Software designer says Casey Anthony prosecution data was wrong

[GhostCrab]

Yes I remember this too. Baez say something to the effect that the highest number of clicks were to MySpace, not searches for chloroform.

Honestly, my own opinion is that KC would have never been capable of making chloroform...she's lazy for starters. And with the abundance of "knockout" drugs on the market, I don't see where chloroform would have been necessary. I thought it a mistake for the SA to make such a big thing of it.

I believe KC killed Caylee and that it wasn't an accidental drowning. However, the commotion surrounding the release of this story (as though it's new news) can have the effect of dampening the fury of the public which has been outraged by the NG verdict. I daresay you will soon have people opining that the verdict was right and the the state was misleading in all of the circumstantial evidence. What a shame.

It was NEVER corrected by the state. There was an original report done with NetAnalysis from which the DT referred when they denied that there were 84 searches done. That was brought out on cross-exam. It was never sonething that the state acknowledged and corrected. THEY insisted the CacheBack report showing the 84 searches was the correct one during the entire trial, including closing arguments. Some of you on hear are trying to take what the DT said about NetAnalysis and use it to show that the state did nothing wrong.

 

[cityslick]

Yes I remember this too. Baez say something to the effect that the highest number of clicks were to MySpace, not searches for chloroform.

Honestly, my own opinion is that KC would have never been capable of making chloroform...she's lazy for starters. And with the abundance of "knockout" drugs on the market, I don't see where chloroform would have been necessary. I thought it a mistake for the SA to make such a big thing of it.

I believe KC killed Caylee and that it wasn't an accidental drowning. However, the commotion surrounding the release of this story (as though it's new news) can have the effect of dampening the fury of the public which has been outraged by the NG verdict. I daresay you will soon have people opining that the verdict was right and the the state was misleading in all of the circumstantial evidence. What a shame.

I agree with this. Most don't like the fact she got off, but a lot of people don't like when they perceive 'the man' trying to get over on someone for it's own causes.

 

[everyoneneedsavoice]

Bumping my post, sorry...but still seeing posts that jurors didn't know (maybe still behind) but, clearly, the jurors knew...

The jury was obviously made aware of the 1 search vs 84...according to the jury foreman's interview w/ GVS...what am I missing? If the jury knew, then the defense knew...and I "thought" I knew that it was clarified as well?? Alas, I'm lost...HELP!

VAN SUSTEREN: You mentioned the chloroform. How did that figure into this and into your thinking?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, the chloroform -- it really -- as far as the development of the chloroform, the Internet search on the chloroform, you know, really, there was the MySpace or FaceBook posting of the "Win her over with chloroform" picture. And then there was the actual Google search the next day that was done from the computer, not the laptop, but from the actual desktop computer in the Anthony home.

You can speculate, you know, hey, here it is, the boyfriend posts this, "Win her over with chloroform." The next day, I want to know what chloroform is. You can speculate into that. There was no documentation on buying anything to make chloroform. The one Internet search that she made from Google was a three-minute Internet search. And then it subsided from there.

And you know, if there was possible more traces of it in greater amounts, more of a way of how it can be concocted, how it could be purchased, whatever may be -- none of that was ever there. So we were very limited in what we had when it came to chloroform.

We were told, and they did, you know, as far as how -- and what chloroform is detected in other products at the levels -- you know, chloroform is detectable in other products, as well. But there just was not enough, there really was not enough for us to bring chloroform into the mix.

We know there were smaller levels of it in the trunk. We know there was a Google search on it. And that's what we had. It wasn't detected anywhere else. It wasn't on the steering wheel. It wasn't on the handle of the door, going into the car. And even if there was, there still is a question of who and where.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-th...39everything-was-speculation039#ixzz1SZSQDVA0

 

[Stargazer7]

I'm not clear on this--have never heard of a not guilty defendant being liable for the cost of a trial. State picks up the tab regardless, right?

Mark Eiglarsh said on Dr. Drew that is is not unusual for the State to make a defendant liable for costs. According to him, it happens all the time.

 

[johnita36]

While I have always thought Casey had something to do with the death of her daughter I think this is absolutely crazy that the prosecution got away with letting everyone think there were 84 searches when there was only 1. This is not proper behavior for the state and it should be dealt with.

If LDB knew this when she was yelling at Cindy you searched 84 times during the state's rebuttal this is wrong, she should NOT have been using evidence that she knew was false there is no excuse for that. I think something needs to be done about this. I mean this WAS a death penalty case there is no excuse for prosecution covering up things.

 

[Psmith]

Yes, she could be. And it is misconduct if she knew it was not true and continued to state it. And I bet that the defense team will be all over this before it is over.

My response is largely personal--I find it hard to believe that LDB is the type of individual who needs to make up evidence or who would do anything to satisfy a vendetta of some kind. jmo

 

[tennisgirlsc]

I wish the SA Office would issue a response.

 

[GhostCrab]

I completely understand what has happened here ... but let me say this:

The SA completely understood their expert witnesses and what their expert testimony would be ... BUT ...

The DT did NOT understand their OWN expert witnesses ... and tried to UNDERMINE EVERY SINGLE WITNESS THE SA put on the stand ... including Jose mentioning the "FINANCIAL FACTOR" of each of the SA's expert witnesses !

This trial was TOO BIG for the SA to take any sort of "RISK" ...

MOO MOO MOO

:banghead::maddening::banghead:

Establishing a financial interest is a basic cross examination technique that all trial attorneys use, prosecution and defense, when handling an expert witness.

 

[JWG]

Folks, there seems to be a lot of confusion here regarding the numbers 84 and 1.

The specific page "chloroform.htm" on the "sci-spot.com" website was visited once. During trial, the CacheBack program incorrectly said it was visited 84 times.

That error aside, what is not in dispute is that Casey searched the word "chloroform" twice and "how to make chloroform" twice, both from Google. She also did searches through wikipedia for information on chloroform.

The sci-spot.com visit count is independent of her searches on Google and Wikipedia.

 

[Mendara]

But here's the point: HER civil rights are the same as OUR civil rights. Free or not.

Really what about George's? Kronks? - Listen and George's peen was never in her mouth. Kronk didn't tamper with the body either. No one other than casey drove her car and Caylee didn't drown int he pool. She is free because of her lies and the defense's false claims.

The defense claimed the computer searches were incorrect about visiting 84 times - Jose did show that error and I remember him pointing it out in detail as he listed the dates of each search and the progression from 82 to 84 - he did a good job of pointitng out those searches were not reliable.

I do not believe the prosecution did anything wrong and I still do not believe these stories that are coming about either. Unless I hear fromt he prosecution admitting an error. I am not buying this.

I hope this does not influence people to start believing what the defense and Casey will soon be pushing in the next few weeks - how SHE is a victim of the system - how SHE is innocent - how the media wanted her dead.

BOLOGNA. MO

 

[Americka]

I really don't remember LDB even mentioning the chloroform in her closing arguments, and she made them right after JB complained in front of everyone about the discrepancy about chloroform in the two computer forensics reports.

I remember Jeff Ashton bringing up chloroform in in his closing arguments, and that was based on Vass's findings in the trunk. He also told the jury they were free to dismiss any of the expert's findings.

I think the defense team are major hypocrites and will find any way to wiggle out of future lawsuits for Casey.

Thank you. According to the transcription in the Trial Archive, she didn't. Here is the link: [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6852010#post6852010"]The State's Closing Rebuttal Argument (LDB) - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[Mendara]

While I have always thought Casey had something to do with the death of her daughter I think this is absolutely crazy that the prosecution got away with letting everyone think there were 84 searches when there was only 1. This is not proper behavior for the state and it should be dealt with.

If LDB knew this when she was yelling at Cindy you searched 84 times during the state's rebuttal this is wrong, she should NOT have been using evidence that she knew was false there is no excuse for that. I think something needs to be done about this. I mean this WAS a death penalty case there is no excuse for prosecution covering up things.

Interesting how these keep poppoing up. Until LINDA says it was false and she knew it - you are NOT convincing me.

Thanks but no thanks.

 

[GhostCrab]

Really what about George's? Kronks? - Listen and George's peen was never in her mouth. Kronk didn't tamper with the body either. No one other than casey drove her car and Caylee didn't drown int he pool. She is free because of her lies and the defense's false claims.

The defense claimed the computer searches were incorrect about visiting 84 times - Jose did show that error and I remember him pointing it out in detail as he listed the dates of each search and the progression from 82 to 84 - he did a good job of pointitng out those searches were not reliable.

I do not believe the prosecution did anything wrong and I still do not believe these stories that are coming about either. Unless I hear fromt he prosecution admitting an error. I am not buying this.

I hope this does not influence people to start believing what the defense and Casey will soon be pushing in the next few weeks - how SHE is a victim of the system - how SHE is innocent - how the media wanted her dead.

BOLOGNA. MO

Sorry, but no matter how you want to spin it, Baez did not violate anyone's civil rights.

 

[Mendara]

I know you all don't believe it - but this story is happening for a reason. The build up to the Casey tour.

Unless the state admits this. Try not to be snowed.

IMO

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

OK...call me a cynic....any bets on this guy making the "morning" info show rounds???

 

[Chilly Willy]

I really don't remember LDB even mentioning the chloroform in her closing arguments, and she made them right after JB complained in front of everyone about the discrepancy about chloroform in the two computer forensics reports.

I remember Jeff Ashton bringing up chloroform in in his closing arguments, and that was based on Vass's findings in the trunk. He also told the jury they were free to dismiss any of the expert's findings.

I think the defense team are major hypocrites and will find any way to wiggle out of future lawsuits for Casey.

bbm

I just reread some older posts from immediately after the closing arguments and am finding many comments about LDB NOT mentioning the 84 searches, so perhaps some of us (me included) are remembering wrong.

 

[Psmith]

Was the site she visited, did it have a recipe for chloroform?

lol Dare you to look it up! (Meaning, then it will be on your computer HD history :crazy

Of the search results in both reports relating to chloroform, only one hit was found for sci-spot.com. That site was visited once, according to NetAnalysis, and visited 84 times, according to the CacheBack analysis.

(bolded by me)

Active link for site at
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/us/19casey.html?_r=3&smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto

 

[Mosby]

As I stated above, I do recall that the state informed DT of the error and Baez whined about it to the judge. I also noticed there was no mention of chloroform in the closing statement.

BBM

That's what I'm remembering too. The only way to verify would be to go back and look at the trial videos. I thought it was cleared up in rebuttal but I freely admit that my head is a muddled mess after all of this.

 

[Mendara]

Sorry, but no matter how you want to spin it, Baez did not violate anyone's civil rights.

Okay - you go tell George and Kronk that. Good luck.

We can agree to disagree. Her civil rights were NOT violated. She is I am sure drinking a nice fat free vanilla lattte right now. Her daughter is still dead and her father is branded a child molestor along with her brother. I refuse refuse refuse to think of that woman anything other than what she is.

A murderer.

Thanks
mo

 

[GhostCrab]

I know you all don't believe it - but this story is happening for a reason. The build up to the Casey tour.

Unless the state admits this. Try not to be snowed.

IMO

If anything, I am glad that the jurors were not snowed. Now I'll just wait for LDB to address this.....