Kronk's Ex-Wife Questioned By Prosecutors

[whiteangora]

Well... I may as well post this. Way back, I was searching around. I came across a site that was not a news site. I can't remember if it was a blog or what. Anyway, what I read there was that KC, Kronk and some woman were seen together in some park somewhere. Supposedly it was around the time Caylee was gone, but I think just a bit before so. I have never been able to find that site since! I find that strange.

Though, I will say that I do not believe Kronk harmed Caylee. I believe her mother did that! *IF* Kronk was involved in any way, the only way I can think of is *IF* he helped KC. Now if he knew KC and was seen with her, that's possible.

JMO

bbm

Maybe you're thinking of the bogus report by one of the A's investigators that claimed to see a picture of Zanny, Caylee, and Casey in some park. It never materialized.

 

[LambChop]

LE poured over KC's phone records,computers,texts ,her friends and family's phones and computers.
KC was a prolific texter.If there was a connection to Kronk they would know it.
So we have Kronk,Jesse Grund,Amy ,Ricardo,George and Lee with tire tread imprints.Very soon I expect Cindy to be squished,as she would be the easiest to implicate,IMO. And ,God knows,what JB and CM will do with the TES records.

Questions like these are exactly what the defense wants,to distract and deflect from the obvious.Don't fall for it. Go back to the beginning. Reread KC's statements.
Play the jail phone tapes.
Listen to George implicate his own daughter. Watch closely as he vomits,just recalling the smell of his grandbaby's decomposing body in KC's car.
Look at the Henkel logo on the tape wrapped around Caylee's face.
Recall all the items from home found with Caylee's body and the way Cindy tried to trick LE with toothbrushes and hairbrushes.
Then look at Kronk. What can you find,really?

As usual, MissJames, you make a lot of sense. jmho

 

[charok]

sounds like smoke and mirrors, the desperate defense is grasping for those straws... like another poster noted, remember ga recalling the decomp stench from the car, the henkel duct tape, the blanket, oh wait a minute mr kronk strikes me as a person who has heart stickers for such an occassion... ( sarcasm,in case you missed that)
"dont believe the hype"
i too think the ex wife has a bone to pick w/ her ex...a smear vendetta campaign if u will..

 

[Woe.be.gone]

If I am not mistaken I believe the DP was put back on the table because of the duct tape wrapped around Caylee's face, items from the home found with the body, the fact the car "smelled like a dead body" and the very fact that they found a body... But that is just an educated guess.

What took them so long then? December 11, 2008, until April 13, 2009?

 

[Woe.be.gone]

I believe LE accounted for those days RK was not working and he was not in the area. Since he is not a suspect his life is still not a public matter. He has been cleared by LE, there is absolutely no connection between he and KC and if there were JB would be shouting it to the rooftops. He is just another victum of the woman who can't tell the truth if her life depended on it and is proving that to us everyday..... jmo

Where was RK on June 23 and 24, did LE say?

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Well... I may as well post this. Way back, I was searching around. I came across a site that was not a news site. I can't remember if it was a blog or what. Anyway, what I read there was that KC, Kronk and some woman were seen together in some park somewhere. Supposedly it was around the time Caylee was gone, but I think just a bit before so. I have never been able to find that site since! I find that strange.

Though, I will say that I do not believe Kronk harmed Caylee. I believe her mother did that! *IF* Kronk was involved in any way, the only way I can think of is *IF* he helped KC. Now if he knew KC and was seen with her, that's possible.

JMO

Of course, if the witness never came forward and told LE what he saw then what you read doesn't hold any weight. I believe you when you say you saw what you saw.
Stuff like that has happened to me too.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

LE poured over KC's phone records,computers,texts ,her friends and family's phones and computers.
KC was a prolific texter.If there was a connection to Kronk they would know it.
So we have Kronk,Jesse Grund,Amy ,Ricardo,George and Lee with tire tread imprints.Very soon I expect Cindy to be squished,as she would be the easiest to implicate,IMO. And ,God knows,what JB and CM will do with the TES records.

Questions like these are exactly what the defense wants,to distract and deflect from the obvious.Don't fall for it. Go back to the beginning. Reread KC's statements.
Play the jail phone tapes.
Listen to George implicate his own daughter. Watch closely as he vomits,just recalling the smell of his grandbaby's decomposing body in KC's car.
Look at the Henkel logo on the tape wrapped around Caylee's face.
Recall all the items from home found with Caylee's body and the way Cindy tried to trick LE with toothbrushes and hairbrushes.
Then look at Kronk. What can you find,really?

phone pings on key dates in the area of Suburban Drive. June 18 and 20, 2008.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Also, are we allowed to be disrespectful on WS now? We were never allowed to refer to the Anthony's as "Ants' but we can call the Defense, 'Duh-fense'?
They have a right to do their job imo even if certain people think there already is a solid 'guilty' verdict.

 

[LambChop]

Where was RK on June 23 and 24, did LE say?

RK is a private citizen and not a suspect. I believe LE said they are satisfied with what they were told. Not sure why there is a concern when he has been cleared by LE. KC has only pointed a finger at JG and the nanny. We know it's not JG and there is no nanny so I don't understand why someone would think it should be RK just because he found the body. jmo

 

[LambChop]

With all due respect to everyone here but I think that old saying applies here, "If you want respect you have to give respect". (or something like that, lol). The A's have burned a lot of bridges, some while they were standing in the middle of it. To blame innocent people and try to implicate them as suspects in your granddaughter's death throws the word respect right out the window. I would hope ZG is not the last person to bring the A's to court for their slanderous statements about others. jmo

 

[MissJames]

Also, are we allowed to be disrespectful on WS now? We were never allowed to refer to the Anthony's as "Ants' but we can call the Defense, 'Duh-fense'?
They have a right to do their job imo even if certain people think there already is a solid 'guilty' verdict.

Sorry ,I've been out of the loop for awhile.You're right.I'll try to go back edit.

Too late.....maybe a mod could edit for me. Sorry ,again.

 

[LambChop]

What took them so long then? December 11, 2008, until April 13, 2009?

I would think SA thought long and hard before putting DP back on the table. I'm sure KC did not want them rushing on her account. jmo

 

[LambChop]

MissJames, I am happy to see you are back. Hope everything is well.

 

[countzero]

I have had this thought for a long time now. It's not addressed at anyone in particular because I found myself about to do it awhile ago. I hit the back button instead.

Slueth'g is what we do here. What we should not be doing is creating scenarios that the evidence will kinda/sorta fit. Isn't it suppose to be the other way around. Facts and evidence. Now I don't know about anyone else so I won't speak for them, but when LE, the FBI and the SAO clear an individual, I don't feel I have the right the challenge their findings. Nor do I the right the question how they proceed in their investigations, or release documents. Sure, I would love the know what the SAO has and is still holding. But that is the legal system. Where I come from, we would not see ANY of the evidence until trial.

The SAO has cleared Mr Kronk and others who had the misfortune of knowing ICA and the As. This should satisfy everyone including JB and the public. To continually pursue Kronk and others to inject them into a scenario that the facts do not and can not substantiate is wrong. Smearing the name of any good person is wrong. Name calling is wrong as well. And personally I refuse to come down to CAs level of mentality.

If there are errors in the investigation, I have confidence in HHJP dealing with it appropriately.

Now I hope my post lives up to my past. Being a thread killer.

 

[LambChop]

No, Count, you are right. But to be fair to JB, it IS up to him to create reasonable doubt. Again, it is his job to do it. Without the evidence to prove otherwise we should not be pursing innocents just because defense can't find a suitable SODDI and resorts to whomever is available for that day. We can sleuth and come up with answers. I think we know when someone is "pulling the wool over ones' eyes." Oh, that would be me!!!!! You know, wool, eyes, lamb. Better watch my p's and q's or I'll be on the "chop"ping block next. OKay.......I'll stop.

 

[countzero]

No, Count, you are right. But to be fair to JB, it IS up to him to create reasonable doubt. Again, it is his job to do it. Without the evidence to prove otherwise we should not be pursing innocents just because defense can't find a suitable SODDI and resorts to whomever is available for that day. We can sleuth and come up with answers. I think we know when someone is "pulling the wool over ones' eyes." Oh, that would be me!!!!! You know, wool, eyes, lamb. Better watch my p's and q's or I'll be on the "chop"ping block next. OKay.......I'll stop.

LambChop, you're right about JB. Wool, eyes, lamb ..... oh would Sherri be smiling and laughing now.

 

[Numbers]

I have had this thought for a long time now. It's not addressed at anyone in particular because I found myself about to do it awhile ago. I hit the back button instead.

Slueth'g is what we do here. What we should not be doing is creating scenarios that the evidence will fit. Isn't it suppose to be the other way around. Facts and evidence. Now I don't know about anyone else so I won't speak for them, but when LE, the FBI and the SAO clear an individual, I don't feel I have the right the challenge their findings. Nor do I the right the question how they proceed in their investigations, or release documents. Sure, I would love the know what the SAO has and is still holding. But that is the legal system. Where I come from, we would not see ANY of the evidence until trial.

The SAO has cleared Mr Kronk and others who had the misfortune of knowing ICA and the As. This should satisfy everyone including JB and the public. To continually pursue Kronk and others to inject them into a scenario that the facts do not and can not substantiate is wrong. Smearing the name of any good person is wrong. Name calling is wrong as well. And personally I refuse to come down to CAs level of mentality.

If there are errors in the investigation, I have confidence in HHJP dealing with it appropriately.

Now I hope my post lives up to my past. Being a thread killer.

I was taught to think for myself, to examine the evidence and draw my own conclusions. And not to rely on someone else to think for me or tell me what to believe. While I have the deepest respect for Linda Drane-Burdick and Jeff Ashton, they will still have to prove their case to me in court. If they cannot prove to me that Casey murdered Caylee, how can I expect the jury to believe it? I will not accept that Casey murdered Caylee only because "Joe Schmo said so."

I'm sure the Duke Lacrosse players are glad that someone questioned the DA and the LEO. While I am NOT a fan of this defense, somebody's gotta do it, and there are checks and balances in place to insure a fair and just verdict.

Sooooooo, I think she's guilty as he11. What's your take on it?

 

[countzero]

I was taught to think for myself, to examine the evidence and draw my own conclusions. And not to rely on someone else to think for me or tell me what to believe. While I have the deepest respect for Linda Drane-Burdick and Jeff Ashton, they will still have to prove their case to me in court. If they cannot prove to me that Casey murdered Caylee, how can I expect the jury to believe it? I will not accept that Casey murdered Caylee only because "Joe Schmo said so."

I'm sure the Duke Lacrosse players are glad that someone questioned the DA and the LEO. While I am NOT a fan of this defense, somebody's gotta do it, and there are checks and balances in place to insure a fair and just verdict.

Sooooooo, I think she's guilty as he11. What's your take on it?

Oh I agree with you. I disagree with inserting a innocent person into a scenario to FIT the facts and be danged with the evidence. There is no evidence that anyone, including Roy Kronk, was involved in murdering Caylee or had any part in dumping Caylee where she was found. Then again, that is my opinion only.

To answer your question. All my posts from the day I joined have said I believe ICA is guilty along with CA, GA and LA. I have never wavered from this. My fence sitting is how involved is CA in Caylee's murder. Although I do allow myself the option to view any evidence that comes to light that could or would change my opinion. But right now as the evidence has been released only the As are responsible in my mind.

 

[JBean]

Also, are we allowed to be disrespectful on WS now? We were never allowed to refer to the Anthony's as "Ants' but we can call the Defense, 'Duh-fense'?
They have a right to do their job imo even if certain people think there already is a solid 'guilty' verdict.

No not allowed and has not been allowed since 2008 Just tryng to keep it respectful.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81352&highlight=variations

 

[Horace Finklestein]

No, Count, you are right. But to be fair to JB, it IS up to him to create reasonable doubt. Again, it is his job to do it. Without the evidence to prove otherwise we should not be pursing innocents just because defense can't find a suitable SODDI and resorts to whomever is available for that day. We can sleuth and come up with answers. I think we know when someone is "pulling the wool over ones' eyes." Oh, that would be me!!!!! You know, wool, eyes, lamb. Better watch my p's and q's or I'll be on the "chop"ping block next. OKay.......I'll stop.

I don't think it's his job to create reasonable doubt though, technically...it's just the pseudo strategy he has employed. Can't the defense simply refuse to defend and force the SA to prove their case?