Sources: Casey Anthony Intentionally Killed Caylee

[SeriouslySearching]

I am not going to continue arguing about where the information came from and the rights of the reporter or station to report it. They aren't on trial here.

Can we get back to what is important and that is to discuss the facts of the case again?

 

[gardenhart]

Glad to see your post. Something I've always wondered about and hopefully you can answer is that most reporters have sources everywhere. Some aggressive reporters actually court their sources in a sense. By befriending them etc etc. And because the sources see so much of them, they come to like and trust them. Is that true? I also edited this post and added ETA and it wound up at the bottom. Please address this too.

All good reporters cultivate good sources. The trust works both ways - they get to know you and know you're not going to burn them and you get to know them and know whether they're reliable, what their motives are. Sometimes their motives are simply to get the truth out. You may have other sources that you know may not always be reliable or who have motives that aren't the purest. Knowing that makes a difference in how far you want to go in verifying information, how you question them to ferret out more information, etc.

Yes, a cleaning lady or someone else who just happened to overhear something might be a source but I would consider them to be a very unreliable source. Not that I haven't had them offer information but almost always it didn't turn out to be anything usable.

I seriously doubt if that's the case here, the information is too detailed. Sources like that are very vague and non-specific. You would certainly want to verify it with multiple reliable sources.

Like I said in another post, timing of a story like this one can be pure happenstance. When you're covering a case like this, often weeks can go by without having an opportunity to talk with police or prosecution sources because they're busy. You run across them in the hallway or in court and grab to ask a few questions or to set up a quick interview.

Sources are people too, not machines. Sometimes they'll talk about something they wouldn't talk about before because they're annoyed at someone or frustrated or in a hurry and want you to stop bugging them about a question you've been pestering them with. Or it could be strategic.

My hunch is in this instance it might be someone was ready to get this information out but the hearing made it more likely they would be talking to a reporter that particular day.

 

[PoppyH]

Wudge is saying he thinks we are gullible. Like the people who buy swampland from a con artist.

What Wudge neglects to realize is these leaks of info is followed by a doc dump that verifies the info.

Like the FBI agent told CA. The media has been accurate in their reporting.

ITA, everything so far has been backed up by Doc Dumps, things SOME were not even sure of and just thought were rumors!!

 

[Lisabet]

I have felt from the beginning that was a LIE. I never felt like he saw either of them that day and the only reason I can determine he lied, was because Cindy wanted to cover for the big fight the night before.

And this could be a part of the reason they feel they need immunity now. Cindy has been heard to say, "It is not a crime to tell lies", but if it's LE you're telling them to, I believe it actually is a crime. Maybe they need to back up with some of their stories and can't do it without immunity.

 

[impatientredhead]

Unnamed sources close to the investigation = Globe and National Enquirer.

Sorry, that would be speculation on your part and we all know how you feel about speculating about facts <smile>. An unnamed source is just that, unnamed.

 

[AZlawyer]

Does someone use a regular criminal law atty that is not an appellate atty for one's appeal?

Not smart people. But yes.

I do a lot of appeals, though, and it always seems like the trial attorney bills almost as much as I do...for "helping" **cough cough**.

 

[BondJamesBond]

Snipped for content:

[/INDENT] Has it ever been established where KC's Pontiac was when she visited Chris S. during the 17th, 18th, or 19th when she was driving TL's Jeep? I believe in his interview he states that KC said it was broken down and that is why she is in TL's Jeep.
I agree with your post but here she has someone that can testify that on at least one of these days she was driving something other than the Pontiac.

Thanks for pointing that out, Marina2.

It would have been more appropriate for me to say that Casey is tied by her cell pings to the Pontiac @ the time of disposal (e.g. 6/18-6/20 which is certainly post-6/17 as determined by d&t.o.d.+ ~2.6 days).

I understand the uncertainty 'bout George's 12:50PM account. IF Casey wants to switch her story to someone/ZFG took the Pontiac 6/15+~2.6 days = 6/17ish...then George's well-known account will hafta go by the wayside taking him outta play for the defense as a credible witness. And the defense's witness list ain't exactly a long one @ this point

IOW...Casey hasn't been making the argument that anyone else took the car prior to 6/30 towing...yet. I'm sure we'll hear that coming as Cindy was laying the groundwork for that in her interviews.

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

I am not going to continue arguing about where the information came from and the rights of the reporter or station to report it. They aren't on trial here.

Can we get back to what is important and that is to discuss the facts of the case again?

SS I'm kinda interested in that swampland for sale...:crazy:

 

[donnam]

Respectfully, have the A's EVER exhibited a desire for "ANY POSSIBLE EXPLANATION"?.......maybe I missed something but.IIRC , from what we have seen, they were ONLY interested in finding an ALIVE Caylee and protecting KC.
And, from what we have seen, they only talked and did very little looking and would not cooperate with TES when they discovered they were looking for Caylee....dead or alive.....
We all wish she could have been found alive but most knew "from day one" that was not likely.
Jane, absolutely NO GLOATING from here. I wanted so badly to believe it was an accident once it became pretty clear that Caylee was not with us anymore.
Don't beat yourself up , for goodness sake......being "wrong" does not make us "bad" or "chumps"......
rather than wax too philosophical I will just say, for those of you old enough to understand , "Who knows what EVIL LURKS in the hearts and minds of man?............" (Actually, it isn't "the Shadow" but only God, IMO)
Jer.9:3- And (like) their BOW they have bent their TONGUES &#63549;~(for) LIES (8267-sheqer), they are NOT strong for the TRUTH on the Earth / Land. And they Proceed (3318-yatsa) from EVIL to EVIL, and they DO NOT KNOW ME, says Y

Bold by me.
For some reason, the past few days I keep thinking about one sentence CA said in an early interview with YM, I think.
"I didn't care where Casey was, I still don't care where Casey is, I just want to find CAYLEE".
So, I don't think at the start, they were interested in protecting Casey. I think, after this interview, everything they said was based on denial. JMO

 

[Wudge]

Wudge is saying he thinks we are gullible. Like the people who buy swampland from a con artist.

What Wudge neglects to realize is these leaks of info is followed by a doc dump that verifies the info.

Like the FBI agent told CA. The media has been accurate in their reporting.

This is standard for high profile cases -- LE and/or prosecutors leak puffery. What was said may be accurate. But that doesn't make it truthful.

I forget: who was it that so told the media?

 

[Lanie]

Tend to agree with those of you who think LE is sending a message. When the death penalty went off the table before, it seems like it might have been a prelude to a deal that the defense may have indicated some willingness to accept. LE may have been willing to deal for the body. They will in many cases. Now, it seems like we're back to hardball. Be interesting to see what happens next.

In the Aarone Thompson case here, the dad's live-in had apparently actually confessed the facts of the little girl's death and burrial 'in a field' to a confidant. Plus, at least one of the other children in the house appeared to have told of hearing the events that might very well have led directly to her death. For a couple of years, though, that was not known to the public and it looked like the parents would get away with 'losing' Aarone, telling a cockamamie story about her running away (when most of the other children in the household couldn't remember seeing her for months or years- having been told she'd moved to another state (which was a lie) and not allowed to ask questions about her or her whereabouts, with no clothes belonging to her to be found anywhere in the house and with her never having been enrolled in school.) These cases where parents 'lose' their children and don't even report them missing are the most frustrating in the world because once the legal cranks up for the 'losers,' no one seems to really care all that much about the child, except LE and the general public.

Personally, I think that if...like...your two-year old is 'kidanpped' or if a social worker discovers that you're one 6 year-old short and you never seem to notice it or never reported it, those types of situations should be pretty much all LE has to prove to get you life in the hoozcow.

I agree 100%. It shouldn't be a get out of jail free card if a body can't be found. Ticks me off.
Lanie

 

[PoppyH]

This is standard for high profile cases -- LE and/or prosecutors leak puffery. What was said may be accurate. But that doesn't make it truthful.

I forget: who was it that so told the media?

I believe you said It was Globe or N E , I tend to think It was a source who knows whats going on but thats JMO

 

[Wudge]

Really?? Do you have a link where Globe and Enquier is reporting this?? TIA

That's the fun part. Now the Globe and the National Enquirer can headline what anonymous sources allegedly said -- the equation is sucker squared.

 

[yolorado]

Sorry, that would be speculation on your part and we all know how you feel about speculating about facts <smile>. An unnamed source is just that, unnamed.

'Deep Throat' was an 'unnamed source' in the Watergate scandal that ousted Nixon from the Whitehouse until Fells outted himself, although I suppose one could say technically that 'Deep Throat' was a 'name.' Just an example of a source being 'unnamed' but right on.

 

[PaddieAB]

I think what we are dealing with here are posters who have not followed this all along, so they don't see the pattern of "sources" right before something big happens.

Most of the leaks appear to indicate her family might somehow be involved, at least that’s certainly the interpretation by many posters on this forum, thread after thread...

That tells me the leaks are being used - regardless of where they originate - to shape the perception that KC was dealt a bad hand....raised in a sick family.......well what more would one expect....how awful for her, she didn’t stand a chance.....

Therefore I think the "something big" is that JB sees no other way out of this than for KC to CONFESS and plead GUILTY to lesser charges, and her defense knows nothing is left but to attempt to paint her public image to a “poor, poor Casey had to confess to protect her entire family from ......insert here......to cover for.....insert here....... What a gal!”. And I can see her confessing on that basis.

Better than the being remembered as the most hated child-killer in history isn’t it.....

IMO It's not going to work.

 

[beaglebrd]

That's the fun part. Now the Globe and the National Enquirer can headline what anonymous sources allegedly said -- the equation is sucker squared.

If the source was the Globe or NE, why wasn't the story reported by the Globe or NE rather than whichever news agency actually reported it?

 

[chiperoni]

Wudge is saying he thinks we are gullible. Like the people who buy swampland from a con artist.

What Wudge neglects to realize is these leaks of info is followed by a doc dump that verifies the info.

Like the FBI agent told CA. The media has been accurate in their reporting.

Absolutely. The doc dumps have been a major key.

 

[kageykaren]

Jane sometimes it is good to take emotion out and replace it with Spock Logic when sluething. I don't believe anyone feels a sense of, "I told you so". I'm so sad in sluething today to see anyone taking this personally when this is about Caylee and not the right or wrong contest of who's thery is the most perfect. My Spock logic tells me W/S members have worked hard to help benefit the search for answers. As GA stated, "It is what it is,". Those words have been haunting me throughout this case.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Denial? Defiance.

Lies covering up truths, evidence, and important issues do not fall under denial. They are directly in contradiction of denial.

If you are in denial...you do not recognize the truth in order to do those things as you simply do not acknowledge their existence.

 

[BondJamesBond]

Less filling! Tastes great!