The Possible Abuse of Caylee REVISIT

[Nefriahaia]

The video that REALLY seems strange to me is the nursing home one. Both Caylee and her Papa seem so full of dread and foreboding that it makes me shudder. It's like they KNOW....but how could they? :tears: hoh:

 

[bonjoviblonde]

Really? You all think Caylee is saying "I kill"? I never took it that way. I always thought she was saying "KeeKee" and that she was talking to Casey and calling her KeeKee. She probably had heard everyone say Casey all the time and she couldn't say it yet, hence KeeKee.

I don't find the video weird, other than the fact, that Casey (whom I believe is filming it) isn't talking to Caylee. The silence is weird. I don't see anything dirty or perverted about it in any way shape or form though, no matter who took it.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I don't think it's weird

 

[Zoe Bogart]

The video that REALLY seems strange to me is the nursing home one. Both Caylee and her Papa seem so full of dread and foreboding that it makes me shudder. It's like they KNOW....but how could they? :tears: hoh:

We talked about this in 2008. It was as though, somehow, their instincts were guiding them. Like somehow they "knew" and they held on to each other.

Even in that video, we hear Cindy in the background talking to Caylee.

 

[angeldust]

Ok mo breakfast video/high chair nothing wrong with it except she silent its not a cooked breakfast it looks like snack crisps quavers we call them in the uk like puffy potato chips and the filming from under the high chair just looks to me that whoever is taking the video is going for the surprise keek a boo angle

the part with her drawing and sitting on the floor she has a nappy on i dont see what the problem is

just my opinion its also my opinion that kc murdered her beautiful daughter

 

[Reality Orlando]

just throwing in my 2 cents worth.. but to me, during the 'breakfast' video.. whoever was behind the camera was first shooting how Caylee had her little feet crossed so cute under her highchair.. and then it kinda turned into a "peek-a-boo" game.. I dont think there was anything nefarious about that aspect of it.. I do find it odd in the videos we assume to be shot by KC, that there is no interaction, verbal or otherwise.

It's obvious KC was interested in photography/cinematography and I think the video was taped from that mindset...documenting her daughter's life. I don't see anything sinister about her not talking during filming. I also think she had a talent for photography. Some of her photos of Caylee are very well done. How sad she couldn't turn that talent into something positive instead of how she instead chose to live her life.

 

[Never4GetCaylee]

I have long been questioning what possible reason the DT could give for George to cover up an accidental drowning. It makes no sense to me. Cindy being angry? Less angry than Caylee being missing, supposedly kidnapped and eventually found in the words with duct tape on her face?
Makes no. sense.

So, what else could make George want to cover it up? Will they try to imply or present evidence somehow that George was abusing Caylee (makes me sick to even type that) as well and he was worried about what an autopsy would show?

If ICA takes the stand...which I seriously doubt...would she dare to claim this? If she doesn't, will the DT allude to it, try to get it out there?

 

[4Jacy]

I have long been questioning what possible reason the DT could give for George to cover up an accidental drowning. It makes no sense to me. Cindy being angry? Less angry than Caylee being missing, supposedly kidnapped and eventually found in the words with duct tape on her face?
Makes no. sense.

So, what else could make George want to cover it up? Will they try to imply or present evidence somehow that George was abusing Caylee (makes me sick to even type that) as well and he was worried about what an autopsy would show?

If ICA takes the stand...which I seriously doubt...would she dare to claim this? If she doesn't, will the DT allude to it, try to get it out there?

The DT will do everything and anything they can. However, how are they going to explain KC allowing GA to babysit Caylee if she herself was molested? Un the he// believable.

 

[Steely Dan]

Wesh is still on http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/interactive.html and RH said something to the effect that the defense will almost have to put KC on the stand if they want to push the molestation evidence. I wish I could remember exactly what he said, but it had something to do with witness' the prosecution didn't call. If the defense calls one of these witness' they will have to put KC on the stand. I was in the kitchen listening.

Hopefully he'll stop by this thread and explain it or someone else listening will.

 

[Never4GetCaylee]

The DT will do everything and anything they can. However, how are they going to explain KC allowing GA to babysit Caylee if she herself was molested? Un the he// believable.

ITA, but they already put it out there that he was abusing ICA and she allowed him to babysit.

 

[SMK]

I have long been questioning what possible reason the DT could give for George to cover up an accidental drowning. It makes no sense to me. Cindy being angry? Less angry than Caylee being missing, supposedly kidnapped and eventually found in the words with duct tape on her face?
Makes no. sense.

So, what else could make George want to cover it up? Will they try to imply or present evidence somehow that George was abusing Caylee (makes me sick to even type that) as well and he was worried about what an autopsy would show?

If ICA takes the stand...which I seriously doubt...would she dare to claim this? If she doesn't, will the DT allude to it, try to get it out there?

If they think it has a chance of influencing some jurors, I would not be surprised. It is known that sometimes a man will molest his daughter, and then that daughter's children. (Not saying I think GA did any of this, but the Defense may try and fly it by the jury nonetheless). It would make for a motive. Perhaps they could say Casey allowed him to babysit because at the time she still did not know he was abusing Caylee. People who were put in danger as children will often put their own children (subconsciously) in danger. It would certainly make Casey appear a victim twice over: First, her own childhood, then, her daughter abused, and the father insists they not call 911 and cover the drowning. They could argue that Casey has Stockholm Syndrome. It is crazy, but hey, Defense attorneys have been known to try some crazy theories to save their clients.

 

[Sabrina2011]

At this point they are way behind, so they will throw everything and the kitchen sink against the wall.

Bizarre claims the body was snatched and hidden...affairs...sex abuse...

They have no case so they are pulling what they can from the trash, or is it garbage?

 

[pcrum12]

The DT will do everything and anything they can. However, how are they going to explain KC allowing GA to babysit Caylee if she herself was molested? Un the he// believable.

They could say that ICA created the "job" and "Zany" so GA would NOT be babysitting Caylee without CA being there. An excuse to leave with her or only leave her with CA. Do we have any proof that he did in fact watch her without CA or ICA there? Seriously asking. TIA

 

[eleni777]

I have long been questioning what possible reason the DT could give for George to cover up an accidental drowning. It makes no sense to me. Cindy being angry? Less angry than Caylee being missing, supposedly kidnapped and eventually found in the words with duct tape on her face?
Makes no. sense.

So, what else could make George want to cover it up? Will they try to imply or present evidence somehow that George was abusing Caylee (makes me sick to even type that) as well and he was worried about what an autopsy would show?

If ICA takes the stand...which I seriously doubt...would she dare to claim this? If she doesn't, will the DT allude to it, try to get it out there?

Honestly with the Anthony's it's anyones guess as to why they do anything. The family unit that they have presented to the general public has been everything BUT NORMAL, LOGICAL and REASONABLE.

The things that cause me to question George's possible involvment in a cover up are the events of June 16th.

First the Anthony’s get the date of the last time they’ve all seen Caylee alive wrong. June 9th is the last day that was first given to police. Then the father’s day video surfaces and “Oh yeah it was June 15th…Ooops we forgot about that visit to pawpaw”, sorry.

Suddenly on June 16th George gives a very detailed and elaborate description of what Caylee and Casey were wearing when they left the house June 16th to go to work and the Nanny’s. Casey’s description of what Caylee was wearing matched Georges with the exception of shorts/skirt. One said skirt, the other shorts but they both said it was jean material. OK, you can't remember when you last saw your grandchild BUT NOW you can recollect with detail what she was wearing...OOkkkkaaaayyyy.

What articles of clothing were found with Caylee's remains? Not the ones describe by Casey and George.

Were the clothes that George described ever found? Not that I can recall.

Here’s where my “WTH is going on?” Meter starts to ring loudly in my head.
At least 31 days passed between June 16th and the day when George gave this detailed description, right? Can anyone remember what they were or their kids were wearing 31 days ago? I can't remember yesterday...I know jean shorts but the shirt and shoes...no.
BUT,
I can remember with elaborate detail what she had on 10/05/10 and she can remember exactly what I had on. Why? Because that is the day she broke her arm and it was a very traumatic day for BOTH of us.

So can anyone say beyond a reasonable doubt that George REALLY SAW Casey and Caylee leave the house?
Or
Was the reason they both remember the clothing in elaborate detail is because that day is forever burned into their memory due something traumatic happening to Caylee and George helped Casey cover it up?

just some things to ponder...

 

[mimmy03]

This particular video made me absolutey fall in love with Caylee. The cute munching and toddler chat was divine.

I can't believe people would be analysing a harmless home move of a toddler enjoying breakfast :waitasec:

Shoot me, I have tonnes of videos of my kids eating at that age.

I agree. I have many videos where I just videotaped my kids being themselves without prompting. I just wanted to document them being them so I can remember everything I can of them at that age. Also, I personally don't care for the sound of my voice so often I don't talk much for that reason as well. And I think the videotaping down below was b/c the person was trying to play peek-a-boo and sneak up on Caylee to get a reaction. Simple game imo. And the whole time little Caylee is saying 'cheese' thinking she's getting her pic taken. I find nothing strange or suspicious about this video.

 

[mimmy03]

This video has creeped me out in a big way! That's all I can say.
Didn't GA say he usually got up with Caylee and fed her breakfast etc...? Like ICA would bother to get up put Caylee in the highchair and prepare real food? (she was eating cooked food right? )
I watched that video a few times. It haunts me now. Don't care to verify what Caylee was eating.
IMO ICA would have given Caylee a handful of Cheerios and a sipee cup. Maybe raisins, a poptart broken up or fig Newton's. or something similar. No way she prepared a meal for Caylee.
Go ahead throw tomatoes at me!
I've just been a pediatric nurse for 20 years...
From my experience Caylee wasn't malnourished or ever hungry. ONLY because her grandma provided for her.

to me it looks like banana, cheerios, and milk in a sippy which is a perfectly fine breakfast for a child that age imo.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

i'm sure i'll be strung up for this but i don't see anything weird with caylee sleeping in the same bed as KC and RM.

i mean, its not like they were having sex with her right there sleeping soundly.....gross!

there are many many families that actually have "family bed" and small children sleep with their parents all the time. what is different with KC and RM, if RM is a close family firend (to KC and caylee) and she knows and trusts him and has seen him many times?

when my daughter was young we would sometimes travel to the other coast for a beach weekend with a close, and male, friend of mine. after a long night of disney movies and junk food, we would all collapse in a heap and sleep on his bed.

this is not the same as turning tricks with your infant daughter sleeping one blanket over.

That kind of implies that Casey was thoughtful and responsible enough to actually have a philosophy about such things. I don't think she did. It wasn't just RM either, IIRC. She just did what was convenient at the time and imo it's not right to imply some sort of wisdom or thoughtfulness on Casey's part where clearly none existed.

 

[goldenlover]

That kind of implies that Casey was thoughtful and responsible enough to actually have a philosophy about such things. I don't think she did. It wasn't just RM either, IIRC. She just did what was convenient at the time and imo it's not right to imply some sort of wisdom or thoughtfulness on Casey's part where clearly none existed.

What difference does it make if she did this because of a philosophy or convenience? Her daughter was safe and probably comfy and happy beside her mom. It does not make her mother a murderer or abuser.

 

[2door73chevy]

Honestly with the Anthony's it's anyones guess as to why they do anything. The family unit that they have presented to the general public has been everything BUT NORMAL, LOGICAL and REASONABLE.

The things that cause me to question George's possible involvment in a cover up are the events of June 16th.

First the Anthony’s get the date of the last time they’ve all seen Caylee alive wrong. June 9th is the last day that was first given to police. Then the father’s day video surfaces and “Oh yeah it was June 15th…Ooops we forgot about that visit to pawpaw”, sorry.

Suddenly on June 16th George gives a very detailed and elaborate description of what Caylee and Casey were wearing when they left the house June 16th to go to work and the Nanny’s. Casey’s description of what Caylee was wearing matched Georges with the exception of shorts/skirt. One said skirt, the other shorts but they both said it was jean material. OK, you can't remember when you last saw your grandchild BUT NOW you can recollect with detail what she was wearing...OOkkkkaaaayyyy.

What articles of clothing were found with Caylee's remains? Not the ones describe by Casey and George.

Were the clothes that George described ever found? Not that I can recall.

Here’s where my “WTH is going on?” Meter starts to ring loudly in my head.
At least 31 days passed between June 16th and the day when George gave this detailed description, right? Can anyone remember what they were or their kids were wearing 31 days ago? I can't remember yesterday...I know jean shorts but the shirt and shoes...no. BUT,
I can remember with elaborate detail what she had on 10/05/10 and she can remember exactly what I had on. Why? Because that is the day she broke her arm and it was a very traumatic day for BOTH of us.

So can anyone say beyond a reasonable doubt that George REALLY SAW Casey and Caylee leave the house?
Or
Was the reason they both remember the clothing in elaborate detail is because that day is forever burned into their memory due something traumatic happening to Caylee and George helped Casey cover it up?

just some things to ponder...

Your're right..There's NO WAY, I could remember what I was wearing 31 days ago or anyone else...hmmm

 

[SATA]

I don´t know if this is the right thread. What I am going to say has a little to do with what I feel like saying though.
It is about George and Cindy. Were they very naive or were they just preoccupied with their own problems and lives?
1. Their daughter lived with them and got pregnant at the age of eighteen - and they did not see that until she was SEVEN months preggers! Cindy a nurse and all. OK, some girls/women don´t "show" too much, and that goes mostly for small, slender ones in my experience, but STILL. It is odd.
2. Their daughter who lived in their house PRETENDED to have a job for how long was it?? They never suspected a thing - even though Casey, after dressing up for "work" in the morning, then leaving, only to return to the house after Cindy and George had left for work. Casey and Caylee must have eaten something during the days, moved things around etc. Odd, odd, odd.
3. Their twenty-year-old daughter, they are told, hires a NANNY to take care of the toddler. Who HAS nannies these days?? Some single-mom alleged "event-coordinator"? I don´t THINK so. RICH people have nannies. George and Cindy just bought that story - and it never once dawned on them that they had never seen or even spoken to the nanny on the phone at least, for almost two years!

They SEEM to have been such good grandparents from photos and videos. You see the garden with all the great toys for Caylee. You see the rooms inside the house, the toys, the clothes, and everything looks so neat and clean and healthy.
But seriously, there must have been something fundamentally WRONG beneath that bright and shiny surface.
I am sure this has been covered over and over, I just needed to say it.