2009.06.16--Brad Conway on GMA

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Truthwillsetufree said:
I am not psychic, but I think I can hear a freakin' TRAIN comin' down the track and the dude drivin' is JB and the one tootin' the horn is KC.
train.gif
Click to expand...

LMAO :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: You are just too funny, Truth! :clap::clap:
 
As a lawyer, he has so much on his plate. His clients are a big MESS!
CA/GA KNEW Caylee was not in river when Padilla was searching............
IMO GA/CA/LA all knew pieces of the story and had helped in some odd way in this diabolical death of this sweet baby girl. Something bad happened and they knew.
Then CA/GA found out Caylee was rotting in the woods, LA probably knew and helped kc in some way also as were the hired PI's by the Anthonys..........I think when everything comes out this will be a VERY BIZARRE story! The most infamous dysfunctional family, IMO
 
Hmmmmmm. I wonder...

Did whatever BC read in the AR cause him to suddenly decide to go on morning TV and reveal his OWN TRUE THOUGHTS on the case? Could it be that he wants to distance himself from the A's weird and wonderful (sarcasm intended) world of "KC is innocent and MOTY to boot" ?

Could it be that the AR has woken BC from his slumber and he now understands that KC is not only guilty as sin but the "grieving" GP's are her active minions?

That perhaps BC had a moment of clarity when he read Dr G's conclusions and then saw the the A's SCOFF and insist that he have it gagged so as to protect the perp and thier TV appearances?

Is it possible that BC knows that his credibility and career are being washed down the sewer with the A's verbal diarrhoea and thusly, had to out himself from the inner circle of the 3rd level of hell?

Me thinks CA will be NONE TO HAPPY with BC today. He chose to deviate from the party line on national TV no less! LKB did such a WONDERFUL job of stating KC IS INNOCENT on her little book release party this morning. Why couldnt have BC taken a leaf from her book (lol pun intended) and sung KC's praises, today of all days? How DARE he speak the truth on TV? Sheesh, CA needs to do a better job at controlling her employees!
 
passionflower said:
As a lawyer, he has so much on his plate. His clients are a big MESS!
CA/GA KNEW Caylee was not in river when Padilla was searching............
IMO GA/CA/LA all knew pieces of the story and had helped in some odd way in this diabolical death of this sweet baby girl. Something bad happened and they knew.
Then CA/GA found out Caylee was rotting in the woods, LA probably knew and helped kc in some way also as were the hired PI's by the Anthonys..........I think when everything comes out this will be a VERY BIZARRE story! The most infamous dysfunctional family, IMO
Click to expand...

Oh, this made me laugh!! This will become very bizzare? I think this has been the most bizarre case I've ever seen.

:blowkiss:
 
lonetraveler said:
Do any of you know off the top of your head, so I don't have to research for a long time, what the date was that JG quit the police force? I have always wondered if the reason was because he felt that he could not be a police officer after maybe, he assisted someone in disposing of a child's body? Just a theory I have often thought about.
Click to expand...

I believe it was june 24th--because he said it "wasn't for him"
 
Sammiejam said:
Hmmmmmm. I wonder...

Did whatever BC read in the AR cause him to suddenly decide to go on morning TV and reveal his OWN TRUE THOUGHTS on the case? Could it be that he wants to distance himself from the A's weird and wonderful (sarcasm intended) world of "KC is innocent and MOTY to boot" ?

Could it be that the AR has woken BC from his slumber and he now understands that KC is not only guilty as sin but the "grieving" GP's are her active minions?

That perhaps BC had a moment of clarity when he read Dr G's conclusions and then saw the the A's SCOFF and insist that he have it gagged so as to protect the perp and thier TV appearances?

Is it possible that BC knows that his credibility and career are being washed down the sewer with the A's verbal diarrhoea and thusly, had to out himself from the inner circle of the 3rd level of hell?

Me thinks CA will be NONE TO HAPPY with BC today. He chose to deviate from the party line on national TV no less! LKB did such a WONDERFUL job of stating KC IS INNOCENT on her little book release party this morning. Why couldnt have BC taken a leaf from her book (lol pun intended) and sung KC's praises, today of all days? How DARE he speak the truth on TV? Sheesh, CA needs to do a better job at controlling her employees!
Click to expand...

Even the guilty need a lawyer. So I don't think it has anything to do with him waking up to anything. But it might be because his clients might not be following his advice. Which might effect his career.
 
steadychick said:
Maybe we are all hoping against hope that there is something significant in the report that implicates KC. My guess is that there is. But if there is, why didn't JB file to have it withheld?
Click to expand...

Tag teaming together on motions to protect a common cause, KC? Double-act?

BC is trying to defuse public anger by admitting the obvious while still leaving the door open to SODDI for the terrible act and KC is just aware.

BC can also be softly opening the door to things JB cannot climb down and admit, such as a plea deal based on AL's case review?

Former DP attorney TL was completely against JB's strategy, maybe AL has brought some common sense to bear? Even the media attorney's criticize JB's focus.
 
beach2yall said:
i thought i was gonna pass-out when i heard him say that! if there was one thing i would have placed all my $$$ on it was that she would not take the stand. Holy mercy - i can't even express what a freaking nightmare that could be for her defense. IF it does happen, it would have to be short, sweet and only hit on a one...okay, maybe two.. fairly insignificant points. All it would take would be a slip of the tongue and/or start yapping away with her crazy *advertiser censored** lies, she would open the door for the prosecution to have the biggest field day ever seen in a courtroom. Most dangerous idea for the defense i've heard of yet.
Click to expand...

-----------------------------------
beach, you are right but I think people would pay to see/hear her take the stand:floorlaugh::loser: I know I would ~ oh to live in fla..
 
I am aiming towards Ricardo or George

She had to have one other person invovled

or maybe they found some type of abuse?
Sexual?
 
sumbunny said:
BC clearly stated that it was the Anthony's that requested the Autopsy reports be sealed.
Click to expand...

I suspect that BC has a copy of the autopsy report, probably given to him by JB as a courtesy. BC likely read the report and provided GA and CA with a synopsis of what the report contains.

If there's anything in the report that directly points to Casey, I can see GA and CA wanting the whole report sealed until trial. I think Dr. G's opinion may be what GA and CA are most concerned about as it carries the weight of a professional opinion.
 
Jolynna said:
Maybe there is something in the report that does not directly implicate KC, but that shows whoever killed Caylee did it deliberately and with malice? I think that taking away the possibility Caylee's death could have been an accident would be a blow to the defense.

There has to be a reason Dr. G could say Caylee's cause of death was homicide and not "undetermined".

Maybe the explanation for why Dr. G came to her conclusion is what the Anthony's are trying to have suppressed?


JMO
Click to expand...

Good point! Not only a reason that Dr. G named the manner of death homicide, but the reason why the death penalty was put back on the table.

I remember that shortly after Dr. G's press conference announcing the identity of the remains, there was an article in one of the local media in which a detective said that investigators who had previously felt that Caylee's death was an accident, now believed, without a doubt, that her death was homicide.
 
TrY said:
I watched the interview a couple of times and I'm curious when did BC give this interview because it looks canned, cut and pasted, and not a live interview on GMA.

I find it interesting that BC is basically conceding that there's no scenario where Casey is excluded as a suspect in Caylee's murder.

But why does BC bring up the scenario that there's SOD involved somehow? Casey is quite capable of murder and disposing of Caylee's body on Suburban Drive all by herself.
Click to expand...

I think BC bowed to GA and CA's insistence that someone else was involved.

I've always felt that if someone else was involved, more thought and planning would have been involved. Caylee's body would have been disposed of far away from the Anthony home, and likely outside of the city of Orlando. It would have been far better concealed from possible discovery.

As it is, Casey is basically lazy and more involved with her own wants. She doesn't seem too intelligent. I think Caylee's remains being found right around the corner from the Anthony home, in a place Casey was familiar with, points directly to Casey placing the remains there and no one else.
 
Kateyes said:
Ok, I wish I could find a link to this, and I will look but it was almost a year ago...I remember something being said on one of the shows, possibly even NG,tha JG had a brother in Georgia, and he was going to move to Georgia. I am really trying to get my brain to remember more clearly - there may have been something about JG going back to college in Georgia for additional education... Can anyone else help out here? I do have a very firm memory of something about a brother already in Georgia.
Click to expand...

I remember that JG had a brother in Georgia. I think JG had already been to Georgia to visit his brother and was making arrangements to move there.

I also remember that JG was asked why he quit the police force and he said he found that after being on the force for a matter of months, he wasn't comfortable with some of the things he had to do as a police officer.
 
Ya know what's funny? On LKL the A's stated that they have a suspect in mind who they have someone looking into. Then today BC said that he doesn't know of any theory that could remove KC from the "umbrella of suspicion". Wouldn't he know about the suspect the A's had being investigated? And wouldn't that be considered a "theory" that could prove KC's innocence? Hmmm
 
Spangle said:
Even the guilty need a lawyer. So I don't think it has anything to do with him waking up to anything. But it might be because his clients might not be following his advice. Which might effect his career.
Click to expand...

Yep, you are totally right, even the guilty do need a lawyer, however when BC took on this case, he did not expect the A's to be the guilty party - he thought he was defending the GP's of a murdered little girl from the media and hostile public. (protestors etc)

I do not think BC would have taken up for them if he had concidered them to be guilty. Perhaps. I could be wrong, have been before.:crazy:
 
I guess I read this interview much different than others here. I see no sign of anything other than BC supporting his client's best interest, not distancing himself. He stated he personally did not know of who might be guilty instead of or other than Casey but that doesn't imply he doesn't think she is innocent of 1st degree murder.

My personal thinking on why he requested the autopsy report be off limits for now, and the reason JB isnt' the one entering this motion is because the fact as to whether she was clothed or not is addressed. The most likely conclusion drawn from or speculated about when a child dies without her clothes on is connected to the unthinkable, a sexual act against that child. This, alone, would give cause to suspect someone else was responsible or involved in the child's death. While the detectives failed to mention whether she was clothed or not, the autopsy report wouldn't ignore that fact, I don't believe. If it did I'd sure be asking why.

Now, given the way much of the media and the public jump to the most damning conclusions about the defendant, is it surprising they might be worried about the conclusions people would draw from this? I can see people jumping on the bandwagon to equate her with a Sunday School teacher in the news lately, without any evidence to support that idea.

The logical conclusion would be that a sex predator is the SODDI, with this kind of evidence. But their most important reason for wanting to keep this sealed for now is the pain they would be forced to go through, day after day until trial, being reminded of what this little girl probably was forced to go through before her death. If I am right, this information and pain can't be avoided during trial. But why magnify and multiply the pain pretrial for months to a year. It serves no good purpose to realease this to the public right now. Baez didn't file the motion, in the best interest of his client, likely because it would only support her possible innocence.

I found it strange that none of the detectives made any mention as to her being clothed or not. Someone on a Forensic Science forum mentioned the same thing, saying is is normal with a child involved to make a point of mentioning if the deceased was clothed or not. I also was disappointed in Dr G, whom everyone praises so highly, to read her making a public statement when this motion hasn't yet been ruled on yet. I find it highly unprofessional to say anything at this point.
 
I only found one small part of BC's interview surprising or shocking in any way: that he would admit something so obvious and rational as the fact that he can conceive of no scenario that omits the defendant from the umbrella of suspicion. At this point, it would appear moronic to deny this, and to continue to try to draw in and blame her friends and associates and leave her out, when she was the person last seen by her family to have custody of Caylee. I'm sure he didn't make these statements without client consent, though, or without intent to benefit the defense. It's also part of his attempt IMO to rehab the images of the A's, so that they can have their careers as advocates for missing children. To continue appearing so anti-fact, LE-hating, obstructionist, etc. is not really conducive to successfully having a foundation, helping others, etc. Most child advocates are for the child and against the criminals who hurt them, and for the members of LE who investigate them and bring the perpetrators to justice. Anyway, you can't have it all ways. If allegations and accusations can be made by them against associates of Casey on the thinnest of suggestions of fact, they can't continue railing against suspicion of the defendant based on a mountain of circumstantial evidence. Well, they can, but look what their conduct in the uncivil civil depositions did for their images.

As for trying to keep the autopsy report from being released, I take no great leap that their action somehow proves any fact, brings child molesters into the equation, etc. It may be calculated to do something like that, but for me it's totally unpersuasive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 95 more.
Total: 292 (members: 96, guests: 196)

Online statistics

Members online
96
Guests online
196
Total visitors
292
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,392
Messages
18,253,597
Members
234,648
Latest member
sharag
Back
Top