurors will defer to someone like him and believe him. And I was at a forensic conference out in Seattle where Jose Baez was there, and I met with him. And Spitz was there, Baden was there, Lee was there. He did his homework, and he found the guy in a lot of peoples` minds who called this autopsy shoddy.

POLITAN: How much of a difference does it make in this case, though, in putting it in context with everything that happened here? Because that`s a piece of evidence kind of over here. It doesn`t get to the heart of the case.

Could it make a difference?

EIGLARSH: You were reading my mind. Let`s put aside the autopsy for one second.

And again, what came from the autopsy is merely, I thought it was a homicide. OK. Put the autopsy aside.

The jurors can decide that themselves. It wasn`t a suicide. What else? It`s obvious it`s a homicide. What do we need them for?

POLITAN: Well, I mean, was it an accident that gets covered up to look like a homicide?

EIGLARSH: They can`t make that determination. That`s the problem with this case.

POLITAN: Yes, they can`t make it. So what they`re almost doing is the job that the jury is really supposed to do, which is figure out what happened.

BREMNER: It doesn`t need an expert. I mean, that`s common sense.

POLITAN: And that`s what Dr. G. talked about. And it comes back to common sense with Dr. G. It comes back to this pool theory.

She testifies that 100 percent of the time, when a child accidentally drowns, somebody, an adult, calls 911. It didn`t happen here.

EIGLARSH: Compelling testimony. And I know another statistic, too. A hundred percent of the time if your child drowns --

POLITAN: Wait a minute. Here comes Jeff Ashton with his closing argument.

EIGLARSH: Are you ready? A hundred percent of the time -- wow, that`s timing -- when a child drowns in the pool, you don`t go out and get a "Bella Vita," the sweet life, tattoo on your back. You just don`t do that.

POLITAN: "Bella Vita," is it not the sweet life? "Sweet Life" would be "Dolce Vita." OK?

EIGLARSH: Oh, correct me, Vinnie, please.

POLITAN: It`s not "The Good Life." It would be "Buona Vita."

EIGLARSH: OK.

POLITAN: "Bella Vita," "Beautiful Life," like Anne Bremner. Bella.

(LAUGHTER)

EIGLARSH: Same conclusion. You don`t get any tattoo when your child tragically drowns in a pool.

POLITAN: Anne, how important are forensics in this case? Because the defense wants to make it around forensics -- make it about forensics because it`s the weakest part, because these remains are sitting there for months and months and months.

BREMNER: Oh, absolutely. And they just want to bore the jury. And they have got tit for tat.

One expert says something, the other says something else. And it goes on and on and on. The jury gets mad and they`re thinking, we want out of here. It`s the Fourth of July.

POLITAN: When you say "mad," do you mean bored?

BREMNER: Bored, yes. But they get angry. You know, jurors get ready to get out of the trial.

And so I think this is a case that really isn`t about forensics, especially since they gave that opening. But more on that later, because of course a lot of it`s gone.

EIGLARSH: I wish it was about forensics, because we still don`t know exactly how this happened.

POLITAN: And that`s Jose Baez`s closing argument in this case. It`s got to be about that. It can`t be about what he said in his opening statement --

EIGLARSH: Correct.

POLITAN: -- because the proof is not there.

BREMNER: Gone. Right, it`s gone.

POLITAN: It`s all gone.

EIGLARSH: Legally and factually, he has to abandon what he did in opening and just say, OK, folks, how did this happen? Would you bet your 401(k) money that that`s how it happened? And they`re all going to have a different theory.

And so maybe it`s not first degree. Well, what about second? Well, the facts don`t necessarily support that either.

We don`t know, Vinnie. Nobody knows. I`m asking everybody. No one has a solid theory they`re willing to bet on.

POLITAN: But is there an innocent explanation for how Caylee`s remains were found? And I think everyone would agree, no.

EIGLARSH: We all agree there, correct.

POLITAN: And are you really going to take an accident and cover it up and make it look like first-degree murder? That doesn`t make sense.

Coming up, we`re going to break down exactly what could happen to Casey Anthony. Will she get the death penalty? Could she actually walk free?

I`m Vinnie Politan, filling in for Dr. Drew, live in Orlando.

Stay with us.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CASEY ANTHONY: Let me speak for a second. Dad, I let everybody talk. Can someone let me -- come on!

CINDY ANTHONY: Casey, hold on, sweetheart. Settle down, baby.

CASEY ANTHONY: Nobody`s letting me speak. You want me to talk, then --

CINDY ANTHONY: All right. I`ll listen to you.

CASEY ANTHONY: -- give me three seconds to say something.

CINDY ANTHONY: Go, sweetheart.

CASEY ANTHONY: I`m not in control over any of this because I don`t know what the hell`s going on. I don`t know what`s going on. My entire life has been taken from me.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BURDICK: No one else benefited from the death of Caylee Marie Anthony. Caylee`s death allowed Casey Anthony to live the good life. At least for those 31 days.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: Welcome back. I`m Vinnie Politan, sitting in for Dr. Drew.

We`re counting down to closing arguments. So what are the jury`s options here?

Casey Anthony, facing a total of seven charges. But here`s what you need to know about the most serious, which is first-degree murder.

Jurors can convict her of that or second-degree murder or aggravated manslaughter or manslaughter.

First-degree murder, that`s the one where she can get the death penalty. It involves premeditation.

Second-degree murder requires commission of a reckless or willful act that results in death.

Aggravated manslaughter involves intended harm from which a death results. And manslaughter involves death as a result of carelessness or negligence.

Here`s where the really hard part comes in. All 12 have to agree on one of those. And if they can`t, the judge will have to declare a mistrial and we do it all over again.

Attorneys Anne Bremner, Mark Eiglarsh are back with me to take a look at all this.

And look what I got here. This is the book. This is Florida`s criminal code right here, Mark.

Explain it to me, to the folks at home.

EIGLARSH: Well, I`ve got it all up here, Vinnie. I don`t need it.

POLITAN: All right. OK.

Let`s talk about first-degree murder. Two ways to first-degree murder, right? There`s the premeditation --

EIGLARSH: There is, but I looked at the indictment. They only have one way in first-degree. They literally put in, I think, just the premeditation the way I read it.

POLITAN: Really?

EIGLARSH: That`s how I read it. And so the way that the jurors are going to do this is they go back there. The first thing they do is elect what they call a foreperson. Not "foreman" anymore, foreperson.

POLITAN: Because that could be a bella like Anne Bremner.

(LAUGHTER)

EIGLARSH: A beautiful young lady like that.

And that person presides over the deliberations like a chairperson of a meeting. And what they`ll do is they`ll start with the most serious charge, first-degree murder.

And they go around. And they say, all right, these are the elements, A, B and C. What are the facts and do they apply? And do we find that she`s guilty of that? And then they`ll work their way down to the lesser included offenses.

POLITAN: Lesser included and also other counts, including the aggravated manslaughter. There`s also aggravated child abuse.

And she`s facing -- second degree would be life for her. And then 30 years or up to 30 years for aggravated manslaughter.

EIGLARSH: Right.

POLITAN: Anne Bremner, is this a case that is just ripe with an opportunity for a compromise?

BREMNER: Yes.

POLITAN: That something less -- and a lot of people are saying -- because a lot of people you talk to, even here in Orlando, where the jury pool was totally tainted by the evil media, people say, we don`t think she necessarily did it on purpose.

BREMNER: I`ve heard it everywhere in Orlando. I`ve heard it everywhere in Seattle, where I`m from.

You know, you hear it everywhere, which could mean a compromise or a hung jury. But I think a compromise more likely for the reasons that you say. Anywhere around here -- I mean, I talked to someone today who`s lived here all his life, and said, "I don`t know. They didn`t prove it."

They just didn`t prove it. You know?

EIGLARSH: Then it`s not a compromise. I mean, understand something - -

POLITAN: No, I think there`s going to be some jurors in that room who are going to say this is first degree. There are other ones who are going to say, oh, didn`t prove it.

BREMNER: Oh, yes. Then they come together.

POLITAN: We`ve got to meet somewhere.

EIGLARSH: OK. Well, I`m with you on that. But they could also all say, all right, we know that she`s guilty of something.

Do we believe that they proved beyond a reasonable doubt premeditation? Yes, maybe she did, maybe she didn`t. Maybe -- so then --

POLITAN: Keyword, "reasonable doubt."

EIGLARSH: Correct.

POLITAN: It`s got to be a story that`s reasonable, folks.

Up next, it`s the prosecution versus the defense, with Casey Anthony`s fate at stake. We`ll take a closer look at their scorecards when we come back.

I`m Vinnie Politan, live in Orlando, sitting in for the doc tonight.

You`re watching DR. DREW.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE ANTHONY, CASEY ANTHONY`S FATHER: I need to have something inside of me get through this.

VINNIE POLITAN, HOST OF HLN`S "SPECIAL REPORT" (voice-over): The emotion of the Anthony murder trial hits home for everyone, but what`s going to happen to Casey? Guilty or not guilty? Who`s proven what? Who`s ahead? I`m stripping it down to a scorecard for both sides. Facts, figures, and fate.

VOICE OF LINDA DRANE BURDICK, PROSECUTOR: No one but Casey Anthony had access to all the pieces of evidence in this case. The duct tape, the laundry bag, the blanket, the shorts, the shirt, the car. At the end of this case, you will have no trouble concluding that Caylee Anthony was murdered by her mother, Casey Anthony.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN (on-camera): I`m Vinnie Politan sitting in for Dr. Drew live in Orlando. Casey Anthony murdered her two-year-old daughter, Caylee. That`s what prosecutors have been trying to prove since day one when assistant state attorney, Linda Drane Burdick, delivered that opening statement. I`m back with attorneys, Mark Eiglarsh and Anne "Bella" Bremner. Also with us, bella numero due, Lisa Bloom joins us from L.A. She`s an attorney and the best-selling author of "Think. How are you doing, Lisa?

LISA BLOOM, ATTORNEY & AUTHOR: I`m great. How are you, Vinnie? Hi, Mark. Hi, Anne.

MARK EIGLARSH, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Lisa, you look fabulous tonight.

ANNE BREMNER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Fabulous.

EIGLARSH: Fabulosa.

BLOOM: I tell you, you guys are on a tear tonight, Vinnie and Mark. I don`t know what to say here.

POLITAN: Look, they dressed alike too, Mark. Look at this.

(LAUGHTER)

POLITAN: The gals are all dolled up for us tonight. All right --

BLOOM: We try.

POLITAN: Here`s what I want to do. I want to take a look at the prosecution case right now. What have they proven so far? You know, it was that 911 call from Casey`s own mother, Cindy, that proved Casey waited 31 long days before telling anyone that Caylee was missing. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: 911, what`s your emergency?

VOICE OF CINDY ANTHONY, CASEY ANTHONY`S MOTHER: I called a little bit ago, the deputy sheriffs. I found out my granddaughter has been taken. She has been missing for a month. Her mother finally admitted that she`s been missing. My daughter finally admitted that the baby-sitter stole her. I need to find her.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Your daughter admitted that the baby is where?

CINDY ANTHONY: The baby-sitter took her a month ago. My daughter`s been looking for her. I told you, my daughter was missing for a month. I just found her today, but I can`t find my granddaughter.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: The prosecution also proved that during those 31 days, Casey didn`t behave like a mom in mourning. Instead, she was living the beautiful life. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOBBY WILLIAMS, TATTOO ARTIST: She came in to get tattooed. She had an appointment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you ask her what she wanted done?

WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What did she tell you?

WILLIAMS: Bella vita in a feminine-type font.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: Lisa Bloom, this is what caught everyone`s attention about this case. You have a girl -- at first everyone thought she was missing. Now, the defense admits that she is dead. And you`ve got a mother that`s out there for 31 days not telling anyone and living this beautiful life like it never, ever happened. Ultimately, how far does that get this prosecution in this case because I don`t know if the defense has an answer for it?

BLOOM: I think it`s a huge piece of evidence in the case, and it`s never changed, and there`s never been an explanation for it except to say, well, you know, she was in shock, and you can`t blame her because she didn`t know how she was behaving, but I don`t think anybody buys that. Look, I`ve watched this entire trial with an open mind. I wanted to see the prosecution prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

And now, I think that they`ve done that. And I think today, with Cindy Anthony being shown to have lied about the chloroform, you know what that tells me? It tells me that Cindy knows that Casey is responsible. We know that George knows that Casey is responsible. Everybody in the family knows.

I think everybody in the jury knows at this point. I think everybody in America knows because the case has been proved at this point beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense really didn`t have anything.

EIGLARSH: Lisa, can I ask you a question then? I don`t disagree with you that she played a role here, and I don`t disagree with you that she`s guilty of something. The question is, can you tell us what exactly did she do?

BLOOM: The prosecution doesn`t have to prove exactly what she did. They have to prove that she intentionally killed her daughter, and the intent is there from the chloroform and the other computer searches which I think we now can say definitively were done by Casey and by the duct tape and by her erratic behavior which shows consciousness of guilt. In fact, I think her whole defense shows consciousness of guilt, because it`s just more lies in the trial that are preposterous and insulting to the jury`s intelligence.

EIGLARSH: But don`t you find a little unusual. In the O.J. case, we could see him literally taking the knife and doing what he did. Peterson case, we can picture it. Isn`t it a little bizarre that we don`t have a clearer picture here? And isn`t that going to affect the jurors in terms of the deliberations as to whether it`s first, second, manslaughter?

BLOOM: Vinnie and I watched a lot of cases on court TV where you could never say exactly what happened. The Scott Peterson case is, I think, a good example. We can`t say, for example, was Laci Peterson killed in the house? Was she killed in the car? Was she killed in the boat? Was she strangled? Was she suffocated?

I mean, that poor woman died at the hands of her husband. He`s now on death row. And I think this is a similar situation. It`s too much to ask that the state be able to prove that much. And they`re not required to prove it. I don`t think the jury will require that.

POLITAN: And here`s the thing. The linkage, OK, the remains are found around the corner from her house, but they`ve got to link Caylee -- Caylee dead, Caylee`s death somehow to Casey Anthony. That`s all done, I believe, through the evidence from the trunk. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It most likely was decomposition of fluid.

ARPAD VASS, FORENSIC SCIENTIST: We have never seen chloroform in that level in environmental samples before, at least, I never have in 20 years of shooting these types of samples.

DEP. KRISTIN BREWER, ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF`S OFFICE KS HANDLER: There was an area of interest that he kept going back to and sniffing pretty hard. He finally came back to that same area after making another lap of the yard and gave a final trained indication in one location in the backyard.

SIMON BIRCH, JOHNSON`S WRECKER YARD: As the door was opened, the smell came out very intently. It was almost like you were releasing it into the atmosphere, and it was very potent. It was eye-opening.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: So many people, so much evidence, and so many different ways links a decomposing Caylee in the trunk of that car. And, I don`t understand why the defense fought this fight. Why did they need to take Caylee out of the trunk of that car?

BREMNER: Exactly.

POLITAN: It made no sense to me. From the beginning.

BREMNER: Exactly. I mean, why take on a burden you don`t have? I mean, the fact of the matter is on that whole issue, just embrace that, too, 31 days is way worse than having the body in the trunk of the car.

POLITAN: Absolutely. The body in the trunk is a panic move. You can explain that.

BREMNER: Sure, where else are you going to put the body?

POLITAN: If you know it was an accident, she panicked. Why would they go there? I think this is such strong evidence for the prosecution. And the reason I think so, Lisa, is because it`s a fight that was picked by the defense, saying that the body was not in the trunk. It was a fight they can`t win.

BLOOM: But you know what else I think is very powerful evidence in this case? Are the four witnesses who say they smelled decomposition, and that`s a smell that apparently, and thank God, I`ve never smelled it, but apparently, if you have, you never forget. And George smelled it. Cindy smelled it. The tow truck driver smelled it.

I mean, people -- we`re talking about former law enforcement, a nurse, a tow truck driver. People, I think, who are in a position to remember that, and say, you can throw out the science. But I`m going to go with these human beings who said there`s no question that they smelled human decomposition coming out of the trunk of that car.

EIGLARSH: And on top of that, you take the human decomposition in her vehicle, and then, you add a heart-shaped sticker.

POLITAN: Let`s talk about the heart-shaped sticker. Take a look at this. We`re going to talk about it, because a lot of people think this is the exact link for Casey Anthony.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELIZABETH FONTAINE, FORENSIC EXAMINER: During my examination of Q-63, an outline of a heart appeared in one of the corners on the edge of that piece of duct tape.

DRANE BURDICK: Are you familiar with whether or not there were heart stickers located in the bedroom of Casey Anthony during the execution of that search warrant on December 20th of 2008?

FONTAINE: Yes, there were.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: Heart-shaped stickers in Casey Anthony`s room. The residue of a heart-shaped sticker on the duct tape. Does that connect Casey to the duct tape to murder weapon?

EIGLARSH: Absolutely. I don`t even need the heart-shaped stickers from her room. I say, if I`m a prosecutor, who in the universe would do this, and then, put a heart-shaped sticker on the mouth? It has to be someone who is intimate with that deceased child. There`s George, there`s Cindy, and there`s the defendant, and that`s who did it. It`s the defendant.

POLITAN: Do you think it was the duct tape? Anne Bremner, do you believe that duct tape, like they said in court, was placed over the nose and mouth of this little girl?

BREMNER: I think there are arguments that can be made that that`s not the case. However --

EIGLARSH: I`d like to hear them. Go ahead. Miss Defense Lawyer. Go ahead.

POLITAN: Let`s hear it.

EIGLARSH: Come on. Come on.

BREMNER: No, we had some different arguments about, you know, the sticker not having been there, not being photographed, not being preserved, and then, with the duct tape, itself, in terms of really, you know, in terms of it being part of the jaw, connecting the jaw during the course of the animals, you know, being involved in scattering of remains and everything else.

I mean, to think of this thing, you know, exactly on her mouth with that superimposition of her face and that skull is really too much. And I almost think it backfires in some ways because it looks at -- you know, this mother, could she do that, kill her that way? They say it`s from suffocation and also from, you know -- I mean, can you see that? I mean, with any mother? Really?

EIGLARSH: Well, not in general.

POLITAN: If she`s a sociopath like Scott Peterson.

Up next, we`re going to take a look at how the defense fair in the presentation of their case. I`m Vinnie Politan sitting in for Dr. Drew.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE BELVIN PERRY, ORANGE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT: Mr. Baez, you may call your next witness.

JOSE BAEZ, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Your honor, the defense rests.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BAEZ: Caylee Anthony died on June 16th, 2008, when she drowned in her family`s swimming pool. As soon as Casey came around this corner and went back, she saw George Anthony holding Caylee in his arms.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: That was day one of the Casey Anthony murder trial when the defense dropped their theory out there that Little Caylee had actually drowned in the family pool, and that it was Casey`s dad, George Anthony, who orchestrated this cover-up.

Welcome back to the DR. DREW show. I`m Vinnie Politan sitting in for Dr. Drew this week, live in Orlando. So, let`s take a look at what the defense accomplished during this trial. Were they trying to prove that an accident happened or disprove that a murder occurred? They got a little help from meter reader, Roy Kronk, earlier this week when he admitted to manipulating Caylee`s remains.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHENEY MASON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: When you went back in there on December the 11th, sir, and you saw this skull, did you do anything with your meter reader stick?

ROY KRONK, FOUND CAYLEE`S BODY: Yes, sir. I was standing behind it, so I was looking at it from behind, and I still didn`t think it was real. So, I very gently took it and put it into the right eye socket and I gently picked it up and I looked down and I realized what it was and I set it down as gently as I could and went off and called my area supervisor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: And so more testimony that helped the defense, a forensic expert that called into question the positioning of the duct tape on Caylee`s body. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAM RODRIGUEZ, FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGIST AND ENTOMOLOGIST: The movement of those remains by animals basically precludes anyone from making any scientific conclusion as to the actual position of that duct tape, whether it was around the areas of the eyes, did it cover the areas of the nose and the mouth?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: Rejoining me in Orlando to talk about this are attorneys Anne Bremner and Mark Eiglarsh. Also joining us from Chicago is Casey Anthony`s former defense attorney and a law professor at DePaul University, Andrea Lyon.

Andrea, let`s talk, first, about your response to the defense case. And I`ll be honest with you, I was blown away by Jose Baez`s opening statement. I thought it was fantastic. I thought he turned his trial upside down, but guess what, by the end of his case, I think it`s back where it started. I was completely underwhelmed by the evidence. Am I wrong here?

ANDREA LYON, CASEY ANTHONY`S FMR. DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, you`re wrong and you`re right. There are promises that get made in opening statements sometimes that are not kept, and there were promises on both sides that were not kept. And you always pay for that. Anybody who`s ever tried a case for prosecution or defense knows that you pay for that. On the other hand, the prosecution has not done what it promised to do either.

It has hooked its evidence or its position to that this duct tape was, in fact, the murder weapon, that it was intentional, that it was premeditated. And their case just isn`t what they promised it to be either. And in particular, regarding the duct tape and regarding the conclusion that this is even a homicide, there`s an awful lot of room for doubt here.

I was listening to you earlier, and you were talking about whether a jury would compromise in these circumstances and that`s what a lot of juries do. When they`re not sure, they come some place in the middle. They know something is wrong, but they don`t know what and they tend to compromise. So, that would not be a surprising result in this case, in my view.

EIGLARSH: Andrea, it`s Mark Eiglarsh. I have a question for you. I have tremendous respect for the work that you`ve done and your experience in the courtroom. I`m wondering if when you were on the team, you were consulted about Jose Baez`s strategy to take on such an enormous burden, which I think absolutely harmed the defense here by promising sexual molestation committed by her father, by saying that he was the one who removed the child from the scene and did those horrific things.

Did you sign off on that? Was there some discussion between you and Jose to agree to that?

LYON: You know, I would love to be able to answer that question, but you know I cannot. I still owe a duty of confidentiality --

EIGLARSH: What if I say pretty please?

LYON: Pretty please isn`t going to help. At all.

EIGLARSH: Andrea, we won`t -- between you and I, we won`t tell him. Come on, just tell me. I want to know who was responsible --

LYON: No matter how many different ways you ask me, I`m not going to answer that question.

EIGLARSH: How about this? Would you agree --

LYON: As I said --

EIGLARSH: Would you agree -- go ahead.

POLITAN: Let her speak, Mark.

EIGLARSH: I know. Go ahead.

LYON: As I said, whenever you make a promise in an opening statement that you`re unable to keep --

EIGLARSH: We heard that.

LYON: In trial, you pay for that. I mean, a jury will hold that against you. And so, you know, some of the things that Mr. Baez promised, he did present evidence to prove, some of the things he didn`t. Some of the things Ms. Draney Burdick promised to prove, she did, and some she didn`t.

POLITAN: Andrea, let`s take a look at George Anthony and his alleged mistress on the stand and you tell me what, if anything, it proves.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is it your testimony that she was just another volunteer?

GEORGE ANTHONY: Absolutely just another volunteer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No different than any other volunteer?

GEORGE ANTHONY: No, because everyone who ever volunteered at our command centers, stuffs like that, some people became more than just volunteers. They became friends.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you have a romantic relationship with her?

GEORGE ANTHONY: No, sir. No.

KRYSTAL HOLLOWAY, GEORGE ANTHONY`S ALLEGED MISTRESS: I did have an affair with George. I spoke to the detectives, and I told them the truth. That I had been sleeping with George.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLITAN: Andrea, what`s the takeaway from this? Did he prove maybe he had an affair? How does that help the defense?

LYON: Well, it makes it more likely if he was having an affair with her, it makes it more likely that the statement that he gave to her about the drowning was true. So, that would be the reason why that would be helpful to the defense, which I do want to emphasize, again, that the burden of proof is on the prosecution and not on the defense.

POLITAN: We know what burden is. I got my legal book right here. It tells me all about the burden. We`re out of time. Mark, Anne, Andrea, thank you all so much.

EIGLARSH: We`re just getting started.

POLITAN: Our judicial system works most of the time. A jury decides if we`re guilty or not. Next a member of Dr. Drew`s jury joins us. I`m Vinnie Politan sitting in for Dr. Drew. Back after this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PERRY: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this concludes the presentation of all evidence. We will convene on Sunday at 9:00 a.m. for closing arguments and instruction on the law in this case. Please remember all of my previous admonitions and additional instructions on behalf of the state? The defense?

BAEZ: Nothing from the defense.

PERRY: Members of the jury, you may be excused.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

POLITAN: I`m Vinnie Politan sitting in for Dr. Drew. After all is said and done, what makes our system so remarkable is that we, we, the people, determine the innocence or guilt of our fellow citizens, a jury of our peers. I wish we could be a fly on the wall inside that jury room when all that`s taking place, but we can`t. So, we have our own Dr. Drew jurors. Back again was an Anthony court regular, Kelly Heaney. Kelly, great to see you.

KELLY HEANEY, DR. DREW "JUROR": Great to see you, too.

POLITAN: I know you`re expecting Dr. Drew. So, I`ll try to dress it up just a little bit for you, OK?

HEANEY: Thank you.

POLITAN: Now, the first question I have for you, it`s a serious question, all right? I take this -- does he take his glasses off when he does a serious question, Dr. Drew? Does he always have them on? OK.

(LAUGHTER)

POLITAN: Here`s the question. George and Cindy Anthony, and I feel for these people. I don`t judge these people. They are in such a terrible position. Have you had -- have you bumped into them? Have you been near them? Have you been with them? And if so, what have you seen, heard?

HEANEY: I`ve seen them every time I`ve been in there. I`ve been in the elevator with them. I`ve actually sat right in front of them today.

POLITAN: Today?

HEANEY: Today.

POLITAN: And this is after Krystal Holloway and all that stuff in the courtroom yesterday, right?

HEANEY: And, today, when they were talking about the cell phone records, I did hear Cindy and George kind of going back and forth about saying cell phones, and you know, --

POLITAN: Can you hear that train inside the courtroom?

HEANEY: Yes, you can.

POLITAN: You can.

HEANEY: Yes.

POLITAN: Do they stop in the courtroom when the train goes by? Is it that loud?

HEANEY: No. No. They keep going. You can definitely hear it, though.

POLITAN: From your perspective -- that`s incredibly loud tonight. It`s never been that loud. All right. We have a moment here. Do you have your own verdict in mind? All the evidence is in.

HEANEY: I do.

POLITAN: All right. What find you?

HEANEY: I think that she will be convicted guilty.

POLITAN: What`s your -- I don`t care what you think is going to happen. What`s your verdict inside your head? You`re our juror. You`re Dr. Drew`s juror. What`s your verdict?

HEANEY: I would convict her of manslaughter.

POLITAN: Manslaughter.

HEANEY: I don`t believe it was premeditated.

POLITAN: OK. Why not?

HEANEY: Just because of the facts. I know there was duct tape over her mouth, but I don`t believe that was a murder weapon. I think that was possibly there to hold back any body fluids that could come out after maybe the chloroform was given to her or possibly just if she did wake up nobody would hear her screaming, but I don`t believe that was the murder weapon, though.

POLITAN: All right. Is everyone behaving inside that courtroom?

HEANEY: No.

POLITAN: What`s going on?

HEANEY: You would think after yesterday, after the gentleman flipped off Mr. Ashton, you would think everyone would behave a little better. But, today, actually, there is some women in front of me that were caught taking pictures of George Anthony on their cell phone, and they were actually escorted of the premises.

POLITAN: Those are some empty seats.

HEANEY: Yes.

POLITAN: More room for -- are you going to try to get back in again?

HEANEY: Yes, I`m going to try.

POLITAN: How long did you wait in line to get in today?

HEANEY: I waited yesterday about nine hours to get a ticket.

POLITAN: That was a close call because the judge, you know, recessed today.

HEANEY: I know. I was a little nervous about that.

POLITAN: Why didn`t you stand up and object? Your honor, we can`t go on recess, I waited nine hours to get in here.

HEANEY: I know. I really wanted to. As soon as the judge said it`s in recess indefinitely, the bailiffs did come over and look at all of us to make sure nobody was going to give any faces. I really wanted to, but I held my composure and did not.

(LAUGHTER)

POLITAN: All right. Thanks so much. Great to see you.

HEANEY: Thank you.

POLITAN: Thanks for watching DR. DREW. We`ll be back next week. Stay tuned to HLN for closing arguments on Sunday and all through the holiday weekend for continuing live coverage of the Casey Anthony murder trial.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

END