George's Alleged Affair #2

[krowdkat]

Unless the laws have changed drastically in the past several years, parents could not take an exemption for a child over 18 unless they were totally disabled or a full time student.

That is my understanding as well. My college aged girl was pissled when her dad (my ex) who was footing her college and housing expenses claimed her but also demanded she have a job. LOL

He won that fight. She was only working part-time. She gets it now.

 

[carole]

I don't want to get OT but here is an example from the IRS:
http://www.irs.gov/publications/p501/ar02.html#en_US_publink1000220939
Example 3.
Your son lives with you but is not your qualifying child because he is 30 years old and does not meet the age test. He may be your qualifying relative if the gross income test and the support test are met.

Was this a question that the BC certified in the Morgan depo? IE: did they claim KC.

Example 3 says you CANNOT take the exemption for this.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

SP said it was gambling. GA told LE it was a Nigerian scam.

Others had also said kc told them GA lost the money gambling. And, when GA told LE about it, he admitted he first claimed it to be from gambling.

 

[okiedokietoo]

That is the text that WFTV showed a picture of on their site. For all we know she saved a friend's number under the name George Anthony and had the friend (or sister) text her this past December.

If they have been shopping the deal for some time, chances are they hatched this plan a while back.

Plus, George was under 24/7 surveillance by the media, public, and law enforcement when this was all going on. Hard to think he was having some sordid affair and no one caught wind of it, not even the great Kathi B...

Ok I could go with this although what if her story is true that LE approached her?

 

[gamom]

I need someone to explain that to me. My son just turned 25 and is in law school. I was told I can no longer claim him because of his age. How would KC qualify if she is not a student or disabled? Doesn't a relative have to prove she's unable to work or is in school. I don't mean to be disrespectful. Maybe I'm missing something I need to know. LOL Sorry for the OT. CA was asked about her tax return in the Morgan depo and she said KC filed her own taxes.

See post above...if he fits the relative qualifications, you can claim him. Disclaimer...of course, I would speak to a tax professional.

 

[elementary]

I completely agree with your line of thinking, and while we are at it, if she had numerous text messages, as well as photos of herself with George, why did she choose THIS particular text to try to prove her credibility? Why not a more damaging text message, or better yet, one of the photos she claims she has in her phone?

It appears she almost tried to "tease" the media by giving them a peep show!

Perhaps she was asked not to show other texts. Perhaps she was embarrassed to show other texts. Perhaps she did not want to show "damaging" texts- why would they have to be "damaging" and how does that enhance her credibility by the way? At best, the text might show that she and George had some form of intimacy.

 

[gamom]

Example 3 says you CANNOT take the exemption for this.

Qualifying CHILD vs Qualifying RELATIVE...may not be able to take the child dependent but may be able to take the relative dependent.

 

[okiedokietoo]

Best part is when Bob flat out asks her if she thinks he (George) knows what happened and she shakes her head no.

Seems pretty clear that if he actually said anything, he shared the theory of a confused father who was hoping his daughter was not actually a murderer.

There is no story here. Thanks for the link.

http://www.wesh.com/caseyanthony/22846841/detail.html
Woman Claiming Affair Discusses Anthony Case
River Cruz Claims Caylee's Death Was Accidental
POSTED: 5:05 pm EDT March 15, 2010
UPDATED: 5:49 pm EDT March 15, 2010

""Do you feel George knew, based on what he told you, what happened to Caylee?" WESH 2 News reporter Bob Kealing asked.

"I'm not going to tell you. I'm sorry," Cruz replied.

(above quoted from article)

 

[lauriej]

What struck me about the text is that the word "you" is spelled out. I mean, I am the world's biggest troglodyte when it comes to texting, and even I would write "I need u".

I do note that the day of the week shown is consistent with the text being sent in 2008 not 2009.

..yep...you made me do it:

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troglodyte[/ame]

 

[strach304]

I need someone to explain that to me. My son just turned 25 and is in law school. I was told I can no longer claim him because of his age. How would KC qualify if she is not a student or disabled? Doesn't a relative have to prove she's unable to work or is in school. I don't mean to be disrespectful. Maybe I'm missing something I need to know. LOL Sorry for the OT. CA was asked about her tax return in the Morgan depo and she said KC filed her own taxes.

Thank you. I recalled that Cindy had stated they did not claim Casey, she filed her own taxes. Couldn't remember which depo or interview she stated that.

 

[carole]

Qualifying CHILD vs Qualifying RELATIVE...may not be able to take the child dependent but may be able to take the relative dependent.

Since I've been through this with my two sons, I still say there is no way the Anthonys could have legally used Casey's exemption because she was older than 18 and not a full time student.

 

[logicalgirl]

If you listen to Brad carefully he questions the womens motives, and implies they are in it for some sort of profit, and are in some way scaming the National Enquirer. So no he does not actually deny the affair, but tries to leave the impression that he is denying the affair and claiming it is a scam. It's all verbal tricks and lawyer/political doublespeak.

Is it just me? I got the distinct impression when Brad was talking that he first heard of this from the National Enquirer because THEY called HIM to ask him about the affair.

 

[cyberborg]

Thank you. I recalled that Cindy had stated they did not claim Casey, she filed her own taxes. Couldn't remember which depo or interview she stated that.

.... or KC said she was doing her own taxes to maintain secrecy but did not need to file, unless theft is counted as taxable income?

 

[LolaMoon08]

I just find it interesting, that although she claims "There's nothing I want to cash in on." She nonetheless kept a single text message for over a year that says "Just thinking about you! I need you in my life."

Some affair, even if true it sounds like it was a text sent long after they had stopped seeing each other.

And IMO Cindy is better looking anyways ;-)

I was thinking the exact same thing! Why save text messages from over a year ago? Who does that? People who would want to use it against that person later on, if needed.

 

[impatientredhead]

If they claimed KC on their taxes that tells me they knew she was not working and that she never had or paid for a nanny.

I just pulled the worksheet for earned income tax credit for 2007. For Cindy to have taken that credit her and George's combined income including unemployment would have had to have been less that 35k.

If it was under 35k (and I doubt that personally) they could not claim Casey since she was not a full time student. If they earned more than 35k they couldn't claim Caylee for the EITC, but Casey could even if she didn't have an declarable income.

If Casey's gross income was less than 3,600 they could claim her as a dependant, but they would get more money back overall by Casey filing on her own to take the EITC.

irs.gov has all the worksheets and rules.

 

[lauriej]

I agree 100%. I've been posting the same thing since this story broke. The affair is not important, except to verify that the # GA called RC on was GA's bat phone.

............i agree as well------partially.

..affair-----whatever----they are both consenting adults. ( but, throw in morals, ethics, a dead baby-----...)

..what MATTERS is----according to "the mistress" ( granted, we haven't seen PROOF of this yet) but she says------"george told her that caylee's death was an accident-----that snowballed out of control".

..so----she now acknowledges the affair began 'around' thanksgiving 2008'---WHEN did he tell her this "snowball effect" story?

..if, PRIOR to december 11.2008, when caylee's body was found---------it's a HUGE deal.

..because if he KNEW, PRE dec. 11th that ( she was dead----due to this accident) and yet CONTINUED to solicit donations for the "help find caylee ALIVE fund" ( which he, and cindy both did right up until the second she was found)--------that's fraud.

 

[RR0004]

I was thinking the exact same thing! Why save text messages from over a year ago? Who does that? People who would want to use it against that person later on, if needed.

...or just proof that something really did exist. The "getting stood up 2x" reason the affair ended could mean that she was just plain left. She may be clueless as to why she was being left...I could see her holding onto the message.

 

[logicalgirl]

What struck me about the text is that the word "you" is spelled out. I mean, I am the world's biggest troglodyte when it comes to texting, and even I would write "I need u". I suppose this could be indicative of an older gent who doesn't send many texts and writes out everything like "old-fashioned" (!) email.

I do note that the day of the week shown is consistent with the text being sent in 2008 not 2009.

Hey! LOL? Older gent who isn't used to texting? I always spell you in the u of text - because I interview people all day long who don't seem to understand the "written" word is different from the "text word". Some of the worst spelling I've ever seen has come from people who text or tweet constantly!

Oh yes, did I mention I am NOT an "older gent" LOL

 

[gamom]

Since I've been through this with my two sons, I still say there is no way the Anthonys could have legally used Casey's exemption because she was older than 18 and not a full time student.

taken from IRS.GOV http://www.irs.gov/publications/p501/ar02.html#en_US_publink1000220939

Example 3.

Your son lives with you but is not your qualifying child because he is 30 years old and does not meet the age test. He may be your qualifying relative if the gross income test and the support test are met.

Gross Income Test

To meet this test, a person's gross income for the year must be less than $3,650.

Support Test (To Be a Qualifying Relative)

To meet this test, you generally must provide more than half of a person's total support during the calendar year.

If these two items are met, The A's could have claimed KC. It seems though KC continued the lie and told them she filed her own return. I would be curious to know if she really did or not. But I guess it does not matter, we already know she lied about working.

 

[Marigold]

Regarding the tax question:

Perhaps instead of posting back and forth about it, someone may want to call the IRS in the morning and then let us know what they learned:

Telephone Assistance for Individuals:
Toll-Free, 1-800-829-1040
Hours of Operation: Monday – Friday, 7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. your local time

http://www.irs.gov/help/article/0,,id=96730,00.html