Return to Transcripts main page


Casey Anthony Cleared of Lying Convictions

Aired January 25, 2013 - 19:00   ET


JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HOST: A stunner tonight. Casey Anthony just cleared of two convictions that she lied to cops. And who knows, maybe the rest could be wiped out soon. Does this add insult to injury? Where is justice for little Caylee?


VELEZ-MITCHELL (voice-over): Tonight, disbelief as two of Casey Anthony`s lying convictions are thrown out. It`s another blow to cops and prosecutors, who already saw her walk on the murder charge involving her precious daughter, Caylee. What`s going on here? How do Americans, outraged over Casey`s not guilty verdict, feel now? Is this the ultimate humiliation for our criminal justice system? We`ll debate it.

And new info in the Jodi Arias trial. We`ll tell you about a bizarre and threatening e-mail to murder victim Travis Alexander`s girlfriend. Did Jodi send it?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: As to the charge of first-degree murder, verdict as to count one, we the jury find the defendant not guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I mean, they just let a baby killer, obviously, a baby killer out of jail.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Justice for Caylee! Justice for Caylee!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Justice for Caylee! Justice for Caylee!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Justice for Caylee! Justice for Caylee!

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We are going chase them down. Hold on. We`re chasing them now.

Let`s see if Jose Baez wants to say anything. Hey, Jose, quick comment?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She got away with it and you know it. And people are saying that it was OK. She didn`t get away with this. I can`t even talk.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They obviously let her just walk out. I thought it was unjust. I think they should have let her go on her way without anybody seeing her. There`s no justice done.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is a big spectacle for somebody that everybody hates. This is our justice system. That`s the way it is.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: And tonight, more outrage and disbelief as Casey Anthony scores another victory against cops and prosecutors. Two of Casey Anthony`s lying convictions have just been thrown out by an appeals court. I`m holding the decision in my hands. Even though Casey is perhaps the country`s most infamous liar.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Justice for Caylee! Justice for Caylee! Justice for Caylee!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Justice for Caylee! Justice for Caylee! Justice for Caylee!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Justice for Caylee! Justice for Caylee! Justice for Caylee!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It`s a shame for the little girl. That`s who it`s a shame for.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Right after Casey Anthony`s "not guilty" verdict on the murder charge, people were screaming their heads off outside court. Well, tonight, she is off the hook for lying. Yes, you heard me right.

Casey`s defense appeal was a big success. Two of Casey`s four convictions for lying to cops have just been tossed out. Is this the final insult to little Caylee Anthony after all the phony tales we heard her mother spin?


CINDY ANTHONY, CASEY`S MOTHER: What do you want me to tell Zanny the nanny?

CASEY ANTHONY, ACQUITTED FOR MURDER: That she needs to return Caylee. I forgive her. My only concern is that Caylee comes back to us, and she`s smiling and she`s happy and that she`s -- that she`s OK.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And is this the ultimate humiliation for the prosecutors who already lost Casey`s high-profile murder trial?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: As to the charge of first-degree murder, verdict as to count one, we the jury find the defendant not guilty. As to the charge of aggravated child abuse, verdict as to county two, we the jury find the defendant not guilty. As to the charge of aggravated manslaughter of a child, verdict as to count three, we the jury find the defendant not guilty.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Let`s bring in our legal panel. Joey Jackson, Michelle Suskauer, Judge Joe Brown. How stunning is this?

Joey Jackson, people around the halls who heard about it were just saying it`s crazy.

JOEY JACKSON, ATTORNEY: Well, you know what? Legally speaking, though, I think the court sort of got it right. Here`s why I say that, Jane. Just basing it on the law itself, what the court said was, listen, what you charged her with was -- was providing false information, right?

So the false information provided, the defense argued, was part of one single transaction. Right? One part of one single statement that she made. So they argue you can`t charge her four times for saying one thing that had four different lies.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I just want to get the reaction if I can. Michelle Suskauer, shocked or not? Yes or no?

MICHELLE SUSKAUER, ATTORNEY: No, not shocked. The court got it right.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Judge Joe Brown, shocked or not? Yes or no?

JUDGE JOE BROWN, HOST, "JUDGE JOE BROWN": Definitely not shocked. They did it exactly right. I even had a reversal in a trial I had for one of the same reasons.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Thank you, panel.

Now we`re going to go out to Jean Casarez. I think the reason I`m shocked is, if nobody is shocked, then why didn`t the prosecution and the detectives know not to charge her in this manner?


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jean Casarez, put some context in this. Because you`ve got the legal experts. None of them are shocked. Oh, yes. Nothing to see here. But everybody in America is pulling their hair out.

CASAREZ: I`m sure. I`m sure. You know, it has nothing to do with Casey`s lies. I mean, that`s a given. Casey lied. On and on, she lied.

It all has to do with the Constitution. And the fact is, when she was interviewed at her home, that night, there were two statements she made that they selected to charge her with, lying to a law enforcement officer. When she went to Universal, there were two statements they selected to charge lying to a law enforcement officer.

Well, the appellate court said, when you have this one interview, you can`t have multiple charges of lying to a law enforcement officer. Because it`s all one statement. So you can only have one charge in that area.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: But why don`t the prosecutors know this, Jean?

CASAREZ: Well, then I guess you can give an argument that there`s overcharging even when it came to a misdemeanor? But the appellate court ruled.

But I spoke with Chaney Mason. They may file a motion for a rehearing on the other two convictions, because they believe she was in custody. They believe that she did not feel free to leave when she was questioned by the officers at the house and at Universal Studios the next day. And on that, the appellate court sided with the prosecution.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK, wait. In plain English, you`re telling me that Casey Anthony and her team are still not satisfied? They`re going to go to the highest court in Florida to get even the last two misdemeanor convictions of lying tossed out, even though this woman is a prolific, pathological liar who lied repeatedly to cops? That`s a yes or no, Jean Casarez?

CASAREZ: I`m going to say no. I`m going to say no, because the issue is not that she`s lying. The issue is the constitutional aspect of it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Well, you explain that very well. But here`s what I don`t get. All right.

Why didn`t the prosecution know this? Why is this no shock to anybody on our panel, but apparently, it`s taken years now for this conclusion to be reached?

Prosecutor Jeff Ashton played by Rob Lowe was the focus of a Lifetime movie made about this case. And it aired to blockbuster ratings lately. Check this out from "Prosecuting Casey Anthony" on Lifetime.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Legal experts say that asking for the death penalty was a strategic error. Do you think it went too far, Joe?

ROB LOWE, ACTOR: Well, the jury had plenty of other options besides death. They could have found her guilty of second degree or even manslaughter. But they weren`t interested in punishment. They didn`t believe that she should be punished at all.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: The movie is all about Rob Lowe explaining why prosecutors lost this mega case.

So this isn`t the first embarrassment for the prosecution. Just recently, it was discovered -- and this was another big story we covered -- authorities failed to check the Firefox search engine on Casey`s computer.

On the very day Caylee was last seen, the day that prosecutors believe she was murdered, somebody did a search for "fool-proof suffocation methods." But that never came up in the trial, because cops didn`t check the data on the search engine that Casey used.

I`ve got to go back to our panel. Joey Jackson, is this just one more mistake in prosecuting one of America`s most infamous individuals?

JACKSON: It is, Jane. Because what you want to do if you`re the prosecution is marshal all the evidence and the best evidence you possibly have.

In an instance like this where you miss something so significant, fool-proof suffocation, you have to wonder, Jane, whether it would have been outcome determinative, meaning would it have changed the verdict in this case? Perhaps it would have.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Brad Conway, you are the former lawyer for George and Cindy Anthony. Thank you for joining us from Orlando, sir.

What is your reaction to two of the lying convictions thrown out against Casey Anthony, given that you used to represent George and Cindy Anthony.

BRAD CONWAY, FORMER LAWYER FOR GEORGE AND CINDY ANTHONY (via phone): Good to be here, Jane. And I think the court did get it right. But let`s put legal issues aside and look at the facts.

Everybody knows that Casey Anthony is a liar. She is using the legal issues that are outstanding to avoid answering the questions that are still on the table. And she`ll, I think, take that to the end because she doesn`t want to answer the questions. She doesn`t want to accept responsibility. She is a consummate liar. And she will ride this out until forced to come to the table and start answering some questions.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: The defense accused your client, your former client, Casey`s dad George, of molesting her during the trial. Something George that said was completely and utterly untrue, false, not right.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Have you ever sexually molested your daughter, Casey Anthony?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Have you ever committed any sexually inappropriate act with or in the presence of your daughter, Casey Anthony?

G. ANTHONY: No, sir.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Considering Casey`s team tried to accuse George of child -- actually did accuse George of child molestation and incest and basically made him out to be a monster after he already had suffered the loss of his granddaughter, Caylee, to the point where he tried to commit suicide.

Brad Conway, you said let`s throw out the legal issues and talk about the human issues. Is this another slap in the face to little Caylee? Is this another slap in the face to George, given that, well, people who aren`t studying the nuances of this might think, well, maybe she isn`t such a liar. Maybe she got it right?

CONWAY: No. No, it`s clear that she is a liar. No matter what the legal issues are and no matter how future courts rule on this, she is a liar.

And the question and the concern, I think, for George Anthony is, is she going to continue blaming him for things that didn`t happen? Is she going to continue putting this on everybody but herself?

The only person in the world that knows what happened to Caylee Anthony is Casey Anthony. And I don`t expect that we will ever, ever hear the truth from her.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have more people locked up in America than any other country in the world. We have the population of some entire countries behind bars here in the United States.

And yet this woman -- and we all watched the case -- we cannot make lying convictions against her stick. And I think that to -- a lot of people are genuinely upset about that, and maybe they have a reason to be. Maybe not legally, maybe just emotionally.

We`re just getting started on Casey Anthony. Later, the chilling parallels between Casey Anthony and Jodi Arias.


CINDY ANTHONY (via phone): We`re talking about a 3-year-old little girl. My daughter finally admitted that the babysitter stole her. I need to find her. There`s something wrong. I found my daughter`s car today, and it smells like there`s been a dead body in the damn car.




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And when did she start watching over your child?

CASEY ANTHONY: It`s been within the last year, year and a half, two years that she started watching Caylee.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: It all began with Cindy`s frantic 911 call.


CINDY ANTHONY (via phone): I found out my granddaughter has been taken. She has been missing for a month. Her mother finally admitted that she`s been missing.


CINDY ANTHONY: ... someone here now.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK, what is the address that you`re calling from?

CINDY ANTHONY: We`re talking about a 3-year-old little girl. My daughter finally admitted that the babysitter stole her. I need to find her. There`s something wrong. I found my daughter`s car today, and it smells like there`s been a dead body in the damn car.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: That call sent cops to the Anthony home, where Casey started lying to them about leaving Caylee with a nanny named Zanny.

The next day, cops asked Casey to go with them to Universal Studios, where then she falsely claimed she worked. She did not. She flat-out lied to them at both places: at her home and at Universal.

These are the four lies she told: Zanny the nanny; oh, I spoke to Caylee just the other day; working at Universal Studios -- unh-uh; and told two co-workers that Caylee was missing. Since she didn`t work there, she didn`t tell co-workers anything; she didn`t have co-workers. OK?

But the appeals court just decided that Casey cannot be charged with more than one count of lying at each interview, at each place. To charge her for two lies per interrogation is considered double jeopardy, being convicted more than once for the very same crime. She can only be convicted two times: once for lying to cops at her house and once for lying to cops when they grilled her at Universal Studios.

The people out there are upset. Our legal team says it`s a good decision. And I`m not even questioning that. I`m questioning, well, if it`s such a good decision, why didn`t the powers that be know this when they were charging her?

Let`s go out to the phone lines. William, South Carolina, your question or thought? William?

CALLER: Yes, my thought on Casey Anthony is she`s going to be a liar, no matter what. If the cops drop it, she`s still going to be a liar to me and to the public.

Yes. So does this surprise you, does it upset you or are you just totally cool with this?

CALLER: I`m upset with it, because you know, I have a 1-year-old daughter. And anything happens to her, I will freak out, you know? I mean this upsets me ever since I started watching this.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Thank you, sir. I think you bring it back to the human side.

I want to bring in our panel, again. Joey, Michelle, judge Joe Brown. Legally, you`re all saying the Supreme Court, the high court and it`s the district court of appeals fifth district made the right decision. I`m holding that decision in my hand. But my question from a human angle. So many people emotionally invested in this case; a child lost her life.

A woman lying with impunity. Do you feel that anybody has -- bears responsibility for not getting the charges right the first time around so that this indignity is not visited upon a prosecution that spent millions of dollars losing a case? And I`ll start with Michelle Suskauer.

SUSKAUER: Well, I mean, it certainly goes just because law enforcement presents charges doesn`t mean they have to rubber stamp it and charge exactly what they`re recommending.

So the buck stops at the prosecutor`s office. What they did was overcharged. They threw everything they could and certainly that`s what prosecutors do. This is not unique in Casey Anthony`s case. It happens everywhere. It`s what happened. The jury saw it and they rejected it. Here, the fifth district court of appeal here in Florida said the same thing. It was too many charges for just two different instances.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. Because you made a good point. Joey Jackson, where does the buck stop? Who made the mistake?

JACKSON: You know what`s going to happen is this. You have a right to be outraged and people in general have a right because she is a liar and should be held accountable. Interesting enough, if this is appealed, all of it may be thrown out, because there`s still the issue of the custodial interrogation. Should she have even been questioned without the right to Miranda?

And so I think we`re going to see more legal angles being pursued by the defense team. And in terms of where the buck stops, it may stop at the very highest court who makes a ruling as to whether all of this should go by the wayside. And think about, Jane, your outrage and your viewers` outrage then.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Judge Joe Brown, host of "Judge Joe Brown" show. Taxpayers spent millions of dollars on this case. We first learned, oops, they didn`t check the search engine that Casey used, just the other day, after all -- that the reams. I had files this high on this case. Oh, they didn`t check that other search engine? And now we`re hearing that they charged her improperly.

BROWN: So what?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: They`re -- well, because tax dollars were spent.

BROWN: See, it`s a part of the problem. OK, fine.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We live in a time of fiscal crisis. Wait a second. We live in a time of fiscal crisis. And we also have to look at the impression this leaves on people.

Like I said, judge, there are more people behind bars in this country than any other country in the world. A lot of them for non-violent offenses.

BROWN: And by the way, I can tell you...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And when they see this, it happens, it has an impact on how they perceive the criminal justice system. Your thoughts, sir?

BROWN: So what? The big problem is, is because the media. Just like is being done through this show, has been hyping up the emotional aspect instead of cool logic.

Now, it is amazing what has happened in this country over the years that I`ve been practicing law, presiding over cases. I`ve tried 42 capital murder cases. And it`s absolutely amazing to see how the public is degenerated into emotions justify just about anything.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: She was improperly charged.

BROWN: Yes! And the bottom line is the prosecution...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: The bottom line is who should be held accountable, given that millions of dollars were spent prosecuting this case.

BROWN: Listen to me, I got your question. I got your question.


BROWN: The bottom line is that the D.A. is an elected official, and he`s responsive to the people that elect him. A lot of them are overwrought with emotions.

When what you need to be thinking about is this in the context of 250 years of guaranteeing that these criminal powers are not used for political purpose.

You`re presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. And the jury just was not satisfied with the evidence.


BROWN: And so you even have an unusual situation here. Most...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We have to take a break, judge. We have to take a break.

BROWN: OK, sure.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And just to clarify, my reaction is not based on this ruling is inaccurate. You`re all the legal team. My reaction is why was this done incorrectly in the first place? More on the other side.


JOSE BAEZ, CASEY`S DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Your stories of this Zanny the nanny. It`s true. For two years, she pretended she had a job and pretended she had a nanny.



CINDY ANTHONY: As long as they continue to look for my granddaughter, you know, I don`t care what America thinks of me, if they think I`m a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) because I`m standing up to the media that want to attack me.

Caylee is not dead. There is no -- there is no evidence to say that.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: This stunning ruling could also impact the defamation suit against Casey Anthony by a real woman named Zenaida Gonzales, who says Casey ruined her life when she lied and said a Zenaida Gonzales kidnapped little Caylee.

Casey`s parents -- you just heard them there -- have been forced to answer questions about Zanny in depositions. Remember this?


CINDY ANTHONY: You slandered me on TV. You perjured yourself with this, because she`s not Fernandez. So there you go. You want to fight it?


VELEZ-MITCHELL: We have John Dill on the phone, the attorney for Zenaida Gonzales. Thank you for joining us, John.

You and Zenaida`s other lawyers have been trying to squeeze the truth out of Casey Anthony for some time in depositions leading up to the civil suit. But my understanding is she keeps taking the fifth, citing this appeal. How is this going to impact your case against Casey?

JOHN DILL, LAWYER FOR ZENAIDA GONZALES (via phone): Actually, it moves us one step closer, even though part of those charges were, in fact, vacated or thrown out, the appeals process is almost over. And there`s not going to be any more Fifth Amendment. So she`s going to have to testify in her trial, bottom line.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: So in plain English, if in fact, let`s say the higher court that she appeals to says, "No, we`re going to leave it as is," then she can`t hide behind taking the Fifth, saying, "Well, that could affect my appeals," because there is no appeals. So she`ll have to answer tough questions. Is that correct, John?

DILL: Absolutely. That`s the issue. And then she`ll have two convictions for lying, as well. So we`ll be able to use those against her in court, as well.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And John, what truth are you trying to squeeze out of her?

DILL: Well, we`re trying to find out why she chose our client. Why did she drag our client into the mix and all the circumstances behind that? I`m sure she doesn`t want to answer these questions, and that`s probably part of the reason she continues to pursue these appeals. But the time is coming, and hopefully, it will be this summer.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know, what was really interesting about this is that we all thought that the best argument for appeal was that Casey wasn`t read her Miranda rights during these interrogations. That in other words, the Miranda rights came after she said all these lies. But, it turns out, Joey Jackson, that that`s not the big issue here.

JACKSON: It`s so true. And it may still very well be, Jane, another issue if the defense decides to pursue it.

But as you mentioned, the bigger issue is the double jeopardy issue. That is whether or not you can stack these statements and charge her for one and another and another. Four statements when the law speaks to providing false information. And then the argument would be, of course, if you provide information separately, should you be charged over and over? The court said no. And that`s what carried the day here.

But I`m telling you, Jane, stay tuned in the event the defense decides to go after the other piece of it. It may be the other thing gets thrown out on the Miranda grounds.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, and speaking of Miranda rights, we all know what Miranda rights are. But just for old time`s sake, let`s listen to Miranda rights being read to somebody. And this is from "Feds," from YouTube. Check it out.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be held against you in a court of law. You have the right to have an attorney present. If you cannot afford one, an attorney will be appointed by the court. Do you understand each of these rights as I have explained them to you?


VELEZ-MITCHELL: And Jodi Arias also had her Miranda rights read to her. We`re going to give you the latest on the Jodi Arias case, up next.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Who has her? Do you have a name?

CASEY ANTHONY, ACQUITTED OF DAUGHTER`S DEATH: Her name is Zenaida, Fernandez Gonzalez.

JODI ARIAS, ON TRIAL FOR MURDER OF TRAVIS ALEXANDER: I just wanted to offer any assistance. I was a really good of Travis`.

ANTHONY: I still have that feeling, a presence. I know that she`s alive.

ESTEBAN FLORES, POLICE DETECTIVE: Jodi, this is over. This is absolutely over. You need to tell me the truth.

ARIAS: Listen, the truth is I did not hurt Travis.


Tonight, astonishing new developments for America`s most hated woman, Casey Anthony: two out of four of Casey`s convictions for lying to cops have now been tossed out. Casey basically turned lying to police into an art form. And now the courts say half of the lying convictions constitute double jeopardy.

Are we going to see the same thing happen across the country in Arizona? Will the most infamous and self-confessed liar Jodi Arias get off the hook as well?

That beautiful 32-year-old photographer is accused of stabbing her ex- boyfriend, Travis Alexander, 29 times, slitting his throat from ear-to-ear and shooting him in the face. She says it was all in self-defense. But she told cops two wild and crazy stories, first.

Listen to some of her lies.


FLORES: Were you at Travis` house on Monday?

ARIAS: Absolutely not. I was nowhere near Mesa. I was nowhere near Phoenix.

FLORES: What if I can show you proof you were there?

ARIAS: I turned around and there are two people there. One is a guy and one is a girl. I don`t remember what they were wearing, maybe jeans.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Straight out to criminal defense attorney, Dwayne Tates, you are in Arizona where this trial is occurring. We just see the impact of lies in one infamous case. What will the impact of Jodi`s lies in her murder trial be?

DWAYNE TATES, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, they can`t do anything but hurt her in this case. It could hurt her credibility but everybody has to take a deep breath at this point because all we have heard is the prosecution`s case, we haven`t heard anything from the defense yet.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. And we are going to hear the defense coming up next week. We are going to be all over it here. I want to bring in Shanna Hogan, journalist and author of "Picture Perfect"; what are you hearing about how this defense case is going to look like -- what`s it going to look like when it gets started next week?

SHANNA HOGAN, JOURNALIST/AUTHOR OF "PICTURE PERFECT" (via telephone): Well, it`s going to be all putting the victim on trial. It`s going to be assaulting his character, talking about how he was abusive to her. How he was sexually abusive to her. They are going to have experts that say she has post-traumatic stress syndrome and that`s going to explain why she lied initially to the cops.

And we`re also going to see some of Travis` friends, which is really interesting. They don`t support her and they`re not going to support her opinion. But they are going to use what Travis had told them about her being a stalker against Travis. That she -- at the same time he was telling friends that she was a stalker, he was also inviting her to his house.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: From the beginning of this investigation, Travis` friends have called Jodi a stalker and a liar. Now I even spoke to Travis` friend about what happened. Listen to this.


TAYLOR SEARLE, FRIEND OF TRAVIS ALEXANDER: A lot of the stories I have heard are that she would always follow around him and the girls that he was dating and either I have heard stories of her watching them sleep or I`ve heard stories of her watching through windows or doorways. And there`s stories also of allegedly her slashing his tires two nights in a row outside his girlfriend`s house.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: According to cops, Jodi even sent an anonymous and we warn you, graphic e-mail to one of Travis` girlfriend saying, quote, "You are a shameful whore. If you let him stay in your bed one more time you will be giving the appearance of evil." She also said that this young woman, Lisa, should be "ashamed of the whoredoms (ph) you`ve committed with that insidious man".

If, indeed, that is an e-mail sent by Jodi Arias, Joey Jackson, criminal defense attorney, it sounds like it shows that the defendant had a lot of rage against the man that she admits she killed. First of all, I wonder why that wasn`t part of the prosecution`s case --

JOEY JACKSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You know what? There are two issues, Jane. The first is an authentication issue, right. Legally speaking you have to lay the foundation for any evidence and there was uncertainty. Certainly it all pointed to her but did it really come from her?

The second issue though, Jane, is whether it`s overly prejudicial. The prosecution felt that it had enough evidence with what it had already. Don`t create an appealable issue and imbedding evidence that could later a judge can say you know what; you shouldn`t have done it. Let`s not take any risks. Let`s prove our case on facts and evidence, leave that out and we`ll still get a conviction. That I think was the theory of the prosecution here for not putting that evidence in.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And Shanna Hogan, what have you learned about the reaction to this really kind of scary e-mail? I mean this -- if I got an e-mail like this, I would be quite terrified.

HOGAN: Firstly, the whoredom that she accuses this woman of her no more than falling asleep on a beanbag chair with Travis. There was no sexual relations as far as I know. And she got this e-mail the day after Travis` tires were slashed. And I found it amusing because she knew that this woman was a Mormon and she sent this letter like it was some sort of mysterious message from God.

But immediately this woman reads the sentence and goes, "Jodi sent it." Immediately. She knew right away that it was Jodi behind it, in her opinion.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let`s go out to the phone lines. Sandra, Canada your questions or thoughts -- Sandra.

SANDRA, CANADA: I don`t understand the whole thing, how the cops are letting her, you know, get away with all of this.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Are you referring to Casey or are you referring to Jodi?

SANDRA: To Casey, actually but -- yes.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. Elaborate a little bit on that. What upsets you about this throwing out of the two lying convictions in the Casey Anthony case?

SANDRA: Well (inaudible) she did all this. You know, why is it drawn out, like the lies and just the whole bit of it. I have been following it from day one and it`s just shocked me as to how she can get away with, you know, all the lies. Is this the same lawyers on her case?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. I want to go back to Joey Jackson for a second. We have kind of fun fiery debate, which we enjoy. Dialectics, argument and counter argument to reach a higher understanding of the given subject matter. But you see the people out there, they don`t understand. They know she`s a liar. And they know she lied repeatedly about her own daughter, leading people to search hundreds, indeed thousands of people to search for a young child that this woman already knew was dead.

JACKSON: Absolutely.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: They really don`t understand how after all of this and the millions of their money, tax dollars spent unsuccessfully prosecuting this woman that then, the sort of misdemeanor, the minor charges that half of those are also thrown out.

JACKSON: Could be thrown out.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Talk about -- oh, you`re a lawyer but you can see why people don`t understand that, right?

JACKSON: Sure. Sure, Jane. I mean there`s the human side of this. And it`s outrageous from a human point of view because people need to be held accountable. The caller is saying look, there needs to be accountability here. Why isn`t she being held to task?

But the issue here legally then becomes moving from human to legal is there are constitutional protections. I know people are throwing things at the television right now for saying that, but there`s a certain decorum that has to happen.

Miranda rights have to be read -- that wasn`t the gist of the decision but legal charges have to be given that are proper. That was the gist of the decision and the court saying listen, we can`t have people charged again, for the same offense.

And it`s for that reason that legally Jane, it was thrown out although we can understand and even we can have ourselves the outrage. But there is a law. We have to follow it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Thank you for that. We are all on a legal show but we are also human beings. We try to put those two and bridge them together so that everybody has a deeper understanding what is happening here.

At the top of the hour, much more on the Jodi Arias trial. "NANCY GRACE MYSTERIES" brings you inside the most incriminating evidence against Jodi and what to expect as the defense prepares to tell their side of the story. Nancy at 8:00 p.m. on HLN.

On the other side, we are going to bring you a woman scorned.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: "Discovery ID" has sex, lies and murder this Saturday, 10:00 p.m. Eastern. We are going to give you a preview of "Scorned".



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The chemistry between the co-workers is undeniable. Before long, their sexy flirtation goes from talk to action.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight: obsession, compulsion and really out of control behavior. A secret love triangle spins out of control as the old saying goes, "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

Sheila Davalloo (ph) seemed to have the perfect life -- a handsome husband, an idyllic life in Pleasantville, New York. But when her husband`s job became a distraction in the bedroom, Sheila went looking for new excitement and found it with a co-worker named Nelson.


ROBI LUDWIG, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: It almost sounds like Sheila wanted to replace her husband with Nelson. And bringing him into her bed in her home was almost like having him be hers.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: It turns out Sheila would do anything to hang out with her young lover including murder. Sheila`s story plays out on Investigation Discovery`s "Scorned: Love Kills" tomorrow night; psychotherapist Robi Ludwig a contributor on "Scorned". You understand this case. What is this about?

LUDWIG: Yes. We have this bored housewife, Sheila who has this brilliant scientist of a husband Paul. She needs some action. She finds this dashing lover at work. They have this amazing sexual affair. She gets her husband out of the house. She says lover, come over, we`ll have sex in the bed, basically pretending he`s hers.

He dumps her after three months and falls madly in love with this other beautiful co-worker. When she ends up dead, Sheila maintains a relationship with her lover as a friendship that the lover comes back to her and basically. They start up this affair again, this amazing sexual affair. It`s -- yes.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: This is unbelievable.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: In other words, she keeps the husband. She kills her rival, her female rival. She keeps her husband and she manages to woo back her lover who doesn`t kind of put it all together.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Her husband wants her the whole entire time, is very much in love with her. She manages to deal with the rejection from her lover and say you know what, if you don`t want to be with me, I will be your friend. And she writes lyrics for songs he`s writing. She just gets herself in there. So much so that he really thinks she`s a friend and likes him as a friend.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Guess what? We are just getting started. Her behavior gets even more demonic, can I use that word? On the other side.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Time for "Pet of the Day". Send your pet pics to Paxton, you are just handsome. Oh, Nini, you are a cutie, Nini. And Nadi and Brisbane, they are hanging out and they have a little toy there. Cruz and Domino -- we`re twins.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`ve never seen her like that before.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you mind if we backtrack?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He says it was his wife who stabbed him during the kinky game.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: (inaudible) Discovery tomorrow night.

Ok, here is the story. You have a bored housewife. She`s cheating on her husband with this guy named Nelson, but Nelson has another girlfriend, who ends up dead. And nobody really suspects this woman, this housewife until a kinky sex game.

So I want to bring in Dr. Robi Ludwig, psychotherapist and a contributor on this show, "Investigation Discovery". Tell me how does this kinky sex game lead to a discovery?

LUDWIG: Well, Sheila still has a husband who loves her very much. She says, you know what? Let me give him some sex and she devises this game where she ties him up, it`s kinky bondage game. It ends up that there`s a stabbing, and this stabbing then reveals who the people in this like love triangle aren`t who they seem to be, which leads authorities to the killer, the cold-blooded killer.

So, it`s through this sexy bondage game that reveals a love triangle and that people aren`t who they seem to be.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, this is fascinating to me, because there`s a bored housewife.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: She has an affair and her husband, brings this guy, Nelson, into the marital bed, have sex with him. Then he kind of breaks up with her and has another girlfriend. The other girlfriend end up dead but cops don`t put two and two together and neither do the guys.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ok. The husband takes her back and she still manages to roll back in the boyfriend, the lover.

LUDWIG: Yes. In fact --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And everything is -- she`s still having her way and then decides well, I`m not satisfied with that. I`m not satisfied with getting away with murder. I want to knife my husband during a kinky sex game?

LUDWIG: She really felt her husband now was getting in the way of her and Nelson being together. And she was obsessed with Nelson, this was the only man that she wanted to be with. And so it`s through this kinky sex game she decides maybe this is a way to get rid of him. You have to understand, her husband is very supportive of her, even when he realizes that she stabbed him, he`s still very supportive of her. He`s still very loving. It`s almost mind-boggling.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Oh my gosh. He needs to go to a co-dependency meeting.

Sheila Davalloo, the woman we`re talking about, who makes the decision to represent herself in court -- another brazen decision on her part for the attempted murder of her husband.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`ll just go through with it, with you, through some of it.

(END VIDEO CLIP) VELEZ-MITCHELL: That is the real woman we`re talking about. Wow. Stories like this make me feel so boring and so normal.

LUDWIG: Yes. It`s just really interesting to see people who are so obsessed, but really see the world in black and white. And they want what they want. And they think eliminating certain people is the way to get it. That`s not the way the world works. But in certain disturbed minds, they`ll stop at nothing to have the love or lust of their life.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know what it is? They want everything. They want the fruits of living with a handsome rich guy and they also want to have their lover.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: This is the Animal Investigations Unit and everybody I talked to on the air and on the street always tells me how much they love little Rico. Well, Rico and I have an important message for you tonight. We need to save one of Rico`s cousins, the American icon called the great wolf. For more than 30 years with the U.S. government`s help, wolves made a dramatic comeback.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Once present throughout the majority of the United States, by 1945 these majestic animals were hunted to near extinction in the lower 48. In the 1970s, wolves were placed under the protection of the Endangered Species Act. And in the 1990s, they were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park and parts of Idaho.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: But in April 2011, wolves were taken off that list by the federal government and, since then, 1,500 wolves have been killed in hunts across the United States. Some say we`re playing politics with an entire species.


BROOKS FAHY, PREDATOR DEFENSE: For all practical terms, this is a genocide in operation that`s being driven by politics.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Straight out to Brooks Fahy the executive director of Predator Defense, here to talk about his important new film "The Imperiled American Wolf". Why? Cut to the chase. We only have a couple of seconds. Why are wolves being gunned down in various states across the country?

FAHY: Well, Jane, it`s a complex issue, but it`s really also pretty simple. State wildlife management agencies are basically funded by hunters, and hunters see wolves as a threat to the animals that they`re hunting. So, there`s this competition and the fact that these agencies are almost 100 percent funded through hunting revenue shows where this conflict is.

These agencies are basically supposed to match species with the best available science, but in the case of the gray wolf throughout Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Minnesota and Wisconsin, it`s -- basically they`re being matched totally by politics. It`s a tragedy.

Right now as I speak to you, 25 percent of the Yellowstone wolf population has been killed just by venturing outside the park, Wyoming and Montana side. And out of those 25 percent, eight of those animals have been wearing radio telemetry collars; these were animals that were used in long-term research. That research has now been destroyed.

And again, the American public is pretty much unaware of what state wildlife agencies are all about. They`re really about supplying animals for people to kill.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Get involved. These wolves can`t speak for themselves. Go to They need your help. They`re being wiped out.

Nancy next.