Sidebar Discussion

[MsMacGyver]

Which trial (KC's or Amanda Knox's) received more media coverage?

Btw Casey is going to watch Amanda go on all those tv shows and write books and make a whole lot of money. I think a majority of Americans believe Amanda Knox is innocent so she'll get all the attention (most of it positive) while Casey sits holed up somewhere with most Americans cursing her. I can picture KC getting in touch with Amanda but I'll bet that Amanda wants nothing to do with KC.

You know, I don't know much about the case but what I have heard the last couple days is pretty interesting. One of the judges was trying this case while under indictment for bad business practices and he went out of his way to paint AK as foxy knoxy..she devil.
There was a woman on this morning that had correspondence with AK. She reported that a doctor had told AK she had aids while in jail so she offered up a list of 7 ex boyfriends. The doctor then used that information to release a story that AK had slept with 7 inmates while jailed. The doctor then told her she didn't have aids. This reporter also said AK was sexually assaulted during the first 6 months she was jailed.
I'll reserve my opinion until I hear her story but from what I've heard about the Itailian justice system, I wouldn't want to end up in jail over there!

 

[wonders]

Devil's Advocate: I think it was an accident. I think she had a break with reality upon finding Caylee deceased, and Caylee ended up where she ended up during that break from reality. I do not think she staged a murder, nor do I think she staged a kidnapping, I think she laid Caylee down in those woods with a few of her things while in absolute denial.

DA- I can't help but think this version of reality sounds awfully parallel to the story FCA fed Amy H about money FCA had stolen from her. You know, that Amy must have hidden the money herself when she was sleepwalking.

I can't imagine why Amy would have believed that BS explanation for a nano-second, much less gone on that fruitless, pathetic and pointless search with FCA around the house.

---
PS- Words matter. FCA did not "lay" Caylee down in the woods. She threw a garbage bag containing her duct-taped baby into trash-strewn woods. The "few of her things" was only a blanket she had wrapped Caylee's corpse in, unless you count the laundry bag and garbage bags from the Anthony home.

Thanks for the insight though- it hadn't really struck me before how telling it was that FCA did NOT send her daughter to her "grave" with a favorite or comforting toy of Caylee's.

I totally agree with the bolded above and that is why it makes me nuts when people say woods instead of a trash strewn swamp. To me using the word woods sanitizes where Caylee was thrown away.

 

[Sleuths4Me]

Originally Posted by pcrum12 View Post
maybe it didn't start there. maybe it was around the blanket or canvas bag - maybe.,,,..

eta: the point being is we don't know. there was no concrete evidence of what the original state of the crime scene was.

really it doesn't matter to me if the duct tape was there or not, it doesn't matter to me if RK touched Caylee's skull, it doesn't matter to me that he had a few accounts what happened when he found Caylee. What matters to me is that Caylee's mother killed her and threw Caylee away like trash..and if you think it was an accident and Caylee's mother freaked out after, it still gave Caylee's mother no right to throw her away like trash, there is no reason that a baby should be triple bagged and tossed in the swamp.

 

[jon_burrows]

I totally agree with the bolded above and that is why it makes me nuts when people say woods instead of a trash strewn swamp. To me using the word woods sanitizes where Caylee was thrown away.

I remember seeing a promo for the Phil show and he used 'buried in the woods'. A far cry from being taped, stuffed in black trash bags and a laundry bag then tossed in a dump/swamp.

IMO

 

[pcrum12]

Originally Posted by pcrum12 View Post
maybe it didn't start there. maybe it was around the blanket or canvas bag - maybe.,,,..

eta: the point being is we don't know. there was no concrete evidence of what the original state of the crime scene was.

really it doesn't matter to me if the duct tape was there or not, it doesn't matter to me if RK touched Caylee's skull, it doesn't matter to me that he had a few accounts what happened when he found Caylee. What matters to me is that Caylee's mother killed her and threw Caylee away like trash..and if you think it was an accident and Caylee's mother freaked out after, it still gave Caylee's mother no right to throw her away like trash, there is no reason that a baby should be triple bagged and tossed in the swamp.

I totally agree. It's dispicable how she disposed of the body. However, that does not prove she murdered her. And that is my standing. I don't "like" her anymore than anyone else. But, as far as the first 3 charges she was acquited of, I have to agree with the jury.

 

[wonders]

I remember seeing a promo for the Phil show and he used 'buried in the woods'. A far cry from being taped, stuffed in black trash bags and a laundry bag then tossed in a dump/swamp.

IMO

Yup! And the Anthony's kept using the word woods it drove me nuts I tell ya.
I for one will never believe that OCA would go to all the trouble and work to bury Caylee. She didn't give a flip about Caylee so she just threw her into that swamp knowing it was a dumping ground for peoples trash and that's what Caylee was to her.

 

[MsMacGyver]

I think you missed the "leaf expert" - no shallow grave.....IMO....and not "placed"......more like tossed......animals would not have waited until she came to the surface - they would have dug her up - her remains were there several months before the flooding....

I was thinking more along the lines of when the bags were opened. If they were opened before the rains came I wonder if her skull could have endured all that water. There would be no current to move her bones around but she would have floated and been pushed around by the wind. If she was put on the surface the animals I believe would have gotten to her very quickly, possibly doing more damage to the bags. If she were put in a shallow grave, depending on what kind of animals were present is very important. I could see racoons trying to dig, not sure how their sense of smell is, possibly dogs but do they have a problem with strays. Because this was a residential area with a school, I would think there would be caution/ reporting of stray dogs. If Caylee was on the surface I would think the bags would have been shredded more and her remains would have ended up completely out of the bags. She was there for a little over 2 months before Hurricane Fay hit. Whatever ground cover that was present would have been disrupted due to the 25-30 inches of rain that fell. Does it make sense that after the water subsided would be when you would start to consider ground cover. We know that some of Caylees bones were buried in the muck.
If she was buried in a shallow grave I could see coons disturbing the ground but I don't think they would have uncovered her completely.

 

[logicalgirl]

I was thinking more along the lines of when the bags were opened. If they were opened before the rains came I wonder if her skull could have endured all that water. There would be no current to move her bones around but she would have floated and been pushed around by the wind. If she was put on the surface the animals I believe would have gotten to her very quickly, possibly doing more damage to the bags. If she were put in a shallow grave, depending on what kind of animals were present is very important. I could see racoons trying to dig, not sure how their sense of smell is, possibly dogs but do they have a problem with strays. Because this was a residential area with a school, I would think there would be caution/ reporting of stray dogs. If Caylee was on the surface I would think the bags would have been shredded more and her remains would have ended up completely out of the bags. She was there for a little over 2 months before Hurricane Fay hit. Whatever ground cover that was present would have been disrupted due to the 25-30 inches of rain that fell. Does it make sense that after the water subsided would be when you would start to consider ground cover. We know that some of Caylees bones were buried in the muck.
If she was buried in a shallow grave I could see coons disturbing the ground but I don't think they would have uncovered her completely.

Here you go MsMacGyver - everything you want to know and more - found at
www.thehinkymeter.com/casey-anthony-murder-trial/searchable-discovery/ and specifically here...Autopsy Report 6440-6475 - discussed by experts at length....

Not too much argument left about how the series of events unfolded.....

 

[MiraclesHappen]

I totally agree. It's dispicable how she disposed of the body. However, that does not prove she murdered her. And that is my standing. I don't "like" her anymore than anyone else. But, as far as the first 3 charges she was acquited of, I have to agree with the jury.

I doubt that anyone is saying that the manner in which Casey "disposed" of Caylee's body, in and of itself, would prove that the child was murdered by Casey.
However, it has substantial evidentiary value, in that it shows consciousness of guilt, a desire to hide the truth of the death, and it shows a bunch of other stuff , already discussed, all of which point to the fact that Casey killed Caylee.

It is a portion of evidence in a chain of events, and it is a portion which points to the guilt of Casey.
It cannot stand alone to prove the crime; I doubt anyone said that. But it is immensely strong evidence which I cannot ignore.

And by the way, if we are talking about manipulation of evidence, of the skull....then I'd suggest this is the time when the manipulation of the skull, and or movement of the skull is a factor. The skull was still attached to the body of course, but that is when the evidence was bagged, taken around town, relocated several times, and ultimately hidden in a manner which shows me there is absolutely no regard for the sanctity of life.
Kind of trumps any other alleged movement of anything. That was the manipulation that got my attention.


MH :wolf:
opinion

 

[zippitydoda]

There is now way this side of H*LL FCA would have spent 3 years in jail on an accident theory! She is way too self centered and if her uneducated self could have drummed up the accidental lie she would have in a heart beat and with her lying skills would have taken it four steps further at that time and GA would to this day be sitting in jail!!!

Also, back in the day, with the abundance of free, high caliber attorneys FCA had supporting her, they would have never had FCA behind bars for three years if they could have explained/convinced the SA that it was a drowning or other type of accident. Everyone tried to get her to admit to an accident, many, many times, but she and JB refused to even speak with the SA or LE. The DT went for the brass ring and won...sorry Caylee.


I.must.stop.rehashing.this.case. - ehhh maybe next week.

 

[logicalgirl]

I doubt that anyone is saying that the manner in which Casey "disposed" of Caylee's body, in and of itself, would prove that the child was murdered by Casey.
However, it has substantial evidentiary value, in that it shows consciousness of guilt, a desire to hide the truth of the death, and it shows a bunch of other stuff , already discussed, all of which point to the fact that Casey killed Caylee.

It is a portion of evidence in a chain of events, and it is a portion which points to the guilt of Casey.
It cannot stand alone to prove the crime; I doubt anyone said that. But it is immensely strong evidence which I cannot ignore.

And by the way, if we are talking about manipulation of evidence, of the skull....then I'd suggest this is the time when the manipulation of the skull, and or movement of the skull is a factor. The skull was still attached to the body of course, but that is when the evidence was bagged, taken around town, relocated several times, and ultimately hidden in a manner which shows me there is absolutely no regard for the sanctity of life.
Kind of trumps any other alleged movement of anything. That was the manipulation that got my attention.


MH :wolf:
opinion

Thank you MiraclesHappen for your succinct words again.....and reminding us of the key - chain of events......guilt...

 

[twomanywords]

OT, but the attorneys seem so much more respectful and professional in the
C Murray trial. I also noticed the judge wanted everyone to use cups instead of swigs from water bottles.
What a difference than in KCs trial!!! It's like watching "Nightline" vs "Jerry Springer."

 

[strawberry]

I could dance with joy just thinking about how jealous FCA is going to be of Amanda Knox's bella vita. I would like Amanda Knox to earn a law degree and marry Tony Lazzaro.

BBM :floorlaugh::floorlaugh: :lol:

 

[marge_rita]

THis is NOT what her defense said at trial. Why wouldn't she just explain how and why she "staged a kiddnapping", if it was all an accident. Why would they present a false defense? It is not logical or believable. Who has ever heard of anyone doing this anyway? And why would anyone offer explainations for a person who can't be bothered to say what really happened?

bbm\
imo

 

[strawberry]

OT, but the attorneys seem so much more respectful and professional in the
C Murray trial. I also noticed the judge wanted everyone to use cups instead of swigs from water bottles.
What a difference than in KCs trial!!! It's like watching "Nightline" vs "Jerry Springer."

That's what struck me the very.first.day. No smirking, whining, running to check the cell phone. And now I practically have the judge's witness speech memorized: "Let me give you instructions I give to every witness in every case. First, sit back and relax" :floorlaugh:

 

[marge_rita]

I totally agree. It's dispicable how she disposed of the body. However, that does not prove she murdered her. And that is my standing. I don't "like" her anymore than anyone else. But, as far as the first 3 charges she was acquited of, I have to agree with the jury.

Yes-disposing of the body--- it kind of goes with the territory of murder.


imo

 

[marge_rita]

So... because the hero who discovered Caylee's remains, might have accidentally lifted the skull- how is this manipulating the evidence??? I fail to see it. How does this prove Casey is innocent, or that he killed Caylee???:waitasec::waitasec::waitasec:

It's laughable. The kc supporters are alive.

Mr. Kronk had nothing to do with the child's murder.

Mr. Kronk wasn't on trial.

imo

 

[BellaVita]

maybe it didn't start there. maybe it was around the blanket or canvas bag - maybe.,,,..

eta: the point being is we don't know. there was no concrete evidence of what the original state of the crime scene was.

I would like to know how the tape lost its adhesive power and detached from the blanket or bag, yet it somehow regained adhesion in order to stick to Caylee's hair???? Not possible. The tape did not lose its adhesive qualities and then magically become sticky again. Not even one in a billion chance of that. Also you have stated in other posts that FCA DID apply the tape to stage a kidnapping/murder to cover for an accident. Just curious if you have changed your mind about that. Thanks.

 

[PeteyGirl]

maybe it didn't start there. maybe it was around the blanket or canvas bag - maybe.,,,..

eta: the point being is we don't know. there was no concrete evidence of what the original state of the crime scene was.

No, we have no concrete evidence (a photo or video) of the dumping grounds prior to RK. It's not like they were quiescent, either, what with the animals scattering the corpse, floodwaters rising and falling, and then RK poking the skull or whatever he actually did.

This is usually the case, so our CSI teams are specially and thoroughly trained to process evidence so the detectives, prosecutor then jury can make their best inference.

The "maybe maybe" never disappears altogether, but all things considered, what we ended up with by piecing it all together is closer to the truth than either you or I could come up with.

It's a big stretch, a huge distrust of the professionals in this case, to still cling to these sorts of "Maybe's". The maybe's you are still defending are the kind of maybe's we all had before any CSI occurred.

If you have some reason to believe there was shoddy work done, or an inside source, I'd be very interested to know it. I mean this sincerely.

 

[bayouland]

I would like to know how the tape lost its adhesive power and detached from the blanket or bag, yet it somehow regained adhesion in order to stick to Caylee's hair???? Not possible. The tape did not lose its adhesive qualities and then magically become sticky again. Not even one in a billion chance of that. Also you have stated in other posts that FCA DID apply the tape to stage a kidnapping/murder to cover for an accident. Just curious if you have changed your mind about that. Thanks.

BellaVita, I would like to add to your question to pcrum.

If FCA really lost her marbles as you seem to think (previous post), then how did she think clearly enough to stage a kidnapping to cover for the accident? How also did Dr.'s determine that she does not suffer mental illness?