In Retrospect-Kronk Believes He Saw Skull In August

[BeanE]

Wrong. Considering an accident to be an option is not speculation, because it is an option.

HTH

Even though the defense (LKB specifically on 48 hours recently) says Caylee was killed by a 'stranger'? The jury can still decide Caylee's death was an accident?

TIA

 

[cecybeans]

Believe as you will then.

As for Kronk, perjury would aid Casey. What did he know? When did he know it, and from whom did he receive information?

I'd say the concept of perjury is like mother's milk to KC. Literally.

 

[Bee Charmer]

Jurors are free to do it on their own. A jury is not required to decide amongst but two options; i.e., the State's claim (and charge) or the case-in-chief of the defense.

HTH

I think most jurors take their oaths seriously and will base their verdict on facts presented at trial.

Let's see this defense present any fact that Caylee died as the result of an accident.

 

[BuffaloPI]

Another life ruined by KC, imo. :sick:

 

[lizzysf]

After harping in many prior posts about motive being about plotting for financial gain causing him to wait...I think I got it wrong. Maybe Kronk was afraid to be the one who found her for it would put him under the microscope for either suspicion, or more likely that some personal history or issues may be exposed that he wants kept secret. (more than child support issues)
He knew the body was there in August...he makes an anonymous call.
How does one think back and go..hmmm..you know, now that I think about it..I think I did see a skull there in August.. huh? You really think that statement makes any sense? A human skull.. either he saw it or didn't. I say he did see it. Who retrospectively thinks they saw a human skull? I know the given explanation for that, which I just can't buy.

 

[Wudge]

I think most jurors take their oaths seriously and will base their verdict on facts presented at trial.

Let's see this defense present any fact that Caylee died as the result of an accident.

I also think 'most' jurors take their oaths seriously, but my experience in high-profile trials is that many jurors have not and/or have knowingly looked past incredibly strong exculpatory or exonerating evidence that equated to an reasonable doubt in a massive way. Simply put, high-profile trials warp minds.

As regards Casey's defense team presenting facts that support Caylee having died from an accident, it's not important that they do so. What's important is for prosecutors to present highly reliable inculpatory evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt any of their top three charges (murder one, aggravated child abuse, manslaughter). Amongst the evidence that we know of, such inculpatory evidence does not exist.

 

[ZsaZsa]

I have a abiding admiration and respect for Mr. Miller, and his teams go in to some dangerous , ugly conditions to look for the children they are searching for. If TES says they aborted the search because of the conditions, I would take that to the bank. I think the good people of the jury will too.

The more I think about it , the more unsettling Kronk getting fired is. I think it is going to be reversed, absolutely, but wow......now we get a glimpse of why people don't come forward some times even when they witness a crime, the whole world gets turned on its head and they get treated poorly. He tried to remain private, remember?

I'm sure the searcher whose ATV was completely submerged back there will also vouch for Mr Miller.

 

[Wudge]

After harping in many prior posts about motive being about plotting for financial gain causing him to wait...I think I got it wrong. Maybe Kronk was afraid to be the one who found her for it would put him under the microscope for either suspicion, or more likely that some personal history or issues may be exposed that he wants kept secret. (more than child support issues)
He knew the body was there in August...he makes an anonymous call.
How does one think back and go..hmmm..you know, now that I think about it..I think I did see a skull there in August.. huh? You really think that statement makes any sense? A human skull.. either he saw it or didn't. I say he did see it. Who retrospectively thinks they saw a human skull? I know the given explanation for that, which I just can't buy.

Exactly.

Allegedly Kronk decided to take a picture of a dead rattlesnake in August. Yet, he also decided not to take a picture of the bag or skull or whatever it was that he claims he (and only he) saw -- my recollection is that back in August, Kronk and another utility worker were in the vehicle that allegedly they drove to seek shade.

His whole story equates to 'get a grip'. It's simply not believable.

 

[ZsaZsa]

I also think 'most' jurors take their oaths seriously, but my experience in high-profile trials is that many jurors have not and/or have knowingly looked past incredibly strong exculpatory or exonerating evidence that equated to an reasonable doubt in a massive way. Simply put, high-profile trials warp minds.

As regards Casey's defense team presenting facts that support Caylee having died from an accident, it's not important that they do so. What's important is for prosecutors to present highly reliable inculpatory evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt any of their top three charges (murder one, aggravated child abuse, manslaughter). Amongst the evidence that we know of, such inculpatory evidence does not exist.

I am of the opinion that 'most' juries are made up of people who can use common sense, are not easily swayed by spin from high priced celebrity lawyers and are anything but warped in their thinking and decision making.
They are all assembled there with the common goal of bringing justice to Caylee.

 

[Reality Orlando]

Just to clear up a minute detail....

Thousands of people did not search that area. That portion of Suburban dead ends into a school, so it is not heavily traveled. Search groups consisted of groups of 20 or less. Not every person in a group goes over the same area, they spread out. Known non-TES searchers were in groups of 1, 2 or 3. People going to the A's house would not intentionally go by this area.
Portions of the area were underwater during August and September.

If we were discussing Jay Blanchard Park, you might get closer to the 'thousands' number.

I live and work in the area and stopped by the "command post" TES had set up off Semoran Blvd. to drop off supplies. I was talking to one of the TES team who said they were disappointed by the small number of folks who actually came out to search those first couple days and I told them I thought it was because many areas were flooded due to Tropical Storm Fay that had passed through that week. Every low lying area I saw was totally under water. Many homes where evacuated in surrounding areas due to flooding. Florida is a very low lying state geographically and flooding is often a problem down here.

Just type "Tropical Storm Fay" into Google search and go to images. I think at that point it will be pretty obvious from those pics at how bad the water situation was at that time and for quite a while afterwards.

Even before that, we had a lot of rain and I can only imagine that area would have been under water most of the time.

 

[lizzysf]

Exactly.

Allegedly Kronk decided to take a picture of a dead rattlesnake in August. Yet, he also decided not to take a picture of the bag or skull or whatever it was that he claims he (and only he) saw -- my recollection is that back in August, Kronk and another utility worker were in the vehicle that allegedly they drove to seek shade.

His whole story equates to 'get a grip'. It's simply not believable.

Not to say that he did anything illegal...just stupid. The bad karma in all this is that his given wobbly storyline, has only put him even further under the microscope than he ever would have been under, had he just firmly followed through in August when he found the body.

 

[Wudge]

I am of the opinion that 'most' juries are made up of people who can use common sense, are not easily swayed by spin from high priced celebrity lawyers and are anything but warped in their thinking and decision making.
They are all assembled there with the common goal of bringing justice to Caylee.

I'm fine with bringing justice to a case via a 'guilty as charged' verdict as long as prosecutors present highly reliable inculpatory evidence that proves their charges beyond a reasonable doubt. However, based on what we know, such evidence is lacking in this case.

 

[The World According]

I'm fine with bringing justice to a case via a 'guilty as charged' verdict as long as prosecutors present highly reliable inculpatory evidence that proves their charges beyond a reasonable doubt. However, based on what we know, such evidence is lacking in this case.

Scott Peterson was convicted on A LOT LESS! And even OJ finally got his, justice will prevail, don't worry.

 

[cecybeans]

I'm fine with bringing justice to a case via a 'guilty as charged' verdict as long as prosecutors present highly reliable inculpatory evidence that proves their charges beyond a reasonable doubt. However, based on what we know, such evidence is lacking in this case.

We love to read your comments and hear your point of view, but would appreciate the etiquette of qualifiers, like imo or jmho when repeating declarative statements you list as fact, particularly when they go against the consensus. I know that your legal experience would have you avoid existential fallacies and hypostatization when constructing arguments as well. TIA.

 

[Wudge]

Scott Peterson was convicted on A LOT LESS! And even OJ finally got his, justice will prevail, don't worry.

I agree.

In June of this year, Judge Gough surprised everyone in an Ohio courtroom by reversing the convictions of both Nancy Smith and Joseph Allen by declaring the evidence was insufficient to support the sexual abuse charges and their convictions back in 1994. They had held slot #4 on my top 20 list of likely wrongful convictions. With the #4 slot vacated, I shuffled any list upwards and, accordingy, Scott Peterson now holds the #6 slot on my list of likely wrongful convictions.

I eventually expect the Ninth Circuit Court to vacate his sentence and remand the case back to California or to find the evidence is insufficient to support the jury's guilty verdict, attach jeopardy and set him free.

I would not at all be surprised if Casey Anthony eventually ended up on my list of likely wrongful convictions.

 

[lizzysf]

I agree.

In June of this year, Judge Gough surprised everyone in an Ohio courtroom by reversing the convictions of both Nancy Smith and Joseph Allen by declaring the evidence was insufficient to support the sexual abuse charges and their convictions back in 1994. They had held slot #4 on my top 20 list of likely wrongful convictions. With the #4 slot vacated, I shuffled any list upwards and, accordingy, Scott Peterson now holds the #6 slot on my list of likely wrongful convictions.

I eventually expect the Ninth Circuit Court to vacate his sentence and remand the case back to California or to find the evidence is insufficient to support the jury's guilty verdict, attach jeopardy and set him free.

I would not at all be surprised if Casey Anthony eventually ended up on my list of likely wrongful convictions.

SP and CA innocent? Not a chance. No way, no how.

 

[Wudge]

We love to read your comments and hear your point of view, but would appreciate the etiquette of qualifiers, like imo or jmho when repeating declarative statements you list as fact, particularly when they go against the consensus. I know that your legal experience would have you avoid existential fallacies and hypostatization when constructing arguments as well. TIA.

Cecybeans, based on the evidence that we know of all that is needed is to cite the highly reliable evidence and the attendant highly reliable premise or premises that force a conclusion that Casey committed a premeditated murder to the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[wonders]

After harping in many prior posts about motive being about plotting for financial gain causing him to wait...I think I got it wrong. Maybe Kronk was afraid to be the one who found her for it would put him under the microscope for either suspicion, or more likely that some personal history or issues may be exposed that he wants kept secret. (more than child support issues)
He knew the body was there in August...he makes an anonymous call.
How does one think back and go..hmmm..you know, now that I think about it..I think I did see a skull there in August.. huh? You really think that statement makes any sense? A human skull.. either he saw it or didn't. I say he did see it. Who retrospectively thinks they saw a human skull? I know the given explanation for that, which I just can't buy.

I think if a person had Caylee on their mind all the time when the search was on for her I think it is very possible to think you see a skull. I think what RK saw in August was a portion of the laundry bag and thought it was a skull. I truely believe RK's intentions were good. I've said this before, if someone had checked it out like they should have done in August even if they had to wear waist high waders they may have found Caylee then. RK used that area to relieve himself. I just don't understand why we want to bash him around.

 

[AZlawyer]

I agree.

In June of this year, Judge Gough surprised everyone in an Ohio courtroom by reversing the convictions of both Nancy Smith and Joseph Allen by declaring the evidence was insufficient to support the sexual abuse charges and their convictions back in 1994. They had held slot #4 on my top 20 list of likely wrongful convictions. With the #4 slot vacated, I shuffled any list upwards and, accordingy, Scott Peterson now holds the #6 slot on my list of likely wrongful convictions.

I eventually expect the Ninth Circuit Court to vacate his sentence and remand the case back to California or to find the evidence is insufficient to support the jury's guilty verdict, attach jeopardy and set him free.

I would not at all be surprised if Casey Anthony eventually ended up on my list of likely wrongful convictions.

OK, so at least you agree she's likely to be convicted. Sorry, couldn't resist. But I really would like to see your list. Do you have a blog or something where you keep this list?

Wudge, assuming that the defense picks Kronk as one of their Defense Bus Speed Bumps (and why wouldn't they? the more the merrier), do you think they will actually attempt to suggest he was involved in the kidnapping/murder/taping/dumping of Caylee? Considering that the body really did show up in December where he claimed he thought he saw it in August, together with plant evidence, etc. showing it was present there for at least 4 months, it seems to me that there is little point in trying to suggest that he DIDN'T see the body there in August (except, of course, random confusion of the jury, which certainly can be successful). A better (although still IMO rather fantastical) storyline would be that Caylee really was killed by Someone Else but not until August, then was dumped near her home with evidence intended to set up Casey, and Kronk was employed to play the Concerned Citizen part to make sure the police found the body (which is why he kept calling--in this fantasy land, of course, Kronk wouldn't get paid until his calls worked).

If the defense could get the jury to buy this theory (and also to dismiss the hair in the trunk and the decomp smell as "junk science") (and also to accept that Casey's partying and IM'ing her friends that she was happier than she had been in a long time was just "ugly coping" or fabulous acting pursuant to The Zanny Script) they just might win this one.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

Cecybeans, based on the evidence that we know of all that is needed is to cite the highly reliable evidence and the attendant highly reliable premise or premises that force a conclusion that Casey committed a premeditated murder to the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

So, based on the evidence that we know of ( police, FBI documents, Police photos, police interviews, depositions etc.) you believe there isnt enough in said evidence that we know of, that would support a conclusion that casey committed a premeditated murder?
In my opinion, based on the evidence we know of that has been released thus far, if I were a juror on this case, I would come back with a verdict of not guilty. Why? Simple I have reasonable doubt.