2011.06.29 TRIAL Day Thirty-one (Afternoon Session)

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Am I in the minority (and if so that's Ok) that Kronk is fishy?

I cant put my finger on how or why.

And I could be wrong way off base in left field.


If he stuck a stick in the eye socket, I SO wish I did not hear that. Oh,,,......
 
I dare say if JB thought he'd get away with it....He'd seat both Roy and Brandon in the witness box to duke it out in front of the jury.
 
In statement Kronk didn't mention to law enforcement he stuck his meter reader stick into eye socket of skull.

by cfnews13casey via twitter at 1:51 PM
 
No. The witness is probably an honest and very believable young man. But the fact that he is equating the "found the childs skull" with "I'm going to be on TV", and that he cannot designate even roughly between individual phone calls or conversations means that it all probably came from one call on Dec 11.

He isn't actually lying, but his recollection of the events is most likely not correct and has been clearly influenced by his wife and mother after the fact.


and a couple of attorneys but

THANK YOU voice of reason
 
Baez calls Kronk to the stand. He then pulls out a gun and carefully aims it at his own foot.

LOL!


On topic: KRONK'S inconsistencies have nothing to do with who KILLED Caylee! I don't believe for a second he meant to be inconsistant...He seems like he was caught in a whirlwind. He may have enjoyed the whirl a bit....BUT HE DID NOT KILL CAYLEE. Or dump her remains.
 
i guess baez thinks that if he can get the jury's minds all mucked up with all this gratuitous...stuff, they'll forget all about what his client did to her daughter. and to her daughter's body. and what she did for a month after killing Caylee. no, no, i don't think he believes he can make that fly. could he? what do i know.
 
just my two cents.. but I think when the DT said they had six more witnesses they meant 6 different people... (not counting when they call the same people back over and over again) MOO

They also said about half a dozen... could be more, could be less.
 
First I was always under the impression that Larry King's people (but may have been ABC) paid for the stay at the Ritz - they did it out of repsect for the A's and the finding of Caylee.

Second, this Brandon Sparks is active Coast Guard military - he should have appeared in his dress whites. He would have presented so much better. To me, anyone that is active military and is requested to appear in a court of law and doesn't come in dress uniform is showing disrespect to our country, the court, and him/herself out of pride in what they do. But again, that's JMHO.

Generally, if their testimony has no relation to their role in the military, or as a representative of the military, they don't like them to wear their uniform in court. Especially in a case like this, I highly doubt the Coast Guard wants anything to do with it. MOO (You saw the same thing in the Cesar Laurean trial)
 
Kronk is saying yes I touched the skull with the stick, JB harping on "but you didn't say you put the stick in the eye socket". Ummm? Where exactly is he going with this? Kronk picked up a bag, found a skull, not exactly rocket science to realize that his exact recolection of how it moved or how he made contact with it is not exactly a forensic review? So where is JB going with this exactly? What on earth is the point?
 
It is so telling that KC doesn't even bat an eye when RK reiterates that he poked his stick through the eye socket of the skull. My God in heaven.....this is her baby girl they are so casually discussing and she can't even manage a flinch at the thought.
 
Help me with my sanity here folks Kronk tells LE in August. He tells his son in November. He tells LE for the 4th time in December. Tells them the remains are in the swap/trash dump along the road? which is where they found them. Doesn't that kinda mean they where there? and NOT moved?

Sound right to me..... thinking LDB was not to worried about this
 
Who cares if Kronk said he was going to be rich and famous??? What does that have to do with Casey murdering her child or even an accident?

I agree. It's just a red-herring.
Clearly RK wanted his son to think well of him.
Since son had not seen him since he was EIGHT YEARS OLD.... RK may have felt that he had been portrayed as (or maybe had been) what is frequently referred to as a "dead-beat-dad". (Not judging here, just making an observation.)

It's not unusual for one who has "lost" so much time with their child to want to re-establish a relationship and be thought well of by the child.

I see this line of questiong by JB as just .....just.... ineffective (stretching for nice words, to avoid TO.)

As much as I want justice for Caylee, I also want our system of justice to be sound. Poor lawyering never furthers the cause of justice!
 
What is that loud noise? Is it JB's pen clicking?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
105
Guests online
2,973
Total visitors
3,078

Forum statistics

Threads
603,686
Messages
18,160,821
Members
231,820
Latest member
Hernak
Back
Top