Sightings/ Tips -Caylee Lookalikes

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
You are mistaken. One has nothing to do with the other.

I agree. Seems to me like they are trying to cover all bases in case they do not find her body. Otherwise, the defense will claim they never looked for her alive, just assumed she's dead, blah blah blah. Confuse jurors about the test results, ala OJ.
 
I'm not so sure people should be having their homes swarmed and little girl frightened late at night. There's so many little girls who could look like Caylee.
 
Now they cant charge her with murder anytime soon. They cant go one day and swarm in with officers asking for proof that this girl Kaylee is who she says she is and not Caylee, and then turn around and charge Casey with murder. It would look like they are charging Casey when they think there is a chance that Caylee is alive. If they wanted to pursue all leads and they wanted to show that they checked out this lead, they should have done it quietly. There is now way they will look credible now if they charge her now.
Either they have evidence of a decomposing body that is Caylee or they do not.

I don't think that this incident has one iota of bearing on whether or not LE intends to charge Casey with Caylee's death. If it was LE's intent to charge Casey with murder "anytime soon" (your words), this incident doesn't do anything to diminish those charges. If, for example, LE was intending to charge Casey with Caylee's death three days from now, then in all probability, that's what they would do notwitstanding this event.
 
I am of the opinion that LE like me feel that 98% she is gone. I am glad they are checking leads. Their search will give defense a point, but I still believe they have enough evidence and was it the same department?

What kind of point could the defense gain from this? That there is a 2 year old girl in Volusia whose first name is Kaylee? How does any of this exculpate Casey?
 
I don't think she looks a lot like Caylee, either, but it does say a lot that this house was swarmed at night. If they had so much evidence that Caylee was no longer with us, why would they do this type of search when the family is asleep?

That says a LOT to me.

When she goes on trial and they try and accuse LE of not following up on tips as Cindy and JB have done numerous times, they have proof. They are doing their jobs!~
 
What kind of point could the defense gain from this? That there is a 2 year old girl in Volusia whose first name is Kaylee? How does any of this exculpate Casey?


LOL, kind of stoooooopid for kidnappers to change Caylee to Kaylee, I think that would be a bit obvious.
 
This kid looks nothing like Caylee. The only similarity is the name and they're not even spelt the same.
 
when did this happen? the reporter just said "what recently brought deputies to the home"
at first you think this happened last night but i never heard an actual date that the officers went to the house.

::goes back to lurking::

No, no nooooo. Come back CocoWiley!
That was a worthy question far as I'm concerned. I was looking for a date myself....didn't find one.

Now don't go back to lurkdom mode....stay and ask some more thought provoking questions.
Oh, and Welcome!:)
 
I don't think that this incident has one iota of bearing on whether or not LE intends to charge Casey with Caylee's death. If it was LE's intent to charge Casey with murder "anytime soon" (your words), this incident doesn't do anything to diminish those charges. If, for example, LE was intending to charge Casey with Caylee's death three days from now, then in all probability, that's what they would do notwitstanding this event.

Yes, but Crimesolver4U is probably right--the defense could hold this up to the jury to inspire doubt--unless the prosecution could show that sometime between following up on this lead, and the time they charged Casey w/ murder that they came upon new evidence, or something else that dramatically conviced them that Caylee was definitely dead.
 
I know departments which don't consult one another and they are in the next county!

raeann answered that better than I did:

One LE agency would not have gone out on such a raid without checking first with the agency who was handling this case. It would have taken one phone call to OCSO to determine whether such action was warranted or not.

I would say that LE is pretty certain that Caylee is dead, and that this incident changes nothing. The tip was compelling enough that LE could not ignore it, so they followed up on it. This incident demonstrates why the public shouldn't really get hung up on whatever words LE uses to classify their ongoing investigation. They basically follow the evidence. This case overwhelmingly looks like a death case ... but it doesn't mean that LE will ignore any tips that might contradict this.

There is NO tip under the sun that would contradict absolute forensic evidence of a dead child.
 
I'm sure Caylees eyes are hazel, not blue.......and whats up with the mucus??? kinda would of been nice to wipe her up before shooting a picture...the poor thing!!
 
That is not really the point, though. I seriously doubt LE would "swarm" in that much manpower to check a tip of an alive Caylee if they were certain she is dead. IMO.


That is not necessarily true, they will search and exhaust all leads regardless if they have evidence, so that defense or family has no questions as to the leads being followed up on.
 
Exactly. Why waste money and manpower "swarming" a place if they are so sure? I am more convinced than ever that she is alive.

I think they are obligated to investigate every tip, no matter how far fetched. I am sure that they believe her to be dead, but if they didn't investigate (especially if you know who called in the tip) they would be accused of scapegoating KC.
 
Even with evidence that leads them to believe she is no longer with us, she isn't legally declared dead. As far as I know, they're still treating it as a missing person (child) case and followed a tip. I wouldn't doubt it (eta: the tip) was intentional...but they have to act on it and I'm glad they did (eta: so nobody can say they didn't check into it).
 
I'm sure Caylees eyes are hazel, not blue.......and whats up with the mucus??? kinda would of been nice to wipe her up before shooting a picture...the poor thing!!

I noticed that too and thought, ewww, cause i have a booger skeeve thing going on. I used to clean my kids noses with Q-tips, hate boogers.
 
LOL, kind of stoooooopid for kidnappers to change Caylee to Kaylee, I think that would be a bit obvious.

But hey, you gotta figure if their "script" is so detailed that it includes, "Tell the cops you went to Valencia college for a year half. Not one year, not two years, exactly 1.5 years. Do not forget!"

But somehow they omit the part of the script that should have said, "Don't tell anyone my name or that you ever met me!!"

And silly kidnappers couldn't even get a sitter for their kids so it was two adults and 4 kids in an escort...

Well, how bright can they be?
 
raeann answered that better than I did:





There is NO tip under the sun that would contradict absolute forensic evidence of a dead child.

So, if someone calls in a tip they are supposed to say "Sorry, she is dead."? They are obligated to respond to any credible tip and apparently they had information that this was credible. I am fairly certain that she is dead, too, but that doesn't mean that a miracle couldn't happen and they could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time but I am sure it is very rare. Until they have an identified body they have to keep all avenues open.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
176
Guests online
1,624
Total visitors
1,800

Forum statistics

Threads
606,471
Messages
18,204,328
Members
233,855
Latest member
insanecobain
Back
Top