The defense, in the Casey Anthony case, is trying to create reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury so they will find her innocent of the murder charges. They are trying to counter any and all theories of the prosecution. What are there strategies?
Well, for one, they are trying to suggest that no one killed Caylee, she died in a drowning accident. This is why April Whalen’s story is important. If they can tied her story to Casey’s copycat story, it will take away one of the defense’s ploys to get Casey off the hook.
Second, they are suggesting that if the drowning wasn’t an accident, but a murder, it wasn’t Casey’s doing. They are trying to implicate her father one way or another.
Third, if Casey is guilty of anything at all, it was merely trying to cover up the accidental death of Caylee.
Fourth, the police acquired their evidence illegally.
And fifth, the story of Caylee drowning is just as plausible as the theory being suggested by the prosecution.
These are all alternative suggestions to what the prosecution is arguing, in order to create doubt in the minds of the jurors. If all else fails, the defense will say that the prosecution failed to provide enough evidence to convict Casey of murder. And, of course, they are laying the groundwork for an appeal in the event Casey is found guilty. All this time, effort and money to try to keep a lying, murdering, sociopath from going to prison?
I have to admit that the defense’s strategy has created reasonable doubt in my mind. After watching several days of the trial I now have some serious doubts as to whether Jose Baez is actually a qualified attorney.