2008.12.18 - PI James H. Interview

[Hot Dogs]

Interesting to note that Cindy, although she hadn't seen Casey in over a month, felt she knew what shoes she had been wearing. Maybe they were the only ones missing. Still, with Cindy's truthfulness in question, I wonder at the veracity of her all-knowing answer. Don't you?

Who knows? If Cindy was in full cover-up mode, she could say and do almost anything. She could have lied about all sorts of stuff she found (or didn't) in the car. She could have made no mention of there being a knife, shoes or boots in the car. Just put that stuff in the house and keep your mouth shut. Of course she has no clue what LE is going to pry out of KC under interrogation.

Melich: Tell me what you left in your car when you abandoned it at Amscot.
Casey: Black shoes, boots, a knife, a bag of trash from TL's place, various other stuff like a backpack, my gray pants, etc.

 

[magic-cat]

Who knows? If Cindy was in full cover-up mode, she could say and do almost anything. She could have lied about all sorts of stuff she found (or didn't) in the car. She could have made no mention of there being a knife, shoes or boots in the car. Just put that stuff in the house and keep your mouth shut. Of course she has no clue what LE is going to pry out of KC under interrogation.

Melich: Tell me what you left in your car when you abandoned it at Amscot.
Casey: Black shoes, boots, a knife, a bag of trash from TL's place, various other stuff like a backpack, my gray pants, etc.

I stand corrected about Cindy giving them the shoes. Thanks for showing me that-lost all my doc's in a CRASH!

I am with you though-we do not know what ELSE was originally IN the car that Cindy took out, or George for that matter-or heck, even Lee had access. We do not know that any and or all of the aforementioned individuals did not take things out that they felt needed to NOT be in the car. This could even have occurred as or after the 911 calls were placed-once they KNEW the police were coming and would be looking in the car.

I am sure there was also the worry of I don't know what Casey might have said as well.

I do know this-if it could be washed and was inside that car-Cindy took it out and washed it. If there were clothing items BESIDES that one pair of pants-guarantee they were washed. I find it difficult to believe that a young woman who has bacically been living on the run for close to 5 weeks had so LITTLE inside of her car. Coat hangers, an empty crate, trash, shoes. Where were her music cd's? Was there a player in the car? Where were all the things that would normally be in ones glovebox? How about trash from convenient stores? Receipts and other small bags. Makeup? The little mirror ornaments that Casey was SURE to have had-where did those get off to? The list of what WAS in the car was much too little for the length of time that Casey was "running" and for a young, busy mother-there should have just been more in there.

It makes me think about the backpack that Tony said seemed to have been "packed out" when she was walking when she ran out of gas on the 23rd and he picked her up. Was THAT when she removed a TON of stuff from the car? If so then where did she put it? By then the death odor would have been beginning to get INSIDE the car-so perhaps THAT is the stuff she washed up at Ricardo's was it? that time she borrowed his washer? What was that date...if it was stuff from the car that would make sense since she knew his washer was in the basement-right?

Anyhow-I digress...

That car was much too empty. SOMEONE removed some things...
WHOM is any man's guess...:banghead:

 

[Verité]

My hunkey-doreyness has no relevance on the issue, not does any finger pointing that the A's may or may not be doing. What I'm questioning is how/why information about Cindy taking out her frustrations on an inanimate object 6 months after Caylee disappeared has any bearing on the case against Casey. It seems to me that LE is asking questions that are way beyond the scope of this investigation and I see no reason for them to do so, unless it's to further embarrass the A's.

How do we know that CA wasn't instructed in a psychotherapy or counseling program of grief recovery to displace her anger by taking
a ball bat to an inanimate object, to include uttering--or, better yet--yelling the names of persons who cause her anger--as a rage reduction technique?
(Such a process is common in certain treatment modalities, specifically Bioenergetic therapy.) How else is this woman supposed to reduce the
passive rage which is part & parcel of grieving a dead grandchild and a daughter incarcerated for first degree murder of that child?

The better question is why anyone was so insensitive or hostile as to invade her legitimate home environment & place an inanimate object which was
sure to provoke. Any effort to rile another is inconsistent with sacred intent, regardless of how it's rationalized as for the lost child. An equal concern is
for the obsessive peering of a camera to videotape what should have been her most private reaction.

Isn't anyone bothered that the person taping the video admitted to LE that he did it in the hopes of making a few bucks, despite his professed loyalty
to the grieving family at that time?

 

[debs]

How do we know that CA wasn't instructed in a psychotherapy or counseling program of grief recovery to displace her anger by taking
a ball bat to an inanimate object, to include uttering--or, better yet--yelling the names of persons who cause her anger--as a rage reduction technique?
(Such a process is common in certain treatment modalities, specifically Bioenergetic therapy.) How else is this woman supposed to reduce the
passive rage which is part & parcel of grieving a dead grandchild and a daughter incarcerated for first degree murder of that child?

The better question is why anyone was so insensitive or hostile as to invade her legitimate home environment & place an inanimate object which was
sure to provoke. Any effort to rile another is inconsistent with sacred intent, regardless of how it's rationalized as for the lost child. An equal concern is
for the obsessive peering of a camera to videotape what should have been her most private reaction.

Isn't anyone bothered that the person taping the video admitted to LE that he did it in the hopes of making a few bucks, despite his professed loyalty
to the grieving family at that time?

I rarely agree with you. However, there have been many people who think that this guy is a slimeball for having infiltrated the Anthony home on the guise of assistance, only to have his private camera rolling at all times. It sickens me that the Anthony's were so taken in by slime that they don't see how slimy are the people around them.

As for Cindy's bashing of a cross made by a protester in an attempt to vent her anger and frustration, maybe RET would be more helpful. However she wants to vent in her backyard, though, should have been private. While the insight to Cindy being angry at protesters, LE, and many many others is interesting, it isn't probative. It doesn't add anything to the case. We all know she's angry at protesters in front of her house day and night, rightfully so. I found that to be such an incredible invasion. But the Anthony family reaction to that wasn't one of internal anger, it was constant conflict, constant calls to 911, constant physical altercations with people. Private anger became public display.

I surely would not have wanted to live in that hell. But when they brought their anger and violence to the front yard, they knew it was going to be public. The slimeball who weaseled in only managed to show that the uncontrolled anger out front was repeated in the back, where they believed there were no eyes. As I said, it added nothing.

 

[natsound]

You must have Hoover confused with Dominic C.
At least Hoover admits that he planned to make some money, that's more
than any of the Anthonys have admitted even though they have.
Hoover seems to admit any of his shortcomings, it takes a man to do that!

I don't have much respect for JH's character, but he's more credible than DC or even LA. JH was not caught in any lies during his interview. No huge red flegs (except the weird part at the beginning where he was taking pictures, fiddling with the camera, taking pictures of the FBI taking fingerprints). DC and LA, on the other hand, couldn't explain their way out of paper bag, although they try and end up sounding like idiots.

 

[natsound]

My hunkey-doreyness has no relevance on the issue, not does any finger pointing that the A's may or may not be doing. What I'm questioning is how/why information about Cindy taking out her frustrations on an inanimate object 6 months after Caylee disappeared has any bearing on the case against Casey. It seems to me that LE is asking questions that are way beyond the scope of this investigation and I see no reason for them to do so, unless it's to further embarrass the A's.

I agree. I'm not worried at all about CA taking her frustrations out on any object. So she's saying F this person, that person. Oh well, she got angry. To me, there are much more important things in this case to get alarmed at.

 

[magic-cat]

Something else that strikes me as odd in Mr. Hoover's statement here is that he spoke of Baez and the Anthony family discussing "defleshing" the remains...And the possibility that they might never gain access to the remains. He says that Cindy is adamant that no "defleshing" occur and that she wants those remains-she wants to cremate Caylee and keep her with her forever...

First-I thought the ME told us there was no tissue left?
Second-How DID they gain access to the remains if not by Casey's consent?

 

[whiteangora]

I don't have much respect for JH's character, but he's more credible than DC or even LA. JH was not caught in any lies during his interview. No huge red flegs (except the weird part at the beginning where he was taking pictures, fiddling with the camera, taking pictures of the FBI taking fingerprints). DC and LA, on the other hand, couldn't explain their way out of paper bag, although they try and end up sounding like idiots.

bold,me

So true. George isn't much better at explaining, he gets frushtrated, but Cindy on the other hand is a pro.

 

[natsound]

Something else that strikes me as odd in Mr. Hoover's statement here is that he spoke of Baez and the Anthony family discussing "defleshing" the remains...And the possibility that they might never gain access to the remains. He says that Cindy is adamant that no "defleshing" occur and that she wants those remains-she wants to cremate Caylee and keep her with her forever...

First-I thought the ME told us there was no tissue left?
Second-How DID they gain access to the remains if not by Casey's consent?

I thought the same thing. Maybe at the time most everyone was unclear whether there was flesh. Maybe Quantico had to "deflesh" to determine there was absolutely no flesh?

 

[Chilly Willy]

I thought the same thing. Maybe at the time most everyone was unclear whether there was flesh. Maybe Quantico had to "deflesh" to determine there was absolutely no flesh?

I don't know which it was, but what a horrible thing to discuss with the family members without knowing for sure.

 

[magic-cat]

I don't know which it was, but what a horrible thing to discuss with the family members without knowing for sure.

Leave it to Baez!

 

[Psmith]

I thought the same thing. Maybe at the time most everyone was unclear whether there was flesh. Maybe Quantico had to "deflesh" to determine there was absolutely no flesh?

Ummmm. I've been looking into that matter (forensics and taxidermy). The saws they need to use to find marrow or other tissue will not work if there is matter or grease. Sorry to say. Indicates material other than bone. They (lab techs) need to do clean, micro-thin slices for exams and scope work chemical, etc.

 

[Psmith]

Something else that strikes me as odd in Mr. Hoover's statement here is that he spoke of Baez and the Anthony family discussing "defleshing" the remains...And the possibility that they might never gain access to the remains. He says that Cindy is adamant that no "defleshing" occur and that she wants those remains-she wants to cremate Caylee and keep her with her forever...

First-I thought the ME told us there was no tissue left?
Second-How DID they gain access to the remains if not by Casey's consent?

See above, o dioscoride of mind. : )

 

[Psmith]

Where did OSCO find the black shoes and boots that were inside the sealed paper bag?

Provocateur! ; )

 

[magic-cat]

Ummmm. I've been looking into that matter (forensics and taxidermy). The saws they need to use to find marrow or other tissue will not work if there is matter or grease. Sorry to say. Indicates material other than bone. They (lab techs) need to do clean, micro-thin slices for exams and scope work chemical, etc.

Thanks for THAT! :bang:

So although the ME stated there was NO soft tissue remaining and the remains were completely skeletonized, they may still have had the "residue" that is left over on the bones and would removing THAT be referred to as "defleshing"? I know that I read that after the decomposing has occurred it is like there is a greasy coating on the bones, but I guess I just blocked out what that MEANT! Ok-so ICK!

 

[Psmith]

Thanks for THAT! :bang:

So although the ME stated there was NO soft tissue remaining and the remains were completely skeletonized, they may still have had the "residue" that is left over on the bones and would removing THAT be referred to as "defleshing"? I know that I read that after the decomposing has occurred it is like there is a greasy coating on the bones, but I guess I just blocked out what that MEANT! Ok-so ICK!

Just sayin what I read.....No doubt bone was not "specimen perfect." ahem. Few "specimens" are lab perfect. Tissue or not tissue, defleshing is of interest.

People can look it up for themselves via search and pairs of words what the word means and the process and why.

MC--a little more than bones. imho imho

 

[Verité]

I rarely agree with you. However, there have been many people who think that this guy is a slimeball for having infiltrated the Anthony home on the guise of assistance, only to have his private camera rolling at all times. It sickens me that the Anthony's were so taken in by slime that they don't see how slimy are the people around them.

As for Cindy's bashing of a cross made by a protester in an attempt to vent her anger and frustration, maybe RET would be more helpful. However she wants to vent in her backyard, though, should have been private. While the insight to Cindy being angry at protesters, LE, and many many others is interesting, it isn't probative. It doesn't add anything to the case. We all know she's angry at protesters in front of her house day and night, rightfully so. I found that to be such an incredible invasion. But the Anthony family reaction to that wasn't one of internal anger, it was constant conflict, constant calls to 911, constant physical altercations with people. Private anger became public display.

I surely would not have wanted to live in that hell. But when they brought their anger and violence to the front yard, they knew it was going to be public. The slimeball who weaseled in only managed to show that the uncontrolled anger out front was repeated in the back, where they believed there were no eyes. As I said, it added nothing.

Glad we found some area for agreement.

As described, it did sound so like Bioenergetic rage-reduction (with the yelling of names & all), and then there was the absurdity of LE soaking it up,
wondering who else was included on her "bat-list. . ." very surreal for sure! Personally, I've never favored Bioenergetic methods for rage reduction,
fearing that it may increase the tendency for acting-out in those with poor impulse control, but BT proponents suggest just the opposite.

Glad, too, that you saw the troubling duplicity of the JH taping (i was wondering if i was the only one upset that i may see him on Jerry Springer!).

 

[natsound]

As described, it did sound so like Bioenergetic rage-reduction (with the yelling of names & all), and then there was the absurdity of LE soaking it up,
wondering who else was included on her "bat-list. . ." very surreal for sure!

And that should have been private too. It's crazy, the things the world is privy to in this case. What else will show up in the doc dumps... when the A's take a dump? When they burp from all that chili? When they cough? Will we see transcripts of their dreams? Video of their underwear drawers? Boxers or briefs, GA?

 

[spyhouston]

When I read about CA beating the cross, my heart actually went out to her for a minute before I reminded myself of all the conniving things she did those many months. Then, my second thought was, whew, better the cross than poor George. The front yard episodes of rage are most troublesome for me. Not that you wouldn't want to go out there and tell those protestors what you think, but to actually do it??? No control, no dignity.

 

[Chilly Willy]

When I read about CA beating the cross, my heart actually went out to her for a minute before I reminded myself of all the conniving things she did those many months. Then, my second thought was, whew, better the cross than poor George. The front yard episodes of rage are most troublesome for me. Not that you wouldn't want to go out there and tell those protestors what you think, but to actually do it??? No control, no dignity.

I disagree. I think considering the circumstances, the A's behaved with great control and dignity when they were confronted by the protesters. Had they not, huge mob fights would have broken out, which is exactly what the protesters were hoping for, IMO.