Casey's Diary Entry for June 21st & Missing Pages #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Gma Kat said:
Wouldn't it be easy for LE to pull the bar code off the notebook, find out how many pages the book is sold with, and then if pages are missing do identation work like my previous post stated? This notebook/diary seems too wierd to me. I hope it is what SA thinks it is...the age of the book would only be relevant if it wasn't sold until after '03 obviously, but if it were purchased prior to '03 then perhaps the ink would indicate age of entry. I don't understand where the pages with the chloroform etc., references come from besides NG's statement about them.....
Click to expand...

Hi G'ma.

You are right that LE could note the bar code / ISBN number and get a heap of information of this particular book. I sure wish they'd released a photo of the back of the book.

That being said, I point out a few posts back that LE and the SA have made no noise anywhere about the significance of the book. It is not listed on any property sheets, so it was probably not taken into evidence. Nor is it mentioned in any investigative reports. We are left to speculate...but then that's what we are here for. :thumb:
 
I was just re-watching the FBI interview with CA. She said that KC loved to write and was always writing her feelings down. If my memory serves me right, TL said KC had a diary. I can bet there was a written confession somewhere--whether or not LE has it is the question.
 
Okay. So where is the diary now?

Option 1. LE has it and is keeping mum.

Option 2. The As have it and are keeping mum.

Option 3. The As passed it on to some third party and they're all keeping mum.

Option 4. Some third party took it without the A's knowledge.

Option 5. The As destroyed it.

Option ... What else?

I still have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that LE did not collect it, in spite of JWG's very compelling example of the child development book story as a demonstration that they could behave otherwise.

I can't articulate my reasons for this, at least not yet, so I suppose I should shut up about it.

This latest attack of "Bombshell" on the subject may rattle a few cages. If someone doesn't develop foot-in-mouth disease then I'm still leaning toward Option 1, just because they're the best at keeping their cards close to the vest.
 
Don't know if this tidbit is relevant but in case it's not been discussed I thought I'd mention that in some of the pics LE took in KC's bedroom of the diary, it looks like the diary is laying on top of KC's yearbook. I was trying to get an idea what the cover of the diary looked like when I noticed the yearbook.

http://www.wesh.com/slideshow/news/18739798/detail.html

Just thought I'd share this magnificent piece of info! Lol
:nuts:
 
fortytwo said:
Okay. So where is the diary now?

Option 1. LE has it and is keeping mum.

Option 2. The As have it and are keeping mum.

Option 3. The As passed it on to some third party and they're all keeping mum.

Option 4. Some third party took it without the A's knowledge.

Option 5. The As destroyed it.

Option ... What else?

I still have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that LE did not collect it, in spite of JWG's very compelling example of the child development book story as a demonstration that they could behave otherwise.

I can't articulate my reasons for this, at least not yet, so I suppose I should shut up about it.

This latest attack of "Bombshell" on the subject may rattle a few cages. If someone doesn't develop foot-in-mouth disease then I'm still leaning toward Option 1, just because they're the best at keeping their cards close to the vest.
Click to expand...


I still don't think the diary in the pic is it. We are relatively certain that LE didn't take it since it hasn't shown up on any evidence report. If they did not take it, then they must not have thought it was important to the case. Taking a picture of it was probably a routine procedural thing. I still think, if there are diary pages out there, they are from a spiral bound notebook that LE analyzed for latent impressions at the FBI lab in Quantico.

I'm sure they're reading this thread and chuckling to themselves as to how we're whipped up in such a frenzy over this.

JMHO as always.
 
ecs5298 said:
I still don't think the diary in the pic is it. We are relatively certain that LE didn't take it since it hasn't shown up on any evidence report. If they did not take it, then they must not have thought it was important to the case. Taking a picture of it was probably a routine procedural thing. I still think, if there are diary pages out there, they are from a spiral bound notebook that LE analyzed for latent impressions at the FBI lab in Quantico.

I'm sure they're reading this thread and chuckling to themselves as to how we're whipped up in such a frenzy over this.

JMHO as always.
Click to expand...
I think your idea has great merit. It's a shame that the media attention to topics is so completely random that we have no way of knowing if they have actually gotten a whiff of something new about diary pages or just happened to revisit or suddenly become aware of old stuff.
 
fortytwo said:
I think your idea has great merit. It's a shame that the media attention to topics is so completely random that we have no way of knowing if they have actually gotten a whiff of something new about diary pages or just happened to revisit or suddenly become aware of old stuff.
Click to expand...


Kind of like **BOMBSHELL- LA's DNA tested for paternity to Caylee**

Geez we knew that weeks and weeks ago!

**BOMBSHELL - OLD NEWS**
 
I was curious to know if there were any shrouded references made to this diary in Casey's more recent "Diary of Days" so I went back and reread DofD. I didn't find any references but I was surprised to discover that there were some parallel thoughts.

Both writings allude to some mysterious event that has occurred ~ and she wonders at the "great consequences" of her "great power" in DofD and "the ends justifying the means," in this diary. She reassures herself in the diary, "I completely trust my own judgement," and "trust no one, only yourself," in DofD. And even though DofD seems dark, she ends it with, "Smile. Laugh. Love unconditionally. Tomorrow is a brand new day." which compares to the end of her diary entry, "I am finally happy, let's just hope that it doesn't change."

I know they're not exactly alike but I think they have enough similar thoughts that it would be reasonable to conclude that they may have been written during the same phase of her life. I don't think they were written 5 years apart, do you all?
 
BondJamesBond said:
Quoting myself to keep the following in context...

I found the original blog, which is dated, Jan 22. So...NOW we know how to calculate what qualifies as new information for NG (3/20 - 1/22) = 58 days :rolleyes:

The original blog is here.

Again...I'm only providing here as a means to pseudo-source NG's reference of last night. I do not make any inferences as to the validity of the blogger's sources. Draw your own conclusions there...
Click to expand...

to the bold: It seems NG may just speak Casey timeline language :rolleyes:

----------------------------------------------

A few thoughts:

1. Maybe GA is the one who handed it over. Maybe it's what drove him to try to kill himself, maybe it was along with the suicide letter. That man seems to know a lot more than he lets on and I think he has turned over a new leaf. I think he is trying to help LE without being too obvious.

2. We may never know anything from this diary entry. If there's no handwriting analysis available and LE doesn't have any other pages, then it's sadly a dead end for this and we'll never really know. The diary alone doesn't hold enough proof and won't stand up in court.

3. Isn't it sad what people can get away with? I can't believe all that this woman has done that is wrong in every way, yet has made such loopholes that there's always still questions. I can't believe how a person who isn't very intelligent can get away with something like this.
 
fortytwo said:
I think your idea has great merit. It's a shame that the media attention to topics is so completely random that we have no way of knowing if they have actually gotten a whiff of something new about diary pages or just happened to revisit or suddenly become aware of old stuff.
Click to expand...


Yep. I guess, for their part, they're giving viewers at large new information. These aren't people who read the new doc dumps the minute they come down, as we do! Sleuthers are way ahead of the game.

It really bothers me, though, when they act like it's "just released information". I noticed, when NG was talking about the DNA paternity test "bombshell", she referred to "JUST ANALYZED" information... a play on words... she didn't say "just released".
 
natsound said:
Yep. I guess, for their part, they're giving viewers at large new information. These aren't people who read the new doc dumps the minute they come down, as we do! Sleuthers are way ahead of the game.

It really bothers me, though, when they act like it's "just released information". I noticed, when NG was talking about the DNA paternity test "bombshell", she referred to "JUST ANALYZED" information... a play on words... she didn't say "just released".
Click to expand...
There must be some synchronicity at work here.

Only a few days ago, in what was for me a rare moment of weakness concerning the Nancy creature, I brought up the same point with my (stunningly beautiful) wife. It is difficult for us as WSers to remember that much, if not most of the world is not immersed in the details and trivia of these cases we follow.

Your most salient point is the one about "bombshells". I've reached the point where I almost physically cringe when I see the word or one like it in the banners now. The certain knowledge that I'm going to be disappointed is almost tangible.

I might not mind so much if it turned out to be something that was only days old, but weeks and even months is becoming commonplace.

I am reminded of a poster in a chat room I once visited. She was a regular, and all of her posts were always in all uppercase, bold, enlarged typeface with color. I wanted to ask her what she would do if she ever really needed to emphasize something.
 
JWG said:
I hear you, but looking at the top image in particular the glue band or whatever it is on the left is much wider than the stippling in the center or to the right. I would expect that if there was an over-application of glue that it would affect facing pages in a similar way as they were pressed together.

That being said, I am not convinced either that pages were removed. If evidence is released one way or the other, I won't be completely surprised.
Click to expand...

I downloaded a high res photo of the diary on the day it was released. It looks to me like torn pages. We shall soon see!
 
ExpectingUnicorns said:
I was curious to know if there were any shrouded references made to this diary in Casey's more recent "Diary of Days" so I went back and reread DofD. I didn't find any references but I was surprised to discover that there were some parallel thoughts.

Both writings allude to some mysterious event that has occurred ~ and she wonders at the "great consequences" of her "great power" in DofD and "the ends justifying the means," in this diary. She reassures herself in the diary, "I completely trust my own judgement," and "trust no one, only yourself," in DofD. And even though DofD seems dark, she ends it with, "Smile. Laugh. Love unconditionally. Tomorrow is a brand new day." which compares to the end of her diary entry, "I am finally happy, let's just hope that it doesn't change."

I know they're not exactly alike but I think they have enough similar thoughts that it would be reasonable to conclude that they may have been written during the same phase of her life. I don't think they were written 5 years apart, do you all?
Click to expand...

I don't think so either! Very good connection!
 
I am gonna have to go back and read some f the past doc dumps again.. but i swear I remember there being pages taken into evidence that were found in a drawer.. lol..
Mabe i dreamed it..
Ill go look while i watch nascar ..
 
I feel that the pages might have had some proof that she harmed Caylee and thats why they were torn out by her or by Cindy.
Why only tear out just a few pages! To hide and get rid omething of course!
 
sharpar said:
they can date the writings by the composition of the ink - they change
the ink frequently according to the FBI for the IRS ------- who knew .

There are pictures on another thread that clearly show clumps of pages still stuck
in the binding - there were several pages removed .
Click to expand...



Okay that's good, unless a horrible pack rat like yours truly. I'm sure we have 15 year old pens in this house that still write.
 
I noticed KC's name written on the inside of a folder containing sticker sheets in one of the evidence photos. The name is written in the same distinctive style as the left diary page. Wonder when the name was entered into that folder? :waitasec:

The evidence photo:

picture.php


A closer look at the name:

picture.php


And the left side of the diary:

picture.php
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 164 more.
Total: 384 (members: 165, guests: 219)

Online statistics

Members online
165
Guests online
219
Total visitors
384
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,020
Messages
18,248,580
Members
234,524
Latest member
ThomasAvade
Back
Top