Sidebar for Caylee Anthony's forum #14

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
It does make the prosecution and OCSO look bad, but to me it makes the defense look worse. Yes, the prosecution missed evidence that shows Casey lied, but they showed throughout the trial that Casey lied. What is worse is that it shows that the defense didn't really care that Casey lied or that she killed Caylee. We have to remember that this new evidence wouldn't have saved Caylee. We have to remember that the good guys don't always win. We have to remember that in the end that the defense and Casey have to live with their decisions and actions. The members here that brought this in the open did so for justice and truth and that is all that matters in the end.
 
The defense is not supposed to care if the person is guilty; it is not a part of their job to even ask. It sounds horrible, and often is, but that is the way it is, as far as I know.

I am having a very hard time with the state having missed this information, no matter what the reasoning is, or how busy they were, or how they may have thought they already had enough. I am just blown away that they did not find this data. I really don't seem to be able to get past it.
 
cluciano63 said:
The defense is not supposed to care if the person is guilty; it is not a part of their job to even ask. It sounds horrible, and often is, but that is the way it is, as far as I know.

I am having a very hard time with the state having missed this information, no matter what the reasoning is, or how busy they were, or how they may have thought they already had enough. I am just blown away that they did not find this data. I really don't seem to be able to get past it.
Click to expand...

You are not alone.

I do feel sorry for the OCSO employees and the States Attorney's Office because I am sure they are beating themselves up pretty badly over this.

Having said that, it was their jobs to leave no stone unturned and they simply didn't get the job done.

What disturbs me the most is that it only took a public record request and a modest amount of time for AZ and JWG to unravel this and Florida had three years.

No one wants to beat them up, but to make excuses for an error of this magnitude requires far more generosity than I can cough up.
 
cluciano63 said:
The defense is not supposed to care if the person is guilty; it is not a part of their job to even ask. It sounds horrible, and often is, but that is the way it is, as far as I know.

I am having a very hard time with the state having missed this information, no matter what the reasoning is, or how busy they were, or how they may have thought they already had enough. I am just blown away that they did not find this data. I really don't seem to be able to get past it.
Click to expand...

Part of what bothers me with a "defense" is that I believe that a defense lawyer shouldn't try to get a person off if they really committed a crime, but a real defense attorney should try to keep innocent people free and if their client is guilty, to get them a fair sentence. True justice is not setting the guilty free, but treating everyone fairly.
 
Okay - I'm a little calmer - not much - but doubt I'll run around in circles screaming like I was ready to do an hour and a half ago.

I wanted to see Jose put on the spot - about being wrong about the AIM account and the computer time. I wanted Tony to ask Jose if he still stands by his statements about George when in all likelyhood these searches were made by FCA as Baez stated he knew for sure that GA was at work by that time.

I wanted Tony to ask Baez after the fact how he feels about helping hide evidence so an person who is most likely a baby killer has gone free. I would even have liked it if he's asked Baez if he thought George would sue him for defamation of character.

And I sure would have liked it if Tony had stopped taking credit for the computer searches and put much more emphasis on the work AZLawyer and JWG did - a lot more - the lack of it made me the most angry of all.
Oh yeah, and being forced to watch that much of Baez again because I wanted to see this report. Never again!!
 
Please delete if this is inappropriate. Someone asked above. If you search "Spiked Venturing into the pro-suicide pit" you will come upon the website Casey clicked on.
 
jandkmom said:
Part of what bothers me with a "defense" is that I believe that a defense lawyer shouldn't try to get a person off if they really committed a crime, but a real defense attorney should try to keep innocent people free and if their client is guilty, to get them a fair sentence. True justice is not setting the guilty free, but treating everyone fairly.
Click to expand...

I am not saying I disagree, but that is not how it works. The State of Florida made a major oversight, IMO, and one they should not have made. It is hard to deal with, at least for me. I never think defense attorneys will do the right thing, and am surprised sometimes when they do.
 
bayouland said:
You are not alone.

I do feel sorry for the OCSO employees and the States Attorney's Office because I am sure they are beating themselves up pretty badly over this.

Having said that, it was their jobs to leave no stone unturned and they simply didn't get the job done.

What disturbs me the most is that it only took a public record request and a modest amount of time for AZ and JWG to unravel this and Florida had three years.

No one wants to beat them up, but to make excuses for an error of this magnitude requires far more generosity than I can cough up.
Click to expand...

OCSO and the State's Attorney's Office had the moral and judicial responsibility to get this right, and really, Lamar should look in the mirror when he searches for someone to blame. He tried to cut corners by having OCSO personnel do the searches of which they apparently couldn't handle. Firefox befuzzled them. :rolleyes: I mean, really?!?! Regardless, this was ultimately Lamar's case and he didn't make sure his bases were covered with the best players. I can't blame LDB, she requested the entire day of the 16th to be searched. When you go into a restaurant and order apple pie, you assume when it comes to your table, it contains all the necessary ingredients even though you didn't go to the kitchen to watch them make it.

But nonetheless, so be it, they had difficulty with Firefox, but when you know you're befuzzled, ask for help from higher up! Linda had no clue that there were problems extracting the data, she assumed she got what she asked for. In a case of this magnitude, the FBI should have been in charge of handling the computer forensics to begin with or at the very least, a professional service provider.

No offense intended at all to JWG and AZlawyer for their brilliant work and dedication to Caylee, but the sad result of this search further fed the flames of those naysayers who claimed all along that OCSO produced a very haphazard investigation. I have no problem with that, I believe in the truth no matter which side it may fall, and it still doesn't change the fact that Casey murdered her very own baby girl.

In fact, it reinforces it, tenfold.
 
jandkmom said:
Part of what bothers me with a "defense" is that I believe that a defense lawyer shouldn't try to get a person off if they really committed a crime, but a real defense attorney should try to keep innocent people free and if their client is guilty, to get them a fair sentence. True justice is not setting the guilty free, but treating everyone fairly.
Click to expand...

Morally, you couldn't be more correct, but realistically and Judicially speaking, that isn't what a trial is all about.

Remember early on when HHJP spoke openly in Court about a trial being solely about who can play the better hand? He wasn't blowing smoke.

It's all a game of 'dare' so to speak; who can outwit, outsmart and outmaneuver the opponent within the seemingly broad boundaries of legalities.

Sad, but true.
 
cluciano63 said:
I am not saying I disagree, but that is not how it works. The State of Florida made a major oversight, IMO, and one they should not have made. It is hard to deal with, at least for me. I never think defense attorneys will do the right thing, and am surprised sometimes when they do.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, we've yet to see Baez "do the right thing" even once.
 
JWG said:
I have no idea what is being written, so I continue to live in blissful ignorance. :crazy:

However, I will say, just because I have never testified in court as an expert does not mean I am not right. Jose's own expert has a bit of egg on his face right now because he used an older version of NetAnalysis to decode the Firefox history. If my reading of the NetAnalysis change logs is accurate, he used a version to decode the file that required he manually add a bias for time zone and daylight savings time.

He was sloppy. Seems that happens a lot with browser history on this case. :banghead:

The later versions of NetAnalysis and Cacheback do the time zone bias automatically. Just like the 2004 version of the Perl script I initially found to decode the file. All agree that the search was done an hour later than what Jose's book says. OCSO did the search earlier this week. They agree too. :thumb:

So Jose, you are right. I have never testified as an expert. But that does not mean I am wrong. It just means I have never testified as an expert.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Your work was awesome and fool-proof. ;)

NavySubMom said:
When I read this quote "had never testified or been admitted as an expert in the court of law", I think it is a Baez mis-speak. I don't think he is saying AZ has no legal standing in any Court of the United States, I think he means this 'someone" who is our AZLawyer was not verified as an "expert" in THIS particular court/CA trial by Judge Perry, for example, by the process during the trial where a witness goes through their own curriculum vitae(sp?), and gives all of the other trials they a have testified at, how they are an expert in the particular area, like the "grief expert" (hiccup), or Dr. G. going through her whole education and why she can testify as a witness as the coroner, and then Judge Perry says, OK, this "someone" can testify as an expert in this particular case.

That is what I think Baez meant, that AZ/JWG didn't testify in this particular case, and were not vetted as an expert witness for this particular case by that process. NOT by ANY MEANS sticking up for JB, but I think some are misreading his statement.

AZ, your take on what I think? do you see what I am saying? or am I, as usual, taking 6 paragraphs to make a simple statement LOL!!

IMO, MOO< etc.

ETA: he is definitely trying to denigate or "poo poo" your findings, but I am reading what he said not as a direct insult to your legal career.
Click to expand...

I now think that he meant to say that JWG has never been allowed to testify as an expert in court (although that certainly doesn't mean he wouldn't be allowed if he tried). I think what he accidentally (?) said instead on Facebook was that the person Tony P was relying on had never been "admitted in a court of law," which is a thing you say about lawyers, not experts.

A person of character would fix his mistake.

peedoffinny said:
I don't like the way Pippitone is presenting this at all. Why doesn't he ask <modsnip> about the facts and since he knew about the search, why did he try to blame someone else? I wish he would focus more on the new evidence pointing to KC instead of blunders by the only one's supporting Caylee. I'm sorry, but to me it seems like this is just turning into a Prosector and LE bashing instead of highlighting the main point which is Casey premeditated the murder of her precious daughter.
Click to expand...

There are two main points. First, Casey searched "fool-proof suffication" right about the same time Caylee probably died. Is that a smoking gun for murder? No, but as circumstantial evidence it ain't bad.

Second, yes, the SA or OCSO or both made a huge mistake. They had a big job to do, and mistakes happen to everyone, but that doesn't mean we squeeze our eyes shut and refuse to say that mistakes were made.

BTW this nonsense I saw on one news story about it being impossible to find the search unless you knew ahead of time to look for "suffocation" is just silly. You could literally read through the ENTIRE internet history for that day (and I did) in 15 minutes. The word "suffocation" pretty much jumps out at you, I promise.

logicalgirl said:
Okay - I'm a little calmer - not much - but doubt I'll run around in circles screaming like I was ready to do an hour and a half ago.

I wanted to see Jose put on the spot - about being wrong about the AIM account and the computer time. I wanted Tony to ask Jose if he still stands by his statements about George when in all likelyhood these searches were made by FCA as Baez stated he knew for sure that GA was at work by that time.

I wanted Tony to ask Baez after the fact how he feels about helping hide evidence so an person who is most likely a baby killer has gone free. I would even have liked it if he's asked Baez if he thought George would sue him for defamation of character.

And I sure would have liked it if Tony had stopped taking credit for the computer searches and put much more emphasis on the work AZLawyer and JWG did - a lot more - the lack of it made me the most angry of all.
Oh yeah, and being forced to watch that much of Baez again because I wanted to see this report. Never again!!
Click to expand...

I told Tony that I wasn't sure why he even wanted to interview me, and that the evidence spoke for itself. :) JWG did more work than I did, certainly, and deserves credit for that. But the fact is that the evidence was public record and, once translated into a more readable format, can be understood by anyone with a brain.
 
Here is a difficult question.

Did Sandra Osbourne know that there "was" a Firefox history that had not been translated or accessed?
 
twall said:
Why would the tape have tissue on it when there was not a trace of it left on the remains? And it did have hair on it, Dr. G had to cut it to remove it from the hair mat which was being held on to the skull by the tape. And the tape just happened to end up wrapped around her skull when it was used to secure the packaging? Not logical at all. JMO
Click to expand...

For the simple reason that duct tape is sticky and will adhere to stuff. If it is wrapped around a body during decomposition, bits of skin and facial hair (stuff that is more resistant to decomposition) would have been attached to it and traces would still be there when it was recovered. They didn't find anything like that, where ever the duct tape was originally, it probably wasn't on her face.

Remember the hair with the "death ring" or whatever they called it? That doesn't happen right away, you have to have decomposition first. And if the body was contained in a bag, that hair could not have gotten out. In other words, if it really was a hair from her corpse, the corpse must have been somewhere outside the bag for a considerably length of time. That could not have been in the car itself because then body fluids would have been found, and they were not. So where the hell was it during that time?

So, for the hair to be in the car, and assuming the car was used to transport the wrapped body to the swamp, the body must have been lying in the house and decomposing for a long time. Remember, all the stuff used to contain the body apparently came from the house. The hair could have been then transferred to the outside of the bag during wrapping and subsequently deposited in the car. Note: the body must have been in the house for a considerable period of time for that to have happened. How can the parents have been unaware of that when they lived there? How could Casey have done that when her parents said she took off right after the last time they saw Caylee alive? The parents version of events is not credible, and they are the primary line of evidence implicating Casey.

The prosecutions own evidence proves that their theory of events could not possibly have happened the way they said.
 
Happy Thanksgiving all.
Well I can say that I am glad I was in bed and did not see any of this last night. To have to look at JB's face hurts so I choose not to.
We all know what really happened anyway, even if a few little time fames are off and people are lying through their holes.
I hope they all choke on their turkey today.
 
Good morning Caylee Warriors and Happy Thanksgiving to you all!:seeya:

No use crying over spilt milk. I'm soooo over this beast but sooo sad that Caylee didn't receive justice.

I truly doubt that a jury would have convicted, even with this evidence. I believe they were lazy, didn't understand their role and allowed a guilty person to walk free..I also believe there might have been a stealth juror who led the deliberations.They truly should be very ashamed of themselves...

Baez on the other hand, should have gotten her to accept that plea deal instead of making a mockery of our judicial system...but he too will get what's coming, if he hasn't already...

You all have a great Holiday....
 
Happy Thanksgiving.
I think we should focus on our family and friends today and not even think about KC and her defense team. Why let her spoil our time with loved ones?
Of course we will never forget Caylee.
 
AZlawyer said:
I told Tony that I wasn't sure why he even wanted to interview me, and that the evidence spoke for itself. :) JWG did more work than I did, certainly, and deserves credit for that. But the fact is that the evidence was public record and, once translated into a more readable format, can be understood by anyone with a brain.
Click to expand...

You are too kind. I think dialing up OCSO and convincing them to send you the files took a bit of work, and then you invested a lot of time crawling through them...so let's just agree it was a team effort. :thumb:

Makes you wonder what else is on the computer in unallocated space. Mozilla entries between late March and early June are missing. Assuming they were not over-written by the Windows file system, they would still be out there in unallocated space. One might be able to find them by doing a search for "google", "facebook", "photobucket", or "myspace".

(Just saying) :whistle:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 181 more.
Total: 772 (members: 182, guests: 590)

Online statistics

Members online
182
Guests online
590
Total visitors
772
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,361
Messages
18,238,340
Members
234,355
Latest member
Foldigity
Back
Top