Anthony's Seek Full Immunity#2

[Gma Kat]

I can see it now-- Cindy will throw herself on the mercy of LE and blame George for all mistruths she HAD to come up with because of him and KC. George who used to be a homicide detective, knows the definition of interferring with a homicide, so he won't be able to blame anyone else. He will be sent to a minimum security for the maximum time, because LE pities him and knows his life won't be worth living if he has to spend more of it with Cindy.

Don't roll your eyes at me; why is this any crazier than everything else going on in this case? LOL

Hilarious! Even the inmates might be kinder to him....

 

[WholeLottaRosie]

Thank you!! WHY-- is what I want to know. Also, what is Conway waiting for? Is he waiting for the investigation of the crime scene to be finished?

Maybe the prosecutor laughed hysterically and told him "no way, thanks for the laugh."

 

[WholeLottaRosie]

All indications are that their attorney, Brad Conway, was retained before the discovery. He wasn't able to meet with them until they returned from their trip.

Somewhere, and, I really don't recall where, I read and watch so much on this, I heard they retained BC on the 9th - the day before Larry King, which I find interesting.

ETA - I heard they retained him on the 9th but only met him for the first time on the 11th after they returned from Calif.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

There are definite reasons in their case to ask for full immunity. Being innocent and merely "feeling guilty", imo, isn't one of those reasons.

 

[Lanie]

IMO, they mentioned the 9th right off the bat, when I think they were still being genuine (i.e Cindy's frantic 911 call)

Didn't kc move out wiht Caylle on the 9th? I can see them having that date focused in their mind until they thought about father's day

I might have done that, and then thought more about it. "Oh yeah, father's day was after the 9th."

But THEY didn't think more about it and correct it. LE found the video on the computer, and tried to bring it to them. YM contacts Cindy about the Father's Day video because it conflicts with the date she and Casey gave of Caylee being missing. She tells him she will look into it, then, IMO, takes her sweet time doing it. This goes into Cindy's FBI visit where she accused YM of threatening her, then as she relates the story, it is more she was threatening him.
I thought for some time this date mix up was an honest mistake, but after hearing Cindy tell the FBI in her own words what went down, I had a hard time wrapping my head around the fact she didn't think having the correct date her missing granddaughter was last seen was something she needed to make a priority.
Ugh, sometimes when I think about everything in this case, it just makes me sick.
Lanie

 

[MiraclesHappen]

The lies told wouldn't have anything to do with probable cause for a search warrant. The location of the body to the house in and of itself would give them probable cause to go back to the house, not to mention the new evidence found bags, tape, clothes, and possibly a sheet. The botanist has tied evidence from the scene back to the Anthony home which in my opinion would be the soil found in the trunk.

Evidence taken from the home very well may prove Cindy and George guilty of specific lies, but the warrant in my opinion is not related directly to a lie told. They could have had perfect conduct and when the body turned up 15 houses away they still would have had their house searched again.

Okay then at least we agree.:blowkiss:

I don't see a motive for the lie about when Casey left. I have read alot about a belief it takes searches away from the A home, but I disagree there.
I was just responding to that theory.

Absolutely agree the warrant is derived from other unrelated factors.

 

[MiraclesHappen]

There are definite reasons in their case to ask for full immunity. Being innocent and merely "feeling guilty", imo, isn't one of those reasons.

I agree SS!!!

I made the distinction between wanting immunity and actually needing immunity because I am a picky old lady!!!

 

[Chezhire]

There are definite reasons in their case to ask for full immunity. Being innocent and merely "feeling guilty", imo, isn't one of those reasons.

I agree SS!!!

I made the distinction between wanting immunity and actually needing immunity because I am a picky old lady!!!

Here's why I think they're so hot to trot re: immunity (assuming that the rumors they're seeking it are even true):
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76149&page=3

Those depositions set for Monday are to be VIDEOTAPED.
Can you IMAGINE. I'd love to be a fly on those walls (whenever they take place, that is, since Brad Conway said they wouldn't show up.)
Justice is coming for Caylee. :gavel: :gavel: :gavel:

 

[Lanie]

Okay then at least we agree.:blowkiss:

I don't see a motive for the lie about when Casey left. I have read alot about a belief it takes searches away from the A home, but I disagree there.
I was just responding to that theory.

Absolutely agree the warrant is derived from other unrelated factors.

Ok, I don't think George was lying to prevent searches of the home. At that point, I don't know that he really realized his home could be a potential crime scene.
Casey said she left her house on a Monday (what Monday, hmmm, just pick one) between the hours of 9 and 1 (and don't even get me started on that, !!!!!), dropped Caylee off at Sawgrass, and never saw her again. George then jumps in with a 'Yeah, I saw her leave', not necessarily because he did, but to lend credence to her story. He even goes so far to limit her 4 hour range (damage control) to an exact time. I think he lied to make her look better.
Lanie

 

[Chilly Willy]

Ok, I don't think George was lying to prevent searches of the home. At that point, I don't know that he really realized his home could be a potential crime scene.
Casey said she left her house on a Monday (what Monday, hmmm, just pick one) between the hours of 9 and 1 (and don't even get me started on that, !!!!!), dropped Caylee off at Sawgrass, and never saw her again. George then jumps in with a 'Yeah, I saw her leave', not necessarily because he did, but to lend credence to her story. He even goes so far to limit her 4 hour range (damage control) to an exact time. I think he lied to make her look better.
Lanie

I think George did more to harm her alibi than help. He says she left the house at 12:50. With the time it would take to get Caylee strapped into the car seat and drive to Sawgrass, there's almost no way she'd get there by 1.

Who would not remember the exact time they dropped their child off with a nanny the last time they saw the child?

 

[passionflower]

I think George did more to harm her alibi than help. He says she left the house at 12:50. With the time it would take to get Caylee strapped into the car seat and drive to Sawgrass, there's almost no way she'd get there by 1.

Who would not remember the exact time they dropped their child off with a nanny the last time they saw the child?

what seemed fishy to me, when my hubby is watching TV, he has no idea what anyone is wearing..........I asked him last night after our granddaughter went home with my son, 'what was she wearing'.......hubby says her usual pink stuff........but GA KNEW exactly what Caylee had on and the back packs and the time.............do the same experiment with men in your family.......bet they are like my hubby..........'no clue' IMO:behindbar

 

[mrstewart]

I have no idea why LE would be inclined to give them immunity...there is nothing left to offer...LE has Caylee's body and will probably have enough forensic evidence...they lost all leverage when her body was found. The time to talk was before.

 

[DesSands]

There are definite reasons in their case to ask for full immunity. Being innocent and merely "feeling guilty", imo, isn't one of those reasons.

Hey SS, so it's kind of like being alittle guilty most of the time or being really guilty once and a while. :crazy: lol

 

[MiraclesHappen]

Ok, I don't think George was lying to prevent searches of the home. At that point, I don't know that he really realized his home could be a potential crime scene.
Casey said she left her house on a Monday (what Monday, hmmm, just pick one) between the hours of 9 and 1 (and don't even get me started on that, !!!!!), dropped Caylee off at Sawgrass, and never saw her again. George then jumps in with a 'Yeah, I saw her leave', not necessarily because he did, but to lend credence to her story. He even goes so far to limit her 4 hour range (damage control) to an exact time. I think he lied to make her look better.
Lanie

To lend credence to that story I think he'd have to be in a nanny costume , and leasing an apartment where Caylee was fictionally dropped off.

It's not a wild thought that Casey might leave. She lived there. It was still her home base before she took off for that last time.

jmho

 

[suspicious1]

what seemed fishy to me, when my hubby is watching TV, he has no idea what anyone is wearing..........I asked him last night after our granddaughter went home with my son, 'what was she wearing'.......hubby says her usual pink stuff........but GA KNEW exactly what Caylee had on and the back packs and the time.............do the same experiment with men in your family.......bet they are like my hubby..........'no clue' IMO:behindbar

Were any of you family members ex-detectives? My uncle is a detective and they are trained to pay very close attention to detail. I bet if that experiment was done on my uncle he would pass it. Just a thought.

 

[TURBOTHINK]

I have no idea why LE would be inclined to give them immunity...there is nothing left to offer...LE has Caylee's body and will probably have enough forensic evidence...they lost all leverage when her body was found. The time to talk was before.

I think that was what they had planned........they hired this attorney to get them immunity and BOOM!!! before they could get back to Florida the body was found. They were going to "bargain" but now their chips are gone.

There is no reason to give them immunity unless they tell that they KNOW KC killed her and if they did all along, they should go to jail too.

 

[impatientredhead]

what seemed fishy to me, when my hubby is watching TV, he has no idea what anyone is wearing..........I asked him last night after our granddaughter went home with my son, 'what was she wearing'.......hubby says her usual pink stuff........but GA KNEW exactly what Caylee had on and the back packs and the time.............do the same experiment with men in your family.......bet they are like my hubby..........'no clue' IMO:behindbar

My husband would be hard pressed to tell you what HE is wearing right this moment without looking first.

 

[Lanie]

To lend credence to that story I think he'd have to be in a nanny costume , and leasing an apartment where Caylee was fictionally dropped off.

It's not a wild thought that Casey might leave. She lived there. It was still her home base before she took off for that last time.

jmho

Well, it is a wild thought Casey would leave to drop her daughter off at the nanny's so she could go to her job at Universal when about 2 weeks earlier Cindy went to Universal and found out Casey didn't work there.
Let me try to explain this one more time.
This is my opinion only. The question was 'why would George lie about seeing Casey on June 16th?' My response to this question is simple, IMO, George was trying to bolster her story. I don't think this is the only lie he told, and I don't think the other lies were any better than this one. IMO, as much as these people seem to lie, I would think they would do a better job of it, I mean, it rolls off the tongue real well, but it doesn't make a lot of sense.
IIRC, and I admit being shaky on this point, when they were going with June 9th as being the date Caylee was abducted, George was saying he saw Casey leave with her that morning as well. So, same lie, different week. Not saying it was a good lie, but not many of them have been.
JMO
Lanie

 

[ThoughtElf]

Somewhere, and, I really don't recall where, I read and watch so much on this, I heard they retained BC on the 9th - the day before Larry King, which I find interesting.

ETA - I heard they retained him on the 9th but only met him for the first time on the 11th after they returned from Calif.

I don't have the link handy, but Conway said himself in a presser late last week that he, "Became involved on Tuesday, but couldn't meet with them until they returned on Thursday." (Tuesday being the 9th and Thursday being the 11th)

Your dates and recollection are right - according to Conway himself. I know I posted the link a few days ago on another thread, if you want it?

 

[ThoughtElf]

There are definite reasons in their case to ask for full immunity. Being innocent and merely "feeling guilty", imo, isn't one of those reasons.

Nor are 'conflicting statements' the only basis for obstruction charges, methinks.