In Retrospect-Kronk Believes He Saw Skull In August

[Imbackon]

Wudge,
I haven't read thru the entire thread yet, but just wanted to comment on something you wrote;
don't know what to make of Kronk and his absurd story. To me, the circumstances surrounding Kronk's alleged initial discovery of Caylee's remains in August are similar to the circumstances surrounding Caylee's death; i.e., I don't know what the truth is and, other than Casey and Kronk and perhaps a Kronk informant, I don't think anyone else knows anymore about what happened (in either situation) than I do.

You realize of course what you said above right?
Face it, EVEN YOU THINK KC is guilty, you just don't think she should be FOUND GUILTY in a court of law!
You sure slipped on that banana LOL

 

[Wudge]

Wudge,
I haven't read thru the entire thread yet, but just wanted to comment on something you wrote;
don't know what to make of Kronk and his absurd story. To me, the circumstances surrounding Kronk's alleged initial discovery of Caylee's remains in August are similar to the circumstances surrounding Caylee's death; i.e., I don't know what the truth is and, other than Casey and Kronk and perhaps a Kronk informant, I don't think anyone else knows anymore about what happened (in either situation) than I do.

You realize of course what you said above right?
Face it, EVEN YOU THINK KC is guilty, you just don't think she should be FOUND GUILTY in a court of law!
You sure slipped on that banana LOL

No. I have often said the following: Casey might have killed or murdered Caylee; Casey might not have killed or murdered Caylee. I don't hold that anyone killed or murdered Caylee. Though that might not be true.

 

[Just Jayla]

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.

I absolutely agree with your analysis-But I wonder if KC had Caylee in the trunk during the entirety of the 2.6 days-I put my thoughts on this in the shovel thread, but I believe KC may have put Caylee in the sandbox, I believe she had to drive TL somewhere (have to go back to that thread to remember discussion details)...for a brief period of time, then borrowed the shovel to remove soiled sand. There was an empty bag of playground sand at the remains site per OCSO evidence list.

 

[Just Jayla]

No. I have often said the following: Casey might have killed or murdered Caylee; Casey might not have killed or murdered Caylee. I don't hold that anyone killed or murdered Caylee. Though that might not be true.

Just to be precise, do you believe neglecting a child while she gets into something deadly is tantamount to "killing" or homicide?
Sorry, OT for the Kronk thread, but trying to follow your thought process in my own head and I get lost easily/don't want to read something into your posts incorrectly!

thx

 

[Imbackon]

No. I have often said the following: Casey might have killed or murdered Caylee; Casey might not have killed or murdered Caylee. I don't hold that anyone killed or murdered Caylee. Though that might not be true.

How can you start your post with the answer NO?
You stated only KC would know the "circumstances" surrounding Caylees death.

NO WAY AROUND WHAT YOU SAID. Cat's out of the bag Wudge.

 

[Wudge]

Just to be precise, do you believe neglecting a child while she gets into something deadly is tantamount to "killing" or homicide?
Sorry, OT for the Kronk thread, but trying to follow your thought process in my own head and I get lost easily/don't want to read something into your posts incorrectly!

thx

My answer is that would depend on the circumstances.

If you are considering the State's aggravated child abuse charge and related manslaughter charge, my assessment based on the evidence we know of is that the jury would have to speculate (guess) to conclude either of those charges were true.

 

[Wudge]

How can you start your post with the answer NO?
You stated only KC would know the "circumstances" surrounding Caylees death.

NO WAY AROUND WHAT YOU SAID. Cat's out of the bag Wudge.

No. Casey might know the circumstances surrounding Caylee's death, but that would not necessarily mean that she either killed or murdered her.

HTH

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

Kronk was honest enough that when he applied for his job with Orange County, way before this case happened, he informed them about the alleged kidnapping incident - even though it had been expunged from his record and likely would never have come up.

That alone tells me a little bit about his character. You may have your suspicions about him, Wudge, but I believe that those suspicions are unfounded. And when the defense tries to discredit him - THEY are the ones that will look like fools, it will backfire on them. IMO

.

I don't think the defense will have to try to discredit him, I think his statements to the police have already done that.
In his first 911 call he said there is a gray bag, a little further up there is something white.
In his second 911 call he said there is a gray, vinyl like bag, like a pool cover, there was something round and white underneath it.
Ok so we have a gray bag with something round and white underneath it.

In the December 11th OCSO statement he said BLACK plastic bag, he pulled bag with meter stick, twice. Bag opened and a small human skull dropped out.

OK so we have a Black plastic bag (not a gray vinyl like, like a pool cover) that he pulled twice with his meter stick, bag opened and skull dropped out(not something round and white underneath).

In RK interview #1 he said I saw something protruding out of the water, it looked like the top of a human skull.

Ok, so how can we have something that looked like a human skull protruding out of the water IF he was telling the truth in the second 911 call and something round and white was UNDERNEATH the gray bag? AND OR how can something that looked like the top of a human skull be protruding out of the water IF as stated in his OCSO statement he had to pull on the black bag with his meter stick to get the black bag to open so the human skull could drop out?

 

[Just Jayla]

My answer is that would depend on the circumstances.

If you are considering the State's aggravated child abuse charge and related manslaughter charge, my assessment based on the evidence we know of is that the jury would have to speculate (guess) to conclude either of those charges were true.

No, not at all-I mean negligent homicide, not aggravated-Aggravated would get into an area of abuse, which does not seem to be what you are addressing....

I'm mentally exploring your proposition regarding proof, that's all, not confronting your picture, just clarifying.

 

[Imbackon]

No. Casey might know the circumstances surrounding Caylee's death, but that would not necessarily mean that she either killed or murdered her.

HTH

I notice you use the word 'MIGHT' now. That is not what you said, there was no might mentioned in your original statement.

So KC might only be an accessory to her daughters murder instead.


I just thought it was obvious that YOU THINK KC IS GUILTY, and that was brought up on THIS THREAD so I called you on it, here, but lets not screw up this thread more since this is the RK thread.

 

[Wudge]

I don't think the defense will have to try to discredit him, I think his statements to the police have already done that.
In his first 911 call he said there is a gray bag, a little further up there is something white.
In his second 911 call he said there is a gray, vinyl like bag, like a pool cover, there was something round and white underneath it.
Ok so we have a gray bag with something round and white underneath it.

In the December 11th OCSO statement he said BLACK plastic bag, he pulled bag with meter stick, twice. Bag opened and a small human skull dropped out.

OK so we have a Black plastic bag (not a gray vinyl like, like a pool cover) that he pulled twice with his meter stick, bag opened and skull dropped out(not something round and white underneath).

In RK interview #1 he said I saw something protruding out of the water, it looked like the top of a human skull.

Ok, so how can we have something that looked like a human skull protruding out of the water IF he was telling the truth in the second 911 call and something round and white was UNDERNEATH the gray bag? AND OR how can something that looked like the top of a human skull be protruding out of the water IF as stated in his OCSO statement he had to pull on the black bag with his meter stick to get the black bag to open so the human skull could drop out?

(Gold star)

What Kronk allegedly saw in August and allegedly discovered in December generated much confusion as to whether the laundry bag was inside the black plastics bags or whether the laundry bag was the outside bag.

 

[Wudge]

I notice you use the word 'MIGHT' now. That is not what you said, there was no might mentioned in your original statement.

So KC might only be an accessory to her daughters murder instead.


I just thought it was obvious that YOU THINK KC IS GUILTY, and that was brought up on THIS THREAD so I called you on it, here, but lets not screw up this thread more since this is the RK thread.

If Casey 'knew' the circumstances surrounding Caylee's death, that too would not necessarily mean that she either killed or murdered Caylee.

HTH

 

[wonders]

The art of most any great cross-examination is usually based on giving the witness no place to turn. I would start out by using Kronk's original story -- that he had his partner were simply looking for a shady area -- to pin him down as to how they first came to be in the area in August where Caylee's body was eventually discovered. And I would use multiple (basically repeat) questions to reinforce that that was the reason that they were there and absolutely no other reason. I would then have him pinned to that story.

After you have your witness pinned, a skilled cross examiner would almost assuredly use Chinese water torture questions (drip, drip, drip) to slowly and carefully show the absurdity of that likely being true or, still better, get him to add something (change his story) as Kronk feels the heat of the cross-examination exposing his story as being simply unbelievable.

As for keeping Mr. Kronk on the witness stand for several days, please understand that Mr. Kronk will be a spotlight cross. Any defense attorney who is worth anything would lust for the opportunity to slow cook Mr. Kronk by gently turning up the heat on him, degree by slow degree, until he's been turned into a thoroughly cooked pot roast.

Ya know if a person is telling the truth then no cross exam is going to be a Chinese Water Torture.
IMO the only spotlight I can see coming is on the clown act the defense will perform.

 

[sleutherontheside]

The art of most any great cross-examination is usually based on giving the witness no place to turn. I would start out by using Kronk's original story -- that he had his partner were simply looking for a shady area -- to pin him down as to how they first came to be in the area in August where Caylee's body was eventually discovered. And I would use multiple (basically repeat) questions to reinforce that that was the reason that they were there and absolutely no other reason. I would then have him pinned to that story.

After you have your witness pinned, a skilled cross examiner would almost assuredly use Chinese water torture questions (drip, drip, drip) to slowly and carefully show the absurdity of that likely being true or, still better, get him to add something (change his story) as Kronk feels the heat of the cross-examination exposing his story as being simply unbelievable.

As for keeping Mr. Kronk on the witness stand for several days, please understand that Mr. Kronk will be a spotlight cross. Any defense attorney who is worth anything would lust for the opportunity to slow cook Mr. Kronk by gently turning up the heat on him, degree by slow degree, until he's been turned into a thoroughly cooked pot roast.

BUT, wise Wudge......would it not be plausible for RK to indicate during cross ,that contrary to any conspiracy theorists, as an Orlando resident he was captivated by the story....that his predetermined route as a meter reader placed him in that neighborhood, that his facination with the case and his own instincts told him that the neighborhood may be the dump site, that given the choice of a shade / potty break in that location or elsewhere, he chose Suburban, that his desire to remain annonymous was due in part to not wanting his boss to think he was conducting personal business on company time, that his witness to the abuse innocent parties were subject to was enough to want to remain in the shadows. Perhaps he really did KNOW back in August, but fear of being vilified in the media was his reason for not pushing the issue. One fact that can't be invalidated during cross is that he found her!

 

[Wudge]

BUT, wise Wudge......would it not be plausible for RK to indicate during cross ,that contrary to any conspiracy theorists, as an Orlando resident he was captivated by the story....that his predetermined route as a meter reader placed him in that neighborhood, that his facination with the case and his own instincts told him that the neighborhood may be the dump site, that given the choice of a shade / potty break in that location or elsewhere, he chose Suburban, that his desire to remain annonymous was due in part to not wanting his boss to think he was conducting personal business on company time, that his witness to the abuse innocent parties were subject to was enough to want to remain in the shadows. Perhaps he really did KNOW back in August, but fear of being vilified in the media was his reason for not pushing the issue. One fact that can't be invalidated during cross is that he found her!

Sure, Kronk could attempt to change his past statements (LE, news shows etc.), but changing his story on the witness stand would suit Casey's defense team just fine, for it would go to his credibility and the credibility that where Kronk found Caylee's body in December was indeed where it was in August.

He already has numerous things that he needs to reconcile. The more he gives his cross-examiner to work with, the longer and tougher his cross is going to be.

 

[static]

JMO, the jury is not going to give a rat's a$$ about Kronk's story when they see the photos of the remains with the duct tape across the mouth. That is going to speak volumes, and put the focus on where it should rightly be. Again, JMO

 

[sleutherontheside]

Sure, Kronk could attempt to change his past statements (LE, news shows etc.), but changing his story on the witness stand would suit Casey's defense team just fine, for it would go to his credibility and the credibility that where Kronk found Caylee's body in December was indeed where it was in August.

He already has numerous things that he needs to reconcile. The more he gives his cross-eaminer to work with, the longer and tougher his cross is going to be.

ITA.......an aside......have you been to the site? I have family in Orlando and actually visited the site when I was in town. It was so overgrown and dank and that was 7 months after she was found. Garbage and such was visible from the road at that time but without getting out would not be identifiable. NOW....while some will argue that she could not have been there at that time or else she would have been located, we must remember that standing water would have varied from week to week and the sighting of something "white" is entirely possible knowing now about the laundry bag. My personal thoughts on Kronk.....He never should have given any interviews to media, he should have been more descriptive in his calls about the location, he should have persisted early on. For whatever reason.....it took a while. Perhaps he was afraid to come forward. The night I drove by, I was followed by none other than the Milsteads. I worried that my tag would be in some statement somewhere. That was 7 months later. What's up with that?

 

[suepitzl]

In your opinion, do you think a reasonable person would think it a coincidence that a blanket belonging to caylee was found with her remains and said blanket was known to have existed in the A home where KC and Caylee both resided, then went missing? A coincidence that a whitney brand laundry bag held caylee's remains and the same type of laundry bag is/was used in the A home? A coincidence that Caylee was "missing for 31 days" while the car she was last seen in reeked of decomposition from a human body? A coincidence that a head hair matching caylee's showed signs of decomposition? A coincidence that none of the A's or KC herself never saved a text message, email message, voice mail message, had an address or a phone # from the supposed nanny, who KC stated was who she left her daughter with?
A coincidence that none of KC's friends ever saw an alive caylee after June 16th? A coincidence that a rare brand of Henkel duct tape was found with the remains and also on gas cans used in the A home? A coincidence that the roll of tape has never been found? A coincidence that KC spoke of dead animals plastered to the engine of the car, when no such animal residue was ever found? A coincidence that when KC had the opportunity, while out of jail, she never looked for her daughter? A coincidence that when caylee was "missing" for 31 days, she never mentioned it to anyone?:waitasec::waitasec:

 

[cecybeans]

BUT, wise Wudge......would it not be plausible for RK to indicate during cross ,that contrary to any conspiracy theorists, as an Orlando resident he was captivated by the story....that his predetermined route as a meter reader placed him in that neighborhood, that his facination with the case and his own instincts told him that the neighborhood may be the dump site, that given the choice of a shade / potty break in that location or elsewhere, he chose Suburban, that his desire to remain annonymous was due in part to not wanting his boss to think he was conducting personal business on company time, that his witness to the abuse innocent parties were subject to was enough to want to remain in the shadows. Perhaps he really did KNOW back in August, but fear of being vilified in the media was his reason for not pushing the issue. One fact that can't be invalidated during cross is that he found her!

He seemed very ambivalent in his 911 call/s and expressed reluctance to be one to positively say it could be Caylee Anthony, IIRC. I got the feeling he wanted to do the right thing but was nervous about the inevitable sh**storm it would bring down. He sure wasn't wrong. I don't think he would mind being thoroughly vetted by LE, but being demonized in the media (where have I heard that line?) for coming forward with information that could help solve a case was probably something he did not expect.

 

[RR0004]

As regards providing evidence that proves the necessary element of premeditation, I have yet to hear a bug testify.

If I'm not mistaken, I think this is referring to any claim the defense may make that Kronk could have conceivably put Caylee there months after the fact that she went missing...when it would have been "impossible" for Casey to have done it.