Evidence

[shoremom]

I agree about the duct tape.

Question (but a very difficult thing to think about):

IF chloroform or a heavy medication was given to Caylee,
and then IF the tape was placed on her while she was still alive,
would Caylee's exhalation/breathing leave any evidence of the chloroform or meds on the sticky side of the tape that could be detected through forensics?

 

[Truth Seeker]

all the above.........and CA said BOOTS were in car.......hmmmmmm........BOOTS=damp woods to hide body! Boots in June???? what kind of BOOTS???? waterproof? snake proof? love to know..........

Party boots her mom found in the car!!!

 

[thelmadawg]

This may have been discussed, but haven't seen it:

When the remains were first discovered, WFTV did an on-phone interview with Dr. Michael Baden. In it he mentions most of what we have heard and then adds -- (paraphrase)

"If there is hair with the remains, it can be matched to the hair in the trunk."

Voila! The mysterious hair in the trunk that the A's and various pundits discount as being important, now has the potential to prove definitively Caylee was in the trunk, deceased, because it matches the hair found with the remains.

The meter reader didn't do it. Zanny didn't do it. Caylee went from the trunk to her final resting place at KC's hands.

IMHO, of course.

 

[FLSleuth]

31 days! And then pretty much every development from then on.

 

[ahi]

Def decomposition and Caylee's hair with death band in her MOTHER's trunk!!!

Sorry, but that bolded fact makes me want to spit nails every time I think about it...:furious:

 

[skullaria]

I'm sorry, i'm not real sure of what goes where, but i've wanted to ask, re the evidence, why did that book - if it had been under water for so long - look like it was in good shape? Was it plastic coated or waxed or something?
I left a book out in the rain one day, and it looked swollen and like crap.

 

[icherish]

The strongest physical evidence tying the murder to KC may be the evidence we have not yet been privy to.

I agree. As for what we are privy to, I think collectively it's the car and Caylee's remains.

 

[zoey]

Let's see:

Body Farm: decomposing body in car
GA: smelled like a dead body in the car
YM: smelled like a dead body in the car
CA: smelled like a dead body in the car
LA: couldn't stand next to the car it smelled so bad
Simon: smelled like a dead body in the car
KC: some squirrels crawled up into the engine and died.

The CAR will toast her, no doubt. Nanny didn't have those keys.

they also have jb stating in court that kc was the primary driver of that car--implying no one else had access to it.....

 

[Kat]

The strongest physical evidence tying the murder to KC may be the evidence we have not yet been privy to.

I agree lacey clementine.

 

[Tuba]

No matter how persuasive or convincing your evidence, or how huge the accumulation, you cannot say, "That's it. We're done!" If there are items in evidence that by their nature direct you to complimentary items, you search for them. What you are aiming at is the totality of the criminal evidence, not an impressive portion of it. To do less is Negligence.

 

[jjgram]

* IF ... there were 2 garbage bags -
* perhaps One WHITE
* perhaps - One Black... extra thick

it could be possible for the inner one to remain sealed with
the BOOK that is plastic coated... which is made to withstand
Toddler/ spills water... etc.

and maybe the bag only got torn and scattered by the animals...
AFTER>>>>
The water went down... therefore only being
exposed to some moisture... not the Flood waters...
besides.....

the CSI & the FBI are totally use to people trying to throw them
off.... they
***
Are L@@King for finger prints... of the NANNY/ZANNY in the
Automobile.... steering wheel... DOORS & Especially the TRUNK!!!
They
are L@@King for Fingerprints in the
ANTHONY ~~~ HOME for NANNY/ZANNY
L@@King * * * * * * * * But since there is NO ZANNY NANNY...
there will never be any sign of her...
NO FINGER PRINTS>>> NO PICTURE >>> NO PHONE >>>
NO DRIVERS LICENSE>>>> NO ID >>>> NO TAX RECORDS>>>>>
NO EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT >>> NO CAR REGISTERED >>>>
NO ZANNY T H E NANNY ! ! !
L@@King, L@@King...... far beyond what a Stupid Girl Like KC could
even imagine..... no matter how MANY CSI's she watched...
NO MATTER>... How many BLOCKBUSTER Movies... of Kidnapping...
she watched...

KC has indeed met her match..... LE & FBI....
Mr Tim Miller, Mr Leonord Padilla and
Truly.....
She is Doomed.... Because she took the life
of
G O D's Little Angel Child..... "CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY"......
God let her
have Little Angel CAYLEE MARIE.... and
now that she choose to abandon her responsibility or
parent/careprovider....

SHE IS NOW IN LINE TO
F A C E * * * JUDGMENT >... Here on earth....
and
then later after... KC's life on earth ends...
She WILL STAND IN JUDGMENT before God...
That is what the Bible says!... for those of us who believe in
that... It is a comforting thought that SHE, KC will have
to PAY... even if she decides to lie... or keep quiet then...
GOD ALREADY >>>>> KNOWS ! ! !

KC has hurt many, many people &
God will indeed call her on her actions ! ! !
Just my opinion !(STRONG!!!)
Thanks!
jjgram

*** HAPPY NEW YEAR to ALL who have been helping to
see that little ANGEL "CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY" is remembered !!!:clap::clap::clap:

 

[wonderer]

I think the only thing they'll need to focus on is what was in the trunk.

The trunk had the hair with the death ring, and fluids from a dead body.

The hair in the trunk and the hair on the body matched.

If there's any question about who did it, they can look at all of KC's fingerprints on the car, and the lack of additional prints/DNA.

I really think if they focus only on that, it will be an open and shut case. No one else had access to that car, and they'll have an approx. date as to when the child was killed/left, and when KC last had the car.

 

[believe09]

Contents of the car Casey was driving including the trunk.

 

[Macushla]

99% of what the Anthonys know about Zanny the Nanny, the 'kidnapping' and just about every other aspect of this case, they heard from Casey. So my question is will any of what they have said even be admissible in court? I thought hearsay was not allowed at any time - unless it was somethng like a 'dying declaration'.

If most of what they 'know' is hearsay and they will not be allowed to talk about it at trial - what does that leave them saying? I would imagine the jail house video tapes would be admissible because that is direct evidence of what each person was saying, but all the things that the Anthonys have said that Casey told them, would that be hearsay.

Take the Tampa trip - would the prosecution allow Cindy to talk about it so they could show that it was all a lie or would the defense object to it as hearsay?

Would the hearsay rule (if it is invoked) work as a tool for the prosecution or the defense?

 

[Searchfortruth]

99% of what the Anthonys know about Zanny the Nanny, the 'kidnapping' and just about every other aspect of this case, they heard from Casey. So my question is will any of what they have said even be admissable in court? I thought hearsay was not allowed at any time - unless it was somethng like a 'dying declaration'.

If most of what they 'know' is hearsay and they will not be allowed to talk about it at trial - what does that leave them saying? I would imagine the jail house video tapes would be admissable because that is direct evidence of what each person was saying, but all the things that the Anthonys have said that Casey told them, would that be hearsay.

Take the Tampa trip - would the prosecution allow Cindy to talk about it so they could show that it was all a lie or would the defense object to it as hearsay?

Would the hearsay rule (if it is invoked) work as a tool for the prosecution or the defense?

Thanks for starting this thread, very good questions ! I am no legal expert, and don't know the rules on hearsay..I think it can get pretty complicated. Maybe some of the legal eagles will weigh in ! I am thinking if Cindy heard it directly from Casey, that might be admissable, but if it was from the fantasy nanny to Casey to Cindy, that might not be allowed in...isn't that double hearsay ? Anyway, I am outside of my realm here...Help Please !

 

[LCoastMom]

99% of what the Anthonys know about Zanny the Nanny, the 'kidnapping' and just about every other aspect of this case, they heard from Casey. So my question is will any of what they have said even be admissible in court? I thought hearsay was not allowed at any time - unless it was somethng like a 'dying declaration'.

Thank you, I thought the same thing listening to Cindy's depo (Geo knows nothing!!) And I got so caught up in the train wreck I completely forgot!! I can't see where any of this would be admissible, except for the A's telling ZG she isn't a 10 (AOO). And maybe Cindy's lie about having ZG's addy & phone #
That she didn't bother using on day 31 when she said KC wouldn't tell her where Zany lived and she didn't have her address.

 

[Lookylou]

99% of what the Anthonys know about Zanny the Nanny, the 'kidnapping' and just about every other aspect of this case, they heard from Casey. So my question is will any of what they have said even be admissible in court? I thought hearsay was not allowed at any time - unless it was somethng like a 'dying declaration'.

If most of what they 'know' is hearsay and they will not be allowed to talk about it at trial - what does that leave them saying? I would imagine the jail house video tapes would be admissible because that is direct evidence of what each person was saying, but all the things that the Anthonys have said that Casey told them, would that be hearsay.

Take the Tampa trip - would the prosecution allow Cindy to talk about it so they could show that it was all a lie or would the defense object to it as hearsay?


Would the hearsay rule (if it is invoked) work as a tool for the prosecution or the defense?

Without proof or even evidece that you did anything to back up what you said you believed at the time, I don't see how anything they could say would matter in a court of law. No matter what they say, they did nothing to follow up on any story that their daughter fed them. To me this proves they did not ever believe her. You can say what ever you want, but its your actions that show what you believe. My opinion of course.

 

[ThoughtElf]

Here is one thread from December where some of this was discussed:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75997&highlight=hearsay

This post was pretty good in discussing the tapes themselves: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3022383&postcount=91

That thread veers of topic a little bit (there was Christmas baking and cooking going on,) but if you stick it out from page 3 on to the end, there are some good posts about hearsay.

 

[Lookylou]

Im courious too, if and what will be used in the trial.

 

[MarleneM]

Yeah, thanks to the civil depos we have CA on record saying she had multiple phone numbers and addresses for a Zanny over the years. That one's not hearsay.

Then there is GA testifying that he said the name "Zanny" to little Caylee just to find a look of recognition on her face - which also goes to his suspicions of his daughter at the time contrary to what he & CA claim now - that's also not hearsay.

CA said JG was the first person to use the term "nanny" in the A home, and that's how she believes "Zanny" became Zanny the Nanny". Those are CA's own words as well.