Is Casey the real Zenaida?

[Jaboom97]

Defendant was not represented by counsel-even though the docket says that-if you pull up the actual paperwork on OC website-it is apparent that there was not an attorney present when the document was signed and the financial penalty was accepted back on 6/11/08.

 

[ZubenElSchemali]

My thought on the copies is:

Is there a court date? Could the court have made the copies in preparation and then charged her?

Could anybody request these records and paid for copies?

Could a certain lawyer requested these copies and paid for paperwork?

It also states.. on (copied and pasted from above... see bolded by me) WTH does that mean???
DEF. REFERRED COLLECTIONS CT./NOT. OF FINES FILED
6/11/2008
A
DEFENDANT WAS REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL:*
6/11/2008
A
IN OPEN COURT
6/11/2008
A
PAY FINE AND COST THRU COLL CT
6/11/2008
A
REASSIGN TO DIVISION
10/5/2008
A
$10 ASSESSMENT NON PAYMENT (BATCH)
12/10/2008
A
DEFENDANT DEFAULTED COLLECTION PROGRAM
12/15/2008
A
DELINQUENCY NOTICE ISSUED
12/15/2008
A
DELINQUENT FEE ASSESSED TO CASE TO87 25.0
1/9/2009

It says the person was represented by council but for some reason the attorney isn't listed as is usual. So I wouldn't venture a guess as to whether there was or not. At this point in time it is delinquent and has been turned over to the collections department.

Jaboom, there is no way, if you look at the phone pings on the dates she could have been available, and see that she has been in jail for all the rest, that this person is Casey. The only way possibile is if she has a very knowing accomplice to do the dirty work in her place. No, I don't think anyone could pin it on Cindy since she was working on part of these dates, as her records show.

 

[cecybeans]

It says the person was represented by council but for some reason the attorney isn't listed as is usual. So I wouldn't venture a guess as to whether there was or not. At this point in time it is delinquent and has been turned over to the collections department.

Jaboom, there is no way, if you look at the phone pings on the dates she could have been available, and see that she has been in jail for all the rest, that this person is Casey. The only way possibile is if she has a very knowing accomplice to do the dirty work in her place. No, I don't think anyone could pin it on Cindy since she was working on part of these dates, as her records show.

What about AD? She got a ticket the very same day, didn't she? And for somebody who was trying to distance herself from being tight with KC early in her interview she sure jumped at the chance to stay overnight when she describes she had her "personal problem" and GA and CA picked her up asap so she could be with KC. That was sometime in August, correct? Maybe she didn't want to risk a personal appearance at traffic court in October on behalf of her friend. Just a guess, there are certainly other possibilities.

 

[sumbunny]

Is it me or is it kind of too coincidental that these documents were copied just a few short days before the States Attorney office announces they will once again re-seek the DP for KC. I don't think they have announced all if any of the factual reasons leading to this decision. I think this might be apropos to the return of the Death penalty being put back on the table. Just My Opinion.

You could very well be right!
Perhaps they've finally realized that perhaps Casey was in fact using ZG as an alias..
It irks me to think she was represented in court by someone.
Wouldnt' there be pictures (mug shots) of the "ZG" that had to appear in court with councel?

I wish a local legal eagle could weigh in on how these proceedings work

 

[sumbunny]

What about AD? She got a ticket the very same day, didn't she? And for somebody who was trying to distance herself from being tight with KC early in her interview she sure jumped at the chance to stay overnight when she describes she had her "personal problem" and GA and CA picked her up asap so she could be with KC. That was sometime in August, correct? Maybe she didn't want to risk a personal appearance at traffic court in October on behalf of her friend. Just a guess, there are certainly other possibilities.

In AD's police interview she said she had her own "issues" that were consuming her.
Perhaps she knew about Casey's arrest as ZG, and that is why the URGENCY to speak with her..perhaps knowing all that had transpired?

I'm thinking outloud. But it does "fit"

 

[ZubenElSchemali]

You could very well be right!
Perhaps they've finally realized that perhaps Casey was in fact using ZG as an alias..
It irks me to think she was represented in court by someone.
Wouldnt' there be pictures (mug shots) of the "ZG" that had to appear in court with council?

I wish a local legal eagle could weigh in on how these proceedings work

Are you saying LE or the SA would have to pay for these copies? I don't think so.

Sumbunny and Cecybeans, do you really think her friend would be bold enough with ZG and Casey's name so much in the news to go there and make these payments? The media already had ZG in the news big time by early August.

 

[AZlawyer]

It says the person was represented by council but for some reason the attorney isn't listed as is usual. So I wouldn't venture a guess as to whether there was or not. At this point in time it is delinquent and has been turned over to the collections department.

Jaboom, there is no way, if you look at the phone pings on the dates she could have been available, and see that she has been in jail for all the rest, that this person is Casey. The only way possibile is if she has a very knowing accomplice to do the dirty work in her place. No, I don't think anyone could pin it on Cindy since she was working on part of these dates, as her records show.

Let's narrow down when KC would have had to actually be present somewhere...

6/11/08 around 8:00 a.m. for the arraignment
7/15/08 for the $50 payment
8/15/08 for the $100 payment

(I think someone determined that these were not online payments, but I would like confirmation on that.)

The payments for copies 8/18/08 and 4/10/09 are not necessarily KC (or ZG)--they could be anyone. The clerk has to enter the name of a PARTY associated with any cost, so if someone (let's say Blink to pick a name at random) went in to get copies, the docket would not say BLINK was assessed for copies but instead ZENAIDA GONZALEZ, because BLINK is not a party. Since the copy costs were being paid at the exact same time they were "assessed," it wasn't like ZG's account was really being charged for them.

It seems to me that the 6/11/08 and 7/15/08 entries COULD have been KC without contradicting any evidence we have...let me know if you disagree.

The only real problem is with the 8/15/08 payment entry, if indeed it has been determined that this was not done online. IIRC, someone here came up with a theory about this date having been entered retroactively??? But please don't take that as gospel and run with it...we need to find that post first.

 

[cecybeans]

Are you saying LE or the SA would have to pay for these copies? I don't think so.

Sumbunny and Cecybeans, do you really think her friend would be bold enough with ZG and Casey's name so much in the news to go there and make these payments? The media already had ZG in the news big time by early August.

Might depend on what kind of favor she might owe her. Read that any way you like.

 

[AZlawyer]

Are you saying LE or the SA would have to pay for these copies? I don't think so.

Sumbunny and Cecybeans, do you really think her friend would be bold enough with ZG and Casey's name so much in the news to go there and make these payments? The media already had ZG in the news big time by early August.

Although LE would not have to pay for the copies, a lot of times it is a heck of a lot easier and ultimately cheaper to just have someone walk in and pay a couple of bucks for public records than to get the records any other way.

 

[sumbunny]

Are you saying LE or the SA would have to pay for these copies? I don't think so.

Sumbunny and Cecybeans, do you really think her friend would be bold enough with ZG and Casey's name so much in the news to go there and make these payments? The media already had ZG in the news big time by early August.

I didn't realize payments HAD to be made in person.
I would think a mailed in cheque would suffice.
Or several post dated cheques?

 

[AZlawyer]

I didn't realize payments HAD to be made in person.
I would think a mailed in cheque would suffice.
Or several post dated cheques?

Good point. Even if the 8/15 payment was not an online payment, that doesn't necessarily mean it was made in person.

 

[ZubenElSchemali]

Let's narrow down when KC would have had to actually be present somewhere...

6/11/08 around 8:00 a.m. for the arraignment
7/15/08 for the $50 payment
8/15/08 for the $100 payment

(I think someone determined that these were not online payments, but I would like confirmation on that.)

The payments for copies 8/18/08 and 4/10/09 are not necessarily KC (or ZG)--they could be anyone. The clerk has to enter the name of a PARTY associated with any cost, so if someone (let's say Blink to pick a name at random) went in to get copies, the docket would not say BLINK was assessed for copies but instead ZENAIDA GONZALEZ, because BLINK is not a party. Since the copy costs were being paid at the exact same time they were "assessed," it wasn't like ZG's account was really being charged for them.

It seems to me that the 6/11/08 and 7/15/08 entries COULD have been KC without contradicting any evidence we have...let me know if you disagree.

The only real problem is with the 8/15/08 payment entry, if indeed it has been determined that this was not done online. IIRC, someone here came up with a theory about this date having been entered retroactively??? But please don't take that as gospel and run with it...we need to find that post first.

As I said in the Zanny timeline thread, the only way possible for Casey to have been at court on June 11 is if she were first in line and it didn't take too long. She was pinging at 9:40 am too far away on another tower. It is possible but not likely. On July 15 she did get within range of the court house but not the clerk's office. Can this be paid at either place or only at the clerk's office where the finances are handled? On the other dates she couldn't possibly have been there.

Azlawyer, I assume that is true for an attorney but LE or the SA should have direct access through their computer system, shouldn't they?

 

[AZlawyer]

So the only appearance that absolutely had to be in person was 6/11/08 around 8:00 a.m. I don't think we have any cell pings or statements that rule out such an appearance by KC.

But to answer a question asked earlier in this thread, for a traffic ticket it is unlikely her picture would have been taken that day.

 

[ZubenElSchemali]

I didn't realize payments HAD to be made in person.
I would think a mailed in cheque would suffice.
Or several post dated cheques?

And someone who is using an alias would have a fake checking account with that name, then use it while under arrest? I don't think so.

 

[AZlawyer]

As I said in the Zanny timeline thread, the only way possible for Casey to have been at court on June 11 is if she were first in line and it didn't take too long. She was pinging at 9:40 am too far away on another tower. It is possible but not likely. On July 15 she did get within range of the court house but not the clerk's office. Can this be paid at either place or only at the clerk's office where the finances are handled? On the other dates she couldn't possibly have been there.

Azlawyer, I assume that is true for an attorney but LE or the SA should have direct access through their computer system, shouldn't they?

If the arraignment was 8:00 a.m. on 6/11, I don't think it's a stretch to think she would have been done well before 9:30.

LE would have access through the computer to the actual documents only if (1) the court in question is technologically advanced enough that it scans documents rather than simply keeping paper copies, and (2) the court computer system is connected to the LE computer system. I'm not sure either is the case here.

 

[AZlawyer]

And someone who is using an alias would have a fake checking account with that name, then use it while under arrest? I don't think so.

The thing is, though, the court would not care whose check it was. Anyone could write the check, as long as they put the right case number on it so it would be credited properly.

 

[ZubenElSchemali]

So the only appearance that absolutely had to be in person was 6/11/08 around 8:00 a.m. I don't think we have any cell pings or statements that rule out such an appearance by KC.

But to answer a question asked earlier in this thread, for a traffic ticket it is unlikely her picture would have been taken that day.

If this is true (I don't Know) then there would certainly be a registration and proof of insurance that doesn't match the last name and the citation would show Casey's car. This rumor has been floating around for months. No way wouldn't someone have gone to the police station, get a copy of this ticket and expose her. There are people herd that live in the area aren't there? Anyone could go down and get it, to bust this myth once and for all.

 

[AZlawyer]

If this is true (I don't Know) then there would certainly be a registration and proof of insurance that doesn't match the last name and the citation would show Casey's car. This rumor has been floating around for months. No way wouldn't someone have gone to the police station, get a copy of this ticket and expose her. There are people herd that live in the area aren't there? Anyone could go down and get it, to bust this myth once and for all.

I agree and can't believe no one has done this yet! Seems like copies of the entire file should be available on docstoc or somewhere similar by now. Maybe we should take up a collection in case it's the $4 copy fee holding back our Orlando WS'ers?

 

[sumbunny]

And someone who is using an alias would have a fake checking account with that name, then use it while under arrest? I don't think so.

Why wouldn't anyone be able to pay her ticket?

I'd think all they would require is a little note on the bottom of the cheque stating the case number the cheque should be applied to?

I write cheques for my kids all the time...their names aren't on it.

 

[sumbunny]

I'd have loved if they asked AD regarding the traffic ticket, and if in fact she were with casey.

It's all a huge assumption..but interesting none the less