George has Casey's car destroyed

[Kimberlyd125]

The Anthonys requested all the evidence back. Not just the car.

http://www.wesh.com/r/28612479/detail.html

Thank you.

From your link:
All of the items remain in the custody of the Clerk of Court's office, which will hold onto it for at least three and a half years, or until a judge issues an order releasing it to a specific party.
George and Cindy Anthony are already fighting to get hold of it. Their attorney, Mark Lippman, says the pair doesn't want it landing in the wrong hands.
"We want it all. We don't want to leave anything out there that could possibly be sold on eBay or privately, whatever it may be. My clients want it all back to keep, and what they don't keep, I'll destroy," Lippman said.


Also from the link:
Casey's car itself was never actually introduced as evidence, only items from inside the car, including the trunk liner.


***so the car was not considered evidence. I'm assuming from reading the article that's why it was not held for 3 years.

Very interesting.

 

[rotterdam]

Thank you.

From your link:
All of the items remain in the custody of the Clerk of Court's office, which will hold onto it for at least three and a half years, or until a judge issues an order releasing it to a specific party.
George and Cindy Anthony are already fighting to get hold of it. Their attorney, Mark Lippman, says the pair doesn't want it landing in the wrong hands.
"We want it all. We don't want to leave anything out there that could possibly be sold on eBay or privately, whatever it may be. My clients want it all back to keep, and what they don't keep, I'll destroy," Lippman said.


Also from the link:
Casey's car itself was never actually introduced as evidence, only items from inside the car, including the trunk liner.


***so the car was not considered evidence. I'm assuming from reading the article that's why it was not held for 3 years.

Very interesting.

I find it kind of odd though that they can hold on to it for 3 1/2 years, considering it was a NG verdict.
That means that GA did not even get his gas cans back??? Unless by Court order?

 

[vlpate]

Thank you.

From your link:
All of the items remain in the custody of the Clerk of Court's office, which will hold onto it for at least three and a half years, or until a judge issues an order releasing it to a specific party.
George and Cindy Anthony are already fighting to get hold of it. Their attorney, Mark Lippman, says the pair doesn't want it landing in the wrong hands.
"We want it all. We don't want to leave anything out there that could possibly be sold on eBay or privately, whatever it may be. My clients want it all back to keep, and what they don't keep, I'll destroy," Lippman said.


Also from the link:
Casey's car itself was never actually introduced as evidence, only items from inside the car, including the trunk liner.


***so the car was not considered evidence. I'm assuming from reading the article that's why it was not held for 3 years.

Very interesting.

Very interesting...never evidence to begin with. Even more interesting, the article is from July 20, before the news of Dr. Phil's show and public opinion. I see crushing the car as the best thing they could have done.

 

[vlpate]

I find it kind of odd though that they can hold on to it for 3 1/2 years, considering it was a NG verdict.
That means that GA did not even get his gas cans back??? Unless by Court order?

It was never "introduced" into evidence...maybe there was a chance it might be...or some part on it might be.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Very interesting...never evidence to begin with. Even more interesting, the article is from July 20, before the news of Dr. Phil's show and public opinion. I see crushing the car as the best thing they could have done.

Why? Why is crushing a car that only had rotten pizza in it a sensible thing to do?

 

[lauriej]

I find it kind of odd though that they can hold on to it for 3 1/2 years, considering it was a NG verdict.
That means that GA did not even get his gas cans back??? Unless by Court order?

..maybe the 3 and 1/2 years that LE holds evidence is "per law".

..b/c------in MANY cases, if one perp is found Not Guilty-----they go on to find the REAL guilty party! and therefore need the evidence for THAT person's trial...

..now in this case------( well, i'm not anxious for a T.O.)
..i guess , per law, they are retaining control of the evidence.

 

[lauriej]

***so the car was not considered evidence. I'm assuming from reading the article that's why it was not held for 3 years.

Very interesting.

..i don't find that interesting, or even 'odd'...

..yes, the car was brought into the evidence bay in july-----and then we were well aware of what PARTS of it they had taken out "as evidence".

..we also saw the parts brought into court and entered into evidence.

..the car------was just the deathmobile itself (if you believe caylee was dead in the trunk)---or it was just a car .

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Of course the car was evidence. If it weren't, how could LE have ever taken all of the pieces of the trunk, run them through all their testing and presented them at trial? I do remember that the Anthonys gave the car to LE of their own free will; LE didn't have to cut any paperwork on it. But, rest assured, it was properly and legally seized as evidence, introduced into court or not.

 

[rotterdam]

..maybe the 3 and 1/2 years that LE holds evidence is "per law".

..b/c------in MANY cases, if one perp is found Not Guilty-----they go on to find the REAL guilty party! and therefore need the evidence for THAT person's trial...

..now in this case------( well, i'm not anxious for a T.O.)
..i guess , per law, they are retaining control of the evidence.

Makes a lot of sense. Although not holding my breath to see them use that evidence ever again. So the Anthonys apparently did not get anything back yet, except for the car which was not considered evidence. IIRC they took quite some stuff out of their home, and lots of it was never actually introduced in the court room.

 

[vlpate]

Of course the car was evidence. If it weren't, how could LE have ever taken all of the pieces of the trunk, run them through all their testing and presented them at trial? I do remember that the Anthonys gave the car to LE of their own free will; LE didn't have to cut any paperwork on it. But, rest assured, it was properly and legally seized as evidence, introduced into court or not.

It was not considered evidence in this case because it was not introduced and submitted as evidence during the trial. It was seized and evidence was extracted from it and submitted in court.

 

[vlpate]

Why? Why is crushing a car that only had rotten pizza in it a sensible thing to do?

Sorry, the only sensitive thing to do...the "rotting pizza" has reached it's shelf life.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Sorry, the only sensitive thing to do...the "rotting pizza" has reached it's shelf life.

Lady Macbeth never had it so good

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

It was not considered evidence in this case because it was not introduced and submitted as evidence during the trial. It was seized and evidence was extracted from it and submitted in court.

Various and several pieces of it were. This is hair splitting and I don't understand to what purpose.

Whatever you want to label it ~ possible evidence, evidence, discovery, possible discovery, physical evidence or whatever, used as an exhibit in court or not ~ it was taken by LE and had to be disposed of or returned.

Would they have had to have physically brought the entire car into the courtroom for it to have been considered evidence? LOL, now that would have caused a few more sidebars!!!

 

[Kat]

I'm not quite sure what to think about this yet. I'm going to have to ponder this for a while.

The problem is we've watched this family for the last 3 years. Crushing this car probably isn't what we would rationalize it out to be---not with the Anthony's. There's no telling what the heck they were thinking.

I'm going to have to sit and ponder this a good while.

 

[lauriej]

Various and several pieces of it were. This is hair splitting and I don't understand to what purpose.

Whatever you want to label it ~ possible evidence, evidence, discovery, possible discovery, physical evidence or whatever, used as an exhibit in court or not ~ it was taken by LE and had to be disposed of or returned.

Would they have had to have physically brought the entire car into the courtroom for it to have been considered evidence? LOL, now that would have caused a few more sidebars!!!

..oh good grief----the visual of that car IN the courtroom...( and i'm still not ready for the 'sidebar' word..)

..on the video, of the car at the salvage yard---the reporters point out-"it IS THE car-----look there! at the evidence stickers still on it.."

..'the car' was clearly evidence.

..the state elected to use certain parts of it only------to introduce INTO evidence.

..those parts will remain with the rest of the items that were introduced into evidence, gathering dust for 3 and 1/2 years.

..what was left of the car-----was returned to the owners by OCSO.
..and crushed.

 

[2goldfish]

isn't the spare tire cover in evidence, separate entirely from the car? i think we saw it pulled out during trial.

that's what I was thinking too ...all the true evidence is still at OCSO as far as we know. the samples in the cans, etc. the car itself wasnt used at all in the trial. only pics and liner, etc.

 

[stilettos]

I'm not quite sure what to think about this yet. I'm going to have to ponder this for a while.

The problem is we've watched this family for the last 3 years. Crushing this car probably isn't what we would rationalize it out to be---not with the Anthony's. There's no telling what the heck they were thinking.

I'm going to have to sit and ponder this a good while.

I will never be able to make rational sense of anything these people do...as so far their behavior defies rational. :banghead: I do not trust them, not a whit!

 

[grammieto5]

I don't care who crushed the car or why, I'm just tired of hearing about these people. Seems every time I go to the news I have to hear about some exploit of George and Cindy.

I don't care if they go to Home Depot. I don't care if they swim with a fish. I don't care if they shop for T shirts in a Nassau tourist trap. I was sick of these people the day they took a limo for crab puffs at the Ritz and still, they keep trying to insert themselves into the public's awareness. Until they do something noteworthy or remotely interesting, like telling the truth, I have no interest in any aspect of their lives.

They need to fade into the sunset and stop trying to present themselves as something they're not for their own gain. In fact, I'll make them a deal. If they'll shut up, so will I.

I agree with your whole post, especially the bold. I must admit though, this is one of the most interesting threads I've read on here in sometime

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Various and several pieces of it were. This is hair splitting and I don't understand to what purpose.

Whatever you want to label it ~ possible evidence, evidence, discovery, possible discovery, physical evidence or whatever, used as an exhibit in court or not ~ it was taken by LE and had to be disposed of or returned.

Would they have had to have physically brought the entire car into the courtroom for it to have been considered evidence? LOL, now that would have caused a few more sidebars!!!

BBM: Exactly ... it would have be "impossible" to bring the entire car to the 23rd floor of the Orange County Courthouse ... it would not have even fit in the "freight elevator" ... IIRC ... photos of the car were introduced ...

Now ... in My Opinion ... the SA could have had their "Perry Mason Moment" :floorlaugh: and could have introduced the ENTIRE CAR into evidence, BUT they would have had to bring the Jury, Judge, courtreporter, attorneys ... to a location where the Car could have been VIEWED by the Jury, Judge ...

Too bad the SA did NOT do this ... MOO ... considering the "allegation" that the car still SMELLED ... maybe the State should have done this and maybe the Jury would have gotten a GOOD WHIFF of the car !

MOO MOO MOO ...

 

[LambChop]

BBM: Exactly ... it would have be "impossible" to bring the entire car to the 23rd floor of the Orange County Courthouse ... it would not have even fit in the "freight elevator" ... IIRC ... photos of the car were introduced ...

Now ... in My Opinion ... the SA could have had their "Perry Mason Moment" :floorlaugh: and could have introduced the ENTIRE CAR into evidence, BUT they would have had to bring the Jury, Judge, courtreporter, attorneys ... to a location where the Car could have been VIEWED by the Jury, Judge ...

Too bad the SA did NOT do this ... MOO ... considering the "allegation" that the car still SMELLED ... maybe the State should have done this and maybe the Jury would have gotten a GOOD WHIFF of the car !

MOO MOO MOO ...

JP stated they could not introduce the car/carpet smell into evidence because if one of the juror's already knew what the smell was and told the other jurors they would then become a witness. Jurors cannot be witnesses. However, this was never explained to the jurors so if they wondered why they could not smell the carpeting they might assume it could have just been trash if another juror told them they had smelled decomp and knew what it smelled like. Either way the juror would still be considered a witness so they should have permitted them to smell it if they asked. jmo