Searchers and the Motion Regarding TES

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Harmony - excellent visual! Maybe you should email it to NG, JVM and any other media outlet that has been talking as if the two areas were related.

This is especially important with regards to why DC was looking there - it completely removes the "pet cemetary" excuse.
 
notthatsmart said:
Wow, I saw a video by the searcher from the other end of the block on Suburban. He sure was confident. He said he went right down in the water and left nothing unturned. Thats the kind of confidence I like to see. A searcher that is not afraid to get their hands dirty. I tip my hat to the man. I just wished he was the one searching down there by Caylee.
Click to expand...

Anyway you can share that video with us?
 
Ripley007 said:
I'm going to post without reading this whole thread. Probably will bite me in butt in the end, but here goes...............
WHY do some (like the media!) think that Caylee's "dump" site was KC's childhood play area and Kio and others Pet cemetary??????? It is most certainly NOT the same spot. Am I right or am i right? so how do we dispell the media myths??????????
Click to expand...

Myth Busters thread:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78216"]Myth Busters and Facts NO DISCUSSION NO DISCUSSION - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
 
In the decomp cycle, as I understand it, there comes a time when there is no longer any odor......given that, the remains had become skeletonized within a month or so...........searchers in August would not have smelled anything......
 
Ripley007 said:
I'm going to post without reading this whole thread. Probably will bite me in butt in the end, but here goes...............
WHY do some (like the media!) think that Caylee's "dump" site was KC's childhood play area and Kio and others Pet cemetary??????? It is most certainly NOT the same spot. Am I right or am i right? so how do we dispell the media myths??????????
Click to expand...

I agree with this. When kio was interviewed, they were sitting down by the school. It makes no sense at all to have a child play area in a ditch or swamp. I am sure Kio would say she dumped her in the woods down by the school, but I bet she was floored by the actual location. I am sure they never played there. IMO
 
tweety933 said:
http://www.wftv.com/pdf/22313189/detail.html

Does anyone want to try to explain why AL & JB filed this motion? I thought they already had a hearing on this and the judge ruled. How is this any different from what they wanted the last time they asked the judge?
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, Tweety, but I believe that originally, the defense wanted EVERYTHING related to Caylee's search. But Tim Miller responded in kind that he would provide info related to the 32 searchers who searched near the area.

It looks like the defense is saying that Tim Miller's group failed to disclose requested info and because of that, they want to throw out the motion that he only needs to provide them with info on the original 32 and they are now again asking for EVERYTHING. Again, I could be wrong, but this is how I'm reading it...
 
Goodness Gracious.....if Baez has information from these individuals, he should depose them, he already knows who they are, duh. Why does he need TES to release their information, if they have already talked with the defense (he can ask them that information himself)? Can't he just put them on the witness list, so that the prosecution can depose them as well?

It seems to me that he wants his discovery to be released by some other means than through himself, why would THAT be?
 
tweety933 said:
Goodness Gracious.....if Baez has information from these individuals, he should depose them, he already knows who they are, duh. Why does he need TES to release their information, if they have already talked with the defense (he can ask them that information himself)? Can't he just put them on the witness list, so that the prosecution can depose them as well?

It seems to me that he wants his discovery to be released by some other means than through himself, why would THAT be?
Click to expand...

What JB wants is more people to say they searched that area in the early September timeframe and did not see a body, did not smell anything like a decomposing body and did not see anything out of the ordinary. JB already has two statements from these two, one person of which taped his conversation with the PI which is illegal. This person sent the tape to SA's office because he felt the PI was leading him with questions. SA's office could not listen to the tape. This is what I understood from the hearing last month.

You're right JB should depose them with SA in attendance. But I am not sure he will ever use these two as one of them will not say what the team wants him to say and the other person just may not be credible. My guess is he is fishing for more people who searched for TES but were not assigned to that area and searched that area anyway. That is why he wants the whole list. They will probably ask each and every one if they were on Surburban Drive. JMO
 
This is the motion that was filed a couple of months ago--it's not new. I think there was a long thread on it at the time.
 
Casey Case: Volunteers’ Private Information May Be Made Public

Friday, January 22, 2010 5:37:49 PM

ORLANDO -- A judge granted a continuation for the volunteer search group Texas EquuSearch.

The defense wants any and all information on the hundreds of volunteers who joined in the search for Caylee Anthony.

More than a year later after people volunteered their time, their private information, including their address and phone numbers, could be for all to see.

Article:
http://cfnews13.com/News/Local/2010...rmation_may_be_made_public.html?cmpid=twitter
 
tweety933 said:
Goodness Gracious.....if Baez has information from these individuals, he should depose them, he already knows who they are, duh. Why does he need TES to release their information, if they have already talked with the defense (he can ask them that information himself)? Can't he just put them on the witness list, so that the prosecution can depose them as well?

It seems to me that he wants his discovery to be released by some other means than through himself, why would THAT be?
Click to expand...



Perhaps Baez is reluctant to spend the $$$$$ required to ACTUALLY perform a true deposition?
 
MONEY - the defense is broke - am sure donations have dried up and neither of
A's are working
 
I can't help but wonder why if JB is so in need of these names......he can't narrow his scope and list specific members to review. Oh wait..........I know........he is on nothing more than a fishing expedition.

In light of Andrea's numerous radio and TV interviews (please see that thread for all applicable links) where she has made a point to mention........."My team can't investigate properly and prepare for trial becasue people are afraid to talk to us, people are afraid that they will be seen as on the wrong side, my investigator, my social worker....."

I said, after the first time that statement left her lips, that this was a statement made for the sole purpose of later referring to KC's inability to get a fair trial. If the motions to gain all the searcher info is denied then they can use, as their platform, the inability to conduct their investigations as their grounds for appeal.

The defense team has demonstrated, via the Mort Smith semi-pseudo,staged, scripted, and edited, straight to You Tube videos that they are willing to attempt to pin something on anyone in an attempt to support their "story".

I think that the SA and Judge STrickland will be able to see right though it. IMO....had they really wanted a chance at the "cast bait and see what bites" motion being granted.....they should have held off on release of the "RK this is your life video" until their motion was shot down again.

Andrea Lyon likes to play her cards close to the vest. http://law.wustl.edu/faculty/documents/hughes/cv112508.pdf

If they want names to "sleuth"......what does she have to offer in exchange? Ummmmmmm nothing. As always...... IMHO.
 
NeJame represents Texas EquuSearch, which looked for Caylee’s remains. He has looked at the group’s documents and witness statements.

“He says it’s convincing proof that Caylee’s remains could not have been placed there [in the woods] after Casey was locked up, as her defense claims,” Kealing reported.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...ampaign=Feed:+entertainment/tv/tvguy+(TV+Guy)
 
You should make broader requests for discovery since if you
haven’t fully developed all of the pertinent facts for a
constitutional claim, you are out of luck in federal court unless can
meet the every stringent test of there being a factual predicate that
could not have been found out with the exercise of due diligence (or
in the unlikely event that there is a new rule of law handed down by
the United State Supreme Court which that court says applies
retroactively to matters on collateral review) and you can show
factual innocence.16


and renew and refer to
that request as you litigate.
http://www.law.depaul.edu/centers_institutes/cjcc/pdf/new_opportunities.pdf


it should further complicate the pre-trial and
trial stages of these cases, giving the defense attorney the
opportunity to truly investigate her case at a level she has been
unable to do before, thus creating a more complex trial, an even
more complex record and expanding rather than contracting the scope
of litigation.


AL via article for cjcc.
 
sleutherontheside said:
You should make broader requests for discovery since if you
haven’t fully developed all of the pertinent facts for a
constitutional claim, you are out of luck in federal court unless can
meet the every stringent test of there being a factual predicate that
could not have been found out with the exercise of due diligence (or
in the unlikely event that there is a new rule of law handed down by
the United State Supreme Court which that court says applies
retroactively to matters on collateral review) and you can show
factual innocence.16


and renew and refer to
that request as you litigate.
http://www.law.depaul.edu/centers_institutes/cjcc/pdf/new_opportunities.pdf


it should further complicate the pre-trial and
trial stages of these cases, giving the defense attorney the
opportunity to truly investigate her case at a level she has been
unable to do before, thus creating a more complex trial, an even
more complex record and expanding rather than contracting the scope
of litigation.


AL via article for cjcc.
Click to expand...

Red above mine.

In other words, confuse the he77 outta the jurors, right? :banghead:
 
Could Caylee Search Volunteers’ Private Info Go Public?

http://www.cfnews13.com/News/Local/...s_private_information_may_be_made_public.html

At the above article cfnew13 makes this claim..

"Meanwhile, Casey Anthony's defense team fired back at the state attorney's office in court documents that only News 13 obtained."

and

"The documents claim the lead prosecutor in the case, Jeff Ashton, "... made statements to this honorable court that were untrue."

and

"The defense team said it needs several pieces of evidence from the state to move forward, and they said the state isn't handing it over."

Is this in a motion filed by defense and why isn't it posted. I haven't seen this, does anyone know what they are referring to and where it can be found?
 
QB. said:
Could Caylee Search Volunteers’ Private Info Go Public?

http://www.cfnews13.com/News/Local/...s_private_information_may_be_made_public.html

At the above article cfnew13 makes this claim..

"Meanwhile, Casey Anthony's defense team fired back at the state attorney's office in court documents that only News 13 obtained."

and

"The documents claim the lead prosecutor in the case, Jeff Ashton, "... made statements to this honorable court that were untrue."

and

"The defense team said it needs several pieces of evidence from the state to move forward, and they said the state isn't handing it over."

Is this in a motion filed by defense and why isn't it posted. I haven't seen this, does anyone know what they are referring to and where it can be found?
Click to expand...

I read the motion yesterday and I recall that part. IT is in reference to SA saying they turned over the TES names of all the persons in the area where the remains were found. Since the defense claims they have names of TES searchers who claim no body, smell, etc.. was in the area, that are not on the list..hence, they claim He lied to the court.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 146 more.
Total: 3,493 (members: 147, guests: 3,346)

Online statistics

Members online
147
Guests online
3,346
Total visitors
3,493
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,699
Messages
18,161,160
Members
231,830
Latest member
Tenae
Back
Top