Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have not been able to read the letters yet. I have read the media captions. I am not seeing anywhere in the letters that Kc incriminated herself. The other two inmates are going to say anything Le wants them to, to get a smaller sentence. I can't believe anything they say. So, my guess is no, the letters don't mean anything. As far as the other two inmates, the jury will have to decide if they are believable. I just don't believe anyone that has a 3rd party reason to lie. IMO
I believe that Kc was visited immediatley after the announcement that day of a child being found in the woods near her home, by Jb. That information could have come from Jb. Also, that other inmate is not a believable person, she is a convicted drug dealer. IMO
What are you basing that on? As Yuri Melich said, only investigators and the suspect would have had that info. There's no way they would tell Baez for heaven's sake. Casey's sunk.
I have not been able to read the letters yet. I have read the media captions. I am not seeing anywhere in the letters that Kc incriminated herself. The other two inmates are going to say anything Le wants them to, to get a smaller sentence. I can't believe anything they say. So, my guess is no, the letters don't mean anything. As far as the other two inmates, the jury will have to decide if they are believable. I just don't believe anyone that has a 3rd party reason to lie. IMO
I have not been able to read the letters yet. I have read the media captions. I am not seeing anywhere in the letters that Kc incriminated herself. The other two inmates are going to say anything Le wants them to, to get a smaller sentence. I can't believe anything they say. So, my guess is no, the letters don't mean anything. As far as the other two inmates, the jury will have to decide if they are believable. I just don't believe anyone that has a 3rd party reason to lie. IMO
I have a very simplistic statement to make. Hope this thread is appropriate for it. Does everybody remember that KC was charged with murder BEFORE Caylee's remains were found? Now, to me, that suggests that the prosecution knows something that we STILL don't know. Was the prosecution really ready to take her to court based on circumstanstal eveidence or is it possible that they have an ace up their sleeve? And how does that work in Florida where everything is so open? TIA.
BBM
You seem to contradict yourself in those first three sentences. Have not read them, but don't see anything incriminating. ??????
And, NTS, it sounds like you are dismissing anything they have to say, before you even read it? Doesn't your sig say "Justice means getting to the whole truth."?
Getting to the whole truth means reading everything with an open mind, not deciding what someone says is not credible - before you even read it.
Here's a couple things you might want to take into consideration, from the FDLE investigation. SA Pages 13476 - 13477:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On February 10, 2010, Special Agent (SA) Christopher Woehr and Assistant Special
Agent in Charge (ASAC) Danny Banks participated in a meeting at the Office of the
State Attorney. During the meeting, a formal request for assistance was made to the
Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE).
It was requested the FDLE make contact with Robyn Adams and conduct a sworn
interview to determine if any information could be obtained that may assist in the
prosecution or defense. The goal of the interview was to ascertain the truth surrounding
the letters, the relationship between Adams and Anthony and possible impropriety
among inmates and correctional officers.
On February 12, 2010, Special Agent (SA) Christopher Woehr and Special Agent
Supervisor (SAS) Chuck Broadway made contact with Robyn Adams at the Tallahassee
Correctional Institute (TCI) for interview purposes. Adams agreed to a sworn, digitally
recorded interview. The following is a summary of the interview:
Adams was advised that the role of Florida Department of Law Enforcement was to
obtain the truth as it pertained to the communications that took place between Adams
and Casey Anthony while incarcerated together at the Orange County Jail, whether it
assisted the prosecution or defense.
Adams and Anthony were supposed to be destroying each letter, after they were read,
by flushing them down the toilet. Adams may have destroyed some of the early letters
before deciding to keep them. Adams never intended to use the letters to obtain
consideration in sentencing or to profit. Adams stated that if she intended to use the
letters to help her at sentencing, she would have offered the information prior to being
sentenced. Adams kept the letters to document this stage of her life and the friendship
(with Anthony).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That does seem to have a ring of truth, doesn't it? She could have possibly reduced her sentence by bringing this up BEFORE she was sentenced. But she did not. IN fact, she never brought them up - someone else did, whereupon she was questioned and finally revealed them.
Getting to the WHOLE truth means keeping an open mind at all times, Amigo.
There is LOTS of sleuthing to be done in this doc dump, and there is plenty that will help put Casey Anthony away, I believe. She keeps sinking her own boat, with her own words. :dance:
And YES, I believe that the State has SO MUCH evidence to convict Casey on, it's going to be a job in itself just deciding what to use and what to leave out.
.
To add to that, people have been convicted without the body, but LE also has the decomp in the trunk evidence, the hair strand of Caylee's from the trunk, the computer searches for chloroform, the same brand of duct tape in the Anthony home, catching Casey in a direct lie at Universal...circumstantial evidence is very powerful and often wins convictions. Trying watching a few episodes of Forensic Files and you'll see...If they had an ACE they would have given it to the defense by now. All discovery has to be turned over in reasonable amount of time. That being said, the fact that she was the last one seen with Caylee, never reported her missing, no nanny could be found, and car smelled like " a dead body" was enough in my opinion to at least charge her with murder. It's not like a 3year old just walked out the house and no one knew for 31 days. But like always, just my opinion.
I have a very simplistic statement to make. Hope this thread is appropriate for it. Does everybody remember that KC was charged with murder BEFORE Caylee's remains were found? Now, to me, that suggests that the prosecution knows something that we STILL don't know. Was the prosecution really ready to take her to court based on circumstanstal eveidence or is it possible that they have an ace up their sleeve? And how does that work in Florida where everything is so open? TIA.
BBM
You seem to contradict yourself in those first three sentences. Have not read them, but don't see anything incriminating. ??????
And, NTS, it sounds like you are dismissing anything they have to say, before you even read it? Doesn't your sig say "Justice means getting to the whole truth."?
Getting to the whole truth means reading everything with an open mind, not deciding what someone says is not credible - before you even read it.
Here's a couple things you might want to take into consideration, from the FDLE investigation. SA Pages 13476 - 13477:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On February 10, 2010, Special Agent (SA) Christopher Woehr and Assistant Special
Agent in Charge (ASAC) Danny Banks participated in a meeting at the Office of the
State Attorney. During the meeting, a formal request for assistance was made to the
Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE).
It was requested the FDLE make contact with Robyn Adams and conduct a sworn
interview to determine if any information could be obtained that may assist in the
prosecution or defense. The goal of the interview was to ascertain the truth surrounding
the letters, the relationship between Adams and Anthony and possible impropriety
among inmates and correctional officers.
On February 12, 2010, Special Agent (SA) Christopher Woehr and Special Agent
Supervisor (SAS) Chuck Broadway made contact with Robyn Adams at the Tallahassee
Correctional Institute (TCI) for interview purposes. Adams agreed to a sworn, digitally
recorded interview. The following is a summary of the interview:
Adams was advised that the role of Florida Department of Law Enforcement was to
obtain the truth as it pertained to the communications that took place between Adams
and Casey Anthony while incarcerated together at the Orange County Jail, whether it
assisted the prosecution or defense.
Adams and Anthony were supposed to be destroying each letter, after they were read,
by flushing them down the toilet. Adams may have destroyed some of the early letters
before deciding to keep them. Adams never intended to use the letters to obtain
consideration in sentencing or to profit. Adams stated that if she intended to use the
letters to help her at sentencing, she would have offered the information prior to being
sentenced. Adams kept the letters to document this stage of her life and the friendship
(with Anthony).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That does seem to have a ring of truth, doesn't it? She could have possibly reduced her sentence by bringing this up BEFORE she was sentenced. But she did not. IN fact, she never brought them up - someone else did, whereupon she was questioned and finally revealed them.
Getting to the WHOLE truth means keeping an open mind at all times, Amigo.
There is LOTS of sleuthing to be done in this doc dump, and there is plenty that will help put Casey Anthony away, I believe. She keeps sinking her own boat, with her own words. :dance:
And YES, I believe that the State has SO MUCH evidence to convict Casey on, it's going to be a job in itself just deciding what to use and what to leave out.
.
Getting to the WHOLE truth means keeping an open mind at all times, Amigos
I see this a little differently. Robin DOES mention that these letters may be able to help her in the future....shows intent. If you put her statement aside for a moment, there is really nothing incriminating in the letters that I have seen. It is Robin's testimony that is incriminating. It is possible that at the time of her sentencing, she was not convinced that the letters would help her. Later, she added/concocted? her testimony, hoping to shorten her sentence. It matters not when your sentence is shortened.... I'm not saying this is what happened...only that it is just as likely that this could be the WHOLE truth. Just my 2 cents.....
Getting to the WHOLE truth means keeping an open mind at all times....