OTR Interviews

Are Inconsistencies in the Meter Reader's Testimony Enough to Save Casey Anthony?

Are alleged holes in meter reader's accounts of finding Caylee's remains enough for Casey Anthony's defense?

 

This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," June 29, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Also on the stand today, the son of meter reader Roy Kronk, giving some surprising testimony. As you know, Roy Kronk told the jury that he called his son in December, right after he found little Caylee's remains, to tell him the news. But today, his son, Brandon Sparks, told the jury something a bit different.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSE BAEZ, CASEY ANTHONY'S DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Did your father state to you that he knew something about this case?

BRANDON SPARKS, ROY KRONK'S SON: Yes, sir. At the time, though, I was not aware that it was about the case...

CASEY ANTHONY PROSECUTOR: Objection. Question requires a yes or no.

JUDGE BELVIN PERRY: Sustained. The question calls for a yes or no.

SPARKS: Yes, sir.

BAEZ: What did he tell you he knew?

SPARKS: He told me that he knew where the remains were.

BAEZ: And when did he tell you this?

SPARKS: This was in November in 2008.

BAEZ: Did your father ever mention that he had found Caylee's skull?

SPARKS: Yes, sir, he did.

BAEZ: And was this prior to December 11th?

SPARKS: Yes, sir.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VAN SUSTEREN: Joining us is criminal defense attorney Ted Williams. Ted represents Brandon Sparks. We're also joined by Orlando attorney Diana Tennis and criminal defense attorney Bernie Grimm.

Ted, I'll get to you in a second about your client. But Bernie, I want to talk to you about George Anthony. I don't -- for the life of me, I don't understand, like, why -- why did they call him to the stand a second time to ask the same thing?

BERNIE GRIMM, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You know, you had brought up that it was already brought out weeks ago by the prosecution to rebut the opening statement. It make no sense to me. One, he's obviously calling a witness cold, which you never do, ever in any kind of case, civil or criminal.

But two, and more compelling, he probably knew he was going to get this answer. I don't think he thought the father was going to confess on the stand to accidentally drowning the daughter. And then what's worse, it's not what he said, it's what happened. He cried right at the end of the case, right when the jury's going to be making a decision this weekend.

That counts more than anything the man said. It was very compelling from two of the people we heard already from in the courtroom.

VAN SUSTEREN: And as Holly said, while her[Casey Anthony's] father's crying, the defendant, the woman who's accused of being a cold-blooded murderer, is sitting there -- or at least, in Holly's -- Holly didn't see the tears. And the jury makes similar observations.

GRIMM: Right, look at her non-verbals. She's sitting there, clicking a pen, you know, symptomatic of somebody that, you know, might even be a sociopath. It's very, very sad and very tragic, the whole thing.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, Diana, this grief expert -- tell me, have you ever seen a grief expert in court before? And was there any sort of argument or debate whether such a thing is an expertise that a jury -- that really a jury needs help with?

DIANA TENNIS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, here's my opinion. The morning went so badly, the George Anthony debacle was so horrible -- the defense opened that door so wide that the prosecutor basically got George on the stand to tell the jury he thought his daughter was guilty. It was that bad.

I think by the end of the day, the judge honestly was -- is at this point scared that we're going to have to do this over again and really was tired. He let them go so far with this expert, I was very, very surprised.

There was the longest hypothetical ever in the history of the world that the defense got to ask her. I mean, it was so long, I could barely follow it. This was after the woman said that part of her expertise was helping write the Campbell's -- the soup -- the soup for the soul series. She didn't know what a peer-reviewed article was. The prosecutor really got her after that.

She seemed a little -- I think she was chewing gum. I mean, it was really -- she was not the most credible expert. And she's been involved in this case less time than the jury has. They just got her involved literally in June of this year, as in this very month.

VAN SUSTEREN: But Diana, the whole point...

TENNIS: It wasn't good.

VAN SUSTEREN: The point of -- no, the point of experts to help a jury when they can't understand something. Like, you get an engineer. You get a pathologist. You get a doctor, something like that.

TENNIS: Right.

VAN SUSTEREN: I really do think that -- you know, I think most people at least have a little grip on what grief is. And so I'm wondering -- I mean, it's, like -- it was just -- it was -- it struck me as an unusual witness. Obviously, she was called by -- if the prosecution had called her, it would have been, I think, a reversible error, not with the defense because it's a totally different situation...

TENNIS: Right.

VAN SUSTEREN: ... based on the respective...

TENNIS: Right.

VAN SUSTEREN: ... duties. But the whole idea that a juror needs help understanding what grief is.

TENNIS: Right. Right. And she basically said -- the prosecutor got her to say grief can look like anything. And he got her to say grief can look like guilt. So I mean, we have 30 days. They're desperately trying to explain it. I think they're almost too focused on it. Whatever happened, it was a crazy way to behave. But you know, I don't think this woman solved it for them.

VAN SUSTEREN: Ted, your client --- it was, like, not a good day for fathers. Your client basically said that his father wasn't candid with the court, also called, I think, probably not telling the truth.

TED WILLIAMS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yes, Greta...

VAN SUSTEREN: Sometimes called lying, too.

WILLIAMS: ... Brandon Sparks is a -- absolutely. Brandon Sparks is a very intelligent young man who is serving his country in the Coast Guard, who got on the stand and said that on about December the 11th, when Roy Kronk, his father, reported that he found the remains -- that Kronk had called him one month before, in November, and told him that he knew where the remains were. And he also told him that he was going to try to earn some money behind this.

VAN SUSTEREN: Now, that actually might help the defense because they've been trying to paint this picture that Roy Kronk, the meter reader, is so immoral that he's moving the body around, although it doesn't quite address the question how the child went from being a child to a body. But it actually might -- that might have been a better witness for the defense (INAUDIBLE) in the midst of bad witnesses for the defense.

WILLIAMS: Absolutely.

TENNIS: Oh, well, definitely...

WILLIAMS: And I'll tell you why...

TENNIS: I definitely agree.

WILLIAMS: I'll tell you -- please, ma'am. Let me tell you why I think you're absolutely right. Roy Kronk has testified that he took his meter reader stick and he actually moved that skull around. As a matter of fact, he even said he stuck his meter reader stick in the eye of the skull. What is significant about that? The medical examiner has testified that the manner in which the skull was set up led her to believe that she would say that this was a homicide. So now we know that Roy Kronk has actually compromised that crime scene.

VAN SUSTEREN: Thank you all. And Diana, sorry to cut you off because I know you had something to say, but we got to go. And unfortunately, this trial -- or fortunately, however you want to look at it -- we'll have another night. Thank you all.