Sidebar Discussion #12

[ILikeToBendPages]

I tried to make the best of my friends visit ( haven't walk down that asile in many years) and grabbed a quite place to sit and think over my sin, so I laid in a weeks supply of chocolates and a good book. I will try to do my best to keep that ole nun from smacking my hand with that ruler.

 

[wonders]

I tried to make the best of my friends visit ( haven't walk down that asile in many years) and grabbed a quite place to sit and think over my sin, so I laid in a weeks supply of chocolates and a good book. I will try to do my best to keep that ole nun from smacking my hand with that ruler.

Welcome back ILTBP.

 

[logicalgirl]

Good Morning Folks! So a quiet evening and morning! I'm looking forward to my long holiday weekend...:woohoo: :woohoo:

Baez's book has taken a bit of a jump up to #24,991 in Books - but next week starts the release of all the new fall books. And Fall is what we'll get...:floorlaugh:

 

[KarmaGet'em]

<modsnip>

There are some good conversations going on over there on the discussion section of the amazon reviews.

Someone referenced an interview that was done with the computer forensics lady that testified in the case.
http://forensicsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/exclusive-interview-with-sandra-osborne.html
I had not seen that before. (Small mention of WS)

Interesting information there and in the discussion forum "behind the reviews" from yesterday.

 

[logicalgirl]

There are some good conversations going on over there on the discussion section of the amazon reviews.

Someone referenced an interview that was done with the computer forensics lady that testified in the case.
http://forensicsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/exclusive-interview-with-sandra-osborne.html
I had not seen that before. (Small mention of WS)

Interesting information there and in the discussion forum "behind the reviews" from yesterday.

So the obvious question is why is the discussion there instead of here? Why not bring it over? Sometimes I've read interesting stuff over there but I found it was mostly carping at/on each other and some of it quite like personal attacks back and forth.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

There are some good conversations going on over there on the discussion section of the amazon reviews.

Someone referenced an interview that was done with the computer forensics lady that testified in the case.
http://forensicsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/exclusive-interview-with-sandra-osborne.html
I had not seen that before. (Small mention of WS)

Interesting information there and in the discussion forum "behind the reviews" from yesterday.

WOW. Just. Wow.

 

[KarmaGet'em]

So the obvious question is why is the discussion there instead of here? Why not bring it over? Sometimes I've read interesting stuff over there but I found it was mostly carping at/on each other and some of it quite like personal attacks back and forth.

I don't know if they are members of WS (some are, but are on 'vacation'), but I just saw some interesting stuff. However, I am at work and cannot stay logged in for long so I thought I would try to point you all in the direction of the stuff.
Just wanted to make note of it before it gets lost.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

There are some good conversations going on over there on the discussion section of the amazon reviews.

Someone referenced an interview that was done with the computer forensics lady that testified in the case.
http://forensicsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/exclusive-interview-with-sandra-osborne.html
I had not seen that before. (Small mention of WS)

Interesting information there and in the discussion forum "behind the reviews" from yesterday.

This is the first I've seen or heard of this Sandra Osborne interview. It's very interesting and informative but I am confused. She keeps talking about the forensics from July 16 and 17. Does she actually mean June 16 and 17? It's distracting me so much that I'm having difficulty focusing on the remainder of the interview.

Thank you so much, KarmaGet'em, for bringing this interview over!

 

[TotallyObsessed]

This is the first I've seen or heard of this Sandra Osborne interview. It's very interesting and informative but I am confused. She keeps talking about the forensics from July 16 and 17. Does she actually mean June 16 and 17? It's distracting me so much that I'm having difficulty focusing on the remainder of the interview.

Thank you so much, KarmaGet'em, for bringing this interview over!

OMG you are right. I didn't even notice that. Good Lord. Let's hope she just mis-spoke.

 

[logicalgirl]

I don't know if they are members of WS (some are, but are on 'vacation'), but I just saw some interesting stuff. However, I am at work and cannot stay logged in for long so I thought I would try to point you all in the direction of the stuff.
Just wanted to make note of it before it gets lost.

Great suggestion - thanks - and I believe all vacations are long over aren't they? :what:

 

[logicalgirl]

This is the first I've seen or heard of this Sandra Osborne interview. It's very interesting and informative but I am confused. She keeps talking about the forensics from July 16 and 17. Does she actually mean June 16 and 17? It's distracting me so much that I'm having difficulty focusing on the remainder of the interview.

Thank you so much, KarmaGet'em, for bringing this interview over!

Isn't she meaning those are dates she received or looked at the information? If Caylee was reported missing on July 16, it makes sense those are the dates this information first came in to her lab?

Very interesting interview and some lessons to be learned. Interesting about not stopping for a" family crisis" or there was "no family crisis".

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Isn't she meaning those are dates she received or looked at the information? If Caylee was reported missing on July 16, it makes sense those are the dates this information first came in to her lab?

Very interesting interview and some lessons to be learned. Interesting about not stopping for a" family crisis" or there was "no family crisis".

Well, I wondered if that was the case too, LG, until I read, "At 1330hrs or thereabouts, the activity picks up again, after everyone has gone to work. What that means is that someone is one [sic] the computer from 0756hrs until 1146 hrs on the 16th of July, 2008. George (Casey’s father, Caylee’s grandfather) testified that Caylee and Casey left at about noon."

So, :dunno:.

http://forensicsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/exclusive-interview-with-sandra-osborne.html

 

[Maia]

There are some good conversations going on over there on the discussion section of the amazon reviews.

Someone referenced an interview that was done with the computer forensics lady that testified in the case.
http://forensicsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/exclusive-interview-with-sandra-osborne.html
I had not seen that before. (Small mention of WS)

Interesting information there and in the discussion forum "behind the reviews" from yesterday.

Thank you for bringing this to us! Great interview. Very honest, informative insight into the technological forensics world. I, too, like Expecting Unicorns, found the date discrepancy (July vs June) a little disconcerting but it's an honest mistake...one I'm sure would be very easy to make.

I also found the small mention of "web sleuths" very heart-warming. It speaks to the quality of work done here everyday. :woohoo:

 

[logicalgirl]

Well, I wondered if that was the case too, LG, until I read, "At 1330hrs or thereabouts, the activity picks up again, after everyone has gone to work. What that means is that someone is one [sic] the computer from 0756hrs until 1146 hrs on the 16th of July, 2008. George (Casey&#8217;s father, Caylee&#8217;s grandfather) testified that Caylee and Casey left at about noon."

So, :dunno:.

http://forensicsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/exclusive-interview-with-sandra-osborne.html

Yes, I see - you are correct! I wonder if this is the person speaking or an incorrect translation from whoever took the notes off the recorder?:waitasec:

I was reading something really interesting yesterday that said our eyes don't actually "see" anything, it is our brain trainslating images coming in through the eye and making sense of them. And that we can read a sentence of complete mispelling and easily "translate" it into making complete sense without really noticing. I think that's what I was doing - making an automatic adjustment.

I'm obviously not the person to be data checking..:blushing: Useless!

 

[wonders]

So the obvious question is why is the discussion there instead of here? Why not bring it over? Sometimes I've read interesting stuff over there but I found it was mostly carping at/on each other and some of it quite like personal attacks back and forth.

I think it's because the FCA supporters never back up what their saying with doc's and the Caylee warriors do. Not that it matters to the FCA supporters of course.

 

[rossva]

I attended Jose Baez's appearance at Books and Books in Coral Gables. I purchased a copy of "Presumed Guilty" and had Mr. Baez sign it. I was inside the book store for the entire time Mr. Baez was there, speaking and signing.

While there is a slight possibility the incident you referenced (posted on the comments of this article: http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...s-signing-goes-very-well-in-coral-gables.html by a commenter using the name "Reality Check") did in fact happen, I did not see it. It is my opinion that it did not, and is a complete fabrication.

This is interesting. On the book site there is a seller who is selling a collectors addition of Presumed Guilty for 199.00. It is signed. If I remember correctly there was a woman that went to one of JB's book signings and after he signed the book, she put it back down on the table and left. If memory serves me, she wanted something specific written in the book. He got mad, told her to leave and that she did. She was not a fan of his.
So, I am curious as to if this is the book. Interesting the book ships from Florida.

 

[logicalgirl]

I think it's because the FCA supporters never back up what their saying with doc's and the Caylee warriors do. Not that it matters to the FCA supporters of course.

HI Wonders!:seeya: Yeah - I got that - but I meant I was glad Karma' brought the info here so we could discuss without having to get in the middle of all that carping and sniping that can go on at Amazon.
Edited to add: Some of the brave folks over there have good reason for their objections and are of value - not to downplay overcoming the nonsense and attempts at damaging the evidence efforts that are going on.

 

[wonders]

HI Wonders!:seeya: Yeah - I got that - but I meant I was glad Karma' brought the info here so we could discuss without having to get in the middle of all that carping and sniping that can go on at Amazon.

Hi to you too LG. Oh okay, I see now. Thanks.

 

[logicalgirl]

I attended Jose Baez's appearance at Books and Books in Coral Gables. I purchased a copy of "Presumed Guilty" and had Mr. Baez sign it. I was inside the book store for the entire time Mr. Baez was there, speaking and signing.

While there is a slight possibility the incident you referenced (posted on the comments of this article: http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...s-signing-goes-very-well-in-coral-gables.html by a commenter using the name "Reality Check") did in fact happen, I did not see it. It is my opinion that it did not, and is a complete fabrication.

Interesting Rossva - thanks for that information. Can you tell us, since I don't believe Jose has done many book signings - did he have any kind of special security on checking who came in and out?
I often wondered if he was concerned if any picketers or objectors would show up and maybe cause a "scene" at what was "his" event.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

Yes, I see - you are correct! I wonder if this is the person speaking or an incorrect translation from whoever took the notes off the recorder?:waitasec:

I was reading something really interesting yesterday that said our eyes don't actually "see" anything, it is our brain trainslating images coming in through the eye and making sense of them. And that we can read a sentence of complete mispelling and easily "translate" it into making complete sense without really noticing. I think that's what I was doing - making an automatic adjustment.

I'm obviously not the person to be data checking..:blushing: Useless!

Me neither LG. I have ALWAYS told my bosses that I suck at proof reading. At least I'm honest.