2010.01.15 Letter to Judge Strickland WFTV

[Kentjbkent]

No...she's just not that smart. Based on what has been produced in discovery, a letter from Joy would have been more rambling and less researched.

IMO only.

Joy also recently posted on another forum she frequents that she was recently released from the hospital where she was being treated for symptoms of her lupus? Apparently, another poster verified this by calling the hospital and being told Joy had been discharged that day.

For whatever that is worth....

 

[TallyHo]

Jurors are just like you and I and most people... They don't take kindly to being taken for fools, and they're usually not stupid.

JMHO

I sure hope so!! I just worry sometimes, knowing how many nuts there are out there- this case has certainly turned up a few, lol!

 

[noonie]

I love when other forum members come here and hijack info and pretend it is their own.* Like the page 21 post........I need no credit nor would ever call them out in their own forum but really?* That's amateur.* See folks.......everyone comes to WS to get their info.* Be proud of the job we do.*

You are the Pri-Madonna ! :dance: :angel::woohoo:

 

[Leila]

I am going to say this only one time.* It is not directed at any poster or any specific opinion.* We as WS do an amazing job.....we all know how overworked LE, investigators, attorneys, and people in any field related to crimes and victims are, and that they don't have enough hours in a day to do as much as they would like.* Resources are thin, budget cuts hurt victims more than criminals.* If you can't afford an attorney to defend you when charged, the State pays for it.* In any other field...when does that happen?* When people state that LE ignored real evidence, that they never investigated, that they didn't try hard enough.......it really gets my goat.* I have 2 LE officers in my family...I have a number of attorneys too...I see both sides.* I understand that in certain cases it may ring true.* BUT......what I don't believe is that real info is ignored or dismissed.* I find it hard to believe that with as many that people visit this site every day (including LE and attorneys) points in an annonymous letter with info as old as my membership, have not been investigated.* If we haven't seen it.....there is a reason.* We are not entitled to police investigation records.* We just plain are not.* The sunshine laws in this case have indulged us, they have proven our early thoughts with the release of doc dumps and they have given us angles to further investigate.* If LE investigated those addresses....that means they pulled up records associated with them.* They know who lived there before and probably what color their current vehicle is painted.* We don't see that info because it is no longer or never was part of an investigation.* Those who theorize that we haven't seen it because they didn't investigate are entitled to that opinion.* I come here to sleuth and to explore options, I choose not to accuse people of failing to do their job investigating, when I have no way to measure what they did and did not do.* If any credible info was contained in this letter...it's been reviewed because as we ALL know...it's been out there in various emails, snips, posts, and soundbites since day 31.* Thank you for being such a great group to post with.* I learn more every day.* My brain is so full, soon I'll need a data dump to make room for more.

Your post deserves more than just hitting the "thanks" button!

People in law enforcement deserve our appreciation for all that they do in the process of solving crimes. I've been saying for a long time that when it come to the trial, we're all going to be amazed by what's been thoroughly investigated and researched by professionals. Just because we, the public, don't know the details of the investigation done by detectives, doesn't mean it wasn't done.

The Florida Sunshine Law affords the public a glimpse into the investigation of this crime, but it doesn't include the entire scope of the investigation.

I think some people believe that they are entitled to know every detail of the investigation. If some aspect of the investigation isn't made public, they make the assumption that LE failed to do that investigation.

In reality, there are many, many details we aren't privy to. No one outside the team of investigators and prosecution knows the entirety of the investigation. The defense doesn't know the entirety of the investigation.

 

[Melanie]

Thanks to all for their thoughts. Personally, I couldn't make it through the 2nd page. I was in shock that someone would have the nerve to send such rubbish to the judge. Don't you think it should have gone to the DA? IMHO, I bet the judge didn't even read it, as it would have to be admitted into evidence by the DA or Defense first (if I'm correct). Plus, if he read it, wouldn't it cloud his judgement in the case? Just my opinion - I could be totally off base. Mel

 

[Leila]

As far as I know (please anyone feel free to correct me here), "hearsay" is not admitted as evidence in any court, whether it's petty claims or civil... certainly not in a criminal trial.

This letter, unless the author is willing to come forth, verify their claims and explain their supposedly privileged knowledge of this case first-hand, it's hearsay. Anyone can write something like this, or something similar, or something that is quite the opposite. But unless whoever wrote it is willing to step up to the plate and testify in court... YAWN.

As I said, I stand to be corrected if I'm wrong.

JMHO

Actually two states (that I know of) have recently passed legislation that allows for hearsay evidence in a criminal trial. California was one of the first to pass this law, and Illinois followed, basing their law on the California law, that set a precedent in California. Certain qualifications must be met for hearsay to be presented, at the discretion of the judge in the case.

One of the qualifications for hearsay evidence is that the person who made a statement is either deceased or otherwise not able to speak for themselves (in a coma or had a stroke). The person who heard the statement can repeat the statement made to them, and it's hearsay evidence.

There's a case in Illinois right now in which the new hearsay law is being tested, and there's a hearing this week - Tuesday, pertaining to what hearsay evidence will be allowed during the trial.

The case is a murder case, in which the suspect, Drew Peterson is accused of murdering his third wife. His fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, has disappeared (Oct. 2007) and is presumed dead. A few months prior to her disappearance, Stacy confessed to her minister that she knew Drew killed his third wife, and described his movements on the night that the third wife was murdered.

As far as I know, Florida does not allow hearsay evidence.

 

[Leila]

Well, lots of luck to her on that one. It went over like a lead balloon on this site and I'm sure it will do the same with any prospective juror who happens upon it.

The letter insults the intelligence of the average person, and I'm sure the jurors wouldn't be happy with the letter. But, once the trial gets underway, that letter won't become part of the trial, and the jury will have plenty of direct evidence to contemplate. The letter will be long forgotten by any person who later becomes part of the jury.

 

[butwhatif?]

The letter insults the intelligence of the average person, and I'm sure the jurors wouldn't be happy with the letter. But, once the trial gets underway, that letter won't become part of the trial, and the jury will have plenty of direct evidence to contemplate. The letter will be long forgotten by any person who later becomes part of the jury.

I dont know...I'm thinking it's more of an insult to JSS's intelligence, than the public or a jury.
If he's upset by the letter, I'd be happy to comfort him. :wink:

 

[Melanie]

I dont know...I'm thinking it's more of an insult to JSS's intelligence, than the public or a jury.
If he's upset by the letter, I'd be happy to comfort him. :wink:

he he...that's cute! I do love me some Strickland! (I'm I allowed to say that)?

:angel:

 

[Kentjbkent]

Your post deserves more than just hitting the "thanks" button!

People in law enforcement deserve our appreciation for all that they do in the process of solving crimes. I've been saying for a long time that when it come to the trial, we're all going to be amazed by what's been thoroughly investigated and researched by professionals. Just because we, the public, don't know the details of the investigation done by detectives, doesn't mean it wasn't done.

The Florida Sunshine Law affords the public a glimpse into the investigation of this crime, but it doesn't include the entire scope of the investigation. I think some people believe that they are entitled to know every detail of the investigation. If some aspect of the investigation isn't made public, they make the assumption that LE failed to do that investigation.

In reality, there are many, many details we aren't privy to. No one outside the team of investigators and prosecution knows the entirety of the investigation. The defense doesn't know the entirety of the investigation.

Bold and Underlined Comment bears repeating (over and over imo)!!! This is exactly what I have tried to explain to those who have stated that the released information is not near enough to convict.

So repeating your comment yet again....

The Florida Sunshine Law affords the public a glimpse into the investigation of this crime, but it doesn't include the entire scope of the investigation. I think some people believe that they are entitled to know every detail of the investigation. If some aspect of the investigation isn't made public, they make the assumption that LE failed to do that investigation.

 

[kaRN]

I seriously think toxins may explain the letter.

 

[LambChop]

We all know KC has made up names by mixing first and last names of people she has either met or is aware of. Gloria may actually be the mother of one of KC's classsmates and is perfectly innocent in this case, no connection to KC whatsoever. The others, also, may be people KC was aware of but did not actually know. So why would LE feel obligated to explain to John Q. Public who these people are and that they have no connection to KC. These people have a right to privacy if they have proven to LE that they are not involved in any way.

KC lied with no regard for the innocence of others and because KC no longer has a voice her family has taken up where KC left off. There is no credibility here. They just keep spinning and spinning. Do they not see why KC is the way she is? I still am appauled at CA's behavior at Morgan deposition. If the family is behind this letter....they still just don't get it as they are doing more harm than good. Hopefully the fraud trial will be a wake up call. JMO

 

[magnolia]

We all know KC has made up names by mixing first and last names of people she has either met or is aware of. Gloria may actually be the mother of one of KC's classsmates and is perfectly innocent in this case, no connection to KC whatsoever. The others, also, may be people KC was aware of but did not actually know. So why would LE feel obligated to explain to John Q. Public who these people are and that they have no connection to KC. These people have a right to privacy if they have proven to LE that they are not involved in any way.

KC lied with no regard for the innocence of others and because KC no longer has a voice her family has taken up where KC left off. There is no credibility here. They just keep spinning and spinning. Do they not see why KC is the way she is? I still am appauled at CA's behavior at Morgan deposition. If the family is behind this letter....they still just don't get it as they are doing more harm than good. Hopefully the fraud trial will be a wake up call. JMO

I am still appalled by CA's behavior as well. I am also appalled the Judge never punished her in anyway. I had no idea someone could refuse to cooperate and behave that way during a deposition. I have often wanted to ask one of the Attorneys here their opinion of why the Judge let her get by with it.

 

[wonders]

I am still appalled by CA's behavior as well. I am also appalled the Judge never punished her in anyway. I had no idea someone could refuse to cooperate and behave that way during a deposition. I have often wanted to ask one of the Attorneys here their opinion of why the Judge let her get by with it.

magnolia, with all due respect Judges don't sit in on depo's. However I am one who hopes that when all is said and done that the A's will see themselves in a courtroom for all they have done.

 

[Mysteeri]

Do you really believe that with all that garbage....that they would be honest about their profession? Sounds like they found the info on the internet.... I mean they included a web link not an actual proper citation of an article or study........an internet link.

It was a link to a thesis in pdf-format, right? Academic papers are often published on the Internet, which is convenient for other researchers, for example. It`s polite to provide a link where you can check the information yourself.

Now I don`t know if the writer of that letter is honest about their profession (don`t know anything about death rings on hair), and what in that letter is garbage.

Edit. Ok, it`s a Master`s thesis from Louisiana State University (http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-01242005-145140/), from their electronic thesis and dissertation collection. I wonder if it`s too much to say "NO WAY possible that there was any DEATH HAIR belonging to Caylee Anthony with a black post-morten ring found in Casey Anthony`s car ", based on that thesis alone.

 

[Intermezzo]

IMO, after rereading Cindy's "My Caylee is Missing" Myspace post, her emails with DC, as well as George's recent letter about being under the microscope, there is no way I believe either of them penned a single line of the letter to Strickland.

I don't want to insult them, but the letter to Strickland is far more lengthy, detailed, and frankly lucid, then anything I have seen from the Anthony's.

So, I am not seeing this as an attempt by them to circumvent the system.

I totally agree with you JWG.

 

[Intermezzo]

I have a question?

Cindy has never admitted to using any cleaning products in the trunk of Casey's car, correct?

The person I believe wrote the letter with the initials J.D. standing for Jane Doe***... yes, I believe it is a psuedo-name for one of the people who were involved in exchanging emails with Cindy and Dominic in the doc dump.

So this woman, who had direct contact through emails with Cindy Anthony in trying to help Casey's defense, insinuates that Cindy did use cleaning products on the trunk of Casey's car?

Maybe investigators should have a nice little chat with this woman and maybe do a little search of her computer? See what all has been said between her and Dominic and Cindy?

She wants so bad to be involved. I say let her be involved.

BBM, well wouldn't that be grand..
If the author has figured this case out I'd like to see LE and the SAO knocking on her door with a search warrant in hand then leaving with the computer.
Like you said Lola..if she wants to be involved in the case then so be it.

 

[flourish]

It was a link to a thesis in pdf-format, right? Academic papers are often published on the Internet, which is convenient for other researchers, for example. It`s polite to provide a link where you can check the information yourself.

Now I don`t know if the writer of that letter is honest about their profession (don`t know anything about death rings on hair), and what in that letter is garbage.

Edit. Ok, it`s a Master`s thesis from Louisiana State University (http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-01242005-145140/), from their electronic thesis and dissertation collection. I wonder if it`s too much to say "NO WAY possible that there was any DEATH HAIR belonging to Caylee Anthony with a black post-morten ring found in Casey Anthony`s car ", based on that thesis alone.

Polite...okay, but it would be more serious and professional if it was done correctly. Here's a link for the writer of that letter that will serve them well: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/

(It's the writing lab at Purdue University)

I think one of the reasons this bothers me so much is because I'm working on my Master's degree (I'm not even a full-fledged "researcher"), and if I handed in a paper that looked anything like that letter, I'd be failing out of school.

 

[nitasch]

What I find shocking about this letter (besides what has been covered by others already) is the fact that the writer points fingers, and drags so many innocent people into this mess!

"shady and questionable characters" is used to describe Tony R and JG....look at them...there is something there!

RYAN P??? Seriously??

Then dragging in this new Jeff***** Hopkins, if he exist, and of course any Juliette L who used to reside in FL.

I am quite sure that anyone who had the unfortunate position of knowing KC prior to or after Caylee disappeared is wishing there was a way to rewind time and erase the day they met. Dragging new people with no connection at all into this, is just heartless.

 

[Tulessa]

What I find shocking about this letter (besides what has been covered by others already) is the fact that the writer points fingers, and drags so many innocent people into this mess!

"shady and questionable characters" is used to describe Tony R and JG....look at them...there is something there!

RYAN P??? Seriously??

Then dragging in this new Jeff***** Hopkins, if he exist, and of course any Juliette L who used to reside in FL.

I am quite sure that anyone who had the unfortunate position of knowing KC prior to or after Caylee disappeared is wishing there was a way to rewind time and erase the day they met. Dragging new people with no connection at all into this, is just heartless.

So well stated!