Cindy Anthony subpoenaed to appear in court

[Mamabear1963]

PSA:

2 days 15 hours and 48 minutes....

Crock pot meal set...check...:angel:

 

[Leila]

PSA:

2 days 15 hours and 48 minutes....

Crock pot meal set...check...:angel:

Way off topic, but could you share your crockpot recipe? I'm always looking for new recipes. So as not to derail this thread, maybe you could send me a pm with your recipe.

 

[Aedrys]

*staggers in from the Kyron Horman forum on WS* Good Lord, all of the excitement there AND a hearing in this case this week. I don't know if I can handle it, lol!

 

[Jomo]

In my state of "writer's block", I have been cruizing around the net and came across a very interesting statement by Peter Hyatt (claimed investigator? no proof or confirmation of this.) AKA Seamus O Riley. This person has been mentioned on other branches of WS forums.
([ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5130747&postcount=7"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 2010.04.30 911 Call Statement Analysis[/ame])
([ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5132370&postcount=21"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 2010.04.30 911 Call Statement Analysis[/ame])

He has a very interesting analysis of Brad Conway's statement that CA is going to tell the truth. "Cindy Anthony to Testify". Ultimately, the conclusion is that from BC's statement, he feels that BC is worried about his client lying and (because she will be under oath) this will lead to many new headaches and a lot more work for him.

There are several other statement analyses of the A's there and I enjoyed reading them.

I figured that this person has been referenced here in the past to it is not a no no. If I am wrong please delete and consider me spanked.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Thanks JoMO...

Here's the link
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108618&page=33

Why would an attorney feel the need to tell the public that his client is going to testify "truthfully"? This is a humiliation of Cindy Anthony by her own attorney.

"She's going to tell the truth"

This shows intention. In a sense, it gives the feel of a "negation" because the expectation is in presuppositional thinking:

testifying in court is under oath.

Why offer that she will testify in truth if there wasn't an issue of lying? This is offered information to us, and it is, therefore, sensitive. Had a journalist said, "Is she going to lie?", it would in response; and not a "negation", but here, it appears to be offered and presupposes that Cindy Anthony has not been truthful, perhaps under oath, but certainly in the context of the 911 call.

Brad Conway is telling us that he recognizes that Cindy Anthony may have not told the truth under oath.

"She made the phone calls. It's factual. She's going to testify truthfully"

Of course, everyone knows SHE made the phone call...but what is "truthfully" to CA??? That's the billion dollar question...JMHO

Seems BC is "hoping" CA tells it true...I wonder if he's gone over this with her? Seems she needs lots and lots of coaching...JMHO


Justice for Caylee

 

[logicalgirl]

In my state of "writer's block", I have been cruizing around the net and came across a very interesting statement by Peter Hyatt (claimed investigator? no proof or confirmation of this.) AKA Seamus O Riley. This person has been mentioned on other branches of WS forums.
(Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 2010.04.30 911 Call Statement Analysis)
(Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 2010.04.30 911 Call Statement Analysis)

He has a very interesting analysis of Brad Conway's statement that CA is going to tell the truth. "Cindy Anthony to Testify". Ultimately, the conclusion is that from BC's statement, he feels that BC is worried about his client lying and (because she will be under oath) this will lead to many new headaches and a lot more work for him.

There are several other statement analyses of the A's there and I enjoyed reading them.

I figured that this person has been referenced here in the past to it is not a no no. If I am wrong please delete and consider me spanked.

No spankings at WS - only Kimmers with her raygun - zap! LOL - at least she warns you so you can duck.:dance:

Thanks for the info Jomo (and great work on Todays News) - I haven't read his blogspot before- I find it more interesting than L. Glass, and don't even need to keep thinking WTH over the spelling. And I LOVE an intelligent analysis!

He's got a really interesting concept about lying, so it was fascinating to see his analysis of Brad's media release re Cindy's testimony on the stand. Clearly he's concerned she will lie and get herself into more trouble!

OT - but I found my crockpot, my desk finally got delivered so I'm off the floor and........


ONLY TWO MORE SLEEPS!

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

 

[doogiesgirl]

Way off topic, but could you share your crockpot recipe? I'm always looking for new recipes. So as not to derail this thread, maybe you could send me a pm with your recipe.

Wow....what a great idea for a thread somewhere. I too need some new recipes. My DH & DS are the pickiest eaters, so I have a revolving 6/7 recipes that have now been so overused it's not even funny. I need a new repertoire of dinner ideas --- HELP!!

:cow:

 

[countzero]

Poor Brad, he certainly is stuck between leaving the A camp for his sanity, which he lost long ago, or staying for the long haul in making these types of statements. Has Brad actually stated how he is getting paid or doing this work pro bono ... or is Brad seeing large royalty fees at the end of this.

Seems to me in making this "standard statements" he knows he has no control over his clients.

 

[trixi491]

Does anyone know what time the hearing will take place?

 

[beach]

Does anyone know what time the hearing will take place?

Thursday, 7/15 @ 2:00 pm edt

 

[sleutherontheside]

Wow....what a great idea for a thread somewhere. I too need some new recipes. My DH & DS are the pickiest eaters, so I have a revolving 6/7 recipes that have now been so overused it's not even funny. I need a new repertoire of dinner ideas --- HELP!!

:cow:

There's a great cookbook out there entitled....Crock Pot Cooking for the Internet Addict. It is divided into chapters based upon what type of internet activity fits your profile.

A few of the more popular recipes submitted by crime forum addicts..........

Lethal Injection Slow Cooker Chicken (Marinade is injected directly into the chicken.)

Commissary Surprise (A combination of various foodstuffs thrown into the slow cooker for surprising results.)

Chili Without Me (A spicy dish that serves all but one.)

 

[nachomama]

There's a great cookbook out there entitled....Crock Pot Cooking for the Internet Addict. It is divided into chapters based upon what type of internet activity fits your profile.

A few of the more popular recipes submitted by crime forum addicts..........

Lethal Injection Slow Cooker Chicken (Marinade is injected directly into the chicken.)

Commissary Surprise (A combination of various foodstuffs thrown into the slow cooker for surprising results.)

Chili Without Me (A spicy dish that serves all but one.)

Check out there recipes:
http://www.pillsbury.com/Recipes/ShowRecipe.aspx?rid=46155&wtfs=1

 

[LambChop]

Crockpot: Chicken tenders or breasts, 1 jar of salsa, 2 cloves of garlic chopped.

 

[sleutherontheside]

I am totally kidding.......was I that convincing???? I guess I didn't make it outrageous enough!!!:crazy:

 

[Leila]

Wow....what a great idea for a thread somewhere. I too need some new recipes. My DH & DS are the pickiest eaters, so I have a revolving 6/7 recipes that have now been so overused it's not even funny. I need a new repertoire of dinner ideas --- HELP!!

:cow:

Me too! When Mamabear mentioned "crockpot" I thought a crockpot meal sounded like a good idea for a busy online day, but I'm fresh out of new and interesting crockpot recipes.

 

[Leila]

Poor Brad, he certainly is stuck between leaving the A camp for his sanity, which he lost long ago, or staying for the long haul in making these types of statements. Has Brad actually stated how he is getting paid or doing this work pro bono ... or is Brad seeing large royalty fees at the end of this.

Seems to me in making this "standard statements" he knows he has no control over his clients.

We saw in the Morgan depos that BC has no control over his clients, so even though he may coach Cindy in regards to her testimony on Thursday, he's got to know that all his advice will go out the window if she decides she has to exert control.

 

[RR0004]

I am totally kidding.......was I that convincing???? I guess I didn't make it outrageous enough!!!:crazy:

You had me convinced...pen the cookbook and I'll buy it for sure!

 

[RR0004]

We saw in the Morgan depos that BC has no control over his clients, so even though he may coach Cindy in regards to her testimony on Thursday, he's got to know that all his advice will go out the window if she decides she has to exert control.

The As walked into the depos angry. Actually, indignant might be a better word. They saw no purpose to answering the questions because they saw no purpose to the lawsuit. I don't see how much has changed, except they may fear getting their b*tts kicked into jail.

 

[Leila]

Crockpot: Chicken tenders or breasts, 1 jar of salsa, 2 cloves of garlic chopped.

This sounds like a very easy one! Make some Lipton's Spanish rice to go with it, and a quick veggie, and it's a meal.

 

[Steely Dan]

Why hasn't anyone considered ordering pizza that night. You'll be the family hero. JMO