Casey and George give just about identical descriptions of Caylee's clothes

[JoAnn_W]

Actually, I have always had my suspiscions with GA's statement about Caylee's clothing.

When that statement came out, I wondered about it so I did my own experiment. I asked my husband what was my grandaughter was wearing a week ago. He remembered. I asked him 2 weeks. He didn't remember. I asked him how about a month ago? He sure didn't remember at all.

I did the same thing with my daughter and her husband. They all could remember a week ago but not a month ago.

Anyone here could do the same experiment. So in my opinion, GA did not see Caylee that day.

Caylee had so many shoes, cothing and sunglasses there is no way he remembered exactly what she was wearing.

I maybe wouldn't remember what mt grandaughter was wearing a month ago, but I would remember what she was wearing the last day I ever saw her.

I can imagine going back to the last day I saw her and trying to remember every gesture, smell, feeling, what she said, what she did, the temperature...


JoAnn_W

 

[Friday]

I'm not sure I believe that George saw Caylee that morning like he says he did. But just to throw this possibility out there....

Maybe there is an explanation regarding the clothes:
Casey and George describe jeans shorts/skirt on Caylee when she was last seen.
However at the dump site there were white shorts with pink stripes.

I think we can agree that Casey's MO frequently was to pretend to go to work. But in reality she just waited until her parents had left the house. Then she came back home and spent the day there waiting until her friends got off work. Then she would drop Caylee off with Cindy.

Maybe on that last day George really did see Caylee leave with Casey in the clothes that he described. Maybe after Casy and Caylee had snuck back home, Caylee had a toilet training issue which required her to have a change of clothes. Hence different clothes were found at the dumpsite. Heck, maybe a toilet training incident is what set Casey off. (Although I think she had thought about "doing away with" Caylee for a long time.) The "soiled" clothes would have been left at the house and later washed (knowingly or not) by Cindy and folded up and put back in the room.

Just a thought. I'm not invested in this scenario by any means.

Maybe when KC borrowed that shovel it was to bury the clothes Caylee had been wearing when GA last saw her?

I know how over the top that sounds, but she borrowed that shovel intending to bury something, and I don't think it was Caylee! That would have been absurdly difficult and also ridiculously noticeable to her parents.

I think she successfully buried whatever she intended to bury. Maybe it was just a knife or cord, but I keep remembering her remark to the bodyguard... "They haven't even found her clothes yet."

 

[kwmred]

Actually, I have always had my suspiscions with GA's statement about Caylee's clothing.

When that statement came out, I wondered about it so I did my own experiment. I asked my husband what was my grandaughter was wearing a week ago. He remembered. I asked him 2 weeks. He didn't remember. I asked him how about a month ago? He sure didn't remember at all.

I did the same thing with my daughter and her husband. They all could remember a week ago but not a month ago.

Anyone here could do the same experiment. So in my opinion, GA did not see Caylee that day.

Caylee had so many shoes, cothing and sunglasses there is no way he remembered exactly what she was wearing.

My little 3 yr. old grandson comes to spend weekends with me approx. twice a month. He is the light of my life. I had him last weekend... met my daughter Sunday so he could go back home. I could not tell you what he was wearing... and I dressed him!

 

[whiskeygurl]

I didn't see a thread for this topic, but if there is one...I do apologize in advance. Casey's written statement and George's description of what Caylee was wearing on June 16th are just about identical. They both describe her clothing as being a pink shirt, hair in pony tail and white tennis shoes. George says Caylee was wearing a blue jeans skirt while Casey says she was wearing jeans shorts. Now we know George's story about the 16th sighting sounds "fishy". IMO, these two descriptions sound like George and Casey got together on their statements or one copied the other. Thoughts ?

Now was this the same shirt that is in the autopsy report?

 

[okiedokietoo]

Now was this the same shirt that is in the autopsy report?

if I recall correctly, clothing found with the remains are not the same as what GA and KC said she was wearing. Which leaves it for the defense to say that the "nanny" changed her clothes.....

 

[seagull65]

Exactly! And the important thing I noticed is he initially had the wrong date ~ along with CA and Casey. Yet, when talking with Greta, he was too precise even noting the time of day Casey & Caylee walked out the door. This is why I've never believed he saw them that day, 6/16. MOO

good point about first having the date wrong but then being so precise about the date and the details later. Plus the fact that it would just be so strange for him to remember what she had been wearing on any given day a month before, you know? Unless he knew to make a mental note of it at the time. Can any of us say what a relative was wearing 31 days ago? There's no reason you would know, unless you had thought it was going to be important for some reason to remember, GA would have had no reason to think this if they had been just leaving as usual.

Unless he was just innocently influenced by hearing Casey's version and pictured it in his mind that way from then on. But it did always strike me as odd. (We talked a lot about this on an old thread, has it been bumped up?)

 

[seagull65]

I maybe wouldn't remember what mt grandaughter was wearing a month ago, but I would remember what she was wearing the last day I ever saw her.

I can imagine going back to the last day I saw her and trying to remember every gesture, smell, feeling, what she said, what she did, the temperature...


JoAnn_W

but you wouldn't have had any reason to make a mental note of her clothes unless you had known at the time that this was the last time you were going to see her, that it was going to be important to remember what she was wearing. If you found out later that same day (as Casey allegedly did) that the child was missing, then you would obviously make a mental note of what she had had on and be able to remember it from then on. But GA didn't find out until a month later supposedly, how would he be able to look back 31 days before and know in such detail what she had had on?

I'm a female, I notice clothes much more than the males in our family, but I couldn't tell you for sure what my son was wearing yesterday (even though I spent the whole day with him and even helped him pick out his clothes!) I have some idea of some pants that got something spilled on them, but I'm not sure if it was yesterday or another recent day, and I don't know which shirt. I have much less memory of the day before yesterday, and if somebody said how about 12 days ago, or 16 days ago, no way, much less 31 days ago. Why would I remember that? Unless the child has only one favorite outfit they wear all the time or something, or if they'd been wearing something very unusual and weird for a special occasion the last time you saw them.

What was my husband wearing even today when he came home from work? I honestly don't know. I can remember what we talked about but not what clothes he had on.

Now, what you said to each other the last time you saw someone, what little gestures the child made and so on, it seems to me, at least in my experience, that that does remain in your mind...it seems like we do kind of remember our last conversation or interaction with someone until we speak to them again for some reason. My opinion only

 

[lisalei321]

All I can say to all this discussion, is that I'm going to start taking a picture of each member of my family before they walk out the door, so I can honestly say this is what they were wearing when they left.

I don't think GA is telling the truth here.

JMO

 

[Zoe Bogart]

Exactly! And the important thing I noticed is he initially had the wrong date ~ along with CA and Casey. Yet, when talking with Greta, he was too precise even noting the time of day Casey & Caylee walked out the door. This is why I've never believed he saw them that day, 6/16. MOO

I haven't read through this thread yet (and it's a bit old) but I wanted to comment when GA said to Greta he was watching the news, Cindy gave him a jab, and he changed it to his favorite show, a cooking show on the food network. I'm almost sure it was during the Greta interview. GA and CA were sitting on their white sofa, I believe.

I've never believed the July 16th story. Just never added up for me. Too many unanswered questions. Also, I know how hectic it used to be around my house in the mornings when there was a little one or two around. I just find it difficult to picture a nice quiet morning, GA and Caylee having breakfast, then GA watching TV while Casey and Caylee get ready for Casey's invisible job and getting Caylee ready for her day with the invisible babysitter. It just doesn't seem like it would be an easy thing to do, take a child to an invisible babysitter every day. It just doesn't add up.

Also, GA's keen observation of what Caylee and KC were wearing on that day always struck me as odd. Most men only notice if we're NOT wearing clothing. I could just picture my dad's face when asked what my daughter was wearing on the day she went missing! Total blank. Fortunately, my girl is still hanging around - after 30 years. :crazy:

Seagull, you are absolutely correct about remembering what someone wore days ago. It would stick out in your mind if it was something striking: a lovely evening gown; an unusual T-shirt; maybe if something were spilled on one outfit and the person had to change, you might remember those outfits, but it's highly unusual to remember something so far back, especially when it was brought to your attention.

hinky meter always goes off when they talk about July 16th

 

[Zoe Bogart]

if I recall correctly, clothing found with the remains are not the same as what GA and KC said she was wearing. Which leaves it for the defense to say that the "nanny" changed her clothes.....

You know, that non-existent nanny does the darndest things.

The conflicting clothing story could also make the jury doubt the testimonies of the witnesses, GA & KC.

 

[LinasK]

:laugh:You know, that non-existent nanny does the darndest things.

The conflicting clothing story could also make the jury doubt the testimonies of the witnesses, GA & KC.

The non-existent nanny for whom there is not one single shred of evidence, when all the evidence points to materials from the Anthony home??? That 10 of a nanny?

 

[Phumi]

if I recall correctly, clothing found with the remains are not the same as what GA and KC said she was wearing. Which leaves it for the defense to say that the "nanny" changed her clothes.....

I've always considered George's super-human memory of caylee's clothing on the 16th to be a "mistruth," but I also wondered what the purpose of this "mistruth" was. If the clothes she was reported to be wearing were found back in the Anthony home, the defense might suggest that it "proves" the imagi-nanny entered the home, changed Caylee's clothes, took the garbage bags and the pooh blanket and of course committed the murder.

 

[Zoe Bogart]

But there's no record the nanny ever existed. In Cindy's own words, KC told her Zanny the Nanny was a hot number, a 10. ZG, the one who is suing KC, is cute, but she's not a 10, per CA. I just don't see how a jury would buy the nanny kidnapper story.

Speaking of this unknown nanny, I still giggle when I think of how hot George became when one of ZG's attorney kept mispronouncing "Zanny". Like GA was defending her. "Her name is Zanny not Zaney." KC isn't the only wacko in the A family.

 

[cecybeans]

I think it been problematic to many of us since the beginning (GA's suddenly specific memory of what Caylee was wearing when he could not, for instance remember other very specific situations like the car chase or the "pool" incident, or the fact that since then, he has changed the details or had several conflicting versions of other stories he has told to various agencies, ie: the "gas can" incident).

However, I think it is now safe to assume that, given what we have also seen in the subsequent months about GA changing stories to fit the needs of the moment, that we might not be able to trust that very specific description he gave of the clothes.

For one thing, the description matched exactly KC's written statement ON THE NIGHT OF JULY 15, in her original LE report - in which she also insists the date is June 9. Of course GA repeats this description pretty much verbatim in his much later LE interview after the last date seen (actually verified by a credible outside source) had been moved forward to June 15.

Regardless of how we might imagine ourselves either able or unable to recall something that specific that much later in time, two facts remain problematic in this case. One, GA and CA have a pattern of changing stories and details to suit their purposes and two, since this description was not recorded the same day as KC's report to LE but much later, (and even if it had been it would have been considered more legitimate if it had been recorded separately without any opportunity to corroborate), it simply cannot be given the same weight as a credible, or even accurate or actual, witness account.

I am becoming very wary of assuming that ANY testimony the Anthony family has given in the past can automatically be deemed either credible or truthful at this point, despite the fact that we are still basing our impressions of what actually happened on statements they made very early on. It's very unfortunate, but I put their statements under the same sort of validity test I am forced to do with KC's statements. The words "mistruths and half-truths" seem to be something endemic to this family dynamic.

 

[cecybeans]

I've always considered George's super-human memory of caylee's clothing on the 16th to be a "mistruth," but I also wondered what the purpose of this "mistruth" was. If the clothes she was reported to be wearing were found back in the Anthony home, the defense might suggest that it "proves" the imagi-nanny entered the home, changed Caylee's clothes, took the garbage bags and the pooh blanket and of course committed the murder.

I have thought from the beginning that this was his general attempt to create an impression that, if Caylee had indeed left the house with her mother, ostensibly en route to a third party "nanny" that a) they might not be the last people to have seen Caylee alive and b) it would help remove the subsequent suspicion that, since she apparently actually left the house that day, the house itself could not possibly be the actual crime scene.

 

[Zoe Bogart]

You are probably more accurate than any of the As have been since day 1 and day 31.

 

[Searchfortruth]

I have thought from the beginning that this was his general attempt to create an impression that, if Caylee had indeed left the house with her mother, ostensibly en route to a third party "nanny" that a) they might not be the last people to have seen Caylee alive and b) it would help remove the subsequent suspicion that, since she apparently actually left the house that day, the house itself could not possibly be the actual crime scene.

This is the only logical answer I can come up with as well. If they can get Caylee with Casey...ALIVE, on the 16th and away from the house they have a better chance of saying someone else was involved. If not, we know who was with Caylee...her family, but mostly Casey. Caylee being alive and well on the 16th when Casey leaves the house with her is central to the SODDI defense.

 

[Jolynna]

Originally Posted by whiskeygurl
Now was this the same shirt that is in the autopsy report?

Yes.

Whether anybody believes George or not, cell phone pings put Casey in/by the Anthony home from 7:30 p.m. June 15 until 4:25 p.m. June 16.

So do computer forensics.The morning of June 16, 9:27 a.m. - 8:06 a.m. Casey and witeplayboi instant messaged. At 9:27 a.m. Casey uploads a picture of Fusian to her Photobucket from the Anthony's IP.

In no way does George's testimony help KC. LE investigator's forensic reports alreadyput Casey in the Anthony home Sunday night and all day Monday until 4 p.m. The items found with Caylee also point toward Caylee being murdered in the Anthony house.

Should "Big Trouble Comes in Small Packages" be a detail about the pink shirt that was purposely held back from the press prior to the discovery of Caylee's body, George's tightened timeline only gives Casey from 1 p.m. until 4 p.m. to kill Caylee. That is bad for KC.

Only an evil & deliberate person could duct tape her child between leaving messages on social sites, texting and chatting. And I think that is what KC did.

JMO

 

[cecybeans]

GA may have thought that E-Z Pass records left some kind of verifiable "trail" in determining his alleged locations on various days, but I'll bet he and his wife never had a clue that their omni-texting daughter was basically creating a GPS collage of her whereabouts and specific activities or conversations during this time line that often contradicts what they have officially "remembered".

The electronic time line she created by being such a Chatty Cathy little gabster is going to be one of the biggest factors in doing her in. (Frankly, if nothing had ever happened to Caylee, I'm sure CPS could have used the amount of time she spent electronically distracted each day as grounds for negligence).

If she is convicted and gets DP her epitaph may well read "Death by Cellphone" or "Dead Man Pinging". This will forever change the way cellular communication and social networks are viewed in crimes - almost as actual "witnesses" in recording and reconstructing critical information.

 

[sumbunny]

If George can't remember the last day he saw caylee (originally June 9th) how could he possibly remember what she was wearing June 16th?

He can't even get the date right. His recollection carries no weight what so ever.