2011.06.23 TRIAL Day Twenty-six (Afternoon Session)

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
LDB having witness point out search "How to make chloraform" typed out search in google and asked if it would appear that way if searching for chlorophyll (no)
 
I'm not seeing how this cross relates to what JB asked.
 
Question. How does someone visit 4 different websites in 1 seconds time? How does some one visit 1 website 84 times in 1 seconds time? What am I not understand?


Your information is incorrect, the total time for these searches were hours not minutes this was already elicited by JA. Perhaps you might go back and read what you missed, it is very interesting. Part of the states CIC.
 
When JB showed this document to this computer expert was he hiding columns on the excel document?
 
And wouldn't it show which myspace page you went to? Didn't CA say she never even had a MS page until she posted her message about Caylee?

And if so, wouldn't it be INTERESTING if it was the Myspace page that declared "Knock Her Out With Cholorform?"
 
For the March 28 2008 CA timecard, it shows she worked from 0800 to 1740 or 9.67 hours for the day and 46.17 for the week. No overtime my azz.
 
This is not a devastating blow guys. First of all we have a client who it has been proven will lie walking all the way the Sheriff's Department doing it. Now we have a mother who testified that while her daughter was 7 months pregnant that she was retaining fluid and is an RN and didn't notice that baby bump.

Then we hear that this stain of decomposition was in the car when they bought it. Imagine the incredible bad luck of this family. They must have some sort of curse on them to have this happen to them. They have a daughter that lied, a granddaughter murdered and now this revelation that Cindy fraudulated her time card.

This jury is not dumb. Cindy had selective recall last time called by the State. Now she has this terrific recall and has come very close to perjury.

Give this jury the credit that they are due. Even if they don't know everything that we do, they will see the handwriting on the wall. This is a mother who was not credible and appeared to have make believe searches just like her daughter had make believe friends.

It will come in on rebuttal. There will be some document or some action on the computer of the company that will blow Cindy out of the water. And I wouldn't doubt that a search warrant for those files is pending as we speak. Plenty of time to show Cindy Anthony up for what she is.

:blowkiss: Big deep breath. :)

Thanks grandmaj. This post is like a big, clean, soft bandage.
 
Today has been a good day for the #CaseyAnthony defense. They have done some damage.
by stevehelling via twitter at 3:38 PM

It should seem that google's searching technology has made life more difficult for investigators. The new auto complete features that is.
by Gabe Travers/WESH.com at 3:38 PM

Jury is looking at what webpages were typed in. #CaseyAnthony -jfell
by cfnews13casey via twitter at 3:38 PM

The searches are now published to the jury again.
by Gabe Travers/WESH.com at 3:37 PM
 
Now that the initial shock of CA's testimony is wearing off, I just had a few thoughts. While in my heart, I still believe CA just perjured herself on the stand, I do wonder about something. What if she was telling the truth and did actually look up chloroform in her search for chlorophyll, like she claims. She did not admit to having looked it up 84 times, but yet somehow, it was looked up that many times. Could it be possible that CA looked it up initially, as she claimed, and then left it open on the computer, ICA saw it and that's what sparked her idea? Honestly, I've always thought Ricardo's "win her over with chloroform" thing was a tiny bit of a leap, and this could actually make more sense. Or, for all we know, ICA could have looked it up before, then when CA went on the computer to look up chlorophyll, chloroform auto filled in on the search engine because the first six letters are the same, and then CA got curious and looked it up. I don't know. I still think CA's lying, but I just thought I'd throw out some scenarios where if she wasn't, that it doesn't mean that ICA didn't do those searches (at least some of them).

Oh, and I, too, am wondering if those dogs were sleepy because they'd been experimented on. My red flags started flying when that was mentioned, too.

What if Cindy was looking /hacking into ICA myspace and that is what lead Cindy searching it up?
 
LDB - do you have confidence taht dates and times on netanalysis are correct or do you rely on cacheback?
witness: dates and times on both reports appear to be accurate can't speak as to how they are interpreted by programs since didn't write programs
 
good rebuttal for LDB, she is going to make the jury think twice about CA......and JB knows this.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
173
Guests online
206
Total visitors
379

Forum statistics

Threads
608,936
Messages
18,247,834
Members
234,510
Latest member
Sarcon
Back
Top