Witness tampering alleged

[jenniek]

Hi CLU,

I was the one who mentioned "the Factor" having the name of the person in the witness tampering....and NO....but Aphrodite, a Fox consultant, said to expect some fireworks about this. So we will have to wait and see.

karma coming to play?? :woohoo:

 

[MissJames]

Goldenlove,

EHH!!! I would bet George wishes you were him too!!! You could walk around with the libelous name of incestuous "child molester", instead of him. Do you honestly think "whatever cost to himself " includes his own daughter accusing him of rape. That would be a real stretch, don't ya think??

I know all about the "someone else could of done it", but we are not even talking about Murder--the defense used this excuse in "their " accidental drowning" theory.Furthermore , it is also highly likely they knew their client wasn't taking the stand , therefore his word against hers, she is a liar, and who would believe her anyway (isn't that what you said?). Then why destroy a mans reputation , thus the act of a less than ethical defense team. They went to far --that is my opinion, and you are certainly entitled to yours.

You and I are at different ends of this spectrum, Neither of us will yield to the other. The only agreement we can have is disagreement. Let's just respect each others veiwpoint and leave it at that. :truce::seeya:

What may be technically legal can also be ethically and morally wrong ,IMO.
Not all defense attorneys stoop to the lowest level the way ICA's DT did.

 

[R.U.Kidding!]

What may be technically legal can also be ethically and morally wrong ,IMO.
Not all defense attorneys stoop to the lowest level the way ICA's DT did.

Thanks MissJames ,

That's exactly what I say---I just went on.....and.....on......on. Wasting space. LOL!!

 

[stmarysmead]

In my opinion, it's one thing to put doubt in people's minds...it's another to state emphatically that people committed crimes...child rape, molestation, and hiding a corpse for profit...especially when you, as an officer of the court, are shielded from slander laws and plan to show absolutely no proof.

Cheney Mason and Jose Baez used tactics in this case that should be appalling to anyone and everyone. The accusation of child rape is horrific...and it takes the lowest type of human to make such an accusation when they never intend to show any substantiation. This can be done to any defenseless person.

And I predict it will become common.

How far will this go? Will defense attorneys now hire a new sub-specialty group of assistants...the SMEAR TEAM...to feel out the Internet for a vulnerable target and then use the opening statement to lob horrendous accusations that shock and awe the jury into acquittal.

How can one defend himself or protect his reputation...against lawyers who can "smear and hide" like this?

All it takes is a vivid imagination...the ability to smear with no accountability...and, of course the lack of integrity of attorneys like Mason and Baez...and sex "crimes" can be invented in almost every defense and innocent people burdened by lies for the rest of their lives for some defense attorney to get a courtroom WIN.

Witnesses swear to tell the truth...but attorneys like Mason/Baez have no duty to tell the truth it seems. Or offer proof of felonies they claim occurred. They can attack anyone apparently...and never offer one whit of proof..in their "theory" of the case.

I fear these tactics will be used on innocent people now far, far more often.

 

[RSDhoping for a cure]

In my opinion, it's one thing to put doubt in people's minds...it's another to state emphatically that people committed crimes...child rape, molestation, and hiding a corpse for profit...especially when you, as an officer of the court, are shielded from slander laws and plan to show absolutely no proof.

Cheney Mason and Jose Baez used tactics in this case that should be appalling to anyone and everyone. The accusation of child rape is horrific...and it takes the lowest type of human to make such an accusation when they never intend to show any substantiation. This can be done to any defenseless person.

And I predict it will become common.

How far will this go? Will defense attorneys now hire a new sub-specialty group of assistants...the SMEAR TEAM...to feel out the Internet for a vulnerable target and then use the opening statement to lob horrendous accusations that shock and awe the jury into acquittal.

How can one defend himself or protect his reputation...against lawyers who can "smear and hide" like this?

All it takes is a vivid imagination...the ability to smear with no accountability...and, of course the lack of integrity of attorneys like Mason and Baez...and sex "crimes" can be invented in almost every defense and innocent people burdened by lies for the rest of their lives for some defense attorney to get a courtroom WIN.

Witnesses swear to tell the truth...but attorneys like Mason/Baez have no duty to tell the truth it seems. Or offer proof of felonies they claim occurred. They can attack anyone apparently...and never offer one whit of proof..in their "theory" of the case.

I fear these tactics will be used on innocent people now far, far more often.

I believe this is a huge flaw in the justice system. It is the defenses right "to not have to prove anything" so in turn, they can accuse, slander and downright screw anyone they want without reprocussions!

The law should be, they do not have to prove their client innocent however, they can not openly throw anyone under the bus witout proof of the allegations.

JMHO

ETA...I am willing to bet there are more than just one or two witnesses that have been tampered with. I agree that Lee and River are 2 of the many.

 

[travelgal]

I believe the whole defense camp is smelly! If it is stinky, it is probably hinky!!!

 

[Chilly Willy]

I believe this is a huge flaw in the justice system. It is the defenses right "to not have to prove anything" so in turn, they can accuse, slander and downright screw anyone they want without reprocussions!

The law should be, they do not have to prove their client innocent however, they can not openly throw anyone under the bus witout proof of the allegations.

JMHO

ETA...I am willing to bet there are more than just one or two witnesses that have been tampered with. I agree that Lee and River are 2 of the many.

I can't say that I agree with your ETA but before that...I'm jumping up and down in agreement. The defense definitely should not be able to present imaginary slanderous theories to the jury, not even with the caveat that opening statements are not evidence. Our justice system is flawed and needs to be fixed because, obviously, some people are not intelligent enough to distinguish fantasy from reality.

 

[STEADFAST]

In regards to the defense opening statements..how is sexual molestation ever proven, unless the assaulter admits to it or the person being assaulted admits to it? Or it eye-witnessed or videotaped. Since GA did not admit to it..does not mean that it did nor did not happen. For obvious reasons, ICA did not take the stand. Most defendants do not take the stand. She is the only one who could have testified to it (and no one would have believed her anyway, by her own lying) so we do not know if the sexual molestation happened or not.

I think it is safe to say that putting doubt in the jurors minds as to another person that may have committed the crime is not new in defense tactics. It doesn't mean GA did anything, it just makes the jurors realize that someone else very well could have committed the crime under the same set of evidence.

As far as making GA the villain, I think the DT made him the villan because it was the most believable that he had something to do with it. It doesn't mean he did, just showing the jurors that it could have been someone else, just as easily as ICA with the same evidence.

I think if I was GA I would be glad that JB saved my daughter from the death penalty, at whatever cost to myself.

My responses, in order.
Since no one has ever testified that George molested Casey and, in fact, no one is known to have ever even mentioned that George molested Casey, there is no more reason to think he did than there is to think that any random person may have molested somebody.
There's a big difference between telling a jury that another person could have committed the crime under the same set of evidence and acting out a preposterous fiction, including dialogue, purporting to dramatize actual events -- that, as it turns out, have no foundation whatsoever (and could not have been true anyway.) They both run out of the house at the same time from different back doors, yet when Casey gets to the pool area, George has already discovered Caylee's body, gotten into the pool and retrieved her and is now standing there holding her? Please.
And, if I were George, I would not be grateful. I would be very, very sad that my daughter could not defend herself with the truth, because then I would know that the truth does not point to her innocence.

 

[erinleigh]

I tend to believe her. She didn't come forward with her story looking for something, LE sought her out.

but she sought out the anthony's. what was her reason for "seducing" GA. she claims she made the 1st move. i think she wanted to immerse herself in the case and was quite pleased when LE tracked her down. i think given enough time she would have come forward regardless. and if she did have ths inside scoop of GA stating it was an accident that snowballed why didnt she come forward right away? maybe because she really had nothing to tell. i think once she had the attention of LE and NE she embellished her story because she found she enjoyed being the center of a national case, and who knows..if she is a manipulator maybe she knew the cell phone records from GA would eventually lead LE to question her so she bided her time so she could say...oh, they found me, i didnt seek LE. i didnt want this attention.
im disturbed by the photo of her running thru the streets when the remains were found and the caption gave her name as river allen. there is something fishy about her. she never looked at the jury. cried dry tears. said she didnt want media attention then ran to InSession to let them know how she "stared CA down as she left he stand" she has issues. she reminded me of casey when vinnie was interviewing her because she kept trying to make this about HER being a victim - not Caylee. her snowball story practially won the case for the DT. the whole theory of GA's involvement spun around that sentence. i hope she was 100% honest or she has to live with her role in Casey walking free.

 

[RNmomnFL]

Here’s a good saying taken from Proverbs-A corrupt witness mocks justice. In my opinion only, the way the defense team “smeared” GA, and Cindy’s possible deceit on the stand is extremely troubling. So unfair. Forced the jury to see through the lies and falsehoods. Sadly, it seems these events are without repercussion. Cindy isn’t facing charges of perjury and GA has no recourse to clear his name. He did answer negative to molestation of ICA on the stand…but many doubt his sincerity. The truth doesn’t seem to matter, even in a court of law. Cue Jack Nicholson (A Few Good Men) “You can’t handle the truth!”
I’m curious about this pending witness tampering investigation. What may come from it? What is the potential punishment? Mistrial would be my wish, but I guess that’s not happening.

 

[Nenato5]

What may be technically legal can also be ethically and morally wrong ,IMO.
Not all defense attorneys stoop to the lowest level the way ICA's DT did.

I agree, and the ramifications of this trial may taint trials and juries all over this country. I do not agree with the verdict, but how do you think the members of this jury must feel having voted "not guilty" because they thought George was untruthful--only to find out that they were "tricked" into believing that because a jury consultant scoured the internet and decided that George should be the target. IMHO, these tactics are immoral and not justice.

 

[KarmaGet'em]

I remember Jeff Ashton saying something in one of his interviews about the defense's opening statement lacking a good-faith basis. (ie. the accusation of George). I am not sure if they could have objected to it, but did find this:

http://dgsearch.no-ip.biz/BN-lawbook/ch28.htm

The forecast may not always be accurate. Anticipated evidence may not materialize for unpredictable reasons (e.g., a witness's claim of privilege,{8} or memory lapse), but both sides have to have a reasonable good faith basis for what they say.{9}

9. ABA Standards for Criminal Justice 3-5.5, 4-7.4 ("It is unprofessional conduct to allude to any evidence unless there is a good faith and reasonable basis for believing that such evidence will be tendered and admitted in evidence"); DR 7-106(C)(1) (lawyer should not "tate or allude to any matter that he has no reasonable basis to believe is relevant to the case or that will not be supported by admissible evidence").

Now, I am not a lawyer, and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but it seems to me that what Baez did was at a minimum unethical.

 

[Beccaboo]

In regards to the defense opening statements..how is sexual molestation ever proven, unless the assaulter admits to it or the person being assaulted admits to it? Or it eye-witnessed or videotaped. Since GA did not admit to it..does not mean that it did nor did not happen. For obvious reasons, ICA did not take the stand. Most defendants do not take the stand. She is the only one who could have testified to it (and no one would have believed her anyway, by her own lying) so we do not know if the sexual molestation happened or not.

Respectfully snipped for space. I have to disagree with this. When I was 20 and I pressed charges against my father for what he had done, there was a lot more to it them he said, I said. There was evidence that went back to my kindergarten records. Evidemce through out my school records, my friends. Sexual abuse does not happen in a vacuum. People may not know they are looking at evidence of sexual abuse until years after the fact, but the evidence is always there somewhere. Casey Anthony showed no signal of an abuse victim and all the signs of am abuser! Just my humble opinion, but evidence always exsists in a true abuse case. You just have to know where to look

 

[simplesimon]

Oh Great! I am just watching some WITCH named Amy Singer who is a "Jury Consultant". She and her buds worked for the defense in finding the PULSE of public opinion through WEB communications (chat rooms, Tweets, blogs, etc). She found GEORGE was not liked or trusted. She then fed the defense that info, and let "the chips fall where they may".........and we know how that worked out. Seems during jury selection as well as the trial this info was constantly updated by Ms. Singer, and her ilk. Now this is the icing on the cake--JVM asked her if she saw anything unethical, about making George the bad guy, ruining his reputation, and not being able to prove any of it. She says---Oh, I just gave the info to the DT, what they did with it was up to them-----

The worst part of this is that it is supposedly done all the time. Jury consultants constantly update public opinion. However this may be the first time they found "the perfect storm" jury, capable of actually convicting a witness , instead of the defendant. Just gets UGLIER AND UGLIER, huh??

LEXINGTON---sorry. long story short--you are absolutely right, Defense Team is VERY Shady. It just doesn't stop, the hits keep comming!!!!!:maddening:

Yes,after OJ jury consulting took on a new twist! The DreAMTeAm used a jury consultant to help them select that jury also!!!
They actually do focus groups to see what/who is believable/unbelievable.
George was needed to tie all the evidence from the house together!they had to have someone other than KC.
It really bogles my mind that this happens! It is like a movie premiere that is shown with different endings and the audience picks the most believable ending! Something is really not "ethical"to me,but that is only my opinion!

 

[simplesimon]

but she sought out the anthony's. what was her reason for "seducing" GA. she claims she made the 1st move. i think she wanted to immerse herself in the case and was quite pleased when LE tracked her down. i think given enough time she would have come forward regardless. and if she did have ths inside scoop of GA stating it was an accident that snowballed why didnt she come forward right away? maybe because she really had nothing to tell. i think once she had the attention of LE and NE she embellished her story because she found she enjoyed being the center of a national case, and who knows..if she is a manipulator maybe she knew the cell phone records from GA would eventually lead LE to question her so she bided her time so she could say...oh, they found me, i didnt seek LE. i didnt want this attention.
im disturbed by the photo of her running thru the streets when the remains were found and the caption gave her name as river allen. there is something fishy about her. she never looked at the jury. cried dry tears. said she didnt want media attention then ran to InSession to let them know how she "stared CA down as she left he stand" she has issues. she reminded me of casey when vinnie was interviewing her because she kept trying to make this about HER being a victim - not Caylee. her snowball story practially won the case for the DT. the whole theory of GA's involvement spun around that sentence. i hope she was 100% honest or she has to live with her role in Casey walking free.

OMG,there was def something shady about her! Who needs to have an alias? Wasn't her twin in jail with KC????Was she sent to set George up? and needed the alias because she did not want anyone to figure out her sister was in jail with ICA??

 

[LambChop]

OMG,there was def something shady about her! Who needs to have an alias? Wasn't her twin in jail with KC????Was she sent to set George up? and needed the alias because she did not want anyone to figure out her sister was in jail with ICA??

One has to wonder because KC had already given a description of ZFG and here KC is with a woman delivering books to her cell who resembles ZFG and has a twin exactly like her outside the jail (Skye appears to be thinner). Did KC learn Skye had a twin and tell JB about her? Did Skye tell her sister to spark up a conversation with GA to get to know him? Was it RC's intention all along to testify for defense the GA said it was an accident that snowballed out of control? Somehow it all sounds way too convenient, packed up in a neat package to me.

When we first heard LE's interview with RC I thought she sounded as if she were truthful and especially the part about not having an affair with GA. On the stand she also sounds truthful when she states she did have an affair. This leads me to believe there is more to this than meets the eye. I don't think there was an affair because what woman would sleep with another woman's husband and then bring the wife flowers the next day. If you listen to the testimony and cross about what GA said that it was an accident she trips herself up, saying one way for defense and another way for SA.

I think someone should be looking into finding the truth about RC's statement. There is just something very wrong about the whole thing. jmo

 

[simplesimon]

One has to wonder because KC had already given a description of ZFG and here KC is with a woman delivering books to her cell who resembles ZFG and has a twin exactly like her outside the jail (Skye appears to be thinner). Did KC learn Skye had a twin and tell JB about her? Did Skye tell her sister to spark up a conversation with GA to get to know him? Was it RC's intention all along to testify for defense the GA said it was an accident that snowballed out of control? Somehow it all sounds way too convenient, packed up in a neat package to me.

When we first heard LE's interview with RC I thought she sounded as if she were truthful and especially the part about not having an affair with GA. On the stand she also sounds truthful when she states she did have an affair. This leads me to believe there is more to this than meets the eye. I don't think there was an affair because what woman would sleep with another woman's husband and then bring the wife flowers the next day. If you listen to the testimony and cross about what GA said that it was an accident she trips herself up, saying one way for defense and another way for SA.

I think someone should be looking into finding the truth about RC's statement. There is just something very wrong about the whole thing. jmo

Yes lambchop,I totally agree.i read somewhere that GA thought she lookedlike ZG....I think (don't want to say for sure)
This whole case had sooo many shady things and people inc the A'S
the psychics, the PI's, Roy Kronk(even though I don't think he had anything to do with the murder)and the shadiest shade of shady ...JB himself

 

[R.U.Kidding!]

Respectfully snipped for space. I have to disagree with this. When I was 20 and I pressed charges against my father for what he had done, there was a lot more to it them he said, I said. There was evidence that went back to my kindergarten records. Evidemce through out my school records, my friends. Sexual abuse does not happen in a vacuum. People may not know they are looking at evidence of sexual abuse until years after the fact, but the evidence is always there somewhere. Casey Anthony showed no signal of an abuse victim and all the signs of am abuser! Just my humble opinion, but evidence always exsists in a true abuse case. You just have to know where to look

Hi Beccaboo,

Very sorry to hear of your experience of sexual abuse at the hands of your father......so you know what a serious charge that is, for you unfortunately it was true. Now can you imagine the defense team using that accusation for no other reason than to ruin a man's reputation, for what----as you said IF there is abuse there is plenty of evidence out there to back up the TRUTH>

Casey Anthony Never mentioned abuse of any kind at the hands of her father for three years, while she claimed Caylee was murdered by the nanny. As soon as they changed their story to an accident---all of a sudden she was molested by her father, and was SOOOOOO intimidated by him she would rather sit in jail for three years for MURDER.

 

[Beccaboo]

Hi Beccaboo,

Very sorry to hear of your experience of sexual abuse at the hands of your father......so you know what a serious charge that is, for you unfortunately it was true. Now can you imagine the defense team using that accusation for no other reason than to ruin a man's reputation, for what----as you said IF there is abuse there is plenty of evidence out there to back up the TRUTH>

Casey Anthony Never mentioned abuse of any kind at the hands of her father for three years, while she claimed Caylee was murdered by the nanny. As soon as they changed their story to an accident---all of a sudden she was molested by her father, and was SOOOOOO intimidated by him she would rather sit in jail for three years for MURDER.

When the DT delivered their OS I have to admit I was angry. When FCA had written that letter in jail where she said she had a dream that maybe her father had come in room at night, I was irritated, but the OS had me enraged! I will grant you some of FCA behavior could be construed as that of an abuse victim, she, in my opinion, is missing the one thing most abuse victims share. That is a sense of brokeness. In order to abuse someone the way Jose claims she was abused, you have to break them. Look at both the Elizabeth Smart and Jaycee. Both girls had chances to escape but were afraid too. Both had been broken. Both seem to be healing, thank God! But neither would have healed while in the hands of their abusers. Casey lived at home, Casey had never been independent of George, there for would not have healed at all. If that were the case, she would still show signs of fear and submission to her abuser. Especially, if as Jose claimed, her abuser shared such a horrific secret. Sorry, I don't buy it. If there was abuse in that house it was most Likely verbal and emotional and most likely came from Cindy. Do I think George is father of the year material? No!! I do not believe for one second he was a sexual abuser. And I do not for one second think Cindy would have allowed that in her house. Cindy is way to Mich of a control freak. The entire family dynamic just doesn't fit the picture painted by the OS.
In all honesty I do think it is possible Lee may have tries something, but not when FCA was a child. Their entire relationship is a little odd to me.

 

[LambChop]

When the DT delivered their OS I have to admit I was angry. When FCA had written that letter in jail where she said she had a dream that maybe her father had come in room at night, I was irritated, but the OS had me enraged! I will grant you some of FCA behavior could be construed as that of an abuse victim, she, in my opinion, is missing the one thing most abuse victims share. That is a sense of brokeness. In order to abuse someone the way Jose claims she was abused, you have to break them. Look at both the Elizabeth Smart and Jaycee. Both girls had chances to escape but were afraid too. Both had been broken. Both seem to be healing, thank God! But neither would have healed while in the hands of their abusers. Casey lived at home, Casey had never been independent of George, there for would not have healed at all. If that were the case, she would still show signs of fear and submission to her abuser. Especially, if as Jose claimed, her abuser shared such a horrific secret. Sorry, I don't buy it. If there was abuse in that house it was most Likely verbal and emotional and most likely came from Cindy. Do I think George is father of the year material? No!! I do not believe for one second he was a sexual abuser. And I do not for one second think Cindy would have allowed that in her house. Cindy is way to Mich of a control freak. The entire family dynamic just doesn't fit the picture painted by the OS.
In all honesty I do think it is possible Lee may have tries something, but not when FCA was a child. Their entire relationship is a little odd to me.

Or, maybe it was the other way around. She certainly appeared to worship him prior to her trial. They did seem very close. Everyone she has dated seems to resemble LA. So maybe the attraction was KC's to her brother. Maybe she was looking for someone just like him. Maybe her behavior was inappropriate and the family has hidden it, acting like it did not happen.

All we know is that LA was very upset about something he had just learned prior to his testimony in court. His parents had not shared their news with him about the baby or anything that had to do with preparations they were making to change the home to welcome Caylee. He was treated like an outsider. And why??? What did LA find out that upset him? Did JB want LA to say on the stand that his parents believed that he was the father of KC's baby and that is why they ignored him? Those implications are surely there with JB's line of questioning. Did KC accuse LA? Sure looks that way with her crying while he is telling this story. If KC was so close to her brother as she claims why would she not include him in this very important event unless she lead her parents to believe LA was the father of Caylee.

With all the puzzle pieces missing, this one would fit if it is true. No wonder he was crying. jmo