In Retrospect-Kronk Believes He Saw Skull In August

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
That's when you place a transcript of what the witness had previously said in front of him and ask him to read what he had previously said to the court. After he has done so, you then ask him: did that refresh your memory?

After about the third time that this takes place, my experience is that anytime you reach for a transcript, that forgetful witness might well suddenly blurt out something akin to: oh yes, I suddenly remember now.

(great things, those transcripts ... snicker)

I feel I can contribute something that may provoke consideration. I wouldn't automatically discount a statement because of variation (note I did not say discrepancy). When I was in college, a very good friend of mine was accused of date rape. I received a call from campus police the day after the "alleged incident" requesting that I come in for an interview. My name had been given as an alibi. So......the Cliffs notes version is this. I was at a frat party and I saw this friend. He was with a girl and they were very affectionate with one another. I remember commenting to HER that my friend was drunk and she'd have to give him a ride home because I didn't want "barf" in my car. I never saw them leave that night. While being questioned by campus police, I was asked when the last time was that I spoke to my friend. I answered honestly and said "last night". The officer then asked me if I was sure. I was so frazzled, nervous, confused, that I TOTALLY forgot that after the party he had called me briefly to ask me if I had seen his wallet and "how did he get home?". When the officer pressed the issue further, it clicked and I remembered. Was I truthful? YES! Did my story change? YES! Did I lie? NO! Sometimes things click. The brain is a mysterious thing.
 
I am going to keep posting this until I get answers from the defenders of the defense: What was the A's PI doing poking around in the same area "poking" through garbage bags? What was he doing there? Only the guilty know.

(chuckle) Like a bulldog on a soup bone.

I have no idea of what the PI will say; i.e., if he is required to testify. What has he claimed so far?
 
I understand what you are saying...but the throw Kronk under the bus is just as relevant as why the A's PI was there in the same place. And since I haven't heard anything relevant regarding that...I place as much stock in their defense as I do Big bird did it...if you know what i mean.
I am not throwing Kronk under the bus. if he was dishonest at all then he is throwing his own testimony under the bus. But in the big picture will it make a big difference? only if it places the location of the body under some suspicion that causes doubt to the prosecutions case. will it matter? don't know.

if he is being completely honest all will be good and it is a moot point.

Like I said, this is all just what Kronk may or may not mean to the defense or the prosecution; what kind of witness he will be and has no bearing on what some of us may think.
 
I feel I can contribute something that may provoke consideration. I wouldn't automatically discount a statement because of variation (note I did not say discrepancy). When I was in college, a very good friend of mine was accused of date rape. I received a call from campus police the day after the "alleged incident" requesting that I come in for an interview. My name had been given as an alibi. So......the Cliffs notes version is this. I was at a frat party and I saw this friend. He was with a girl and they were very affectionate with one another. I remember commenting to HER that my friend was drunk and she'd have to give him a ride home because I didn't want "barf" in my car. I never saw them leave that night. While being questioned by campus police, I was asked when the last time was that I spoke to my friend. I answered honestly and said "last night". The officer then asked me if I was sure. I was so frazzled, nervous, confused, that I TOTALLY forgot that after the party he had called me briefly to ask me if I had seen his wallet and "how did he get home?". When the officer pressed the issue further, it clicked and I remembered. Was I truthful? YES! Did my story change? YES! Did I lie? NO! Sometimes things click. The brain is a mysterious thing.

I could not agree more. We do not always remember all the facts immediately.

If you ever get questioned again, ask the officer to put all of their questions in writing and you'll get back to them.
 
(chuckle) Like a bulldog on a soup bone.

I have no idea of what the PI will say; i.e., if he is required to testify. What has he claimed so far?

I think Little Bitty's point is that if it looks hinky that a meter reader happened to be pointed to that spot, wouldn't it be hinky if anyone else was steered there as well?

Early on, DC intimated that the psychic dowser was a source, but that's a lot less credible to most folks than an interested party taking a whiz. DC's videotape indicates he was given very specific landmarks to look for - three pavers, black plastic bags, etc. So far nothing points to the fact that RK had advance notification, but it does point to the fact that DC did. So the presence of DC - who was given specific location, etc. does not contrast favorably with RK, who seems to have stumbled upon the remains naturally. If one is going to be suspicious of RK - someone not connected to the defense, they need to apply equal suspicion to DC, who definitely was connected.
 
Unless the Anthonys have been covering up clear and convincing evidence that Casey committed a premeditated murder, I just don't see that bearing fruit for prosecution.

My experience is that jurors will cut parents of defendants a ton of slack. Intuitively, jurors recognize the trauma done to innocent persons, and as much as many here seem to detest and enjoy vilifying the Anthonys, they are assuredly also victims.

In most cases you're correct. But the demeanor of the Anthony's will turn off almost any jury member, in an epic way. And I'm sorry to say most people with common sense will see that there isn't a single Anthony family member who is "innocent". No matter if you are a "grieving grandparent" there is no excuse possible for the Anthonys to have lied as much as they have to LE. I'm not talking a little white lies, but HUGE lies.

If there is one thing for certain there is only one victim in this case, and that's Caylee.
 
I am not throwing Kronk under the bus. if he was dishonest at all then he is throwing his own testimony under the bus. But in the big picture will it make a big difference? only if it places the location of the body under some suspicion that causes doubt to the prosecutions case. will it matter? don't know.

if he is being completely honest all will be good and it is a moot point.

Like I said, this is all just what Kronk may or may not mean to the defense or the prosecution; what kind of witness he will be and has no bearing on what some of us may think.

I have no idea of exactly how the defense intends to work Mr. Kronk to their advantage, however, I can see them using him to claim that Caylee's body must have been placed in that location after August. Of course, it would have been tough (impossible?) for Casey to do that.
 
CLIPPED FOR BREVITY:

Regarding Brini's question of why would Casey drive around for 2.6 days with Caylee decomposing in her car trunk if K or SOD is the perp, etc.... well, why would she drive around with Caylee decomposing in the trunk for 2.6 days if she herself is the murderer? If she had put her there, why leave her in there long enough to decompose?

I believe the answer to your question (underlined) lies in KC's previous behaviors related to "solving" her dilemmas.....as previously discussed, she lives in the moment.

She obviously figured out at some point that she was pregnant, yet neglected to plan (or share her news with anyone) until she was 7 months pregnant.

Pregnant = problem
What to do = Worry; Come Up with a Plan Tomorrow, Party Time
Tomorrow = Repeat Step 2
Seven Months Later = Gig is Up

She took Amy's checkbook and wrote checks
Fraud = Problem
What to Do (explanation) = Worry; Come Up with a Plan Tomorrow, Party time
Tomorrow = Repeat Step 2
Months Later = Gig is up (arrested)

Caylee is gone (murdered IMHO) = Problem
What to Do = Worry; Come Up with a Plan Tomorrow, Party Time
Tomorrow = Repeat Step 2
31 Days Later = Damn Mom!

I could go on and on with examples of incidents in her life...

I believe Caylee remained in that trunk because KC's spur of the moment plans for disposal weren't working and she had to put her body somewhere. So she hid her in the trunk until she could come up with some alternate, "no fail" plan, then her personality MO (listed above) came into play and Fusion and TL diverted her attention until the smell forced her to do something.
 
You know this entire thread is a lot of conjuncture. We're forgetting that we haven't seen one of the most important and telling evidence, the entomologist report. If the bugs and plant life prove without a doubt that Caylee was "dumped" 6 months before she was found all of this is moot. And the defense can try to impeach Kronk until the cows come home but it won't mean anything. Especially once the jury hears that DC was searching this place before she was found. It will point all arrows back to where it should be placed, Casey.
 
Too bad Mother Teresa didn't find Caylee. "Give the best you have, and it will never be enough. Give your best anyway."

At least we know George, Cindy and Lee will also be subjected to the same type of cross examinations. I think they'll be reminded of their transcribed statement a few times, as well. . .
 
I have no idea of exactly how the defense intends to work Mr. Kronk to their advantage, however, I can see them using him to claim that Caylee's body must have been placed in that location after August. Of course, it would have been tough (impossible?) for Casey to do that.

I would think the defense would have to draw that to its logical conclusion and try to infer that Kronk had access to the Anthony home and their duct tape (or anyone else they would try to implicate) and that KC had a good reason her trunk stunk like a dead body (and not the squirrel excuse).

I would imagine the state has entomologists and botanists on hand to indicate how long the remains were there. It should be relatively reasonable to prove the difference of two months, if the defense wants to argue that the remains were somehow placed there in August. But I think a jury will want the Full Monty and not some shoddy SODDI based on doubting the motives or veracity of a civilian that tried to recover Caylee's remains.

Frankly I think it's a can of worms that would point to something they would like to keep hidden. RK was respectful enough of a possible crime scene to refrain from touching things and called LE in immediately. DC's "search and destroy" methods point to someone who was called in to contaminate a crime scene and get rid of evidence. The fact that he was working for either the defense or the family at the time looks far more nefarious to me than a concerned citizen who may have tried to originally play down why he was looking for Caylee during his shift.
 
In most cases you're correct. But the demeanor of the Anthony's will turn off most any jury member, in an epic way. And I'm sorry to say most people with common sense will see that there isn't a single Anthony family member who is "innocent". No matter if you are a "grieving grandparent" there is no excuse possible for the Anthonys to have lied as much as they have to LE. I'm not talking a little white lies, but HUGE lies.

If there is one thing for certain there is only one victim in this case, and that's Caylee.


I agree that the slack jurors cut parents is reduced in high-profile cases -- a mob mentality can and has taken the whole family down, including the Mama bear.

On December 21, 1954, Dr. Sheppard was wrongfully convicted of murder in his first trial. The media had field day with the family and some jurors -- now full fledged media celebrities -- talked about how they did not believe a thing that any family member said on the witness stand.

On January 7th, 1955, Sam's Mother, Mrs. Sheppard, used a gun to take her own life. His will to live and fight now gone, Sam's Father passed away from cancer eleven days later.

FWIW
 
You know this entire thread is a lot of conjuncture. We're forgetting that we haven't seen one of the most important and telling evidence, the entomologist report. If the bugs and plant life prove without a doubt that Caylee was "dumped" 6 months before she was found all of this is moot. And the defense can try to impeach Kronk until the cows come home but it won't mean anything. Especially once the jury hears that DC was searching this place before she was found. It will point all arrows back to where it should be placed, Casey.

As regards providing evidence that proves the necessary element of premeditation, I have yet to hear a bug testify.
 
I got the distinct impression that he was actively searching for Caylee...unfortunately he was doing so on company time. I suppose he valued his job. Perhaps his version of events was a way to cover his a$$.

I was under the same impression, but guess I am still not understanding why some are looking at Kronk searching for and finding Caylee's body as suspicious.

My memory of the first six months after news of her "disappearance" there were MANY people who were looking for her in the Orlando area (as well as some who travelled in from other areas) whether on official "search days" or not.

It certainly doesn't seem to me that it was a "stretch of the mind" to consider the possibility that Caylee's body was in the neighborhood after KC dropped her little hint in the jail video of being sure Caylee was "close to home".

Heck, if I lived in Orlando, the thought might have occurred to me to look in wooded areas in their neighborhood should I find myself in that area. I, too, wanted Caylee found!

Just still confused :waitasec: as to why Kronk is so suspicious???
 
Where do you put KC in this whole fiasco? If what you've been saying holds up? -- that means lots of young mothers will just happen to "lose" the babies they don't want with no accountability. I don't get how you are getting past the non existent nanny, not reporting her daughter missing, lying to police and the dead body smell in the car, I could go on and on but won't. I just can't figure how you get to doubt. We know it was a dead body smell by the simple fact that her daughter turned up dead and several people testified that's what it was in their opinion. So by simple deduction = Caylee. Unless you have a theory about a different dead body in her trunk that I'm unaware of. Just so I understand you, are you saying you believe the smell wasn't from Caylee?

MOO

None of what you've written here provides evidence that Casey committed a premeditated murder. If you add all the evidence that Mr. Kronk brings to the State's party, there is still insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the State's murder one charge, and no conviction on the murder one charge, means no conviction for murder.

HTH
 
None of what you've written here provides evidence that Casey committed a premeditated murder. If you add all the evidence that Mr. Kronk brings to the State's party, there is still insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the State's murder one charge, and no conviction on the murder one charge, means no conviction for murder.

HTH

I was unaware our discussion of RK had anything to do with proving premeditation. That's an entirely different thread and many people have contributed there as to why they disagree with your opinion on whether the presently revealed evidence is sufficient.
 
I was unaware our discussion of RK had anything to do with proving premeditation. That's an entirely different thread and many people have contributed there as to why they disagree with your opinion on whether the presently revealed evidence is sufficient.

I agree. I added Kronk in my response only because I was trying to maintain some level of thread integrity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
107
Guests online
242
Total visitors
349

Forum statistics

Threads
609,270
Messages
18,251,600
Members
234,585
Latest member
Mocha55
Back
Top