Point taken. I respectfully suggest the title of this thread be changed.
The title of the thread came from the title of the 'News report"......& it's only quoting a 'source'........
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Point taken. I respectfully suggest the title of this thread be changed.
I don't mean to get off topic here, I just...I wish this that ONE THING, just one thing in this case could be straightforward and not have 574938 sides and suspicious circumstances towards it. It really, really is like riding a roller coaster. I haven't even followed the case for the last three weeks really, (other than quick visits to news sites) I'm so worn out from it.
Now, back on topic...
I don't want to sound uh, anti-Kronk, or whatever, and I certainly am not trying to place blame or find fault, but if I thought I saw a skull in August I would not be appeased until I dragged an officer down there, literally by my side. I mean there would be just NO shutting me up (as my lovely fiancee can attest ) until I got my way, and had someone down there WITH me.
I just do find it odd, I guess. I just don't understand
The title of the thread came from the title of the 'News report"......& it's only quoting a 'source'........
I do not want this to come off as sarcastic just letting you know up front.
But he did do exactly what you say you would have done!!, it is the officer that blew him off an said there was nothing there and that it was trash.
I 100% agree.
There is no story here. He is basically saying, in hindsight, looking back, etc., that he now believes it he saw the skull..geez I already get that from 911 call and the something white comment. It was even discussed here somewhere IIRC already that the something white he saw might have been the skull.
I went down -- well (INAUDIBLE) I went down, and behind one of the trees was a (DELETED) and it looked rather suspicious. I didn't touch anything. And then a little bit further up, you can tell where someone ran across it with a mower, but the weeds are still real high in that area. There's a fallen tree that it looks like someone had tried to cut on it at one point. But there was a white board hanging across the tree, and there was something round and white underneath of it. And I don't know what it is, but it just didn't look like something that should be there.
I do not want this to come off as sarcastic just letting you know up front.
But he did do exactly what you say you would have done!!, it is the officer that blew him off an said there was nothing there and that it was trash.
What can the defense say? I think they will really need to tread lightly on this particular subject. A witness can say after some thought what they really saw might be different from what they reported. Especially with a mitigating circumstance like high water levels. In the end, it was Caylee and Mr. Kronk did not put her there.
I do not know much about forensic science and body decomposition, but I wonder if the body would have decomposed enough so that Kronk would have seen a "skull" in August. Does that sound feasible?
He didn't say "I think I saw a skull " back then.
And I don't think the officer reported it as trash without checking it's content!If it's so then I will apologize and shame on him.
And my point in starting this thread was to call attention to the fact that this officer has a history of not following up on leads to an acceptable degree.
He is a three year veteran of the OCSO and has accumulated three complaints (including this one) for not following through.
I do not see that his story changed.
It is more like he is saying the something white in retrospect and looking back, he NOW believes it was the skull.
There is no story here. I do not see what there is to even pick a part from this statement.
That's a good spooky story, but the skull wouldn't be white and there was hair still attached.
The title of the thread came from the title of the 'News report"......& it's only quoting a 'source'........
I do not see that his story changed.
It is more like he is saying the something white in retrospect and looking back, he NOW believes it was the skull.
There is no story here. I do not see what there is to even pick a part from this statement.
Notice I said *IF*......this story is coming from a *source*....doesn't mean that source is really the MR.
The defense can't put KC on the stand, sure can't *find* any nanny.....
their only game plan will be to dis-credit all prosecution witnesses & evidence.