BIG HOLES in the defense theory

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

When this first hit the airwaves 3 years ago didn't Inmate say that there was a letter from Zannie ? stating that they would bring Caylee back in 50 days or something like that ?
 
^^That was the "Timer55" script, where ICA took Caylee to the park to meet up with Zanny - someone put Caylee in the nannimobile and Zanny strong-armed ICA telling her to follow the script if she ever wanted to see Caylee again. The script was the nanny has Caylee at wherever, ICA was to party and act normal for 31 days. Caylee would be returned on or around her third Birthday (55 days).

This story was hatched around the time Lenny Padilla was in town and LE got it second or third hand.
 
The trial having passed day 12 I am now convinced beyond convincing that there was a dead body in the damn car. I'm slow but I think it was hammered home about fifteen witnesses ago. If it smells like decomp, stains like decomp and the lab says it's decomp, it's decomp. So the insistence of the DT that the dogs and the scientists and the untrained noses were all wrong and there was a hamburger or a chicken instead of a cadaver in the damn car utterly fails to move me. It becomes a huge gaping hole in the defense. If they'd said that Caylee died and Casey was so mentally unbalanced (due to everything she's gone through that's not her fault) that she couldn't bear to part from her dear little decomposing corpse and drove around with her in the trunk until the smell got too bad, or that the car was used in the disposal of the body... but they're not. They're saying that the dogs were reliable when they hit in the backyard because that's where Caylee died but that they are unreliable when they hit the trunk because Caylee was never there and everybody else is lying or confused and just plain incompetent about the trunk smelling like decomp.

It makes me think that the trunk is extremely important to the case since It Must Be Denied At All Costs. It's not because it proves Caylee is dead since we know that already, so why? Because of the chloroform and the COD has to do with the chloroform or the trunk?
 
I've just been going back over JB's OS and at one point he says:

" Something's not right here....and anything Casey could do to protect her child, she did! Including living a lie, making up a nanny, making up a job...that's what Casey had to do to live"

Uhm....how exactly did those lies protect Caylee?

It kinda sounds like he's going to go the 'GA was going to molest Caylee' route, but how does that fit in with the accidental drowning?

I really need to stop listening to JB. He makes my head hurt.
 
Re: ICA's pregnancy JB says:

"Another thing you'll hear is when Casey didn't want to hide this anymore, she went to Cindy's job. And in the middle of the summer-time, in July, wearing an overcoat. Hot Summer day, wearing a huge coat to hide her pregnancy. Well, co-workers saw her. They began to talk. Office gossip went around and unfortunately a week later Cindy Anthony had to come in and announce that she was going to be be a Grandma."


WHOA!!!! Is JB telling us that ICA has defied her parents secret-keeping in the past? That she was bold enough to go against the people she feared to let the truth be known?
That would suggest she was just as capable of revealing the 'truth' about the 'accidental drowning' over the last three whole years!!! Yet she didn't.

But hang on a sec....if ICA was going in there to let the pregnancy be known, why was she wearing an overcoat to hide it? :waitasec:

Way too many of JB's outlandish statements were followed by a contradiction such as this one. I really hope the jury picked up on them.
 
nosytrish said:
so let's say it was an accident at the house on June 16th (let's take GA out of the equation because it's preposterous to even mention him being involved at all IMO) her actions for the 31 days afterward...post traumatic stress disorder? Does PTSD kick in instantaneously? That video of her and TL sauntering into blockbuster just hours after her child's death (accident or not) were just too calm and collected. AND how can you possibly say that her behavior in the 31 days (lying, tattoos, hot body contest, stealing etc.) were proof of this PTSD, she was doing many of those things PRIOR to June 16th!
Click to expand...


Yes, and she admits on tape to doing those things in the two years after Caylee's birth. She admits at the Universal interrogation to taking Cindy's credit cards and taking lots of money to buy a lot of "nothing". She admits that was the only problem with Cindy, over money and being irresponsible, but that Cindy wasn't ragging on her constantly. Also, the defense can't really say that Casey didn't work in order to protect Caylee because she had no sitters. She had the friend who babysat for awhile then the Grunds, but she was not working as they thought she was. She was conning those folks to live the lazy life away from her child as much as possible then leaving Cindy with her child at night while she supposedly worked at Sports Authority.
 
butwhatif? said:
I've just been going back over JB's OS and at one point he says:

" Something's not right here....and anything Casey could do to protect her child, she did! Including living a lie, making up a nanny, making up a job...that's what Casey had to do to live"

Uhm....how exactly did those lies protect Caylee?

It kinda sounds like he's going to go the 'GA was going to molest Caylee' route, but how does that fit in with the accidental drowning?

I really need to stop listening to JB. He makes my head hurt.
Click to expand...

I think they are going to go that route because it fits their storyline perfectly. All along they have been implying that George may have framed Case. [ he had keys to the car, had the duct tape,the laundry bag, thus implying he planted the body in the trunk to implicate Casey. ]

If they are going with that premise, he framed Casey, then they need to give him a motive to do so. If they are going to label him as a sexual abuser than it would follow naturally that he would abuse Caylee as well. And it fits perfectly into their little fairy tale. Gives him the motive for framing Casey.

And it makes Casey the noble one, just trying to 'protect' her child. Right.
 
katydid23 said:
I think they are going to go that route because it fits their storyline perfectly. All along they have been implying that George may have framed Case. [ he had keys to the car, had the duct tape,the laundry bag, thus implying he planted the body in the trunk to implicate Casey. ]

If they are going with that premise, he framed Casey, then they need to give him a motive to do so. If they are going to label him as a sexual abuser than it would follow naturally that he would abuse Caylee as well. And it fits perfectly into their little fairy tale. Gives him the motive for framing Casey.

And it makes Casey the noble one, just trying to 'protect' her child. Right.
Click to expand...

I didn't follow that?
If Caylee was dead how did she protect her by continuing the lie?
 
Sleuth5 said:
I genuinely think that Baez believed the nanny story for some period. I don't know when she gave him the accident tale, but I can't believe it was early on.

Just MOO.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think he was in a state of infatuated heroism and wanted to save the pretty young damsel (and become famous in the process), and now I think (and hope, because his performance disgusts me) he lies awake at night in a cold sweat with visions of her cold, dead eyes boring into him and wishes she'd never crossed his path. I think he is trying desperately to save her so he won't be next in her sights, fighting for his own life now that he knows the lying lengths she will go to to exact revenge on people who have stopped being useful.
 
THe Big Hole that really gets me is. If a child early in the morning drowned in the swimming pool, why go to the bother of dressing her, packing her backpack to put in the trunk, and wrapping duct tape around her mouth. I have heard of instances where a baby has died and the mother has dumped it, i cant ever rememeber any of them going to such great extremes.
 
" Something's not right here....and anything Casey could do to protect her child, she did!"

Except get a job.

If Casey was abused, and doing "everything thing she could" to protect her child...why didn't she get a job and take Caylee out of that house? Or get TWO jobs like many single Mothers do...and forego partying. What could be more important to an Abuse Survivor than protecting her child from abuse?

And she seemed to have no trouble...for 31 days...finding alternative lodging...even with NO job.

So what's her excuse?

If the Defense goes this route, there better not be ONE time when Caylee was left with George! Not one! Because , since Casey has no job...there is NOT ONE REASON...NOT ONE...where Casey could have any moral excuse to leave her child with her Abuser. Therefore, if they argue Caylee was abused...Casey ENABLED that abuse...just to party, hang out with friends.

Casey has refused to see her parents for a long, long period of time. Essentially she is free of them, done with them. So why did her story only change when she walked into court for her trial? That makes no sense.

Casey's bigness problem IMO is her demeanor. She presents as aggressive and absolutely able to show a full range of emotions from intense anger to pleasure. This does not fit with the scared zombie defense she and Baez are spinning. She's no Andrea Yates.

In one tape, she says to Cindy that they are so alike...that everyone thinks Cindy is a spitfire...and Casey is just like her. Now we are to believe that Little Miss Spitfire let her daughter be babysat by her abuser...and let her abuser take the child's body and hide it...and Little Miss Spitfire sat in jail for 3 years too afraid of him to talk.

This is ludicrous.
 
I think the biggest downfall in the defense of case is ignoring the trunk evidence. Why didn't they just say GA put her in the trunk to frame her and ICA wasn't aware till the car started to smell?
 
Huge Hole And Big Red Flag:

DT proposes that Roy K. hid Caylee and put the duct tape on her remains after she was already skeleontized. However the wear and tear of the duct tape does not reflect the difference in the time. In other words when Caylee's remains were found the wear of the duct tape reflected 180 or so days not the 3-4 month time period the DT has proposed. If what they propose were true there should have been a little something more left to it.

Sure hope jurors are taking note on these type of subjects and it doesn't get missed!
 
UKgirl said:
THe Big Hole that really gets me is. If a child early in the morning drowned in the swimming pool, why go to the bother of dressing her, packing her backpack to put in the trunk, and wrapping duct tape around her mouth. I have heard of instances where a baby has died and the mother has dumped it, i cant ever rememeber any of them going to such great extremes.
Click to expand...

BBM. I don't believe Caylee drowned, but IF she did... she could have already been dressed in the clothes she was found in. The backpack, and the duct tape especially, make no sense to me in regards to a drowning.
 
Anais said:
Huge Hole And Big Red Flag:

DT proposes that Roy K. hid Caylee and put the duct tape on her remains after she was already skeleontized. However the wear and tear of the duct tape does not reflect the difference in the time. In other words when Caylee's remains were found the wear of the duct tape reflected 180 or so days not the 3-4 month time period the DT has proposed. If what they propose were true there should have been a little something more left to it.

Sure hope jurors are taking note on these type of subjects and it doesn't get missed!
Click to expand...

This is what I don't understand. At first, it seemed they were pointing the finger at George in regards to the tape -- a rare brand they say that only he had access to, etc. Now, it seems as though they are pointing the finger at Roy Kronk for that -- saying that someone placed the tape on Caylee after she was skeletonized. It's like they don't know what direction their own defense is taking.
 
LCoastMom said:
A body in water will usually sink but because the specific gravity of a body is
very close to that of water then small variations e.g. air trapped in clothing have a
considerable effect on buoyancy. Having sunk to the bottom the body will remain
there until putrefactive gas formation decreases the specific gravity of the body
and creates sufficient buoyancy to allow it to rise to the surface and float.

http://www.dundee.ac.uk/forensicmedicine/notes/water.pdf

The drowning victim's body typically sinks shortly after death. It will resurface 3 days to 3 weeks after death.

http://dmmoyle.com/simeans.htm
Click to expand...

That same resource/article also says this "If the victim is
less dense than water, the victim will not displace as much water, and will
float."

Caylee was tiny. I still think she would have been floating. Even if she did eventually sink to the bottom of the pool, I think it would have taken a while. JMO, though, and pretty much academic, as I don't believe she drowned at all, anymore.
 
I don't see how George framed or scared Casey into lying, as evident in her discussions with them on the videotapes like the one below - totally contradicts the defense theory, and she talks about seeing Caylee soon, how they are good parents, George saying kind things to her as well...:

George Anthony to Casey: I'd give my life for you-
http://www.wtsp.com/video/974791344001/0/George-Anthony-to-Casey-Id-give-my-life-for-you

Her story was all about Zenaida Gonzales taking Caylee. Casey covers for herself, not her dad. Her actions and words, even to them, prove that.
 
After re-hearing JB's opening statement, I referred back to Casey's 31 days timeline (provided by acandyrose). JB stated Caylee died of drowning on the 16th and that George and Casey covered it up from Cindy who was at work. If George worked from 3pm - 11pm, it would have had to occurred before 3pm, but James Thompson reports seeing Casey and Caylee exiting Casselberry Walmart at about 4pm. Was James Thompson included in the Prosecution's case? His testimony could throw this theory out of the window.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 148 more.
Total: 3,351 (members: 149, guests: 3,202)

Online statistics

Members online
149
Guests online
3,202
Total visitors
3,351
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,694
Messages
18,160,957
Members
231,824
Latest member
tayericson1026
Back
Top