2011.06.25 Sidebar Thread (Trial Day Twenty-eight)

[Emma Peel]

Not sure if this has been posted or not, but everyone should watch this 3 minute account of Saturday's activities. I found it very intriguing and telling. Especially Chaney and Baez in the holding cell with ICA - and her response coming out.

Something is definitely UP!

http://www.clickorlando.com/video/28358075/index.html

Saturday: Minute-By-Minute
Local 6 News reporter Tony Pipitone recounts what happened in the Casey Anthony murder trial on Saturday.

MOO

Mel

just found this.

bumping 'cause it's a great time-saver regarding yesterday's delayed proceedings.

So Cheny raises new issue & Cheney Mason says it's an entirely different issue than DOD Dr. Ferdon.

At adjournment, His Honor concludes that it's an entirely different legal matter (unrelated to DOD witness matter); HHJP says both sides concur a legal issue has arisen. And ... ADJOURN.



*****************************************************

Folks here have been speculating for 30 hours as to what it could be. :dunno:

Cheney had planned to bring the issue up in the AM, obviously. "An entirely different subject I would like to address." Baez knew about it (also obvs.).

It does seem to be a matter that was of "news" to the SA team - given initial body language at 9 AM. They seem thoughtful, rather than upset or combative. See Burdick & Ashton step away from Judge with heads down - in thought - Burdick with arms in defensive position and Ashton with both hands stuck in pockets.

Also Cheney @ 9 AM, being polite to both SA's leaving sidebar - Baez reacting as if he already had the info and knew what he would next do.

There-after ... DT & SA team chatting quietly amongst selves pre-recorded conference in chambers.

So...if it's not DOD witness issue ... and it's a legal issue, and the source of legal issue was Cheney/DT ... and DT responds non-combatively to it, and agrees there's an issue ... what could ...

oh crap. I give up. :dunno:

Any other hunches?

Why does the reporter, at the top if this video, say "an entirely different subject indeed because what happened next could fundamentally change the entire case"?

That's just weird. How is he able to say that? Sensationalism? Or ... going with the theory that the local press knows stuff we don't before they are "allowed" to report it ... what, indeed, could fundamentally change the entire case?

:banghead::banghead:thanks 4 the headache.

 

[pipkins]

i think it was Cindys testimony too and Baez is in BIG trouble as he told her what to say - thats called Subornation of perjury

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subornation_of_perjury"]Subornation of perjury - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Scale_of_justice_2.svg" class="image"><img alt="Stub icon" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Scale_of_justice_2.svg/29px-Scale_of_justice_2.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/0/0e/Scale_of_justice_2.svg/29px-Scale_of_justice_2.svg.png[/ame]

 

[Kat]

My added contribution to the must read threads for this forum are:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=159"]The Rules - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
Every thread listed.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81352"]UPDATED PLEASE READ:No Name Calling or Using Negative variations on Player Names - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]



And:
Please read Caylee Forum Rules - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
Posts by Tricia. If you are new and are unfamiliar with who Tricia is: she owns websleuths.

Websleuths is a heavily moderated website. That is a very positive thing and one of the foremost reasons I have kept a membership here myself. It is best to get to know the rules and the etiquette used here because it does vary from other websites. I hope that all new members come to appreciate and truly value their memberships as much as I have. This is a stellar website (look at how many guests we have each day when you log in, the numbers are astounding).

HTH.

 

[cluciano63]

If it is an entirely new issue or different issue...it could be about witnesses lying but that probably would not surprise the state or be news to them...they already know it. I guess the surprise could be the DT bringing it up...

 

[Melanie]

Seems a little harse to me. Put yourselves in their shoes wouldn't you want to be there? I know I would. As far as working perhaps they're notoriety prevents that. Not to mention the daily turmoil that they must be going through. I don't like them anymore than you do but I still can empathize with them and the situation they're in. JMO

Sorry if I came across as harsh - I apologize. However, it doesn't change how I feel. I was around for the David Westerfield case (I worked with Damon). Guess what - he never quit his job, Brenda didn't go on disability. Damon took time off for the trial, but not the time that it took it to go to trial. Why wasn't Cindy working between 2008-2011?

Again, knowing the parents of a murdered child, the notoreity here in San Diego was huge (even going so far as accusing the parents of being drug addicts and swingers). It was horrible. They were on the news or on the front page every single day.

But Damon had a safe place to land at work, and it was important for them to maintain some kind of normalcy in their household. Nothing was going to bring Danielle back.

So that's where I'm coming from. I know many a murdered family member who doesn't have the luxury of sitting on their rear for 3 years while waiting for the trial. It goes beyond my comprehension.

1 parent perhaps, but both, and the brother?

Nahhh...something ain't right. But that's just my opinion.

Thanks!

Mel

 

[TiaM]

But, alas, after last weeks testimony I think she "might" sell 500 copies -- tops.

I'd boycott anyone who buys a book full of lies penned by one Cindy Anthony. Now mind you, if I saw one lying on a trash heap, I might take a peek, but I'd never spend my husbands income on such garbage.

MOO

Mel

Like I said before, if someone just HAS to waste their time reading a book full of lies, "half-truths" and "mis-truths", be my guest.

But don't spend money on it.

Read it at the library - for free.

Or sit in Barnes & Noble in one of their comfy chairs with a frappacino and read it.

Just don't put money in Cindy's pocket.

 

[Hey boss!]

Even thought they are who they are, I think that Cindy said she is on disability for emotional/mental distress, which I think has to be real. Who wouldn't be a mess, learning what she has learned (even if she tries to block it out) over the past three years? And what employer could take on the circus that would inevitably come with hiring any of them?

And don't forget, they had people SPITTING on them, throwing things at their house, following them down the road, yelling from their lawn at all hours of the day. I don't particularly like the way they are acting, with all the I don't remembers (oh, except for that one pop up on my computer 3 years ago), but they did nothing to deserve all of that. They were scared, angry, devastated and confused and were treated like garbage by the public.

 

[allycat1208]

seriously is there even a snowballs chance of perjury charges against CA?
...I wish

I was curious about this myself and asked about it in the attorneys thread. AZlawyer said perjury is very hard to prove and although it goes on every day all over in courtrooms, charges are hardly ever brought to those guilty of it.

 

[gngr~snap]

O/T
LA's testimony and ICA's reaction is so strange to me. Every time I see it again, I can't help but feel something is very very strange.
Mainly I can't keep from trying to figure out ICA's reaction. ICA was genuine crying even down to facial twitching. If you only watch her during LA's testimony, she seems to feel bad FOR Lee, which is unique for ICA, indeed.
But what's also so weird, is as she is listening to LA, at some point she gets a scared wide eyed look on her face- when he is being questioned about why Lee was angry. Like she thought he was going to reveal something she didn't want him to. Then he didn't, and she resumes crying FOR Lee again. Anyone else sort of analyzed ICA's reaction during LA's testimony? I wish I knew what it was she was anticipating him saying.

I also beleve on Friday 6/24 the first? time CA was on the stand and questioned (maybe the 2nd) before she left the stand she let out a huge body sigh... iike she was fearful something was going to be explored and wasn't.
- maybe it was after Lee was on the stand?
something that really stood out to me. There IS still a skelton in that closet...
moo

 

[little_miss_smart]

acandyrose...is a good one. Also, I got most of my info from the wftv website. After I read all the documents (my poor eyes will never be the same), I went back and watch all the televised hearings, which were to me, every bit as interesting as the trial has been. Plus Baez gets some good smack downs. A must see is the hearing when Andrea Lyons was arguing why the death penalty shouldn't be used in this case. Sorry, I'm no good with links, but I think is was in ????2009. Maybe someone else knows exactly when.

Bolded part - I would love to see this if someone can provide a link please???

I haven't seen much of the televised hearings, only bits and pieces.

 

[curiositycat]

In the thread "Caylee Anthony Drowned in Pool Theory" I posted a link today to an interview between GVS and Mark Furhman from August of 2008. I searched for it all morning. I wanted to make sure I remembered what it was reported, at the time, CA said. She clearly told MF&GVS it was on June 17th 2008 that she saw the ladder up and the gate opened. So, now it's the 16th. According to what was reported happened that day, I say "no way, JB"

Here is the link http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,399183,00.html

 

[Hey boss!]

My big thing was both CA and LA's testimony about the trunk stains being there when they bought the car. In the past 3 years, there's been sooo much talk about the trunk, the "outline of a body", trunk liner samples, etc....

I just knew JB was going to ask "now, Caylee wasn't shaped like a basketball was she?" :floorlaugh: I hate it when I'm wrong.

 

[Melanie]

And don't forget, they had people SPITTING on them, throwing things at their house, following them down the road, yelling from their lawn at all hours of the day. I don't particularly like the way they are acting, with all the I don't remembers (oh, except for that one pop up on my computer 3 years ago), but they did nothing to deserve all of that. They were scared, angry, devastated and confused and were treated like garbage by the public.

I understand, but that was back in 2008. What about 2009, 2010, and now 2011. That was a small blip on the radar in the grand scheme of things.

I think they were treated this way because of their actions and how they defended Casey instead of supporting their dead grandaughter. NO - regardless, they didn't deserve any of it -- I agree with you on that!

Now they will treated bad again, by those who read every deposition and listed to every pre-trial hearing, and realize that Cindy lied on the stand to help her daughter and to he!! with Caylee Marie.

If so, I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it.

MOO

Mel

 

[cluciano63]

And don't forget, they had people SPITTING on them, throwing things at their house, following them down the road, yelling from their lawn at all hours of the day. I don't particularly like the way they are acting, with all the I don't remembers (oh, except for that one pop up on my computer 3 years ago), but they did nothing to deserve all of that. They were scared, angry, devastated and confused and were treated like garbage by the public.

Very true and to be honest, watching some of what took place against them made be feel ashamed to be of the same species as those attackers...also this couple (much more so than Lee) have been nationally known and shown, followed by cameras, etc...much more so than the Van Damm's for example. If they did not have mental/emotional issues before all of this (and we know they did) I can certainly buy that they are truly wacked out now.

 

[HMSHoney24]

Good Afternoon Y'all! Hope that y'all are having a semi-relaxing weekend...I've deliberately tried to stay away from the computer and media because of yesterday's mess and the not knowing driving me crazy but have checked in a few times hoping for news of WTH happened! Where's a media leak when you need one, eh?!

Anyway...I have a question regarding the whole CM "opening the door" on ICA's past criminal issues when questioning the Deputy about handcuffing her....

Didn't CA do that before CM when she testified on 06/23/2011 and said (found here [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6746726&postcount=74"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Cindy Anthony's testimonies[/ame] in the CA testimony thread) "She first learned of the computer searches was when Melich and Allen came to her house prior to ICA's arrest on check charges (September of 2008).?

The jury heard that testimony, didn't they? I'm not great with legal issues but wouldn't that alone be enough for the subject/issue to be, for lack of better legal wording, fair game?

Thank y'all in advance for any enlightenment y'all might be able to provide. I almost can't contain myself waiting for tomorrow morning...who in their right mind wishes for a weekend to be over, geez?! :crazy:

 

[AbbieNormal]

I'm sure that whoever was doing the searches did not specifically type how to make chloroform 84 times. Rather they types out that very precise "How To Make ChlorAform" (note theA, damning as autocomplete would not do that). From there they simply danced in and out of the pages that that search brought up. Each click into or out of one of those pages was another hit on the 84. So KC did the initial search (first hit) clicks on the first result (next it), reads a few pages into it (several more hits) clicks back to go back to the search results (more hits) selects the next search result (hit again) and reads sub pages there (another hit each) etc etc. Probably just going in and out of 6 or 7 web sites from that initial typed search string could generate the 84 instances that that one LE program found.

The key point in all of it is not that someone may or may not have searched for chloroform 84 times. that is just a matter of the application reporting. The key take away is that someone at that computer (ICA) deliberately typed out a misspelled search for how to make chloroform, then followed through and read 84 pages worth of material on the subject. This indicates a more deliberate search for very specific knowledge rather than a casual searching. Which goes towards intent.

I love this! I bet HHJP dreams about doing this.

I agree,and really would like to see them sequestered ,as well,but HHJP was following FL law. :maddening:

\

How could the ants be sequestered, they all live together, would this be 3 more hotel rooms the state has to pay for? Just curious.

 

[TiaM]

I am not a super religious person but one thing really bothers me.

There was a tweet the Cindy and George were in the witness holding area reading the bible to one another. How can you sit and read the bible, take the stand to tell the whole truth so help you God, and lie like a dog.

It's no wonder the skies opened up over the courthouse Friday.

BBM

Unfortunately easily.

Take a gander at the news any given day.

People everywhere selectively use and twist the words of the Bible (and the Torah, and the Koran) to justify their point of view for all kinds of horrible acts.

 

[Blue Ridge]

From MSNBC.

NeJame thinks Casey will take the stand.

"The reality of it is, of course, the defendant in America does not have to take the stand and the burden is entirely, as it should be, on the State. However, when you come in with such a *powerful* statement that you heard in this opening statement; well you know, guttural sounds coming out of Jose Baez about what HE was going to prove and what they were going to show. That doesn't go forgotten by the jury. And so they've almost in some ways by that boisterous opening statement, set themselves up where they've reversed the burden and now they have to come forward.

Now what's interesting is you've heard nothing in their case so far about any inappropriate sexual activity as it relates to sexual battery or matters such as that. You've not heard any of the promises that they've made come out. And what I find particularly telling - absent from the defense witness list - are any health care professionals as far as psychiatrists or otherwise, to, in fact, prove, what, in fact, they alleged. So, how do you do that? There can only be one way they can do that. And that is to put her on the stand. How else do you tell that story?"

Do you think they will put Casey on the stand?

"Well, I think they planned to put her on the stand. In light of the ebbs and flow of this case, who knows anything? This has been my opinion, this has been such a disjointed... uh... defense - I'll just leave it at that. But the reality of it is, clearly they had to anticipate putting her on the stand. Because how else do you prove what they claimed without her telling the story? There's no other way to do it."

I am REALLLLYYYY liking hearing MN's comments the past few days. And I am REALLLLYYYY hoping that ICA will take the stand, too!!!!

 

[kelian36]

If the A's think the hecklers and protesters were bad 2 summers ago, I highly suspect hecklers to start up again now that Cindy and Lee are forgetting Caylee and sticking up for Casey. That is moo. I stated it that way because what Cindy and Lee did on trial -----is heartbreaking.

 

[cleo612]

So true. When I was on salary (meaning I didn't get paid for OT) didn't mean that gave me carte blance to leave early if I worked extra (which I did most weeks). My hours were 8 a day, if I chose too, or my boss asked me, I would work late. But I didn't sneak off early the next day for doing so - no one did. And guess what, I put those hours on my time card (just didn't get paid for them). If you look at managers, or top level executives, many work long long hours, but are on a fixed salary.

My goodness my boss would flip out if I left at 1:00 (in time to be on my home computer searching for chloroform, alcohol, and bleach) by 2:00 -- instead of being where I should be. AT WORK.

I don't believe her story for a minute, and her company must be hopping mad right now.

Give me those records, I wanna see em

MOO

Mel

Yeah, she included acetone in there too.

So my question would be why are you searching for items such as these, rather than "hand sanitizer" and "bamboo?"

Her entire series of answers was way "over the top!"