Kiomarie and other issues

[countzero]

Yet another potd. Y'all need to slow down else the lurkers are going to start thinking a master's degree is required and a phd desired to post here!

Not me :innocent:

 

[Spangle]

What does potd mean?

 

[countzero]

What does potd mean?

Post of The DAY !!

 

[Rlaub44]

Rlaub44, I just read these two posts to my near perfect hubby and he's impressed too! Both are beyond excellent and well frame points I tried to make. It's also interesting to note that a over 7% of the posts you've made in the last two years were on this thread and on this subject. I guess I don't need to add that I strongly agree with the points you raised but in the interest of being redundant, did anyway.

What can we do to enjoy your wit and intellect more often? That's one of my only two complaints: Where have you been hiding and how on earth can I select any one passage to bold for emphasis??

ETA: 7% of the posts I've made in the last year would be between 165-200, depending on how much I post before you read this!

Thanks Lin. I read everything, and rarely need to post, because everyone here does an excellent job, but when my interest gets piqued strongly enough, I'll speak up!

Let me take this opportunity to say how much I have appreciated your insightful posts throughout this case. You have a way of summarizing points in a way that just plain makes sense. As you are one of my favorite posters to read, your kind words mean a lot to me. Thanks for all you do!

 

[Just Jayla]

I think everyone is going to be surprised when this case goes to trial at how much investigation detectives did into each of the friends and acquaintances of KC. They have to in order to rule out anyone else being involved.

They don't have to report this investigation as discovery to the defense and hence released to the public. It winds up being labeled as "field notes" or something like that. In other words, the prosecution has to hand over evidence of the crime to the defense as discovery. It doesn't have to hand over "no evidence of a crime" that resulted from their investigation into other individuals. So the prosecution may have done a lot more than just interviews and polygraphs on other people in their investigation and ruled them out based on what was found/not found.

LE would have been seriously remiss if they didn't thoroughly investigate everyone who had contact with Casey and Caylee in the months prior to Caylee's death. The Orange County Sheriffs Dept. has not shown any indication that they haven't done everything possible to determine who killed Caylee.

I'm sure that the OC detectives were certain within the first 24 hours who their prime suspect was, and had Casey in custody. But that didn't preclude them from doing a thorough investigation into what happened to Caylee, and determining if there were accomplices, etc. They didn't just say, "we've got our suspect" and dropped all further investigation. We've seen how thorough they've been.

At trial, if the defense tries to infer that some specific individual, other than Casey, did the crime, I believe the prosecution will have the information to refute that claim.

The only place it could really get muddy is if the defense makes the claim that another member of the family did the crime, and Casey is covering for them.

Thank you for posting this-I too feel that LE probably has as much info on RM, TL and AD as they did JG. Unfortunately with JG, he was coming close to being KC's fall guy, and the State had to hand over their investigation notes to the defense to put a stop to the potential damage JB and the gang were going to try to do to JG.

Kio does not factor in nearly as much as those I listed above, though I am sure LE/the state knows what they are doing with her, too. Unless there is something solid, I would see no reason to put Kio's life out there for the world to see as was done to Jesse.

 

[magic-cat]

I definitely think the defense have their work cut out for them, they're going to have to basically mount an investigation of their own. Sad that by now lots of evidence could potentitally have disappeared. In saying this, I also can't fault LE for reaching the conclusions they did, in their experience when someone is apparently lying about the disappearance of their child, it usually means they killed them. Then they found what they think could be a human decomp air signature in her car trunk. She wouldn't rat out any boyfriend or anything, so they thought she must be the killer.

Bold mine, respectfully...here is where one of our problems lies concerning what are known facts and not could be's concerning that car trunk. It is true that TBF results indicate it could be of human origin, however, there are some other points that indicate that smell IS and WAS of human origin. Those are the seasoned detectives and professionals (and this is including the perps own mother who is an RN:blushing who are familiar with the smell of a decomposing human and recognized it with certainty in the trunk of that car. Then there are also some cadaver dogs, fully trained, who alerted to decomposition...one dog jumped into the trunk and sat ON the stained area and indictated "this is where she was" for all intents and purposes. It is fine to consider each indicator in and of itself, but I think it unwise to completely disregard the other indicators when considering the whole, and the whole is this: Casey's mother stated in her 911 call (as a trained professional nurse) It smells like there's been a damned dead body in the car. There's something wrong. I can't find my granddaughter. The tow yard manager recognized the smell of human decomp. The detectives recognized the smell of human decomp. George Anthony recognized the smell as human decomp. The cadaver dogs recognized human decomp. The results on the proximal end of the root of the hair indicate human decomp. The air signature is consistent with human decomp. It is only one of MANY reasons why it is a 99.9999999999999% chance, which is as good as science gets, that there was indeed a dead body in the trunk of that car. The airtest is not THE only indicator, it is only one of many.:waitasec:

 

[magic-cat]

Bold mine, respectfully...here is where one of our problems lies concerning what are known facts and not could be's concerning that car trunk. It is true that TBF results indicate it could be of human origin, however, there are some other points that indicate that smell IS and WAS of human origin. Those are the seasoned detectives and professionals (and this is including the perps own mother who is an RN:blushing who are familiar with the smell of a decomposing human and recognized it with certainty in the trunk of that car. Then there are also some cadaver dogs, fully trained, who alerted to decomposition...one dog jumped into the trunk and sat ON the stained area and indictated "this is where she was" for all intents and purposes. It is fine to consider each indicator in and of itself, but I think it unwise to completely disregard the other indicators when considering the whole, and the whole is this: Casey's mother stated in her 911 call (as a trained professional nurse) It smells like there's been a damned dead body in the car. There's something wrong. I can't find my granddaughter. The tow yard manager recognized the smell of human decomp. The detectives recognized the smell of human decomp. George Anthony recognized the smell as human decomp. The cadaver dogs recognized human decomp. The results on the proximal end of the root of the hair indicate human decomp. The air signature is consistent with human decomp. It is only one of MANY reasons why it is a 99.9999999999999% chance, which is as good as science gets, that there was indeed a dead body in the trunk of that car. The airtest is not THE only indicator, it is only one of many.:waitasec:

Just wanted to add

AND

that dead body WAS Caylee Marie Anthony, not reported missing for 31 days...and still unaccounted for until December 11th when her remains were found on Suburban, a perfectly consistent place with all existing theories on where a mother who killed her child might dump her body or bury her...close to home...She's close to home...

She's close to home allright, and Casey knew it as sure as she knows her own name...because she put her there.:banghead:

 

[noonie]

Just wanted to add

AND

that dead body WAS Caylee Marie Anthony, not reported missing for 31 days...and still unaccounted for until December 11th when her remains were found on Suburban, a perfectly consistent place with all existing theories on where a mother who killed her child might dump her body or bury her...close to home...She's close to home...

She's close to home allright, and Casey knew it as sure as she knows her own name...because she put her there.:banghead:

______________________________________________________________________
She darn well knew it cause she put her there! was on this case since it started and We all know it was her! I cab't wait until trial! They have more than we know as evidence and beyond. I have faith in LE.
FYI: Stay away from the site. Has a bad infection called Agent.FA Screwed up my computer 2X"s.

 

[Leila]

Bold mine, respectfully...here is where one of our problems lies concerning what are known facts and not could be's concerning that car trunk. It is true that TBF results indicate it could be of human origin, however, there are some other points that indicate that smell IS and WAS of human origin. Those are the seasoned detectives and professionals (and this is including the perps own mother who is an RN:blushing who are familiar with the smell of a decomposing human and recognized it with certainty in the trunk of that car. Then there are also some cadaver dogs, fully trained, who alerted to decomposition...one dog jumped into the trunk and sat ON the stained area and indictated "this is where she was" for all intents and purposes. It is fine to consider each indicator in and of itself, but I think it unwise to completely disregard the other indicators when considering the whole, and the whole is this: Casey's mother stated in her 911 call (as a trained professional nurse) It smells like there's been a damned dead body in the car. There's something wrong. I can't find my granddaughter. The tow yard manager recognized the smell of human decomp. The detectives recognized the smell of human decomp. George Anthony recognized the smell as human decomp. The cadaver dogs recognized human decomp. The results on the proximal end of the root of the hair indicate human decomp. The air signature is consistent with human decomp. It is only one of MANY reasons why it is a 99.9999999999999% chance, which is as good as science gets, that there was indeed a dead body in the trunk of that car. The airtest is not THE only indicator, it is only one of many.:waitasec:

This deserves more than just a thanks! It's the totality of the whole that makes it a certainty that there was a body in the trunk of Casey's car, and specifically, Caylee's body. We cannot separate all the various factors that point to this conclusion, and call one the only indicator.

 

[magic-cat]

This deserves more than just a thanks! It's the totality of the whole that makes it a certainty that there was a body in the trunk of Casey's car, and specifically, Caylee's body. We cannot separate all the various factors that point to this conclusion, and call one the only indicator.

I know. It is like this to me. If a pot is red and everyone who looks at it sees it is red then it is a fairly good indicator that the pot is, in fact, red. But then let's say just for arguments sake, a colorblind person looks at the same pot, lacking the full range of the spectrum of colors shared by the majority who looked upon the pot and agree upon its redness, sees the pot as blue...Does that then make the pot blue because it IS blue to that one person? Or is it possible that the majority is correct, and the pot IS red, and the person who sees a blue pot, although seeing things differently is not seeing the complete spectrum of colors and so is unable to actually determine the color of the pot in reality.

Thus this line of reasoning, where one angle is picked out, from amoung an entire geometric range of shapes and lines, and is said to indicate something or to not indicate something. All must be considered also as part of the whole while singling out for individual attention...because to look at ONLY one factor when many concerning the related subject matter are available, is to see the pot as blue, when it is in fact, red...:blushing:

 

[Brini]

Bold mine, respectfully...here is where one of our problems lies concerning what are known facts and not could be's concerning that car trunk. It is true that TBF results indicate it could be of human origin, however, there are some other points that indicate that smell IS and WAS of human origin. Those are the seasoned detectives and professionals (and this is including the perps own mother who is an RN:blushing who are familiar with the smell of a decomposing human and recognized it with certainty in the trunk of that car. Then there are also some cadaver dogs, fully trained, who alerted to decomposition...one dog jumped into the trunk and sat ON the stained area and indictated "this is where she was" for all intents and purposes. It is fine to consider each indicator in and of itself, but I think it unwise to completely disregard the other indicators when considering the whole, and the whole is this: Casey's mother stated in her 911 call (as a trained professional nurse) It smells like there's been a damned dead body in the car. There's something wrong. I can't find my granddaughter. The tow yard manager recognized the smell of human decomp. The detectives recognized the smell of human decomp. George Anthony recognized the smell as human decomp. The cadaver dogs recognized human decomp. The results on the proximal end of the root of the hair indicate human decomp. The air signature is consistent with human decomp. It is only one of MANY reasons why it is a 99.9999999999999% chance, which is as good as science gets, that there was indeed a dead body in the trunk of that car. The airtest is not THE only indicator, it is only one of many.:waitasec:

Yet, another POTD!

 

[Tulessa]

Thanks for an interesting read you guys. My eyes have now crossed for the day, and special thanks to JBean.

 

[lin]

Thanks Lin. I read everything, and rarely need to post, because everyone here does an excellent job, but when my interest gets piqued strongly enough, I'll speak up!

Let me take this opportunity to say how much I have appreciated your insightful posts throughout this case. You have a way of summarizing points in a way that just plain makes sense. As you are one of my favorite posters to read, your kind words mean a lot to me. Thanks for all you do!

Thanks very much but I think you're confusing me with those really brilliant posters here upon whose coattails I try to ride.

 

[lin]

Yet, another POTD!

I know, right? I'm starting to wonder if I'm educated enough to post in this thread!!

 

[Spangle]

I know, right? I'm starting to wonder if I'm educated enough to post in this thread!!

Same here. I KNOW I'm not educated enough to write in here. LOL! I think some of those things,but just can not put it in print, without using a million words, go around several trees (forget bushes).. and after everyone is completely board.. finally get to the point.

I LOVE it when folks spell it out so simply.. I'm just totally green..

 

[Balthazar]

Lin, I have been following this thread with some interest. Months ago we all posted our thoughts on the SODDI thread. Thankfully, it fell into the archives because we certainly all gave it a run for the money.

Poor Kio. The immature girl in her saw an opportunity to make some $$$ and get 15 minutes of fame. Little did she or the others who had the misfortune of knowing KC and those who really knew KC in more ways than they now wanted to, are now having their lives dissected by the public. I suspect Kio had no idea the severity of her words and actions at the specific time she spoke or did them.

I really don't recall Kio being part of any SODDI theory we hashed out back then. And now, she is being raked over again and again. I just cannot find anything in her statements that would make me jump off the fence I have been sitting on since July 16, 08 and add her to my list of accomplices of KC. It just isn't there. LE isn't interested because if they were, they wouldn't have released her statement. It would still be in the "working the case" stage. There is more evidence to be released that I am more than interested in viewing and Kio isn't part of it.

Rlaub44 ...... excellent posts. Totally agree with ya.

Ya'll remember DC and the psychic. :loser: Well Kio reminds me of the same. Both gals out to help but didn't accomplish anything but to give the public something to talk about. No substance to either's story.

Once again NO ONE here thought KMTC was an accomplice or the murderer. We were simply interested in how her LE interview contained contradictory information and wanted to examine that interview in light of what we know today.

I don't understand why that is a problem with anyone. There is nothing wrong with reconsidering what each witness has told LE and even the press in light of what we now know. Realisitically, KMTC's LE interview as well as her National Enquirer interview will be examined for years to come in various books about this case.

 

[Spangle]

LE don't waste their time with investigating anything, unless they believe it relates to the case. Some folks consider that logical.

Which might be why that folks think the reason for the deep, deep, deep discussion of Kio, must be because some thing she is related in this case in a deep way.

 

[lin]

Same here. I KNOW I'm not educated enough to write in here. LOL! I think some of those things,but just can not put it in print, without using a million words, go around several trees (forget bushes).. and after everyone is completely board.. finally get to the point.

I LOVE it when folks spell it out so simply.. I'm just totally green..

LE don't waste their time with investigating anything, unless they believe it relates to the case. Some folks consider that logical.

Which might be why that folks think the reason for the deep, deep, deep discussion of Kio, must be because some thing she is related in this case in a deep way.

You just contradicted your own post!!! The top post is completely contradicted by the bottom which is concise, well framed, logical and so very TRUE, imo. lol Well done, Spangle; thanks.

 

[lin]

Once again NO ONE here thought KMTC was an accomplice or the murderer. We were simply interested in how her LE interview contained contradictory information and wanted to examine that interview in light of what we know today.

I don't understand why that is a problem with anyone. There is nothing wrong with reconsidering what each witness has told LE and even the press in light of what we now know. Realisitically, KMTC's LE interview as well as her National Enquirer interview will be examined for years to come in various books about this case.

Respectfully, that may be your intent but doesn't represent the full content/context of the posts made by some others, imo. Despite the disclaimers, some of your posts could be and are interpreted very differently, for example:

I spent some time thinking about what it is that really bothers me about KMTC's LE interview. And I think I finally figured it out.

I want to state up front, I DO NOT think that KMTC is guilty of anything or had anything whatsoever to do with Caylee's disappearance and death.

There are clearly inconsistencies in KMTC's statement that I hope LE checked out completely. But what really bothers me is that this statement was made all of 4 days after Caylee was first reported missing. KMTC tells LE that she and Casey were "best friends" in high school and then says that when she heard that Casey borrowed a shovel, the first thing KMTC thought of was that Caylee was dead and buried somewhere in the woods where they used to hang out. I am having trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that a "best friend", would immediately jump to that conclusion. If I were in KMTC's position and my "best friend" from high school was in Casey's situation, 4 days into the investigation, I would initially want to believe that her child was kidnapped. I would not jump to the conclusion that she was a murderess because she borrowed a shovel and be calling LE and telling them all this stuff about my best friend being a liar, that she never wanted her child, and so on - at least, not a mere four days into the case. Initially, I'd want to help my friend and see if I could get any information from her.

Looking at the statement KMTC made, I think that something really bad must have happened between KMTC and Casey in the past and that the overall tone of the statement reflects bad blood between the two women. The thing is, LE did not seek out KMTC, she sought them out. KMTC had no real reason to get involved in this mess, but she chose to involve herself. I'm trying to understand what motivated her to do that.

Do you have any reason to believe her inconsistencies were not 'completely checked out by LE'? Of what possible relevance are these inconsistencies that they should have been checked out 'completely' by LE?

Here are a couple of other examples:

On the previous thread we were discussing the change in KMTC's official statement and wondering what was ever found out about the "other Casey" that she changed her story to, etc. Please note that as before, this is no accusation toward KMTC. I am one of the people on the board who have not accused anyone, KMTC included.
I don't know what the change in KMTC's statements means. That's why I was asking questions. Of course anytime a witness changes his/her story, especially on the subject of when the victim was last seen or heard alive, it's of interest in a case like this.

(respectfully snipped)

BBM - Note the disclaimer in this post extends to everyone, which necessarily includes KC.

Writing "I don't know what the change in KMTC's statement means" imo indicates there must be some meaning. Actually, "anytime" a witness changes their story, especially a very minor player without anything of substance to add to an investigation, it really isn't relevant and therefore I have a difficult time understanding the emphasis and heightened attention given, if the innuendo is truly unintended.

So, to recap some of the things that jumped out at me in the interviews (tell me what your interpretation is of the change in statements, etc, or if anyone has additional info regarding the other Casey W that I haven't seen), of course I'm bolding or italicizing parts that happened to jump out at me:

(respectfully snipped)

KMTC said when Casey had been pregnant she had asked Casey what she wanted to do with the baby because she KMTC wanted to adopt Casey's baby (although she was only 19 at the time, too) because she had been told she should not have children due to a medical condition.
(respectfully snipped)

This interpretation is at best misleading as to the actual circumstances as described in Kio's sworn statement and there is no other source ascribed to contradict her sworn statement. Kio didn't state that she asked KC what she wanted to do because Kio wanted to adopt the baby. What makes this interpretation suspect or possibly deliberately misleading, imo, is that the issue has already been discussed by this poster and the actual words of Kio were pointed out to correct their misunderstanding. See posts #128 and #130 here.

IMO, there is a lot more innuendo is this particular post but for the sake of brevity, am not quoting most of it.

yes, as far as I'm aware it should be in the interviews JBean. I can't believe I accidentally typed "The Hulk" at first instead of the "The Mummy"! ha ha I'm fixing the typos as I listen again.

Edited to add: OK, checked it over. Nothing from outside the taped interview and follow up phone call. Again, those are parts that jumped out at me.

(Just so anyone who is new knows, these are just points that grabbed my attention for discussion, it's not a transcript. Check page 1 for the links to the complete interviews. )

What is the purpose of discussing these things that “jump out” from Kio's sworn statements in relation to this case? I'm not quite understanding why slight inconsistencies that do not seem to be material and are made by a peripheral player are of such interest if the purpose is not offensive innuendo.

These are just a few examples that "jumped out at me" and I hope that others will refresh our recollections with passages from posts that "jumped out at them" that seem to belie the stated intent of similar posts.

 

[Brini]

Once again NO ONE here thought KMTC was an accomplice or the murderer. We were simply interested in how her LE interview contained contradictory information and wanted to examine that interview in light of what we know today.

I don't understand why that is a problem with anyone. There is nothing wrong with reconsidering what each witness has told LE and even the press in light of what we now know. Realisitically, KMTC's LE interview as well as her National Enquirer interview will be examined for years to come in various books about this case.

No it won't honey.

Nobody is paying a the slightest bit of attention to that interview, except us.

Kio is SO peripheral. She has no material information. She likely won't even be called as a witness-- she hadn't really been involved with KC since long before any of this happened.

We may be making a big deal of Kio. Nobody else is.