Return to Transcripts main page

ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES

Casey Anthony Found Not Guilty of Murder

Aired July 5, 2011 - 22:00   ET

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


JOHN KING, CNN ANCHOR: This is a special edition of 360.

Millions took a lost little girl into their hearts. They cast a cold eye on her mom, then followed every twist in her mom's murder trial and debated every detail. Tonight, what those millions can't stop talking about and what happens next after 12 men and women had their say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE BELVIN PERRY, ORANGE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT: Will the defendant rise, along with counsel?

Madam clerk, you may publish the verdicts.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you, Judge.

"In the Circuit Court for the Ninth Judicial Circuit in and for Orange County Florida, the State of Florida Versus Casey Marie Anthony, as to case number 2008DF15606-0, as to the charge of first- degree murder, verdict as to count one, we, the jury, find the defendant not guilty, so say we all, dated at Orlando, Orange County, Florida.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: You see it there. A tearful Casey as the "not guilty"s rolled into every charge except lying to authorities. She will be sentenced for that on Thursday.

The defense's decision to keep her off the stand in retrospect looking like a safe one, reaction afterwards from the defense attorney, Jose Baez.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSE BAEZ, ATTORNEY FOR CASEY ANTHONY: What my driving force has been for the last three years has always been to make sure that there has been justice for Caylee and Casey, because Casey did not murder Caylee. It's that simple.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: The defense team's decisions later on the other hand to celebrate, whooping it up at a restaurant directly across from the courtroom, well, lots of eyebrows raised about how appropriate or not that was.

This new video coming to us tonight from Orlando affiliate WKMG. A little later, we will talk to Jean Casarez, who was invited inside that restaurant and was able to talk to members of the defense team. As for the prosecution, late word that this will be Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton's last case. He's retiring. Other than that, no comment.

No comment either from voting members of the jury, nor from Casey's family, who left the courtroom quickly and quietly, issuing a brief statement through their attorney later. It reads in part, "While the family may never what has happened to Caylee Marie Anthony, they now have closure for this chapter of their life. They will now begin the long process of rebuilding their lives."

Again sentencing for the lying charges, that happens Thursday. Second-guessing on the other hand is forever. And there's plenty of that tonight. An awful lot to talk about no matter what you expected to happen. We have got a wide range of views tonight.

We begin though with the facts, the very latest and Martin Savidge, who was in the courtroom as all this unfolded in Orlando.

Martin, take us inside that room. Just what was it like as the verdict, the drama was unfolding?

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, really the drama began, John, at about 11:25. That's when Karen Levey, who's the spokesperson for court, came into the media and said, look, there's been a verdict.

Well, that set everyone into motion. Calls are made. Networks get ready. And the drama was starting to unfold at that time. So then we make our way towards the courtroom. And that's where I run into Jeff Ashton in the hallway there.

He was very pumped up. He clearly felt that the verdict was going to go their way, as did many because they thought it was a short deliberation, usually meant it was going the prosecution's way. However we get into the courtroom, deathly silent. Nobody is saying anything. It is packed. Every seat is taken.

And then you watched the defendant come in, Casey Anthony. She was clearly very shaken, trembling. She had tears in her eyes. Her attorneys were crowding around her. They were speaking to her in soft tones. They obviously had a fear that this could not go their way.

Then you had the verdict that was read. And what a 180. As far as everybody that was listening, there was no sound. They were literally left speechless because of what they had heard. The only sounds in the courtroom were gasps, literally, coming from the defense team, and then sobs.

This was not high-five period yet. This was not hugs yet. It was a sob as if every emotion they had tied up in all of them came coming out at once and they went into that group hug there. And then you also saw Casey's reaction there as she just suddenly lets it all loose and realizes that she is not going to be found guilty.

It really was remarkable from the way people felt going in to the way they felt coming out. And then you saw (AUDIO GAP) they came up, the Anthony family. And they quickly left. So that is how it all came to a head, great drama, but certainly not the way many people thought it was going to turn.

KING: Well, Martin, you mentioned the family heading out without saying anything. You have that contrast in emotions. She is crying, the defense team is hugging. The family is gone, and her brother is not even in the courtroom. Anything to make of that?

SAVIDGE: Well, this is a trial that showed and not just to a court but to a nation how dysfunctional many people perceived the Anthony family to be.

And it's quite clear that this was also a trial that tore that family, I won't say completely apart, because we don't know that, but certainly tore the fabric that makes up the family unit. Lee was not there, had not been there for a couple of days. You know that there was one point where he contradicted on the stand what his mother had said.

The mother had gotten up and she had been contradicted as a result of evidence that showed that, yes, she did lie, claiming she was on the computer when clearly work records showed she could not be. And then there was the case of the alleged affair that George Anthony had.

So a whole family, their dark secrets, everything exposed for everyone to see. It is hard to imagine how they will all come back together at Thanksgiving and celebrate. And, yet, they are blood and flesh. And they will one day have to face one another.

KING: One thing we don't have tonight, Martin, the camera's not allowed to point at the jury during these deliberations. The jurors were supposed to give a press conference this afternoon. And you had been designated to ask the first question. But then it was abruptly canceled. Do we know why?

SAVIDGE: No, we don't know why. Well, here's what we know. It wasn't so much that it was canceled. It's that we understood that the jurors would be asked, all right. Now the media would like to interview you. It is traditional. It's pretty much that you can go forward if you wish.

It could have been all, it could have been some. But we certainly expected that a few of them would go before the cameras. And we were told that, yes, they're making arrangements for that to happen. Everything had been set up, cameras in place, reporters there as well.

And then we had Karen Levey come in again and tell us, no, they have all decided that they do not wish to talk to anyone in the media. And also they don't want to be identified, which is again their right. They do not have to do that. That was explained clearly to them. And they clearly felt that they would rather not talk, at least at this point -- John.

KING: Great reporting up close from Martin Savidge on the scene in that courtroom. Martin, thanks.

And despite the lack of comment from the 12 voting jurors, one of the alternates did speak briefly, expressing doubts about the state's evidence. So our view into what the jury was thinking is quite limited. On the other hand, we watched and saw almost exactly what they did in court.

Here's Tom Foreman with the key moments.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The jury took less than 11 hours to hand down a verdict, but sat through 35 long days of arguments, alibis and shocking allegations, starting with the defense's opening statements.

BAEZ: And shortly thereafter, George began to yell at her, look what you have done. Your mother will never forgive you.

This child at 8 years old learned to lie immediately. She could be 13 years old, have her father's (INAUDIBLE) in her mouth and then go to school and play with the other kids as if nothing ever happened.

FOREMAN: And from the prosecution?

LINDA BURDICK, PROSECUTOR: Casey Anthony went to a club with her boyfriend Tony Lazzaro and entered or participated in a hot body contest. Caylee Anthony wasn't there. Caylee Anthony wasn't at home with (INAUDIBLE). Caylee Anthony wasn't with her grandmother Cindy. So where is Caylee?

FOREMAN: At the start, it looked like the prosecution had a clear edge. The jury saw pictures of Casey out partying, getting a tattoo, enjoying the wild life even as her daughter went missing.

The state said this was evidence enough that young mom did not want to be a mother anymore and planned her child's murder on a home computer.

John Bradley is a software expert.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is that a Google search?

JOHN BRADLEY, SOFTWARE EXPERT: Yes, it is.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: For?

BRADLEY: The words neck breaking with a space in between, head underscore injury. Ruptured spleen. Chest trauma. Hand-to-hand combat. A search turned up internal bleeding.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How many times was that site visited?

BRADLEY: According to the history, 84 times.

FOREMAN: Central to the state's case was the theory that Casey used duct tape and chloroform to kill Caylee. The defense struggled to explain her often contradictory stories to investigators and friends. But then came a bombshell from Casey's mother, Cindy Anthony.

BAEZ: Do you recall in March of 2008 you doing any types of searches for any items that might include chloroform?

CINDY ANTHONY, MOTHER OF CASEY ANTHONY: Yes.

FOREMAN: Suddenly, the prosecution was scrambling, forced to prove that Cindy was at work when those computer searches were done from the Anthony home.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you first opened it, what was your reaction?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I essentially jumped back a foot or two.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you immediately recognize the odor that was emanating from the piece of carpet in the can?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I recognized it as human decomposition.

FOREMAN: But Casey refused to take the stand herself.

JUDGE BELVIN PERRY, ORANGE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT: And it is your decision not to testify?

CASEY ANTHONY, DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.

FOREMAN: Letting her lawyers portray her as a victim, too, picking away at the prosecution's story.

J. CHENEY MASON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Can you from the evidence, sir, rule out accidental death?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No.

FOREMAN: They called Casey's father, George Anthony, the culprit behind an accidental drowning death in the family swimming pool, who then forced his daughter into a cover-up.

They accused him of sexually abusing Casey Anthony as a child. He denied it.

GEORGE ANTHONY, FATHER OF CASEY ANTHONY: Sir, I never would do anything like that to my daughter.

FOREMAN: The defense also claimed Casey's only brother, Lee, tried to grope her. Her mother slapped that accusation down.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you recall several years back, when there -- were there was an incident involving your son, Lee, going into Casey's room at night?

CINDY ANTHONY: No.

FOREMAN: But most of all, Casey's defense team pounded away on the fact that precisely when and how Caylee died remains unclear to this day.

BAEZ: You have to have an abiding conviction of guilt. That's what you have to have inside of you. You have to know that this case was proven.

FOREMAN: And in the end, it was enough. The once seemingly sure case for the prosecution crumbled, and so did the murder charges against Casey Anthony.

Tom Foreman, CNN.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: Crumbled, as Tom just said, but leaving plenty, plenty of rubble to dig through.

Joining us now, Andrea Lyon, Casey Anthony's former lead defense attorney, also criminal defense attorney Mark Geragos and veteran San Francisco prosecuting attorney Paul Henderson.

Mark Geragos, let me start with you. You have experience defending somebody like this in a high-profile capital murder case. What's your reaction to the verdict today?

MARK GERAGOS, ATTORNEY: Well, I think that this verdict was the only -- the logical verdict.

Any time you have got a case where you can't show the cause or manner of death and you have got pathologists who say, I don't know and I can't rule out accidental, what else do you expect a jury to do? My only fear for the defense in this case all along was that somehow this kind of drumbeat and presumption of guilt was going to overwhelm the complete lack of evidence of a crime.

And, clearly, the -- I think at least the sequestration of the jury is what -- what helped her achieve justice. And for those who say there was no justice in this case, I take great issue with that. Here in America, we have a presumption of innocence. The prosecution has the burden of proof.

The prosecution woefully fell flat in this case at all times. They're the ones who invested themselves in this kind of guilt by character assassination. And they forgot about the one thing that they needed in this case, which was actual evidence. And they didn't have actual evidence.

KING: Well, Paul Henderson, you disagree with the defense there. You disagree with Mark Geragos. Why?

PAUL HENDERSON, PROSECUTOR: Well, look, I was shocked and disappointed with the verdict, like I think a lot of other people that are familiar with this case are and a lot of people that watched this case were as well.

We know it was a circumstantial case. And those are tough cases when you're proving a homicide. This case in particular was fraught with a lot of distractions and did not have a lot of hard evidence to present to a jury. And so it's difficult in trying to get them to understand what happened when there's not a lot of evidence to support those theories.

You know, one of my concerns and I think the concerns that a lot of people were reflecting in frustration with this case is that, even based on Casey's own statements about what could have happened or what supposedly happened with the case, her behavior was just as much part of the evidence as everything else that the jury heard.

And that was a real distraction. I spoke to my sister, who is a forensic psychologist, about this case and her observations, too. And one of the things that was really interesting that she pointed out was the sociopathic behavior of Casey in association with this case just made everyone associated with this case and watching this case believe that she was more guilty rather than innocent.

And so that's why I think this verdict when it came out was such a shock to everyone, at least to the people that I was with and that I spoke to about the case and that I know was watching this case.

(CROSSTALK)

HENDERSON: It's still a shock to me.

KING: Still a shock on the one hand.

But, Andrea Lyon, you were once part of this defense team. What was it in your view that won your former client this acquittal?

ANDREA LYON, FORMER CASEY ANTHONY DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, what won my former client this acquittal is that the evidence wasn't there, that the prosecution overreached. They used junk science. They attempted to overwhelm the lack of evidence with character assassination.

And the mob mentality -- there's all this talk sometimes about drinking the Kool-Aid. Well, I think the prosecution did, too. They did not have evidence of a homicide. They didn't have evidence of a murder. And instead of charging her with charges that they could sustain, like the lying charges or perhaps charges for child endangerment for not reporting her daughter missing, instead of charging her with the evidence that they actually had, they reached more because they believed, they believed, they had some subjective belief that no mother would behave this way.

Well, maybe a mother that they know wouldn't behave this way. Maybe we all would say this is not how we would behave. I'm a parent myself. And I wouldn't -- if my son or daughter were missing for 31 seconds, let alone 31 days, I would be raising all kinds of hell. But that is not evidence and that is not proof. And this jury took a look at the actual evidence presented to them, and they said this isn't enough, not in America. And thank goodness they weren't jurors from Orlando. I can tell you that much.

KING: Well, Mark Geragos, the public relations aspect of this continued right after the trial. Casey Anthony's lead attorney, Jose Baez, saying there were no winners tonight.

Let's be honest tonight. Casey Anthony was acquitted of capital murder. She beat the death penalty. Maybe you can't call her a winner. She's got a tough life -- putting her life together. But she did today as well as she could have given all the evidence about her lying that even the defense conceded, correct?

GERAGOS: Well, correct. And I would echo everything that your previous guest just said. Thank goodness we live in America. Thank goodness that the mob mentality did not rule here.

I know that it's not a popular opinion to express, but the fact remains that this jury was charged with looking at this case beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the prosecution had the burden of proof.

They decided -- the prosecution decided to engage in just nothing but blatant character assassination. And that, I think, was the big problem in this case. They didn't have -- and they had a sequestered jury. And apparently the kind of guilt by osmosis that they would have seen if they weren't sequestered didn't seep into that jury room.

Instead of people saying that this is a tragedy -- because any time that you have a little girl who dies, that's a tragedy -- I think the true tragedy is, is when people say we're never going to know what really happened and she should have been convicted. That to me is absolutely inexplicable.

If you don't know what happened, how can you convict somebody beyond a reasonable doubt and put them to death? I mean, it makes no sense whatsoever. Maybe it's good for Iran or North Korea, but not in America.

KING: I'm going to ask everyone to stick around. We will come back to all of you shortly.

And let us know what you think. We're on Facebook or follow me on Twitter @JohnKingCNN. I will be tweeting tonight.

Up next: more on what the defense did and how it won the day for a client whose reputation for truth-telling, well, already a long shot long before the trial began. In that vein, we will highlight some of the many statements Casey Anthony made that were simply not true, including an imaginary nanny.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CINDY ANTHONY: What do you want me to tell Zanny?

CASEY ANTHONY: That she needs to return Caylee. I forgive her.

CINDY ANTHONY: What do you think her reasons are?

CASEY ANTHONY: Mom, I don't know.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MASON: I hope that this is a lesson to those of you having indulged in media assassination for three years, bias, and prejudice, and incompetent talking heads saying what would be and how to be.

I'm disgusted by some of the lawyers that have done this. And I can tell you that my colleagues from coast to coast and border to border have condemned this whole process of lawyers getting on television and talking about cases that they don't know a damn thing about it and don't have the experience to back up their words or the law to do it. Now you have learned a lesson.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: You're watching a special edition of 360.

Strong words there, defense attorney Cheney Mason taking a shot at the coverage and legal commentary. Some today calling the media in this trial and other high-profile cases a 13th juror for the prosecution.

Yet the real jurors still managed to acquit. And, again, until they talk, if they ever will, we won't know for sure why they decided the way they did. But as you saw a moment ago, the defense presented powerful closing arguments. Here's another portion of that case.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BAEZ: Here we are at the end of our journey. And I have to tell you that I probably think you have more questions than you have answers.

And if you recall, at opening statements, the first -- the final thing that I told you, at the end of the day, when everything is said and done, the one question will never be answered. The key question in this case will never be answered. It can never be proven. And that is, how did Caylee die?

This case must not be decided for or against anyone because you feel sorry for anyone or are angry at anyone. And that's because, obviously, we want you to base your verdict on the evidence, not on emotion. If you have questions, then it was not proven.

And that's as simple as it goes. And there's no way in looking at all of these circumstances that you can say that she -- that this case was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. There's just no way. And there's various reasons why this is such.

It began with part of the cover-up. It began with -- it also concluded with part of the information and the investigation as to where it was carried out. To find her guilty of any single charge, any single one of them, you have to have an abiding conviction of guilt. That's what you have to have inside of you. You have to know that this case was proven. You have to know that these facts were proven. And you don't have that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: And that might have been key. Whatever else Jose Baez said or didn't say, whomever the defense chose to call to testify, jurors may have simply believed the prosecution failed to meet its burden of proof.

For the moment, we can only go on what alternate juror Russel Huekler said. He wasn't involved in the deliberations on the verdict. We need to be clear about that. But here's what he told our sister network HLN.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUSSEL HUEKLER, ALTERNATE JUROR: The prosecution did not prove their case. The big question that was not answered, how did Caylee die, I think there was probably a lot of discussion that it was probably a horrific accident that dad and Casey covered up. And, unfortunately, it did snowball and got away from them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Let's talk more about the jury, the defense and how the defense prevailed with legal contributor Sunny Hostin from "In Session" on truTV, also forensic scientist and Anthony defense team member Larry Kobilinsky.

Sunny, we heard in the intro there one of the alternate jurors say simply he didn't believe the prosecution proved the case. Do you think that says anything about the -- what I will call the real jurors, those who had to make the decision in the end here, were debating and thinking?

SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I think there's no question about it. The prosecution has the burden of proof. And that burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. It's a very high legal standard.

And the burden is never shifted. It's never shifted to the defense. And so, when you look at this case -- and I have been looking at it, John, as you know, from the very beginning, not just over the past 35, 36 days, but pretrial and before then -- it is pretty clear that this was a circumstantial case from the very beginning.

The prosecutors thought they had the who, but I don't think they ever really answered when Caylee died, how did Caylee die. Why did Caylee die is a big piece of it. So when you look at it like that, I think Jose Baez in his opening statement said reasonable doubt lives in this case. And I think that's come to pass.

KING: And yet, Larry, Sunny makes a strong case there. But when you heard the jury had reached a verdict so quickly, shy of 11 hours of deliberations, did your gut say bad news for the defense?

DR. LAWRENCE KOBILINSKY, PROFESSOR OF FORENSIC SCIENCE, JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE: Yes. At first, I thought that the jury had used its anger and hostility toward Casey and made an emotional decision.

I mean, it was a very short deliberation, considering the complexity of the case that went on for six weeks. But I think the jury -- clearly, I mean, they were looking at the state's case. And they felt they didn't make the case. And even though there was science used by the state, I think the jurors decided that that science was not reliable.

Certainly, the defense pulled out their experts, and they neutralized -- essentially neutralized every piece of evidence. And there's real questions now about whether that evidence ever should have been part of this trial.

KING: And, Sunny, one of the questions that get asked -- Mr. Kobilinsky makes that point there. Look, we know there was no direct evidence. They could not directly connect the dots. On a lot of high-profile cases now, including this one, people will ask, did the prosecution overreach, did they overcharges, especially when it came to seeking a capital murder conviction?

HOSTIN: Yes, I think people are saying that. I'm not going to go so far, John, as to say they overcharged this case. But they certainly went all in.

And when I say that, they decided that the theory here was one of premeditation. And in sticking with that, they had to prove that Casey Anthony used chloroform to disable her daughter and then used duct tape over her nose and mouth to suffocate her. Why? Because she wanted to lead this beautiful life. She wanted to party.

They stuck to that theory. And I don't know that the evidence was there to support this first-degree premeditated murder charge. And so overcharging, I don't think I will go that far, but they certainly didn't give the jury alternate theories, anything else to work with.

So if the jury decided, as obviously they did, they didn't believe the premeditation piece, they didn't believe the duct tape was the instrument of death, then it's over for the prosecution.

KING: Larry, you raised questions about the science involved here. The alternate juror we heard from a moment ago said he had a very hard time believing the scientific evidence that you had questioned. Specifically, one of the points he raised was this decomposition, the smell in Casey's car, with the prosecution saying they had scientific proof that it was a human. You're a member of the defense team, which makes you biased, of course, but what are your sense of the biggest holes in the prosecution's science argument?

KOBILINSKY: Well, I think that the air sampling procedure, the work of Dr. Vass, I wouldn't call it junk science, but I would say it's not state-of-the-art, it's not ready for prime time. It is not truly reliable.

Oak Ridge National Laboratory is not a crime lab. The -- Dr. Vass is an anthropologist. He's not a chemist. There were even some issues raised about whether there was some monetary gain in using this equipment for a major trial.

But I think that if you're going to use technology, science in the courtroom, it's got to be reliable. It's got to be validated. It's got to be tested. It's got to be published. There's got to be peer review. And it was lacking. It just never should have gotten into the hands of the jury.

And I have to give them a lot of credit, because usually jurors don't understand the science. And it was essentially neutralized by Ken Furton and others who discussed the pitfalls of doing science, but not doing it the right way.

The controls were not done at the same time as the samples. This is unheard of. So, I'm just -- I'm shocked that it got into the courtroom in the first place. I think the jury made the right decision.

Science is wonderful. It gives you factual information, if it's done right, if it's reliable. But that's -- I don't think that was the case here.

KING: Well, Sunny, Larry's talking there about what happened in the courtroom, the court of law.

What about the court of public opinion? If you listen to all those people who were outside the courthouse, a lot of outrage over the not-guilty verdict. Is that outrage right, or did the system work here?

HOSTIN: I think the system worked. And quite frankly, I'm surprised that there is so much outrage. Certainly, there's outrage because a little girl is dead, and we don't know what happened and who did it at this point. I don't know that we'll ever really know what happened.

But the system certainly worked in a sense that we had cameras in the courtroom, John. People saw a good defense team. They saw good prosecutors. They saw good judge -- a good judge. And then they have 12 people of her peers that didn't know Casey Anthony, listened to all the evidence, sequestered for 33 days, and decide her fate. And they decided it fairly. And so when people are outraged and say the system doesn't work, I say they're wrong. The system worked the way it was supposed to work. And just because you don't agree with the verdict doesn't mean you should say that the system is wrong.

KING: I think we can all agree on that one of the points you just made there, which is we may never know, the sadness of that. We may never know. A 2-year-old girl is dead, and we may never know exactly what happened. Sonny Hostin, Larry Kobilinsky, thanks for your time tonight.

Up next here, the lies Casey Anthony told. The jury only convicted her of lying to police. We'll take a look at the elaborate world that Casey made up, inventing a nanny, a job, even a whole group of friends.

And later a lingering question in the case: who is Caylee's father? Some of the theories coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LAWSON LAMAR, STATE ATTORNEY FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA: Reasonable doubt as to each and every element in a case, especially a case like this, which is a mosaic of proof with no smoking gun and a tiny victim who is reduced by time and the elements to skeletal remains, those remains lacking in any chemical evidence that could be brought forward. This was a dry bones case. Very, very difficult to prove.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: State attorney Lawson Lamar speaking today after a jury found Casey Anthony not guilty of any of the murder charges against her. The jury convicted her on four misdemeanor counts of giving false information to the police.

And in fact, one of the most fascinating aspects of this entire case was the elaborate web of lies that Casey spun.

Now, the defense freely admitted Casey just made up dates, facts, places, even people. Here's a look at some of those lies.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LINDA DRANE-BURDICK, PROSECUTOR: When Casey Anthony's lie can no longer stand, Casey Anthony comes up with a new, a bigger, and a better lie.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're tired of the lies. No more lies. What happened to Caylee?

CASEY ANTHONY, ACQUITTED OF MURDER: I don't know.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You do know. CASEY ANTHONY: I don't know where she is. That is the God's honest truth.

I can feel it, mom. I know she's still OK. We're going to get our little girl back. She's going to be just as she was.

DR. DREW PINSKY, HOST OF HLN'S "DR. DREW": In order to lie with this degree of conviction, you kind of on some level have to really believe what you're saying.

LEE ANTHONY, BROTHER OF CASEY: Where should I focus a search or tips or reaching out to people?

CASEY ANTHONY: Check -- check things locally, Lee, in all honesty. Places that are familiar to us. To our family.

NANCY GRACE, HLN HOST: In a stunning turn, Tot Mom's own lawyer admits Tot Mom lied. That there never was a Zanny the nanny, the mystery woman Tot Mom swore kidnapped Caylee.

CASEY ANTHONY: They never searched by her full name, Z-E-N-A-I- D-A. And I know she went by both last names. She always has, since she was younger, since her mom remarried.

CINDY ANTHONY, CASEY'S MOTHER: Victor and Gloria are her parents?

CASEY ANTHONY: But I know she has a lot of money. And that's where she got the car from. She has his last name. And her mother's last name.

CINDY ANTHONY: Oh, he adopted her?

CASEY ANTHONY: He adopted her. He legally adopted her, yes.

RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Casey also took investigators here to Universal Studios. According to the affidavit, she told them she worked here as an event coordinator.

DRANE-BURDICK: So what happens once you get into the building?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We walk into the building. She turns left, starts walking down this hallway. And about halfway down the hallway she stops, turns, looks at us and says, "I don't work here."

JEFF ASHTON, PROSECUTOR: When Casey is faced with a problem, her solution is to change her lie, to modify it.

CASEY ANTHONY: I as a mom, I know in my gut there's feelings. You know certain things about your child. You can feel that connection. And I still have that feeling, that presence. I know that she's alive.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: Joining us again, Casey Anthony's previously defense attorney Andrea Lyon, criminal defense attorney Mark Geragos and prosecutor Paul Henderson.

Andrea Lyon, to you first. The defense team acknowledges -- we just played many. Lie after lie, after lie. Answer the person out there watching tonight who says if she told all these lies she had to be guilty.

ANDREA LYON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, there's a difference between telling a lie and being guilty of a crime. But here is what the prosecution tried to do.

They overcharged the case, and they asked for the death penalty in the case. And they asked for the death penalty inappropriately with a person who had no -- no violence in her background, no criminal history other than writing a bad check. And they did it to gain the advantage of a death-qualified jury from which everyone who was against the death penalty has been excused, a pro-prosecution, pro- police jury that was more likely to convict than another jury. And they did that on purpose.

And now all of a sudden everybody's been this drum beat. She's a liar so she's guilty. She went out partying so she's guilty. She must be a murderer if she's a bad person. That is the way that this prosecution went forward. They put all their eggs in that basket.

And now -- now they have an acquittal on their hands, and they have an acquittal on their hands because they did not fairly look at the evidence. They were horrified by the way that she behaved. And they listened to the mob around them in Orlando. And believe me when I tell you it's a mob in Orlando. And that's what they did. They prosecuted her for her bad character instead of for the evidence that they had.

And it's really kind of interesting to me to now listen to people talking about proof beyond a reasonable doubt when yesterday and this morning they were all talking about there was no question this jury was going to convict her. Only a question of what level of offense.

KING: Well, Paul Henderson you were shaking your head during a lot of that. To this point, if this was a pro-prosecution jury and these lies are so damning, why didn't they carry more weight?

PAUL HENDERSON, PROSECUTOR: Look, here's the thing. And it's very disappointing and challenging. And you know, I believe in the criminal justice system. But I disagree with this verdict.

And I think what -- the frustration that you're seeing is reflected in the understanding and the knowledge that so many of us in the public have in knowing that Casey's own behavior and Casey's own lies contributed to them not having evidence.

And so that's why people have such a visceral response. The reason we never got to have a full autopsy is because she never worked with law enforcement. She never told anybody where the body was. She lied about what she was doing. She lied about her past.

And you know, she said even in her own statements, she did know. She did know that -- she said that it was an accident and the baby drowned. Well, where is that body? Why cannot someone prove your story? Why can't we know what happened to your baby and to your child?

The fact that now she is benefiting in some way from her lies, the fact that she ends up benefiting from her terrible behavior as what we would perceive to be a good mother is just what makes people feel very frustrated with how this case ultimately ended with this verdict. That's the challenge and that's the frustration I think you're seeing in the public.

KING: And it's Mark Geragos shaking his head. Now, you know, Mark, she was convicted of lies, four counts of giving false information to the police. If the judge gave her the maximum of each of those would be four years. She's been in prison roughly 32 months being held without bail.

Do you assume that she will just be released now for time served and just set free? And are you surprised her defense team -- maybe they're a little bit stunned today -- didn't ask today that she be released?

MARK GERAGOS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, when you're facing the death penalty and you're convicted of misdemeanors, I don't think your immediate action is, "Judge, I want my sentencing hearing right now."

But let me respond to a couple of other things. Did the prosecution prove that she's a liar? Yes, beyond a reasonable doubt. Is that -- is there a single jury instruction that says if the prosecution proves beyond a reasonable doubt these misdemeanor lying to an officer charges that, therefore, you give somebody the death penalty? No. There is no such jury instruction.

And I share Cheney's outrage about what has gone on in this case. The -- the commentators and some of the bozos and yahoos that they have put on in the media commenting on this case and holding themselves out as lawyers, who have never tried a serious felony case, has been absolutely abysmal.

And part of the reason that the public is, I suppose, so outraged is because there are so many clowns masquerading as lawyers on TV, giving the public and feeding the public misinformation. If the public understood -- if the public knew that most of this nonsense that they see spewed by bleached blond former prosecutors is just that, nonsense, that never gets into a courtroom, that never reaches that jury, they wouldn't be surprised.

If the public understood the fact that the prosecution has this very high burden that separates us from the rest of the totalitarian regimes, the public wouldn't be there outraged. The public would be celebrating the fact that the criminal justice system works.

KING: Mark Geragos, Paul Henderson, Andrea Lyon -- Mark, I think I know where you were going with that last one -- we're going to leave it right there. Thanks for coming in tonight. Still ahead here, you'll hear what the defense team was saying and doing inside that restaurant as they celebrated their big victory today. "In Session's" Jean Casarez was right there. She joins us ahead.

Plus a huge question that still hasn't been answered. Who's Caylee's father? And did that question help the defense win its case?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: As we said earlier, minutes after the verdict was announced the defense team went to a bar near the courthouse to celebrate. You could see several of Casey's lawyers right there in this video from our Orlando affiliate, WKMG. Well, Jean Casarez, a correspondent for "In Session" on TruTV, was there in that room by invitation. She joins me now.

Jean, first you had a chance, obviously. You're right in there with the defense team. Anything they said to you which gives you any indication about what they expect to come next? Will Casey be going home? Where she might end up?

JEAN CASAREZ, CORRESPONDENT, TRUTV'S "IN SESSION": They definitely want her to be released as a free woman on Thursday. There is sentencing of those four counts, those first degree misdemeanor counts that are up to one year in jail. That would equate to four years in jail. They're going to try to get her to be sentenced to time served, which would mean that she would be released on Thursday. That is what they will argue for, saying that all four counts occurred during the same incident. Therefore they should be served concurrently, meaning together, that would mean one year. And she has been in jail far longer than one year.

KING: And so Jean, you got this invitation to come to the defense party after the verdict. Tell us what was happening, what you saw.

CASAREZ: Well, first of all, I was invited as a journalist to stand there, watch, observe and report what was going on. And I want everybody to know that this was a restaurant across the street from the courthouse. This is where the defense has gone to lunch every single day of this trial. It is in the office building of Cheney mason. So I think that they would go here for their get together after the verdict. It was a very small number of people. It was the staff attorneys, their assistants, someone from the public defender's office was there. The defense's mitigation specialist. The fair verdict for their client of not guilty.

There were seven flat-screen televisions throughout this restaurant, and they were watching the local coverage in Orlando. And whenever the verdict was announced, everyone would watch and listen, watch the reactions, and they would clap. They would hug each other.

They also watched the defense press conference. And clapped and were very ecstatic, I believe from, just their opportunity to step before the microphones to voice their thoughts and opinions on this verdict.

Lube: Obviously they won a high-profile case. And one would expect them to have celebration and reflection. Any concern at all that doing I it.

CASAREZ I don't think they ever realized it. I think this is where they go every day. This is where they veered to today. And I don't think it crossed their mind what the public perceptions would be.

And you know what? They probably don't care. Because they care about Casey. And they didn't want to talk about the case. They didn't want to talk about the evidence. They wanted to relax.

KING: Jean Casarez, thanks for sharing that with us tonight.

And the Casey Anthony trial is over. The jury has spoken. But so many questions remain. Including this one. Who is Caylee Anthony's father? It was a big question Mark going into the trial. And the defense tried to use it to their advantage. Here's Randi Kaye.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It is the other question in the Casey Anthony trial. Who was little Caylee Anthony's trial?

To answer that question, it's best to start with who we know it isn't. We know it's not Casey's own father, George, nor her brother, Lee. The FBI's DNA tests ruled that out. But that didn't stop the defense from suggesting it during one of the most explosive moments of the trial, George or Lee Anthony. But that didn't stop the defense from suggesting it during one of the most explosive moments of the trial.

JOSE BAEZ, ATTORNEY FOR CASEY: Were you asked to conduct a paternity test on for Lee Anthony as to Caylee -- being the potential father of Caylee Anthony?

KAYE: Jesse Grund, Casey Anthony's ex-fiance, isn't the father, either.

JESSE GRUND, FORMER FIANCE OF CASEY: I got a paternity test done to prove that I was not Caylee's biological father.

KAYE: Grund says a pregnant Casey told him the baby was his. But when Caylee was born less than seven months after the couple had met, he knew it wasn't true. Even so, Grund wanted to be a father to her.

NANCY GRACE, HLN ANCHOR: Did you love little Caylee like she was your own child?

GRUND: A piece of paper couldn't tell me not to love her like she was my daughter. KAYE: But Casey Anthony told different things to different people. According to this deposition by Brittany Sheiber, an old friend, Casey told Brittany she didn't know who the father was. Brittany goes on to say that Casey's best friend told her Casey said it was just a, quote, "random one-night stand." Another old friend, Melina Calabrese said to detectives -- Casey, at first, said her fiance Jesse Grund was the father.

But after the couple broke up in May 2006, Casey said Caylee's real father was a one-night stand named Josh. Casey gave no last name but said he was from Georgia.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did she tell you how old he was?

MELINA CABRESE, FORMER FRIEND OF CASEY: Actually, no.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did she describe him to you?

CABRESE: No. She said he was really hot.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And did she say what happened to Josh?

CABRESE: Josh passed away in a car accident shortly after Caylee's second birthday.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That would have been 2007?

KAYE: And here's what Casey apparently told her mother after revealing that her ex-fiance wasn't the father.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Who did you think Caylee's father was?

CINDY ANTHONY: She gave me a name of Eric Baker.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And did you ever meet anyone by the name of Eric Baker?

CINDY ANTHONY: No, sir, I have not.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did Casey -- what did Casey tell you about this Eric Baker?

CINDY ANTHONY: He was two years younger than her, and he was an old friend. And she had seen him about the time that she had started seeing Jesse. He was in town and upset about a girlfriend or such. And I guess they got together. It was one night. And Eric lived out- of-state.

KAYE: However, Cindy said Casey had talked to her about Eric Baker in connection with other friends who later turned out to be fictitious people. And although investigators did turn up a death certificate for an Eric Baker who died in a car accident, they don't know whether he had any connection to Casey, only further adding to the mystery and the tragedy of the story of this little girl.

Randi Kaye, CNN. (END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: Our coverage of the verdict in the Casey Anthony trial continues in our next hour.

Also ahead, new developments tonight in another high-profile case. Attorneys for Dominique Strauss-Kahn preparing to meet with prosecutors in New York. This as he faces possible new charges in France.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Isha joins us with a "360 News & Business Bulletin."

ISHA SESAY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: President Obama has invited congressional leaders to the White House on Thursday to try to broker a deficit deal. He also sent Republican lawmakers a strong message, saying he's opposed to a short-term increase in the debt ceiling.

A source tells CNN that attorneys for former IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn will meet tomorrow with New York prosecutors who just days ago disclosed that they have uncovered credibility issues with a hotel maid who accused Strauss-Kahn of assaulting her. Meantime, a French today filed a criminal complaint against Strauss-Kahn, alleging attempted rape. A lawyer for Strauss-Kahn said he's filed a counter claim for false declarations.

A federal appeals court ruled that Tucson shooting defendant Jared Loughner can't be forced to take anti-psychotic medications until the government shows they are necessary and will make him competent to stand trial. Loughner is charged in the January rampage that killed six people, and seriously injured Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The court asked Loughner's lawyers and prosecutors to make their case by mid-week.

And John, a surprising revelation from actor Daniel Radcliffe. In an interview with "GQ UK," he said he quit alcohol last August after spending years battling a secret drinking problem while starring in the Harry Potter franchise.

Kind of bizarre that one that's coming out now.

KING: A lot of pressure he faced as a young man. At least he's owning up to it now.

SESAY: True. No one wants to see a wizard drunk on the loose. Just saying.

KING: No.

The last installment out soon. We'll watch that together. Isha, thanks.

A lot more ahead here at the top of the hour, starting with more on today's dramatic verdict in the Casey Anthony murder trial.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)