Could Lee Anthony face charges for obstruction of justice?

[PaddieAB]

A game to make Lee look worse than he already did??? :bang: Well coach he won that one for sure....lmao.

IF the potential charges are in regard to the quasi-investigation, then what does Lee have to lose? His lawyer already as much as stated Lee's act was UNKNOWING.

Lee can't deny he helped Jesse, nor can he avoid being charged. But that doesn't mean Lee will be convicted IF he is charged. But WHY he is charged will be on the table, along with more charges being laid regarding who Lee was abetting and why he unknowingly obstructed justice.

That's why I think this is a cat and mouse game. Just my opinion.

 

[tehcloser]

IF the potential charges are in regard to the quasi-investigation, then what does Lee have to lose? His lawyer already as much as stated Lee's act was UNKNOWING.

Lee can't deny he helped Jesse, nor can he avoid being charged. But that doesn't mean Lee will be convicted IF he is charged. But WHY he is charged will be on the table, along with more charges being laid regarding who Lee was abetting and why he unknowingly obstructed justice.

That's why I think this is a cat and mouse game. Just my opinion.[/

How do you know that it wasnot Jessie helping Lee????? The Anthonys keep referring to Lee's investigation, not Jessies.

 

[weasel]

I can understand LA hiring an attorney. I would too if I were in his shoes. Just basing my opinion on what I know, but I don't see where he has obstructed justice in any way. If I remember correctly, he was the one who told LE about the CA / Casey fight on Father's Day. I just thought he seemed pretty open during his interview with LE.

 

[debs]

So........back to Lee. I still find it curious that Lee's lawyer would preempt a O of J charge with such a statement that says "inadvertently." I'm curious as to how inadvertent it is to conduct one's own investigation, find out things, do stuff with those things, and still claim inadvertent.

 

[Angel Who Cares]

If the Anthonys are not candid and truthful, sources said, it may come to obstruction of justice charges against one or more of them.

This includes LA concerning OJ not just GA & CA. I still believe something is going to be coming out & that is what was behind LA's lawyer statement to the police. All of the A's seem to try to do damage control before LE releases a bombshell or docs. MOO

 

[Tom'sGirl]

Please note!

Many of you have been guilty of going off the Topic of this thread which is "Could Lee Anthony face charges for obstruction of justice?"

Get back on Topic already :sheesh:

 

[Lanie]

So........back to Lee. I still find it curious that Lee's lawyer would preempt a O of J charge with such a statement that says "inadvertently." I'm curious as to how inadvertent it is to conduct one's own investigation, find out things, do stuff with those things, and still claim inadvertent.

Respectfully snipped.

Maybe Lee, in the course of his investigation, came across the 'bad' pics of Casey, and deleted them. It could be 'inadvertent' towards the OJ if he did it to protect his parents from seeing them, not realizing they could have something to do with the case. Lee seems protective of his mother, and I could see this happening.
Lanie

 

[Spitfire4ever]

Please note! Many of you have been guilty of going off the Topic of this thread which is "Could Lee Anthony face charges for obstruction of justice?"

Get back on Topic already :sheesh:

Thank You!!

<snipped>
Monday Dec. 28, 2008

2 PM ET - Will Lee Anthony face criminal charges? Someone who claims to be an adviser to Lee, who is the brother of Casey Anthony, told a local Orlando media outlet that the state attorney's office could seek to charge Lee with obstruction of justice or aiding and abetting. The adviser, attorney Thomas Luka, says the state could charge Lee even if it was not Lee's intention to commit a crime. Luka says that Lee Anthony had been conducting his own investigation and looking into leads for other suspects. Luka adds that the Anthony family is preparing to be called as witnesses in the case. Also today, investigators are reportedly focusing on computer searches on a computer in the Anthony home during the same time someone was searching "neck breaking" and "how to make chloroform". Computer records reportedly show someone did a Google search for "One Tree Hill's" 100th episode -- which is about a nanny kidnapping a child. (From Matthew Zarrell, Nancy Grace Associate Producer)




http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/09/08/NGfindcayleeblog/index.html

 

[impatientredhead]

Thank You!!

<snipped>
Monday Dec. 28, 2008

2 PM ET - Will Lee Anthony face criminal charges? Someone who claims to be an adviser to Lee, who is the brother of Casey Anthony, told a local Orlando media outlet that the state attorney's office could seek to charge Lee with obstruction of justice or aiding and abetting. The adviser, attorney Thomas Luka, says the state could charge Lee even if it was not Lee's intention to commit a crime. Luka says that Lee Anthony had been conducting his own investigation and looking into leads for other suspects. Luka adds that the Anthony family is preparing to be called as witnesses in the case. Also today, investigators are reportedly focusing on computer searches on a computer in the Anthony home during the same time someone was searching "neck breaking" and "how to make chloroform". Computer records reportedly show someone did a Google search for "One Tree Hill's" 100th episode -- which is about a nanny kidnapping a child. (From Matthew Zarrell, Nancy Grace Associate Producer)




http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/09/08/NGfindcayleeblog/index.html

I think if Lee has done anything actionable it will be related to the items he gathered after the kidnapping story, or if his private investigation has bumped up against witness tampering.

 

[Chilly Willy]

I think if Lee has done anything actionable it will be related to the items he gathered after the kidnapping story, or if his private investigation has bumped up against witness tampering.

LE knew Lee went to pick up Casey's belongings and were at the house when he returned with them. I don't see how they can use that against him now. They should have gone themselves if they felt the items were evidence.

 

[indicat]

I think if Lee has done anything actionable it will be related to the items he gathered after the kidnapping story, or if his private investigation has bumped up against witness tampering.

I really wonder if it has to do with earasing stuff off the laptop, sorry if this was said already...I have not been able to read everything.

 

[LaLaw2000]

Thank You!!

<snipped>
Monday Dec. 28, 2008

2 PM ET - Will Lee Anthony face criminal charges? Someone who claims to be an adviser to Lee, who is the brother of Casey Anthony, told a local Orlando media outlet that the state attorney's office could seek to charge Lee with obstruction of justice or aiding and abetting. The adviser, attorney Thomas Luka, says the state could charge Lee even if it was not Lee's intention to commit a crime. Luka says that Lee Anthony had been conducting his own investigation and looking into leads for other suspects. Luka adds that the Anthony family is preparing to be called as witnesses in the case. Also today, investigators are reportedly focusing on computer searches on a computer in the Anthony home during the same time someone was searching "neck breaking" and "how to make chloroform". Computer records reportedly show someone did a Google search for "One Tree Hill's" 100th episode -- which is about a nanny kidnapping a child. (From Matthew Zarrell, Nancy Grace Associate Producer)




http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/09/08/NGfindcayleeblog/index.html

Isn't today Monday, December 29th? Look at the date! LOL, they made a mistake!

 

[PaddieAB]

How do you know that it wasnot Jessie helping Lee????? The Anthonys keep referring to Lee's investigation, not Jessies.

I don't know any more than you. But I think the reference in the press release to "Lee's investigation", by omission of it not being only Lee, is revealing.

Time will tell.

 

[debs]

Isn't today Monday, December 29th? Look at the date! LOL, they made a mistake!

They changed the day of the week. I read this same article when it was still Sunday, with Sunday's date/day correct.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Nice try. You know better than that. I recall it being reported that Jesse said he was asked if he was willing to take a ploy. So that means he took one and he passed? And we believe because that just because Jesse said? Are we going to know if he failed? Think not...matters none. No one believes everyone passing polys are innocent anyway, so why bother going there?

I think Jesse must be sweating over that press conference by Lee's lawyer. Cat and mouse.

I think what Lee's lawyer was referrring to was Lee doing things to help Casey cover up her involvement...I think what he is hinting at is that he will argue that because Lee didn't believe his sister killed Caylee, and believed she was kidnapped, he did not intend to obstruct the investigation by lying about things, he just wanted to send the investigation in the direction that he thought was "the right one" and get the focus off Casey.

 

[Humen]

Hi all. This is my first post, so please be gentle I noticed that when LA first starts discussing the laptop in his interview (page 54) he says "...actually when I got there originally it was, it was still, it was off at that point. But it was set up...It was set up, plugged in, on the kitchen countertop. Uhm, and when I turned it on so I can just try to see if I can get on the desktop there because I was curious..." Then later in the interview (page 57), the officer (Edwards) says "You said it was sitting there running on the 15th when you went to get it?" And LA answers "Exactly." Edwards says again further on about the laptop sitting there "running"--even talking about how it could have been sitting there running from the 9th to the 15th. Does it matter that LA first says he turned it on and tried to get to the desktop, but later says it was already running, and agreed that it could have been running for days? The only reason this bugs me is that I think he forgot what he had already said (that he had turned it on) which tells me he's lying. Why would he lie about it if he hadn't done anything? JMO

 

[SuziQ]

(snipped)
Hi all. This is my first post, so please be gentle The only reason this bugs me is that I think he forgot what he had already said (that he had turned it on) which tells me he's lying. Why would he lie about it if he hadn't done anything? JMO

Good catch! And welcome to WS!

 

[curiositycat]

Would erasing the *advertiser censored* pics be considered obstruction of justice?? I am sure he did that based on some of the things that GA said in the FBI interview.

I just don't think that would be enough for obstruction of justice charges though. It has to be something we aren't aware of yet. IMO

 

[whiteangora]

Hi all. This is my first post, so please be gentle I noticed that when LA first starts discussing the laptop in his interview (page 54) he says "...actually when I got there originally it was, it was still, it was off at that point. But it was set up...It was set up, plugged in, on the kitchen countertop. Uhm, and when I turned it on so I can just try to see if I can get on the desktop there because I was curious..." Then later in the interview (page 57), the officer (Edwards) says "You said it was sitting there running on the 15th when you went to get it?" And LA answers "Exactly." Edwards says again further on about the laptop sitting there "running"--even talking about how it could have been sitting there running from the 9th to the 15th. Does it matter that LA first says he turned it on and tried to get to the desktop, but later says it was already running, and agreed that it could have been running for days? The only reason this bugs me is that I think he forgot what he had already said (that he had turned it on) which tells me he's lying. Why would he lie about it if he hadn't done anything? JMO

IMO, Lee has told lots of lies and so has mom & dad.
That is why the media is talking about Them all facing charges.
The media has not even hinted about anyone else facing charges.

 

[Humen]

Good catch! And welcome to WS!

Thank you! My other thought for the day (sorry, off topic) is that when JB said we don't know half the story, here's what he meant: the who, what, when, where, why and how of this case is the whole story. So we DO know about half of it:
WHO? KC
WHAT? murder of a precious child
WHEN? June 16-18 is my guess
WHERE? We probably know about 1/2 of that...Orlando for sure, maybe in or around the A's home
WHY? Well, we probably know 1/2 of that too...jealousy, inconvenience
HOW? We don't know that (yet, and maybe never)
So if you add up what we know and what we don't know, yeah, it's about half. First thing he's said that I find believable.