New Docs Part 2

[justbetweenus]

It may be routine. If you have an alledged kidnapping of a child or even if a child goes missing in this day and age, sad to say, sexual predation is always a possibility. Even when an adult disappears it might very well be related to sex crimes. Seems rational that missing persons and sex crimes would co-ordinate pretty closely.

I think you're right. I recall early in the case someone calling into Nancy asking why sex crime was involved, and the answer was pretty much what you stated.

 

[ValleyGirl]

I want to read it so badly! But it says damaged here, too.

 

[Whisperer]

Just looked at the pages. What the h@ll is this all about do you think?

On the Ricardo doc (The property form where the chloroform picture is receipted) there's a column headed "Involvement Code" and the code given was OTH. Do we know what that means. Yeah, I know, it's probably the code for "Other." LOL

The 5 witnesses statements attached must surely be the statements from the 5 amateur searchers. How could all 5 of the groups have stumbled on a sex crime in progress?? I mean they weren't even there on the same day. And there's nothing in their statements to indicate they came upon anything remotely like a sex crime.

I'm just completely baffled--as usual.

OTH is military code for Other Than Honorable...it relates to the discharge from service.

 

[piratemom]

Back in May she is talking about Zani, oviedo house, dogs and roomates. Is there a phone log for this time to see WHO she was calling???

 

[cleo612]

You know, AL stated that when they broke into the shed to retrieve the gas cans, KC's car was parked on Suburban. He drove her back to her car and watched while she poured the gasoline into her car. He stated that she would not let him near the car--that she could put the gas in herself.

Why would she have been parked on Suburban to begin with? This would have been around the 23rd-24th of June.

 

[laniefi]

You know, AL stated that when they broke into the shed to retrieve the gas cans, KC's car was parked on Suburban. He drove her back to her car and watched while she poured the gasoline into her car. He stated that she would not let him near the car--that she could put the gas in herself.

Why would she have been parked on Suburban to begin with? This would have been around the 23rd-24th of June.

Thanks - do you remember which AL interview it was?

 

[Valrico Analyzer]

It definetely fits the time line of the body being moved.

but WHY would the dirt look "fresh" on 09/12/08? That lends to an accomplice OTHER than the "A" family as Im certain the LE were keeping tabs on them

 

[Reality Orlando]

I think GA is very good at doing CA's bidding. That sign is a huge advertisement for planting reasonable doubt in a potential jury pool.

I drive by that corner several times a week and he's always there...most times alone. I do feel for him. He looks truly devastated.

 

[Hailiejade77]

It definetely fits the time line of the body being moved.

but WHY would the dirt look "fresh" on 09/12/08? That lends to an accomplice OTHER than the "A" family as Im certain the LE were keeping tabs on them

could it be possible,.. "someone" that took her to and from JB's office, drop her off so she could do it? She didn't have a GPS monitor, just a ankle monitor that went off if she left when she wasn't allowed too. Maybe Lee or Cindy drove her there and let her move the body. They don't know WHERE it is but they know it is moved. Does that make sense to anyone? Sorry if it doesn't, I haven't had my coffee yet! JMO

 

[lastchance]

I keep thinking the same thing==that KC was not as well guarded during her time after being bonded out. She went to JB's office for 5-6 hours--was she there the whole time?
I thought originally that her ankle monitor had a GPS on it--but it seems that it did not.
I can just see her saying, "I just need some fresh air, or a cheeseburger, or something, and her slipping out the back door.

 

[Waddles]

You know, AL stated that when they broke into the shed to retrieve the gas cans, KC's car was parked on Suburban. He drove her back to her car and watched while she poured the gasoline into her car. He stated that she would not let him near the car--that she could put the gas in herself.

Why would she have been parked on Suburban to begin with? This would have been around the 23rd-24th of June.

ran out of gas there?

 

[debs]

ran out of gas there?

This then begs the question why she would be on that particular road at all.

 

[laniefi]

I'm not sure why she would be on that road and without having seen this area myself (I've only been to the parks, west side of Orlando on vacation) it looks like Suburban Drive cuts through to Econlockhatchee Tr....

Is that correct?

I do remember early on there was some ping discussion on Econ Tr & Lee Vista area....abviously A's home and Lee live about equal distance from Suburban drive but I think it was related to search areas...

Am I remebering correctly?

 

[future criminologist]

The great grandmother's e-mails to Mary Lou give great insight to the dynamics of George's and Cindy's marriage.

According to Cindy's mom...

Cindy is only staying with George because his lawyer says Cindy will have to pay alimony and give George half of the house. Cindy WON'T give up the house she paid every penny for. George is a loser that can't keep a job. Casey isn't making enough to pay for herself and Caylee so Cindy is supporting them too. Cindy would kill herself but has to stay alive for Caylee and her parents.

call me devil's advocate but I don't see what those emails between Cindy's mom and her friend/"Shadow" have to do with the case. they are basically gossip between two friends and will get tossed out as heresay. I don't think they can use random statements people make on what they were "Told" by someone unless it can be backed up, can they? like the JG statement about Casey and Lee. not that I don't believe him, but he could say anything - he could say Casey was impregnated by an alien if he wanted to - and they can't use it unless it's backed up by someone else or by evidence, right? so I guess I don't understand why that information would be included as evidence used to charge her.

 

[Chezhire]

WFTV reports that the latest documents (released 11/26/08) include allegations of sexual conduct including overtures by Lee towards Casey and possibly abuse of Casey by George. Has anyone identified the precise documents that contain these allegations? Perhaps we can discuss them here.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2995192&postcount=75

K - for those of us WSers who haven't already read this thread, discussing LP's comments on Nancy G 10/6, go here:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70290
Lots of information and opinions on Lee, what Leonard Padilla said about Caylee's paternity, what FBI agent Joe Trimarco said about trusting Leonard P, and other relevant comments.

 

[butwhatif?]

exactly!!!!!!!!!!

Taking a step back...

So if this was the original "gravesite" would the dirt still be disturbed from June/July in September? There was a hurricane in between correct? Then this wouldn't make sense. Unless, this was the original "gravesite" until someone moved the body in September?

Hmmmmm

These statements have me scratching my head yet again. Why were there 4 statements in regard to the find at suburban dr, that do not state that they found anything? If they had found something attached to the rope, why was it not included in the statement? And why, if they didnt find anything, are these statements included in the documents? And why does each one end with the same sentence 'i did not contact the media about this.'
The one written by an adult states that the day before there had not been any disturbed soil...its all just very odd, imo.

 

[butwhatif?]

Exactly. That's why I find it strange. There are several boxes that could've been checked, including homicide and missing persons. Why did they specifically check sex crimes?

I posted about this a couple of days ago. Its strange because they have ticked the 'child abuse' option a couple of pages before this.
In the documents i did find a mention of child abuse/sex crimes being the same division at that time, so thats probably explains it. It wasnt until 22nd (i think) of october that they started their own seperate SCU.

 

[butwhatif?]

heres another thing i just dont understand...
In this investigative report it states that on the 16th july they did not take the pants because they had been laundered by Cindy, but they went back on August 4th to get them.
Why didnt they just take them in the first place?

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

These statements have me scratching my head yet again. Why were there 4 statements in regard to the find at suburban dr, that do not state that they found anything? If they had found something attached to the rope, why was it not included in the statement? And why, if they didnt find anything, are these statements included in the documents? And why does each one end with the same sentence 'i did not contact the media about this.'
The one written by an adult states that the day before there had not been any disturbed soil...its all just very odd, imo.

butwhatif?, it is odd!! If there was not a connection to this case I don't think these 5 statements would have been included in this dump. I feel certain LE has been called out to many, many "finds" by various searchers -- and this is the only one I'm aware of that is included here.

I'm thinking they did find something but had the men stop just short of saying what it was that they found at the end of that rope and pipe. Or maybe LE got there before the young men finished digging the entire thing up, LE had them write their statements, had the men leave -- and then LE finished the job. . . and found something significant that they don't want to reveal at this time.

I wondered about the 46 year-old man's statement, too. On 9/10 the area was undisturbed but the next day he found what he called a shallow looking grave (or something like that). I don't know if he saw the same thing (the tire tracks and dirt covered grass) on 9/10 as the youngsters did and just considered it nothing. What he describes he saw on 9/11 could then be the place that the young men had been digging. It's hard to tell.

But this coupled with the fact that TonE picked KC up on this same road when she ran out of gas makes it even more suspicious. What was she doing there? Putting her in the same area as the mysterious buried rope/grave makes this find substantial, IMO.

 

[butwhatif?]

butwhatif?, it is odd!! If there was not a connection to this case I don't think these 5 statements would have been included in this dump. I feel certain LE has been called out to many, many "finds" by various searchers -- and this is the only one I'm aware of that is included here.

I'm thinking they did find something but had the men stop just short of saying what it was that they found at the end of that rope and pipe. Or maybe LE got there before the young men finished digging the entire thing up, LE had them write their statements, had the men leave -- and then LE finished the job. . . and found something significant that they don't want to reveal at this time.

I wondered about the 46 year-old man's statement, too. On 9/10 the area was undisturbed but the next day he found what he called a shallow looking grave (or something like that). I don't know if he saw the same thing (the tire tracks and dirt covered grass) on 9/10 as the youngsters did and just considered it nothing. What he describes he saw on 9/11 could then be the place that the young men had been digging. It's hard to tell.

But this coupled with the fact that TonE picked KC up on this same road when she ran out of gas makes it even more suspicious. What was she doing there? Putting her in the same area as the mysterious buried rope/grave makes this find substantial, IMO.

Just had a thought....I wonder if there is any connection between the rope find, and KC's comments about 'them not even finding her (caylees) clothes yet'?