Sidebar for Caylee Anthony's forum #14

[kkdj]

And Cindy

 

[RR0004]

I would love to know why, when the State had this case for 3 whole years, they waited until the 11th hour (2 months before trial, really?!?!) to extract those files.

IMO, there is simply no excuse for that, especially knowing that Casey lived her life through social networking.

My 2nd question is, why didn't Osbourne notify Linda that they could only extract less than 2% of those files - again - knowing that there had to be more on that hard drive given Casey's lifestyle. You would think that would have been a major red flag for Osbourne.

The Jury mistrusted George so much, (thanks to George's own antics on the stand), that I truly don't believe any of this would have mattered to them nor convinced them of Casey's guilt, but it's still disgusting to know how shoddy Osbourne was both in her recovery (non)-efforts, as well as her notification to LDB.

Happy Thanksgiving all; take comfort in the fact that Caylee is in a much more loving, safer, happier place with God today than she ever was on Hopespring Drive.

IIRC, they were trying out new software to extract information (faulty at that). Let's also remember that JWG used an even better, updated version. When I think about it all, I liken it to those people put away for crimes who have been recently been exonerated due to DNA testing, testing that wasn't available at the time they were convicted. Now, if I only knew how Baez's experts were able to find this info prior to trial. Perhap JWG can answer that.

 

[Tulessa]

BBM. Again, in your opinion. There is absutely NO proof it didn't happen. Period. And cause it's only an opinion, it's not perjury.

She opened her mouth & spoke. Therefore it'a a blatant lie.


Proven over & over again....

 

[beach]

IIRC, I was told by one of the lawyers here during the trial that JB can't be sued for anything he says in the courtroom. That's why GA has no recourse against him.

Correct. However, he CAN be sued for "mistruths" (aka lies ) he said in his book that defames George. (Or anyone else for that matter.) I never read his book so I'm not sure exactly what he said or what it implies about George that are proven lies now. The devil is in the details.

 

[RR0004]

Yes, because the files were handed over to the defense prior to trial. OCSO never looked at them. Baez's team did.

Never looked at them, or couldn't access them (for whatever reason)?

 

[cluciano63]

IMO
George was in on the game.
jmo

I think GA knew what was what by the time Caylee was found, but not at the time she was murdered. The whole business of getting the car from impound and other things make no sense to me if he already knew what had happened by then.

 

[Nore]

That whole phony story of Casey being raped while waiting for the school bus in the morning....TOTAL PERJURY by Baez, imo.

---------------
Hi Katydid, one thing I noticed right away, day of his "speech"" is Baez said
"could have, not would have". There is a big difference.:furious: he chose his
words well. :seeya:

 

[Steely Dan]

IMO
George was in on the game.
jmo

And Cindy

After reading Jeff Ashton's book it sounded like they weren't on board for calling GA a child molester.

 

[Nore]

Brad Conway would not agree with you. He complained to OC Sheriff dept that Baez lied to Judge Perry when he told him that Conway had seen evidence showing that Caylee was not in the woods four months before her remains were found there.
He told investigators "I certainly did not see that, wasn't aware of it.
Conway said he was thinking at the time "Bull****, that didn't happen."

Have you also forgotten about the letter Mr Stogsdill wrote to the court re Baez and his lies to Judge Perry about payment for Court reporting services..
Last but not least, remember when Judge Perry said to Baez "Y'all lied to me. I can't trust one thing your side says anymore!"
That was typical of their exchanges. Judge Perry knew he was being lied to on a daily basis. He caught them and so did we..

-----------------
I wish HHJP would have done something about Baez. It was bad!! :what:

 

[RR0004]

ok, I will bite. again. my snip, btw, I'll only reply to this bit, because when I hear something like this, I just think maybe not everyone has read all the documents. because according to the documents, ALL THE STICKINESS WAS GONE. the reason the tape was still present in its original position was because the ends were taped to caylee's hair on either side, becoming matted and tangled in throughout the time spent underwater, decaying, and being worried at by animals. the tape, because of the matting of the ends in her hair, remained so tight against her face that HER. TEETH. WERE. STILL. IN. PLACE. when the remains were found.

---------Copied from post. Bump
Exactly!! :banghead:

BUMP, BUMP
This was murder.

ETA: IMO

 

[ZsaZsa]

I think GA knew what was what by the time Caylee was found, but not at the time she was murdered. The whole business of getting the car from impound and other things make no sense to me if he already knew what had happened by then.

As soon as they smelled the car they knew someone was dead. When they found Casey they knew it was Caylee. It was all cover-up from then on.
Inside the house they knew "the ***** in that room" had the answers to what had happend to Caylee, but GA was not allowed to investigate further.

 

[RR0004]

I'm still angry too! Thinking about poor lil Caylee and then after the verdict...the defense team partying it up and flipping the bird out the window. They knew she was guilty and yet still chose to act like they won the lottery. So disgusting but I am in awe of both Az & JWG for setting the record straight. Thank you so much for all you've done.

Yes, in light of what we know now (JB was aware of the suffocation search during the trial), it makes the "celebration" even more disgusting. They weren't celebrating the fact that they got an "innocent" person off...they were celebrating the fact that they won; they got the jury to believe their BS.
What a class act you all are, DT!

 

[katydid23]

IIRC, I was told by one of the lawyers here during the trial that JB can't be sued for anything he says in the courtroom. That's why GA has no recourse against him.

I know that he cannot be sued for slander for saying that in his opening statement. But he cannot continue to make those accusations in print or on tv without some kind of proof.

 

[krkrjx]

As soon as they smelled the car they knew someone was dead. When they found Casey they knew it was Caylee. It was all cover-up from then on.
Inside the house they knew "the ***** in that room" had the answers to what had happend to Caylee, but GA was not allowed to investigate further.

Unfortunately GA is a man who is so intimidated by his wife that he could not bring himself to go against her demands, not even for his granddaughter. I do not respect this man as he is weak, but I do understand the power of intimidation, and a woman being in charge of a household is not as uncommon as many believe. With this in mind, it is fairly easy to understand how some jurors might be so intimidated by other jurors that they cannot bring themselves to make waves in the deliberation room--not even in the name of justice for a murdered baby.

 

[Steely Dan]

I know that he cannot be sued for slander for saying that in his opening statement. But he cannot continue to make those accusations in print or on tv without some kind of proof.

As long as you add "In my opinion" or "It's my belief that" or something to quantify that it only conjecture on your part, your ok. AZL may be able to clarify that for us.

 

[RR0004]

Yes. After JB's book came out this summer, the prosecutors asked her to confirm that there was really a "fool-proof suffication" search, and she was able to access the files at that time, so I don't know what changed. By the time I contacted her in late July, she already knew all the details of the searches.



Oh, I know. I wish we had been able to get the whole hard drive image.



If there was, I would have posted it in the computer forensics thread. I think I did post something about Cindy's apparent attempt to investigate Casey and her friends the night before she finally tracked Casey down.



More importantly, I doubt George would have bothered accepting a Facebook friend for Casey and checking a Myspace comment in the middle of his "suicidal" search.



The entire hard drive was turned over to the defense. The defense extracted and reviewed the relevant internet history files. The prosecution only got partial files from OCSO.

Ok...I'm reading backwards...there are two interesting point you've made here: 1) SO knew about the search (so who the heck on the PT read Jose's cr*ppy book??!!), and 2)WTH!!! OSCO only gave them partial results??!!

PS- just realized...it was because they didn't get into FF.

 

[PrincessSezMe]

As soon as they smelled the car they knew someone was dead. When they found Casey they knew it was Caylee. It was all cover-up from then on.
Inside the house they knew "the ***** in that room" had the answers to what had happend to Caylee, but GA was not allowed to investigate further.

I've always thought though that GA and CA did their best to delude themselves, for as long as they could, that their own offspring could not do something this heinous. I think they found out for sure when KC bonded out in August or September of 2008. It was in October 2008 that CA made the big slip of saying "we don't believe Caylee's in the woods", and in November 2008 Dominic Casey was trudging around the very area Caylee was found likely looking for the body. I suspect that there was some kind of "hallelujah" moment for them, by way of a confession perhaps, when KC was out of jail. JMHO.

 

[AZlawyer]

BBM I did not realize that the defense was given the entire hard drive, while the prosecution only got partial files. I don't fully understand how all of this works, so maybe I'm reading something into this that isn't there. I guess my question is, why was this the case and, could this have had any impact on the end results, i.e., on the fact that the foxfire browser "fool-proof suffocation" search was not discovered by the prosecution? :waitasec:

The sheriff's office had the hard drives and turned them over to the defense, which turned them over to the defense computer experts. The prosecutors didn't ask for the hard drives--they asked the sheriff's office to investigate the hard drives and give them anything useful, basically. There would have been no point in the prosecutors taking possession of the hard drives from the sheriff's office in order to turn them over to their own computer experts, because their computer experts were employed by the sheriff's office.

Technically the prosecution did have the entire hard drive. Their computer forensics person failed to extract the FF browser history.

That's the latest story, anyway. At the time I got the records, I was not told that there was any problem extracting them previously--just that they only did keyword searches and "weren't asked" to read through the browser history for any particular dates. They had no trouble extracting the browser history when I requested it.

Excellent post! Thanks button just wouldn't do.

JB repeatedly perjured himself in court and because he is a defense attorney, that's just fine.

True justice would require that regardless of the trial outcome, an attorney be held responsible for misconduct, which SHOULD, but sadly doesn't include, telling baldfaced lies that contradict each other in a court of law.

JB ought to be punished for his lies. But he won't be.

That whole phony story of Casey being raped while waiting for the school bus in the morning....TOTAL PERJURY by Baez, imo.

Jose did not commit perjury in his opening statement. He wasn't under oath, he wasn't testifying, he wasn't saying that he knew this information personally. I don't think people should throw around the word "perjury" when they mean "presented a defense that ought to have made him feel morally queasy."

Also, in my experience, many (perhaps most) attorneys are very very good at fooling themselves into believing the positions they present in court. This is a useful skill in some ways (e.g., helping you present the position with passion and credibility), but less useful in other ways (e.g., anticipating the other side's positions). Perhaps Jose does believe what he said in his opening statement.

IIRC, they were trying out new software to extract information (faulty at that). Let's also remember that JWG used an even better, updated version. When I think about it all, I liken it to those people put away for crimes who have been recently been exonerated due to DNA testing, testing that wasn't available at the time they were convicted. Now, if I only knew how Baez's experts were able to find this info prior to trial. Perhap JWG can answer that.

Baez's experts were able to find it IMO because even the older versions of the software had no trouble extracting the information--they just messed up the timestamps.

I have no idea why OCSO is now saying that they had trouble extracting the data. They didn't mention that to me. They just said that they weren't asked to look through the data, only to do certain keyword searches.

 

[CaptainKangaroo]

I've always thought though that GA and CA did their best to delude themselves, for as long as they could, that their own offspring could not do something this heinous. I think they found out for sure when KC bonded out in August or September of 2008. It was in October 2008 that CA made the big slip of saying "we don't believe Caylee's in the woods", and in November 2008 Dominic Casey was trudging around the very area Caylee was found likely looking for the body. I suspect that there was some kind of "hallelujah" moment for them, by way of a confession perhaps, when KC was out of jail. JMHO.

You are probably right. But I always thought that she never fessed up and that although they knew Caylee was dead they continued to delude themselves about who was responsible until they found out what Jose was going to say in court. As soon as they knew she was saying Caylee drowned, all doubt about who was responsible was gone.

And yet they still helped her.

 

[krkrjx]

The judicial system is looking for the truth I believe.
The evidence must support it. It only makes sense.
The facts (IMO) supported this, but were distputed, effectively.
Had the prosecution been correctly advised of the Internet searches, I believe the whole course of the trial and the evidence would have had a different outcome. It's so obvious!
Jmo

I so wish the evidence had been presented, but I do not think it would have changed the outcome of the trial. Not with the jury in this case. The mere fact that the "Casey" account was used by family while Casey herself used a separate accounted labeled "Owner" is something the jurors would have used as reasonable doubt that Casey did the searches. IOW, without corroboration that Casey was really "Owner" on that computer, there would be room for doubt. And who would corroborate? Cindy? George? Lee? Yeah, right.

Unless the computer data is such that it clearly proves Casey was "Owner" to the point where it could not be denied in any way, I believe the jurors would have bought any assertion from the defesne that "Casey" is Casey, and "Owner" is...whoever owns the computer.

Just my take based on how other evidence was viewed by the jurors.