In Retrospect-Kronk Believes He Saw Skull In August

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
The defense would imply the reason the officer didn't see it, and the searchers didn't see it, was because it wasn't there to see until later.
They need only to bring reasonable doubt. If the officer didn't see it, and searchers didn't see it, and the only one who did see it made questionable statements to the police, a jury may find reasonable doubt.


Yep....that's what the defense will try to say. THEN the State of Florida will remind the jury that the PI(s) hired by both JB and the A family were directed there as well. I think the jury can figure that one out. In light of KCs comments to Lee..."she's close", "at the T", "think of familiar places from childhhod"......it's a non issue.
 
RK had did exactly what everyone wanted. He found Caylee. You/they can put any kind of spin on, but that is the bottom line. This case is not any kind of compiracy or complex, simply KC caused Caylee's death and then threw her in the swamp. I only wish he would have had a competent officer when he first called, then there would have been enough evidence to put an end to this circus. IMO

You are correct, RK found Caylee. I also agree that a competent officer would have made a huge difference in the evidence, had the remains been found that day.
 
The defense would imply the reason the officer didn't see it, and the searchers didn't see it, was because it wasn't there to see until later.
They need only to bring reasonable doubt. If the officer didn't see it, and searchers didn't see it, and the only one who did see it made questionable statements to the police, a jury may find reasonable doubt.

There were roots of plants growing through the material in the bag and even Caylee's skull. I think there will be enough evidence in the reports by the botonists and entemologists to establish how long Caylee had been there.Add to that the last time Caylee was seen,the decomp in the trunk and when the car was abandoned and you have a pretty good time line for the jurors.
 
I have no idea what the search particulars truly were. I simply posted one of many links that refer to cadaver dog searches having taken place in the area where Caylee's remains were found. I'm more interested in just how far Caylee's remains really were from the road. If it was but 15 feet, that is a very short distance. And I would have trouble with Mr. Kronk seeing something at a short distance that no one else could see.

Moreover, I'm not positive, but I believe Mr. Kronk had a partner riding with him on the day in August when they were allegedly seeking shade and came to be in that area. If there was another person riding with Mr. Kronk that day, I expect to hear them testify as to what took place, what they remember seeing and what Mr. Kronk said to him.

I think where the confusion is is many times folks refer to the "wooded area near Suburban", but Wudge what area they were at was FURTHER DOWN, BY THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. Even Brad admitted, that one ABSOLUTELY, WITHOUT QUESTION could have missed something even one foot away , the vegetation was so thick. I think of Kronk's testimony like a jailhouse snitch, so what if he has ulterior motives, his testimony will be backed up by the plant evidence, so in the context of the entire puzzle I am ok with some to the jury not not embracing his story or motives. You don't always have priests for witnesses. Yes, his co-workers will be called to testify, even on the tapes that were released ( the comprehensive tapes that detail the chatter while he was on hold, the calls within the county supervisors, you can clearly hear the banter back and forth between Kronk and his co worker, saying things like I told you, no I told you what I saw was a skull.) His family already admitted and he has admitted he was interested in the case and thinking a lot about it and it had ran through his mind that would be a likely place to put the baby's body. So yes, I agree he was there not to urinate, only, but more out of curiosity. So what? If I lived there, I'd bet you dollars to donuts I likely would have been there looking too. My bottom line is the jury is going to find Tim Miller to be a modern day hero and once he testifies and uses his photos for an example, the entire Kronk matter is over. The child was under water, the evidence will show that, and there were plants growing through her tiny bones. The evidence will show that. That negates any attempt the defense is going to make to implicate Jesse, Amy, Kronk, Ricardo, the ever elusive Nanny putting her there after Casey went to jail. No one in America cares that mafia members were convicted on tax fraud rather then being found guilty of murder. Maybe I have been in Texas too long and the prairie justice has seeped in , but some times in life Wudge, the end justifies the means.
I'm OK with her being found guilty even if you do not believe the state should have charged the case the way they did. The good people on the grand jury obviously found he state credible. In fact, I think the good people of the jury are going to be wholly offended when it becomes apparent to them the lengths that have been went to to accuse innocent people like Jesse in this case and they are going to get turned off, big time, if Jose tries to shoot the messenger, Kronk. Scott Peterson had a stellar lawyer who tried the very same thing, blame everybody else under the sun and the actual quotes from the foreman and jury members included the words , "It was rather insulting to our intelligence, I mean c'mon, we weren't born yesterday! That made no sense, zero!"

Here is what Tim said, "Tim Miller, founder of Texas EquuSearch, a group that looks for missing people, said the area where the body was found was underwater when volunteers attempted to search it in August and November.

"When Caylee disappeared, Florida was in a drought," Miller said. "When we searched that area, a tropical storm had come through, and the water was too high."

More than 4,500 people participated in searches, Miller said.

Miller said he called off the search after a volunteer destroyed a four-wheeler in deep water.

The find gave Miller hope that Caylee will soon have a dignified burial.

"Caylee's one of those little cases that's touched the hearts of everybody and broken the hearts of everybody that's been involved at all," Miller said.
just my opinion as always
 

Attachments

  • PlantMaterial.jpg
    PlantMaterial.jpg
    1.8 KB · Views: 1
Just to refresh our memory!
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO2dF8C5p04"]YouTube - Where Caylee Anthony Rested[/ame]
 
The defense would imply the reason the officer didn't see it, and the searchers didn't see it, was because it wasn't there to see until later.
They need only to bring reasonable doubt. If the officer didn't see it, and searchers didn't see it, and the only one who did see it made questionable statements to the police, a jury may find reasonable doubt.

In order for them to reasonably make this argument wouldn't they have to assign a motive for RK to have drawn them there under false pretenses the two or three times before? And what, pray tell, could that be? What would he have had to gain by having them come out when nothing was there to be found?
 
In order for them to reasonably make this argument wouldn't they have to assign a motive for RK to have drawn them there under false pretenses the two or three times before? And what, pray tell, could that be? What would he have had to gain by having them come out when nothing was there to be found?

They reasonably could argue that he was simply mistaken.
 
As a juror I would not reasonably believe that. They would have to discredit RK alot more than that.

The defense could first go over all his statements to the police, which could bring reasonable doubt to him. Then bring out the fact that the officer did not see anything, and searchers did not see anything. Then they could reasonably question whether or not he was simply mistaken.
 
How wonderful and very illuminating to see it so close up, how helpful for the die hards, shall I name them? Just kidding, we do so enjoy the debates.

And keep in mind that video was shot July 31, 2009!! It's amazing to see how that vegetation has grown back after being totally picked clean in an effort to find every piece of Caylee (hard to type that) that was left after decomposition, scavengers and a hurricane!
If the universe (insert your particular belief here) had wanted DC to find Caylee he would have. Evidently such was not the case!! :innocent: IMO
 
The defense could first go over all his statements to the police, which could bring reasonable doubt to him. Then bring out the fact that the officer did not see anything, and searchers did not see anything. Then they could reasonably question whether or not he was simply mistaken.

This is where I have a problem. Knowing what has been put out there so far I fault the officer, not RK. If I were sitting on the jury and presented this by the defense that would be my "reasonable" conclusion, the officer was a lazy a$$
 
I can't help but remember about the A's refusal to provide a personal item with scent to Tim. I can't help but remember the comment made to LP about "pre-conceived notions". I can't help but remember the "sightings and tips" that were made directly to the A family instead of LE. I can't help but remember the day GA staged a "command center scouting trip" and attempted to subliminally suggest that the area around MCO (airport) was key. I can't help but remember the disrespect that CA showed toward TES and Tim Miller. I can't help but remember the fact that the PIs were poking around in that area upon the pretense that a psychic had a feeling. I can't help but remember CA's departure from media right after November 15th. And...
I can't help but wonder what guilt CA carries around daily knowing that she sold out her "angel" in an effort to save the "devil".
 
Still looking for Tim M quotes.

Here's what Tim's representative, NeJame, had to say about it:

"At a news conference on Thursday, Mark NeJame, who is representing Miller, released photos, which he claimed show why the group called off a search of the area where Caylee's remains were later located.

The photos were taken from a helicopter in November, one month before Caylee's body was found in the wooded area of Suburban Drive near the Anthony family home.

NeJame said the photos show "a green wall of foliage" which could have easily prevented a searcher from finding Caylee's body. NeJame stepped down as the Anthony family's attorney in October 2008.

"One could literally be within inches of an item and be blocked due to the thick and massive underbrush and foliage," NeJame said in a letter sent to the state attorney's office and Anthony's defense team.

NeJame also said the photos show "standing water throughout the area."

"When the search was conducted, the areas where Caylee's remains were found were still in water, which is why the search in that specific place was called off by Tim Miller," Nejame's letter said."

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/20489614/detail.html
 
There were roots of plants growing through the material in the bag and even Caylee's skull. I think there will be enough evidence in the reports by the botonists and entemologists to establish how long Caylee had been there.Add to that the last time Caylee was seen,the decomp in the trunk and when the car was abandoned and you have a pretty good time line for the jurors.

If the botonists and entemologists have presented accepted evidence that the remains had been in the spot they were found in for at least 4 months, then the defense will not be able to question along these lines. Are these in the evidence docs somewhere, I have not seen them?
 
They reasonably could argue that he was simply mistaken.

He wasn't mistaken. They have the body. The police were in error. The salient point is that the body was there. It is more logical and reasonable to believe the police officer was lazy and didn't look thoroughly ~ not that Kronk pretended to find the body, was proven wrong (on more than one occasion) and then on the third time, voila!! ~ a body appeared. Now, to me that is not reasonable.
 
I think where the confusion is is many times folks refer to the "wooded area near Suburban", but Wudge what area they were at was FURTHER DOWN, BY THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. Even Brad admitted, that one ABSOLUTELY, WITHOUT QUESTION could have missed something even one foot away , the vegetation was so thick. I think of Kronk's testimony like a jailhouse snitch, so what if he has ulterior motives, his testimony will be backed up by the plant evidence, so in the context of the entire puzzle I am ok with some to the jury not not embracing his story or motives. You don't always have priests for witnesses. Yes, his co-workers will be called to testify, even on the tapes that were released ( the comprehensive tapes that detail the chatter while he was on hold, the calls within the county supervisors, you can clearly hear the banter back and forth between Kronk and his co worker, saying things like I told you, no I told you what I saw was a skull.) His family already admitted and he has admitted he was interested in the case and thinking a lot about it and it had ran through his mind that would be a likely place to put the baby's body. So yes, I agree he was there not to urinate, only, but more out of curiosity. So what? If I lived there, I'd bet you dollars to donuts I likely would have been there looking too. My bottom line is the jury is going to find Tim Miller to be a modern day hero and once he testifies and uses his photos for an example, the entire Kronk matter is over. The child was under water, the evidence will show that, and there were plants growing through her tiny bones. The evidence will show that. That negates any attempt the defense is going to make to implicate Jesse, Amy, Kronk, Ricardo, the ever elusive Nanny putting her there after Casey went to jail. No one in America cares that mafia members were convicted on tax fraud rather then being found guilty of murder. Maybe I have been in Texas too long and the prairie justice has seeped in , but some times in life Wudge, the end justifies the means.
I'm OK with her being found guilty even if you do not believe the state should have charged the case the way they did. The good people on the grand jury obviously found he state credible. In fact, I think the good people of the jury are going to be wholly offended when it becomes apparent to them the lengths that have been went to to accuse innocent people like Jesse in this case and they are going to get turned off, big time, if Jose tries to shoot the messenger, Kronk. Scott Peterson had a stellar lawyer who tried the very same thing, blame everybody else under the sun and the actual quotes from the foreman and jury members included the words , "It was rather insulting to our intelligence, I mean c'mon, we weren't born yesterday! That made no sense, zero!"
just my opinion as always

(chuckle)

I certainly don't believe, as you say, that the Kronk matter is over. Mr. Kronk might have x-ray vision, or he might have been directed to the area. What Mr. Kronk might reveal on the witness stand is anybody's guess.

As regards the jury in this case, the defense will try to seat as many highly intelligent jurors as possible. The State's case is strong on emotion and extremely weak on inculpatory evidence. The defense will try to have the jurors focus on the lack of highly reliable inculpatory evidence that's required to prove there was a premeditated murder.

By my measure, your comparison of the evidence in this case to evidence in the Laci Peterson trial is fair. In that trial, the State's case was also emotion-based and lacked sufficient evidence to support the 1st degree murder charge, yet Scott was convicted and sits on death row.

To obtain the verdict it seeked, the State was aided when Judge Delucchi removed the original foreman, Dr. Gregory Jackson. Though smart, my call is that he lacked the courage to go against a verdict the community clearly craved.

Like Dr. Sheppard's 1st trial, Scott's trial also created celebrity jurors. I'm an old man now, but that still greatly offends my sensibilities. I hope I live to see an Appellate Court vacate the jury's verdict.

FWIW
 
(chuckle)

I certainly don't believe, as you say, that the Kronk matter is over. Mr. Kronk might have x-ray vision, or he might have been directed to the area. What Mr. Kronk might reveal on the witness stand is anybody's guess.

As regards the jury in this case, the defense will try to seat as many highly intelligent jurors as possible. The State's case is strong on emotion and extremely weak on inculpatory evidence. The defense will try to have the jurors focus on the lack of highly reliable inculpatory evidence that's required to prove there was a premeditated murder.

By my measure, your comparison of the evidence in this case to evidence in the Laci Peterson trial is fair. In that trial, the State's case was also emotion-based and lacked sufficient evidence to support the 1st degree murder charge, yet Scott was convicted and sits on death row.

To obtain the verdict it seeked, the State was aided when Judge Delucchi removed the original foreman, Dr. Gregory Jackson. Though smart, my call is that he lacked the courage to go against a verdict the community clearly craved.

Like Dr. Sheppard's 1st trial, Scott's trial also created celebrity jurors. I'm an old man now, but that still greatly offends my sensibilities. I hope I live to see an Appellate Court vacate the jury's verdict.

FWIW

Respectfully, why? Goodnight friend. We just disagree. Big time!!! That is the wonderful thing about being American. We can disagree. I notice you have a keen interest in the Sheppard case from many years ago and the defense quotes form that case in their COV request for the check fraud case. Is there any chance you kibitz for them? What does it matter at all about Kronk's motives for looking in the woods once you read the autopsy report that details there were plants growing through the baby's little skeleton? Have you seen the autopsy report?
 

Attachments

  • PlantMaterial.jpg
    PlantMaterial.jpg
    1.8 KB · Views: 2
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
1,599
Total visitors
1,711

Forum statistics

Threads
606,115
Messages
18,198,854
Members
233,739
Latest member
Nithila
Back
Top