Didn't Casey write June 9th as the last day she saw Caylee in her first statement?
2011.06.24 TRIAL Day Twenty-seven (Afternoon Session)
- Thread starter beach
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
New Posts
-
CA CA - San Francisco, WhtMale UP5964, 43-60, near KYA radio tower, Jul'06- Latest: ChatteringBirds
- Status
Didn't Casey write June 9th as the last day she saw Caylee in her first statement?
okiedokietoo
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 3,398
- Reaction score
- -14
JB: a computer tells you quite a bit about someones activities
YM: about computer activity
YM: about computer activity
LOL You should be careful! You are quickly moving from mock juror to mock defendant! :floorlaugh:
Duct tape at the anthony's
Duct tape at find Caylee tent
Duct tape on the gas can
Duct tape on posters
Duct tape on Caylee
Duct tape missing
Follow the Duct tape....it obviously leads to George, or Cindy, or Lee or Casey. Hmmmm which one which one, if we only had a clue to help us figure it out.
cecybeans
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2008
- Messages
- 2,319
- Reaction score
- 3
Who was it that obtained those cellphone photos on RK's phone (of the snake and his porch and bunches of irrelevant stuff) and released them to the media? Is that where JB was going? The "influence of the frozen snake pies"? (with a nod to Frank Zappa on that).
TraceyLeigh
Lover of WS Peeps!
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2008
- Messages
- 1,749
- Reaction score
- 0
Sheer brilliance right there
Beyond Belief
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2005
- Messages
- 14,496
- Reaction score
- 98
Next....subject to recall.
Horace Finklestein
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2008
- Messages
- 5,658
- Reaction score
- 1
He's not going to investigate people for no reason, Mr. Baez. Why not investigate everyone on hopesprings drive? What about the shovel-neighbor?
"LA knows what he's done..." ?????????
wenwe4
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 9,499
- Reaction score
- 7,359
YM looks thru report - reading narrative report don't have confirm of Aug 1st - I would have to look thru ....
Yes Aug. 1st -
got RK's call records from June - Dec 2008 - did you confiscate computers not RK's - sometimes computers can tell emails sent and internet sites and google maps locations, computer tells you quite abit about the person...it tells you about the computer usage....we obtained statements from RK and co-workers and cell records for a period of time.
LDB- YM have been provided a tip from Det. Gerald White - co-worker in Homicide unit-tip was very general in nature...mention suburban drive...swampy area across from 6' fence....familiar in Aug 2008 - this was near Hopespring Drive and dead end of Suburban drive - where stops just short of the woods - where dead ends @ school ...hidden oaks elementary - between Hidden Oaks - and Hopespring - but remains found closer to Hopespring but you believe end of Surburban drive had been searched by Jason Forgey and his K9 - end by the school had been searched by Forgy and dog
witness excused subject to recall at a later time.
:yes:
mombomb
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
- Messages
- 1,437
- Reaction score
- -3
4:11
DIRECT EXAMINATION OF YURI MELICH BY JB
He is the lead investigator in the case, but he has a supervisor.
He was first called out on July 16, 2008.
He was made aware of the smell at some point by GA, but doesn't know if it was early on.
He did not do anything with that information until later that day.
They had the car brought to their central operations center later the night of the 16th.
In the early morning hours of the 16th he stayed a little over an hour and then went back to drop ICA after she showed him the locations. At the driveway at that time GA wanted to speak to him. YM was in his car. The purpose of that conversation was to focus on ICA?
OBJECTION - speculation of state of mind - SUSTAINED
What was the purpose of the meeting?
OBJECTION - OVERRULED
He did not know what GA's purpose was. He noted in his report what GA had said.
He left the house around 7:00 a.m. He then met with ICA at Universal.
While he was at the A's he recalled that there were 2 uniformed officers and himself. He saw sergeant Hosey, but didn't recall who else was there. He didn't believe there were 7 or 8 officers there that evening.
Did any officer tell him the car should be confiscated due to smell?
OBJECTION - SUSTAINED
He did not go get the car. He had already made arrangement with GA.
It wasn't until she was under arrest that he decided to look for evidence in the car.
She was arrested because she had the elements of the crime. Part of his determination of the arrest was that he was concerned that she might hurt herself, based on another case that was in the media at the time.
She had already fulfilled the element of the crime he arrested her for.
After the arrest, the focus of the investigation was to find the child. They did focus on the car, but it wasn't the sole focus.
They were going off of what they were told happened which included that the child was kidnapped.
He was told initially that the child went missing on June 9 - including GA. A few days later they found out that the correct date was June 16.
At that time they had knowledge of Zanny from ICA and family. They had not talked to friends and associates and outcry witnesses.
It took a while to determine that Zanny did not exist. ICA never changed her story. In jail visits, she was still talking about the nanny. He did not know exactly when he determined she did not exist.
He did not have any contact with the A's prior to July 16, 2008.
He had a detective subpoena ICA's cell phone records. He ultimately got GA's cell phone records. He did not recall what time period he requested for GA. He then said he did, and that they had been working with the MBI also.
He requested GA's multiple times - also for June and July. He gave them to the prosecutors. He now says he specifically remembers the March ones and not the June and July. Only the home phone records for June or July.
OBJECTION - relevance - OVERRULED
Cell records will give calls dialed, received, duration, towers carried and text messages. The towers would tell him generally where the phone was when a call was made. He has used it to track a person's movements. They used that for ICA. They subpoenaed the records and the MBI plugged the towers in. They did not do that for GA or CA or LA - just ICA.
He also pulled these records for RK. On 12/11 he discovered the remains. He called his communications and 911 was called They responded to Suburban Drive and interviewed RK. He asked him what happened and what he did. He also asked for any other important information. It was all recorded. And he didn't tell you that he had call the police 4 months earlier?
OBJECTION - hearsay - SUSTAINED
When did you first become aware of prior calls to 911 by RK?
OBJECTION - APPROACH
SIDEBAR #12 (4:27-4:29)
During August 2008 he was approached by Officer Gerald White about a tip off of Suburban Drive. Did you tell him he did not need to follow up?
OBJECTION - leading - SUSTAINED
He recalled the tip to be very general and that they had already sent the cadaver dog in that general area and that it had already been searched.
RK's phone records - he can't recall the dates requested. He believed he got them for June thru December of 2008. He turned them over to the SAO. They included cell tower info. He did not give it to the MBI. He did not instruct anyone to observe RK's movements during that time.
After the remains were found, he recalled there was duct tape found near the remains. He agreed that several months later there was video taken of duct tape at a command center where GA was working with the same Henkel logo markings. He had never seen duct tape with a logo on it. He did not interview GA about why he had such duct tape.
OBJECTION - asked an answered - SUSTAINED
The only duct tape with the Henkel marking found at the A's home was on the gas can. There was no other duct tape found at the time of their search warrants. The only Henkel tape he knew of was at the command center - on the gas can and at the remains scene. The gas cans were reported stolen by GA?
OBJECTION - leading - SUSTAINED
He determined that the gas can in evidence was the one that was reported stolen. He looked at Exhibit 107 and stated it appeared to be the same gas can but he did not see the tape on it.
You interviewed GA on 7/30/08? Yes. That was when he first informed you of a fight with ICA about the gas can?
OBJECTION - hearsay - SUSTAINED
Did GA inform you he reported the can's stolen?
OBJECTION - hearsay - I'll WITHDRAW
Were the gas cans first collected on 8/1/08? Shortly after GA would have told us...
OBJECTION - hearsay - SUSTAINED
How long would you have waited to collected the cans after being notified of the cans? Hard to answer - he can't recall. Would have been within a reasonable time - days. He was asked to check his report. He did not have a record of that and asked JB to show him. JB showed him something and he agreed the gas cans were collected on August 1, 2008.
RK's phone records from June thru December of 2008 - did you also get his computer? No. Could that have told you more?
OBJECTION - speculation - SUSTAINED
As a general rule he will confiscate a computer if he feels it will give him information. That can tell emails, internet searches and map searches.
What else did you do to investigate RK or his actions? They obtained statements from his and his co-workers an got his cell phone records.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY LDB
Tip by Det. Gerald White? Tip was general? It did mention Suburban Drive - swampy area across from a six foot fence. He was aware it was near the A's. OCSO had dealt with the dead end where Suburban stops just short of woods - the far east side where the school is. The remains site was between the school and the A's - closer to the A's. His response to the tip info was baed on his belief that the end of Suburban being searched by the cadaver dog.
Detective is excused (4:48)
DIRECT EXAMINATION OF YURI MELICH BY JB
He is the lead investigator in the case, but he has a supervisor.
He was first called out on July 16, 2008.
He was made aware of the smell at some point by GA, but doesn't know if it was early on.
He did not do anything with that information until later that day.
They had the car brought to their central operations center later the night of the 16th.
In the early morning hours of the 16th he stayed a little over an hour and then went back to drop ICA after she showed him the locations. At the driveway at that time GA wanted to speak to him. YM was in his car. The purpose of that conversation was to focus on ICA?
OBJECTION - speculation of state of mind - SUSTAINED
What was the purpose of the meeting?
OBJECTION - OVERRULED
He did not know what GA's purpose was. He noted in his report what GA had said.
He left the house around 7:00 a.m. He then met with ICA at Universal.
While he was at the A's he recalled that there were 2 uniformed officers and himself. He saw sergeant Hosey, but didn't recall who else was there. He didn't believe there were 7 or 8 officers there that evening.
Did any officer tell him the car should be confiscated due to smell?
OBJECTION - SUSTAINED
He did not go get the car. He had already made arrangement with GA.
It wasn't until she was under arrest that he decided to look for evidence in the car.
She was arrested because she had the elements of the crime. Part of his determination of the arrest was that he was concerned that she might hurt herself, based on another case that was in the media at the time.
She had already fulfilled the element of the crime he arrested her for.
After the arrest, the focus of the investigation was to find the child. They did focus on the car, but it wasn't the sole focus.
They were going off of what they were told happened which included that the child was kidnapped.
He was told initially that the child went missing on June 9 - including GA. A few days later they found out that the correct date was June 16.
At that time they had knowledge of Zanny from ICA and family. They had not talked to friends and associates and outcry witnesses.
It took a while to determine that Zanny did not exist. ICA never changed her story. In jail visits, she was still talking about the nanny. He did not know exactly when he determined she did not exist.
He did not have any contact with the A's prior to July 16, 2008.
He had a detective subpoena ICA's cell phone records. He ultimately got GA's cell phone records. He did not recall what time period he requested for GA. He then said he did, and that they had been working with the MBI also.
He requested GA's multiple times - also for June and July. He gave them to the prosecutors. He now says he specifically remembers the March ones and not the June and July. Only the home phone records for June or July.
OBJECTION - relevance - OVERRULED
Cell records will give calls dialed, received, duration, towers carried and text messages. The towers would tell him generally where the phone was when a call was made. He has used it to track a person's movements. They used that for ICA. They subpoenaed the records and the MBI plugged the towers in. They did not do that for GA or CA or LA - just ICA.
He also pulled these records for RK. On 12/11 he discovered the remains. He called his communications and 911 was called They responded to Suburban Drive and interviewed RK. He asked him what happened and what he did. He also asked for any other important information. It was all recorded. And he didn't tell you that he had call the police 4 months earlier?
OBJECTION - hearsay - SUSTAINED
When did you first become aware of prior calls to 911 by RK?
OBJECTION - APPROACH
SIDEBAR #12 (4:27-4:29)
During August 2008 he was approached by Officer Gerald White about a tip off of Suburban Drive. Did you tell him he did not need to follow up?
OBJECTION - leading - SUSTAINED
He recalled the tip to be very general and that they had already sent the cadaver dog in that general area and that it had already been searched.
RK's phone records - he can't recall the dates requested. He believed he got them for June thru December of 2008. He turned them over to the SAO. They included cell tower info. He did not give it to the MBI. He did not instruct anyone to observe RK's movements during that time.
After the remains were found, he recalled there was duct tape found near the remains. He agreed that several months later there was video taken of duct tape at a command center where GA was working with the same Henkel logo markings. He had never seen duct tape with a logo on it. He did not interview GA about why he had such duct tape.
OBJECTION - asked an answered - SUSTAINED
The only duct tape with the Henkel marking found at the A's home was on the gas can. There was no other duct tape found at the time of their search warrants. The only Henkel tape he knew of was at the command center - on the gas can and at the remains scene. The gas cans were reported stolen by GA?
OBJECTION - leading - SUSTAINED
He determined that the gas can in evidence was the one that was reported stolen. He looked at Exhibit 107 and stated it appeared to be the same gas can but he did not see the tape on it.
You interviewed GA on 7/30/08? Yes. That was when he first informed you of a fight with ICA about the gas can?
OBJECTION - hearsay - SUSTAINED
Did GA inform you he reported the can's stolen?
OBJECTION - hearsay - I'll WITHDRAW
Were the gas cans first collected on 8/1/08? Shortly after GA would have told us...
OBJECTION - hearsay - SUSTAINED
How long would you have waited to collected the cans after being notified of the cans? Hard to answer - he can't recall. Would have been within a reasonable time - days. He was asked to check his report. He did not have a record of that and asked JB to show him. JB showed him something and he agreed the gas cans were collected on August 1, 2008.
RK's phone records from June thru December of 2008 - did you also get his computer? No. Could that have told you more?
OBJECTION - speculation - SUSTAINED
As a general rule he will confiscate a computer if he feels it will give him information. That can tell emails, internet searches and map searches.
What else did you do to investigate RK or his actions? They obtained statements from his and his co-workers an got his cell phone records.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY LDB
Tip by Det. Gerald White? Tip was general? It did mention Suburban Drive - swampy area across from a six foot fence. He was aware it was near the A's. OCSO had dealt with the dead end where Suburban stops just short of woods - the far east side where the school is. The remains site was between the school and the A's - closer to the A's. His response to the tip info was baed on his belief that the end of Suburban being searched by the cadaver dog.
Detective is excused (4:48)
- Status