Yet another brouhaha has erupted between the defense and the prosecution of the Casey Anthony murder trial. Friday’s proceedings were suspended and an indefinite recess called by Judge Perry due to the insistent whining by lead defense counsel José Baez that he should have the opportunity to depose two witnesses the State intended to give rebuttal testimony.

Perry is now clearly perturbed by the delay tactics and the continual nit picking by the defense. “There are real problems and there are imaginary problems. This better not be an imaginary problem.” He went on to say that the jury has been sequestered for over a month and are far away from home. While the attorneys can go home to their families every day and enjoy life as usual, the jurors cannot. They cannot use the Internet, read newspapers, listen to radio, or sit on the couch and watch whatever TV channels they feel like watching. They are effectively captives, and the attorneys should understand and respect the position they are in, particularly with regard to contrived issues or “imaginary problems.” The judge’s tone of voice suggested more than a hint of pique at the puerile behavior of opposing counsel.

Judge Perry has vowed to work late nights, weekends, and holidays in order to conclude the proceedings and give the trial to the jury. He voiced his firm conviction to do that by Sunday.

Meanwhile, Matthew Bartlett, the bird-flipper, is indeed in jail. I bet he doesn’t think he’s so cool now. Media reports bring out that Bartlett is not happy that Casey Anthony has been accused of and being prosecuted for a crime she did not commit. Oh, yeah? Based on what? Wishful thinking? Certainly, Ms. Anthony deserves from us all the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Bartlett and his cohort are entitled to think what they will of Casey’s guilt or innocence, but they are not entitled to make a mockery of the trial through juvenile actions. If Bartlett comes out unscathed after his six days, it is my hope that he nevertheless learned his lesson and sends a signal to the others who would make him their hero, but I doubt it.

You’ve no doubt read posts in newspaper feedback forums and the like by people of Bartlett’s ilk, or perhaps you’ve seen their Twitter tweets. They bitch every time Judge Perry sustains a prosecution objection or overrules a defense objection. “Of course!” they say, suggesting that Perry is in bed with the prosecution, reducing them to a lynch mob out to hang Ms. Anthony the Downtrodden. Perry, of course, long has been known for his firm and fair courtroom management. He has every reason to want to avoid being biased toward one side or another, especially in such an obvious manner as these morons suggest. An appellate judge would surely see through such an attitude if even these self-proclaimed experts do. Judge Perry has demonstrated throughout this trial that he is fair to a fault, and is patient and unbiased. Any suggestion to the contrary is sour grapes. Once again, we’re dealing with a cross-section of society that is self-absorbed and too used to getting its way. They don’t care about others’ rights or property. This is what concerns me. If the jury returns a guilty verdict, will these low-lifes turn to violence to express their displeasure?

I wouldn’t worry too much. I don’t think white people really know how to riot properly, anyhow.

Bartlett must have had an interesting night in jail. Assuming that he’s still a jail virgin, he must have been thinking of where he’s going to work after he gets canned (as he should) at T.G.I. Fridays. Maybe there’s a book deal in the offing for him. Haha. Perhaps Good Morning America will pay him $10,000 to appear, although Letterman is probably a better bet. He deserves to fade into obscurity and poverty but he will probably be able to capitalize somewhat on his 15 minutes of Warholian fame. It’s too bad that our society can reward a schmuck like this in any way at all.

I’ve spent enough time on Bartlett. He’s an asshole unworthy of my time. I’ll be following his appeal, though, just for laughs.

It’s lunch time for me and for the jury. They haven’t had to hear any testimony at all today. What a life this is for them! Can you imagine being ushered into and out of a courtroom all day sitting out long periods waiting to be called back in? Could any of these jurors have had any idea of what they were in for when they joined this jury back in May? Sitting and waiting. Sitting and listening. Sitting and waiting. Just sitting. I wonder what Orange County is feeding these people. The judge is very sensitive to their plight, but how many “regular folks” care about their hardship. Once they become known after the trial, they’ll face further hardship when partisans blame them for the verdict that didn’t go their way. These are ordinary people whose lives will be changed permanently by their unselfish participation in this trial.

I’ll be back atcha when anything happens, real or imaginary.

José Baez’s defense of Casey Anthony ended with a decidedly canine whimper instead of the much ballyhooed potential bang of the skanky defendant taking the stand. It says a lot for this trial when the featured event of the day involved a 28-year old chain restaurant waiter who flipped off prosecutor Jeff Ashton from the gallery during the trial and was summarily fined and sentenced to serve prison time by no-nonsense Judge Belvin Perry.

The first defense witness was River Cruz (née Krystal Holloway), who claimed she had a down and dirty affair with handsome George Anthony. He had strongly denied any such thing in prior testimony. Baez attempted to elicit testimony from Ms. Cruz that George had admitted that Caylee Anthony’s death “was an unfortunate accident gone out of control”, but under cross-examination, Cruz could not put the finger on George. Whether he laid a finger on her is moot, although a potential negative perception of Mr. Anthony could introduce doubt into jury deliberations.

Other witnesses were pretty dull until we entered the “dead dog” phase of the defense strategy. At this point, Baez called each of the Anthonys (sans Casey) to testify about the manner in which their dead pets had been wrapped and taped prior to burial. I found this to be highly disrespectful to the dearly departed doggies. How would you like to be taking your eternal dirt nap with people talking about how they wrapped you in plastic garbage bags secured by duct tape? I doubt that the jury would spend so much as a minute discussing the relationship between a duct taped dead doggie and little Caylee’s traumatic death. If Baez was trying to prove that Caylee’s death was an accident and that she received the same treatment as beloved family canines when they went to that great fire hydrant in the sky, how bizzare! Who the hell is going to buy that?

The court recessed for lunch at 11:30 and would resume at 1:30. This unusually long lunch break caused a buzz among the media vultures who, after the dead doggy testimony, were desperate for a story. Could Casey be going to take the stand? They rushed out to see who was having lunch with whom, and to glean what they could glean.

At 1:30, Ms. Anthony was seen signing several papers and discussing them animatedly with members of the defense team. This was all that the TV people needed to see to conclude some or all of the following must be true:

• Casey was going to testify and she was signing papers to absolve counsel of responsibility, as she was testifying against their advice
• Casey was not going to testify, and she was signing papers to indicate that she made that decision of her own volition
• Casey was probably in the midst of the defense cooking up a plea deal (huh?)

The document Ms. Anthony was signing turned out to be a routine stipulation (or as Judge Perry would call it, a “stippalation”). The media were screwed again. The judge asked both sides and the defendant if they had agreed to the stipulation, and once that was done, he called the jury back in.

Judge Perry: The defense may call their next witness.
José Baez: Your honor, the defense rests.

Casey Anthony would not testify. The judge asked her to answer several questions regarding her decision not to speak for herself: whether it was her decision and her decision alone, whether she made the decision under duress, and so forth. She satisfied the judge that all was hunky dory.

The jury was sent away for yet another argument between the opposing sides. The prosecution had obtained some time records from Cindy Anthony’s employer for its rebuttal of her claim that she was the one who did the computer searches involving chloroform on the Anthony’s home computer. Presumably, these time records would show that she was at work at the time the searches were done. Baez felt that there was not enough time for the defense to review the presumably voluminous records. Besides, the defense wanted records from the a day prior to the date of the documents obtained by the prosecution. At one point, Baez complained about the prosecution, “That’s all it is. More blablablablabla.” I believe that both sides are complicit in the blablablablabla. So the discussion wore on, with Baez asking for more time and Perry telling him essentially to pound sand. “It is what it is.”

After a couple of rebuttal witnesses had been heard, it was time for the featured event of the day, a trial within a trial. Perry first excused the jury for the day.

Matthew Bartlett, a 28 year-old white male waiter at T.G.I. Fridays at Millenia, was brought before the judge and shown two pictures.

Judge Perry: Do you recognize these pictures?
Bartlett: Yes.

Perry: Whose pictures are they?
Bartlett: That’s me.

Perry: And what are you doing in the pictures?
Bartlett: I’m giving a hand signal to Jeff Ashton.

Perry: You extended your middle finger. What does that hand signal mean?
Bartlett: It means the f-word to someone.

Perry then asked him when the flip-off took place — was it during the trial. The answer was yes. The judge asked Bartlett if he had read the signs on the door about not making gestures or facial expressions during the trial. He said he had. The judge asked him if he had been further instructed by the deputy in the proper comportment during the trial. He said he had. The judge then asked him why he did it in spite of all those indications that he shouldn’t. Bartlett would not say what we all knew he should: that he is a disrespectful asshole who thinks the world revolves around him. Instead, he abjectly apologized, hoping that the judge would accept the apology and send him home.

No such luck.

The judge summarily imposed a $400 fine and six days in the county jail for contempt of court. He said that Bartlett would also be responsible for court costs, which the clerk estimated would be approximately $230. The judge mercifully gave Bartlett a payment plan, with six equal monthly payments starting August 1. Then he advised Bartlett of his right to appeal and that if he couldn’t afford an attorney, the court would appoint one for him at public expense.

Perry: Do you wish to appeal?
Bartlett: [still somewhat taken aback by the sentence] Yes!

The judge then asked him what was his annual income, which turned out to be $15,000. He asked about savings accounts and checking accounts, in which Bartlett said he had $12 and $600, respectively. He asked about any other assets, which Bartlett denied owning. Finally, he asked what Bartlett’s monthly living expenses were. Bartlett replied that they were $1,500.

“The court will appoint a public defender for your appeal. You will be remanded and held at the county jail for processing. That will take about 45 minutes,” said Perry. Two deputies escorted Bartlett out of the room.

If you click here you can talk to an expert regarding the situation. This dumbass kid is bound to become a sensation among slackers — a hero, even. Remember the “Don’t taze me, bro!” guy in Gainesville? This guy is going to have that same sort of notoriety and following. Young hedonists, who think Casey is being wrongfully accused by a society bent on not letting the poor girl have a little fun (and by way of projection, doing the same thing to them), will lionize this schmuck for his brass balls and for taking the fall for their cause. I’m here to say that those who fall into that category are all assholes who didn’t have a proper upbringing, and their parents should be shot for malfeasance. These scofflaws contribute nothing to our society, but take more than their share. I hope Bartlett has a nice time being Bubba’s bitch down at 33rd Street.

Today, more rebuttal witnesses. Judge Perry still thinks summations can be delivered on Saturday morning and instructions given to the jury on Saturday afternoon. We’ll see.

Casey Anthony glared out of the corners of her eyes while  taking copious notes during her father’s emotional testimony yesterday, as the murder trial wore on.

Why would Ms. Anthony have the need for such detailed notes? I can think of three possibilities. One is that she wants to look busy and engaged for the jury. I doubt this is the case; otherwise, she would have been doing it throughout the trial. Another is that she wants to have a stronger voice in managing her defense. Perhaps so, as signs of friction between her and lead counsel Jose Baez seem to exist. The third, and most intriguing possibility is that she is preparing to testify to rebut her father’s testimony. This would be a powerful, albeit desperate, ploy by the defense that stands more chances of backfiring in their faces than anything else. Yet nobody has ruled it out.

Even if Ms. Anthony could make some points during a direct examination, she could be torn to shreds with the cross-examination talents of the prosecution team. It would be a great, big, humongous mistake for her to testify in her own defense. She doesn’t have to — the U.S. Constitution protects her right not to — and she shouldn’t. Nevertheless, the defense has shown regular flashes of self damaging behavior, to the incredulity of the assembled media circus performers at times, and it would not surprise me if they made this blunder.

If she does, she’ll be using what the monotonously droning, repetitious WFTV legal analyst, Bill Shaeffer, called “her soft voice.” (Shaeffer is annoying me, as you can tell. Not only is he of the “why use a sentence when a paragraph will do” ilk, but also his neologisms are vastly inferior to mine. “Hyperbolizing” just ain’t no word, Bill!)

Did George’s emotionality win points for the defense or the prosecution? I’ll be mealy mouthed and ambiguous in responding to that question. Baez probably cast some doubts upon Anthony’s credibility with his witheringly sleazy direct examination. However, George came across as sincere, a real person compared to Baez’s plasticity. I think that the end result will be a few points for the prosecution, which is why the defense might just be desperate enough at this juncture to recommend to Casey that she testify.

Other witnesses yesterday included meter reader Roy Kronk’s estranged son, who testified that Kronk had called him saying that he was going to be rich and that he should watch his dad, whom he hadn’t seen since he was eight years old, on TV. In the previous day’s testimony, Kronk had said that the phone call in question never occurred. I still believe Kronk. Nevertheless, this testimony could have planted some doubt in the jurors’ minds about him. The final witness of the day was a flaky grief expert from FSU. Her rambling answers confounded counsel on both sides, as they tried to reel her in, while she probably put half the jury to sleep. In the end, her testimony meant little, as she established only that grief can take on many different forms that differ from person to person. If I were awarding points, I’d probably give this one to the defense by a slim margin.

(If I were a fly on the wall listening to a conversation between the loquacious grief expert and the bombastically repetitive WFTV legal analyst, I would be sending out for a can of Raid.)

As adjournment neared, Judge Perry once again asked Baez when he thought he would be wrapping up the defense’s case. Baez responded that he saw no reason why the defense could not rest its case Thursday (today). Hallelujah! Given that the prosecution has scheduled some rebuttal witnesses, Perry told everyone not to plan any outside activities for Sunday or Monday (Independence Day), because although he could foresee handing the case over to the jury on Saturday, if anything went wrong with that schedule, he wanted to give the jury the option of working straight through the weekend.

There is still an open issue regarding the mistrial motion filed by Ann Finnell regarding the case in South Florida for which a Federal judge decided that Florida’s death penalty law is unconstitutional. If the judge grants the motion, we’ll have to do this whole damn thing all over again. With well over $300,000 having been spent thus far by the State of Florida, do you really think that Judge Perry is going to accept this motion?

Today, as the defense presumably will wrap up its case, there is a possibility of some Fourth of July fireworks if the mysterious Krystal Holloway, also known as River Cruz, testifies. The only reason for her to testify would be in essense to call George Anthony a liar and state that they did indeed have a sexual relationship as well as to represent that George had knowledge of the nature and time of the death of his grand-daughter. This would impugn George before the jury and possibly introduce some reasonable doubt. They probably have been sympathetic to George up to this point. I doubt that a wacko who renames herself River Cruz will have the needed credibility to change anything.

The big question looms, though. Will she or won’t she? We’ll find out today.