Dr. Phil's Interview w/ George & Cindy Anthony - Thread #3

[jon_burrows]

thanks, don't remember seeing the actual Caylee bear.

So, the Caylee bear is a regular brown teddy bear with a Caylee t-shirt listing the foundation name??? WOW!! That took a lot of thought, don't you think?? quite original also, NOT...... what a waste of an idea, huge waste.....

IMO, MOO, etc.

I saw them posing for the camera in a hospital. I believe it was the children's section in Ohio. They had one of those little red wagons filled with teddy bears. CA/GA were grinning from ear to ear.

I thought the teddy bears should have read 'I love you', 'snuggle bear', 'hugs'...something that children could understand and possibly be comforted by but noooooooooo the As had to put the name/web address for their charity. The name of a child killed by her own mother was awful as well as the blatant promotion of their charity.

It's really sad because the parents of the children were going through he** and maybe even felt guilty if they didn't donate to the charity who gave their child a teddy bear. Which is probably the A's thought process as well.

IMO

 

[MsMacGyver]

No test in the world is going to guarantee the verdict you want under our current justice system. Everyone wants a test but nobody has any idea what would be on that test. Ask them if they understand the rules? Make the read volumes of law books?

Juries get verdicts wrong every day, not just in high profile cases. You are asking 12 strangers who a majority don't have a legal background to form opinions based on rules that are written out for them. On top of that you throw in words such as burden of proof and beyond a reasonable doubt. Even the phrase 'beyond a reasonable doubt' is a subjective phrase based on a person's opinion.

This is mentioned in the sidebar thread but it bears repeating here. Juries usually get it right. I'd say over 90% of the time. Out of that 10%, a small fraction are high profile cases. Out of that fraction, how many times do juries get it wrong? Yes, I think most can agree who is responsible for Caylee's death. But sometimes you have to look at the big picture before we decide to revamp the entire justice system.

Great point..We are seeing the same mistakes made in the Conrad Murray trial. The judge is more concerned with staying on scedule than taking time to choose the jury. If I was a jurer, It would have taken me a long time to even get through the instructions. If these wasn't anyone in the room with me to explain some issues, I would have to go back to the judge for clarification. None of this was done. I would want to see evidence again, none of this was done. They made mention of common sense today, how you determine if a person has common sense, what one or two questions on paper could help you determine if a person has it? They have 27 people with 20 minutes today, thats less than a minute for each person to be questioned. Why do they take so little time choosing the people that have the last word!
I don't think JB is a good lawyer but I do think he spent alot of time studing the jurors profiles and finding out how he could manipulate their thinking. He knew FCA left evidence, verbal and physical, that was enough to make GA the fall guy and make it "appear" there was reasonable doubt. The duct tape that belonged to GA, the squirrels under the car that GA drove, GA would do anything for FCA because he molested her so he had to help her.
They called it a social media trial but I think it was also a mentally manipulated one also.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Non profits do not get "licensed". They recieve ( or don't) aprroval as a 501(c)3 as a charity from the federal government, paving the way for donations to be tax deductible.

http://www.wikihow.com/Start-a-501c3-Nonprofit-Organization

Fulfill charitable solicitation law requirements. If your organization’s plans include fundraising, be aware that many states and few local jurisdictions regulate organizations that solicit funds within that state, county, or city. Usually compliance involves obtaining a permit or license and then filing an annual report and financial statement. Contact the state Attorney General’s office, the state Department of Commerce, state and local Departments of Revenue and county or municipal clerk’s offices to get more information.

 

[NavySubMom]

If it helps give children a little comfort during a traumatic time I think it is anything BUT a waste. Huge or otherwise.

IMO LE has been giving these types of bears out all over the country for quite a while to children.

I mean the actual amount of time that was put into the creation of the actual "Caylee" bear was pretty much nothing, no thought put into the bear itself, just a boilerplate bear with a nothing white t-shirt.

How about Caylee's favorite color was purple, how about a purple t-shirt, or something-else-Caylee specific intead of the website of the foundation on the shirt. THAT is what I said was a waste. The bear looks like another PR move for the Caylee Marie Foundation, MOO.

IMO, MOO, etc.

 

[NavySubMom]

I saw them posing for the camera in a hospital. I believe it was the children's section in Ohio. They had one of those little red wagons filled with teddy bears. CA/GA were grinning from ear to ear.

I thought the teddy bears should have read 'I love you', 'snuggle bear', 'hugs'...something that children could understand and possibly be comforted by but noooooooooo the As had to put the name/web address for their charity. The name of a child killed by her own mother was awful as well as the blatant promotion of their charity.

It's really sad because the parents of the children were going through he** and maybe even felt guilty if they didn't donate to the charity who gave their child a teddy bear. Which is probably the A's thought process as well.

IMO

Yes, your whole post is exactly what I am talking about.

IMO.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Well, not only was that the word Dr Phil used, IIRC, but if you google the keywords 'licensed 501c' you'll get hundreds of thousands of hits from organizations that use the same terminology on their sites. It's very common phraseology.

http://www.tvguide.com/News/Dr-Phil-Casey-Anthony-Parents-1037054.aspx

TV Guide Magazine: You stress that your show didn't pay for the interview, that instead you're making a donation to their new foundation. Do you feel confident that that money will go to the right place?
Dr. Phil: They haven't gotten their authorization yet. They didn't make a demand, they made a request. And I asked when we sat down, "Let me be clear, you didn't ask to be paid for this. You asked that we make a donation to this 501c3 charitable organization. And you take no money from that, you get no salary, no fee, no reimbursement, nothing from the foundation." He said that is correct. I said, "You understand that this is federally licensed, and the IRS and the government monitors this." They said that is absolutely correct. So I moved on with that confidence in mind.

***Dr. Phil did say licensed.
???

Maybe this would fall under the charitable solicitation thingy??? Because the A's solicited a donation for the interview?

 

[LinTX]

The Foundation IRS form 990 from 2010

http://www.irs.gov/app/ePostcard/displayEPostcard.do;jsessionid=9WpkTybp1FyyRKbyFh51fvWqd7QsPjTxTB8CQckrXPW8zHv6H1Ms!2018834583?dispatchMethod=displayInfo&ePostcardId=1166052&ein=264418560&isDescending=false&ein1=&dispatchMethod=search&ein2=&state=All...&country=US&city=&nameSearchTypeAll=false&indexOfFirstRow=0&sortColumn=orgName&resultsPerPage=10&names=Caylee&nameSearchTypeStarts=false

And the one from 2009.

http://www.irs.gov/app/ePostcard/displayEPostcard.do;jsessionid=nrSNT8pcLNylvSk1LL2v1K1tRj2DsScnnySNjJkwTy54qFnT44b9!2018834583?dispatchMethod=displayInfo&ePostcardId=740082&ein=264418560&isDescending=false&ein1=&ein=264418560&ePostcardId=1166052&dispatchMethod=displayInfo&state=All...&ein2=&country=US&city=&nameSearchTypeAll=false&indexOfFirstRow=0&sortColumn=orgName&resultsPerPage=10&names=Caylee&nameSearchTypeStarts=false

Note the increase in revenue "no more than".

From the FL State Report "2010-2011 Gift Givers' Guide, A Guide to Charitable Contributions in Florida" https://csapp.800helpfla.com/cspublicapp/giftgiversquery/giftgiversquery.aspx

CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY FOUNDATION, INC., ORLANDO, FL (Charitiable Organization"
Registration Number: Ch29385 Expiration Date: 04/23/2011
Revenue Source: DCS Statement of Support/Revenue
Total Revenue: $2,580.72 Program Services Cost: $630.25 20% Percent
Total Expenses: $3,107.49 Administrative Cost: $2,477.24 80% of Total (my note: 80% of expenses, but 95.99% of Revenue)
Surplus/Deficit: $526.77- Fund-Raising Cost: $0.00 0% Expenses

Wonder if it was renewed (see expiration date)...

 

[Kimberlyd125]

BBM - I think the teddy bears were a promotional gimmick. There is no need to put the name of a murdered child along with their charity address unless they want more donations. It's creepy at best. Also, the teddy bear promotion site used to have more teddy bears.

Caylee Bear:
http://www.cayleemarieanthonyfounda.../.pond/P5100162.JPG.w560h800.jpg&target=_self

Promotional Bears:
http://www.ameripromo.com/-c-411_412...acacf30ed5b0c1

MOO

For some reason the Caylee Bear link is not working.
The promo bears link is.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

thanks, don't remember seeing the actual Caylee bear.

So, the Caylee bear is a regular brown teddy bear with a Caylee t-shirt listing the foundation name??? WOW!! That took a lot of thought, don't you think?? quite original also, NOT...... what a waste of an idea, huge waste.....

IMO, MOO, etc.

The Caylee Bear link worked for you?
I'm having trouble with it.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Nevermind. It worked.

I think it's precious.

 

[MsMacGyver]

The only foundation CA could start is one that supports daughters that kill.
I watched the interviews to see if she would stand up for Caylee since the trial was over and no further legal issues existed. CA wasn't playing to the camera to repair her image to get donations. I think it was clear she was still denying FCA did anything wrong. Hopefully people who watched saw that, evidently some did since Dr. P was flooded with thousands of e-mails on facebook, twitter and message boards from people outraged at CA's excuses
I have faith there are more people watching these people than even they believe and the train wreck CA caused by her denials and excuses would lead me to believe there are interested parties watching them to see if they try to skim money off these foundations illegally and will report this to the proper authoritys. There is always a good and bad side to everything. If Dr. P got huge ratings and it keeps his show alive another season..who cares? I would bet since this man is a grandfather himself and it was a large amount of money, he will be watching these two and their foundation closely. He has said they promised that none of that money will be used to line their pockets. I don't view Dr. P as a stupid man and I bet he has some experience at running foundations himself. He has alot more money than the A's and can afford alot better quality of lawyers.
The damage CA did to herself and her daughter was priceless and I was glad to see GA given the opportunity to tell his side of the story and defend the allegations made towards him by a worthless lawyer and a vindictive daughter, who knows full well, as many of us do... what she did.

 

[MsMacGyver]

http://www.tvguide.com/News/Dr-Phil-Casey-Anthony-Parents-1037054.aspx

TV Guide Magazine: You stress that your show didn't pay for the interview, that instead you're making a donation to their new foundation. Do you feel confident that that money will go to the right place?
Dr. Phil: They haven't gotten their authorization yet. They didn't make a demand, they made a request. And I asked when we sat down, "Let me be clear, you didn't ask to be paid for this. You asked that we make a donation to this 501c3 charitable organization. And you take no money from that, you get no salary, no fee, no reimbursement, nothing from the foundation." He said that is correct. I said, "You understand that this is federally licensed, and the IRS and the government monitors this." They said that is absolutely correct. So I moved on with that confidence in mind.

***Dr. Phil did say licensed.
???

Maybe this would fall under the charitable solicitation thingy??? Because the A's solicited a donation for the interview?

BBM
You can take this two ways..
1st...The A's agreed to do this interview without personal financial gain

2nd...If the A's try to skim money from this foundation illegally, Dr. P has on video made it very clear the terms agreed on by the A's...Evidence!

 

[Aghast]

Hey everyone! I know I'm butting in to a ongoing conversation but I just had to ya this itty bitty funny. I was talking to my neighbor about cindy's coworkers being on the stand. She said, " can you imagine being her boss? How long did she work there? After hearing her testimony and seeing her on Dr. Phil, (useless), my neighbor thinks cindy's poor supervisor is having to go over years of work. They now know full well that woman could't tell the truth even if her hair was on fire so..... Can you imagine the scope of the investigation they may have to or already have started? Sheeshhhh! Toxic

 

[Kimberlyd125]

BBM
You can take this two ways..
1st...The A's agreed to do this interview without personal financial gain

2nd...If the A's try to skim money from this foundation illegally, Dr. P has on video made it very clear the terms agreed on by the A's...Evidence!

I'm on Tapatalk and I can't see what you bolded.

But ITA with you.
Dr. Phil is not a dumb man. He knows what he's doing.

 

[MsMacGyver]

GA did lie and steal from CA. At the time of his "gambling problem" both kids were over 18. He had no legal responsibility to support either one. He did contribute to their finances but they were married. What spouse looks at the other and says, Hey, by the way, I'm going to take 30,000 out and lose it on gambling. Other spouse says..Ok, no problem..GA lied to CA and he did steal but that doesn't make him a molester or a co-conspiractor. I don't think he had the constitution to be either one.

 

[MsMacGyver]

I'm on Tapatalk and I can't see what you bolded.

But ITA with you.
Dr. Phil is not a dumb man. He knows what he's doing.

I bolded Dr. P making it very clear what the terms were for the donation. I believe he did this to protect his money/donation. If he discovers any illegal action by the A's, he has it on video..evidence.


OT..watching a trial on HLN, jurors just asked to see some evidence..would have been nice to see in FCA trial!.....:banghead:

 

[LambChop]

I saw them posing for the camera in a hospital. I believe it was the children's section in Ohio. They had one of those little red wagons filled with teddy bears. CA/GA were grinning from ear to ear.

I thought the teddy bears should have read 'I love you', 'snuggle bear', 'hugs'...something that children could understand and possibly be comforted by but noooooooooo the As had to put the name/web address for their charity. The name of a child killed by her own mother was awful as well as the blatant promotion of their charity.

It's really sad because the parents of the children were going through he** and maybe even felt guilty if they didn't donate to the charity who gave their child a teddy bear. Which is probably the A's thought process as well.

IMO

What is ironic is the A's did not pay for the bears, donors did, so why are they taking credit by putting their names on the bears. It's suppose to be run as a charity not an advertising campaign. This is what I mean about people running these charities who are clueless. jmo

 

[jon_burrows]

thanks, don't remember seeing the actual Caylee bear.

So, the Caylee bear is a regular brown teddy bear with a Caylee t-shirt listing the foundation name??? WOW!! That took a lot of thought, don't you think?? quite original also, NOT...... what a waste of an idea, huge waste.....

IMO, MOO, etc.

I think their only thought was how to get more money. Buy some cheap teddy bears, slap on the shirt the name of a murdered child, then give the web address so they can get donations.

IMO

 

[BellaVita]

Great point..We are seeing the same mistakes made in the Conrad Murray trial. The judge is more concerned with staying on scedule than taking time to choose the jury. If I was a jurer, It would have taken me a long time to even get through the instructions. If these wasn't anyone in the room with me to explain some issues, I would have to go back to the judge for clarification. None of this was done. I would want to see evidence again, none of this was done. They made mention of common sense today, how you determine if a person has common sense, what one or two questions on paper could help you determine if a person has it? They have 27 people with 20 minutes today, thats less than a minute for each person to be questioned. Why do they take so little time choosing the people that have the last word!
I don't think JB is a good lawyer but I do think he spent alot of time studing the jurors profiles and finding out how he could manipulate their thinking. He knew FCA left evidence, verbal and physical, that was enough to make GA the fall guy and make it "appear" there was reasonable doubt. The duct tape that belonged to GA, the squirrels under the car that GA drove, GA would do anything for FCA because he molested her so he had to help her.
They called it a social media trial but I think it was also a mentally manipulated one also.

Some of the Casey jurors said during voir dire that they had never thought about whether they were for or against the death penalty. That they hadn't formed an opinion about it. REALLY?? How do you get to be an adult without ever having given this consideration in your own independent thoughts? How thoughtful of a person is someone like that? No wonder they were unable to grasp anything. And some actually said they thought being on a jury meant they would be solving a mystery. NO. They were there to weigh the testimony and facts and determine reasonable doubt. There to solve a mystery? Very simplistic thinking. UGH.

 

[Aghast]

So what's next in this ongoing comedy/drama. Another interview? the anthony's and Phil must realize by now that this last stunt by all ain't working out for them.
Casey interview? More interview from Cindy and George trying a new twist to see if the public will buy it? Baez runs for president? I can't image what's next.