Agree w/AZ Lawyer.
In this instance (bbm) it is definitely an error, since we know the reference was to the crucial date of JUNE 16, 2008, not
July.
As we all know, July 16th was the date of FCA's arrest, a full month after Caylee was last seen.
However, within the interview quoted, Ms Osborne does additionally make separate reference to the computer activity on the 16th (and 17th?) of
July, which was the timeframe when someone at the A. home apparently was busy deleting huge amounts of data and browser history from the home desktop. This was hinky behavior, considering that a child from this home had been reported missing. If the family members were mystified and worried sick about the child, why on earth would they be deleting any information at all from their home computer?
Ms Osborne points out that because the data had been so recently deleted around the time of FCA's arrest, and because the computers were so quickly thereafter confiscated, much of that deleted data was able to be reconstructed for the investigation.
The similar "31 days apart" dates -- June 15/16, versus July 15/16/17, undeniably cause confusion, and have done so from the start. Remember when we were first following this case and these pesky transpositions between June/July became common? It happened a lot here, as well as within the LE interviews, depositions, investigatory reports, other docs released, etc. IIRC, June/July got mixed up a couple of times in the court testimony, too.
BTW, that in-depth interview with Ms Osborne is eye-opening and full of pertinent and thought-provoking detail, IMO.
http://forensicsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/exclusive-interview-with-sandra-osborne.html
:shakehead:
Why oh why was the State was not allowed to present this very clear and compelling evidence of FCA's activity on the computer on June 16, to refute the Defense's assertion that Caylee drowned in the pool that day? I will never understand.