The SODDI Defense (Some Other Dude Did It)...If not KC, who?

[Balthazar]

I concue. I live in a house of single people who order all kinds of pizza and they constantly leave it sitting out. I am not sure that cooked cheese can even mold. Even the "fresh" ingredients are COOKED in the oven.

Nowadays there is a new style of pizza that is very popular where I live - and mostly what the college kids eat. It's very different from what you would get at Domino's or Papa John's. The pizza consists of a crisp thin crust, topped with olive oil, then fresh tomato slices and spices, salt and pepper, which is baked. This is topped with ALL fresh ingredients dressed in a vinaigrette - similar to a salad - such as Arugula, fresh mozarella balls, red bell pepper (may be roasted bell pepper), Italian meats julienned. This is the kind of pizza I experimented with. But again, all I got was a vegetal odor.

 

[countzero]

The purpose of this thread is to figure out what the Defense's SODDI strategy might be, so I'm not sure how your comments fit in here?

I've read every single document, seen every interview, and I personally think Casey is probably guilty. But, at the same time, we have the Defense building their own case and trying to predict what that may be based on the evidence we have so far. Since we have only seen the prosecution's evidence that leaves us in a bit of a vacuum where we have to look to things like the police interviews to determine what the Defense may say.

BBM: if that is your case, then why the attempted SODDI that does not correlate with the pings, texts, and phone records which is evidence so far released? Are these not considered evidence? Do you feel they are "doctored" by LE or that JB and crew will somehow say this isn't evidence? How do you reconcile all of this to fit a SO did it? And pray tell, who is this SO running loose around Orlando or where ever they are now? Again, how did this SO removed personal items from the A's house that were found with Caylee? How do you do it?

Predictions belong to the weather forecasters on local news channels. Now those, I don't trust

 

[Seebra]

BBM: if that is your case, then why the attempted SODDI that does not correlate with the pings, texts, and phone records which is evidence so far released? Are these not considered evidence? Do you feel they are "doctored" by LE or that JB and crew will somehow say this isn't evidence? How do you reconcile all of this to fit a SO did it? And pray tell, who is this SO running loose around Orlando or where ever they are now? Again, how did this SO removed personal items from the A's house that were found with Caylee? How do you do it?

Predictions belong to the weather forecasters on local news channels. Now those, I don't trust

EXACTLY. And if LE even suspected a SO took and killed baby Caylee, why would they chance throwing a 22 year old, pretty girl in jail with no bond, and then seek the DP against her?

Are they out to prosecute an innocent mother who lost her child? NO. They are there to get justice for a child's life lost.

 

[Balthazar]

Please understand, I am not putting anyone down. You are entitled to your opinion.

However, posts that contain lengthy alleged discrepancies of LE reports/statements and FBI forensic reports or that accuse LE of falsifying reports that don't have any SODDI theories attached, don't follow the theme of this thread, SODDI.

I have not put any alleged discrepancies of LE reports/statements in this thread nor have I accused LE of falsifying reports or anything else. I have only pointed out that we have NO evidence that LE ever investigated known SO's in the area regarding this case and now we have a known SO who lived less than 4 miles from the Anthony's who has been charged with a crime in which he took a 4 year old out of her bed and duct taped her mouth, arms and legs.

 

[Devon]

I would like to see that link also. IT is well documented that witnesses who do NOT know the person are frequently wrong. In fact, most cases that are overturned are overturned because of witness testimony that is proven wrong by DNA (circumstantial evidence.) I have to believe that the mis-statements by that poster show a severe lack of knowledge about the case and even a possible link to the defense, because the spin is intense.

What 'mis-statements' are you referring to? I don't personally believe anyone else is involved in Caylee's death but from what I've read, AquarianEssence is simply stating her thoughts on, and interpretations of, the evidence that is available to us all, and where she's made reference to any other sources of information she's quoted that source.

I agree with her that the released evidence contains some inconsistencies/inaccuracies/omissions etc and that there are various ways in which much of it can be interpreted. On the whole it has raised more questions for me than it has answered, and IMO the entire case is crazy so anything is possible!

Why is it that when someone posts alternative theories they are accused of having links to the defence? I've had the same accusations thrown at me, even though I am thousands of miles away in the UK, a British citizen and of no possible use to the defence! We are all entitled to our own opinions and have the right to express them without ridicule.

I also don't think AQ needs to constantly provide links to information she quotes from discovery that is available to us all and some of her comments are clearly her own opinion and therefore there are no links. Posters refer to information from the discovery all the time but are not asked to provide links. The currently available facts are out there for us all to read, interpret and ponder - it's the way we interpret those facts that gives rise to differences of opinion and while I have my own preferred interpretations of some of that information I find it very useful to consider another's perspective.

 

[MissJames]

I have not put any alleged discrepancies of LE reports/statements in this thread nor have I accused LE of falsifying reports or anything else. I have only pointed out that we have NO evidence that LE ever investigated known SO's in the area regarding this case and now we have a known SO who lived less than 4 miles from the Anthony's who has been charged with a crime in which he took a 4 year old out of her bed and duct taped her mouth, arms and legs.

But that doesn't fit this case because of the A's own words and not reporting Caylee missing.

 

[Balthazar]

BBM: if that is your case, then why the attempted SODDI that does not correlate with the pings, texts, and phone records which is evidence so far released? Are these not considered evidence? Do you feel they are "doctored" by LE or that JB and crew will somehow say this isn't evidence? How do you reconcile all of this to fit a SO did it? And pray tell, who is this SO running loose around Orlando or where ever they are now? Again, how did this SO removed personal items from the A's house that were found with Caylee? How do you do it?

Predictions belong to the weather forecasters on local news channels. Now those, I don't trust

Let me suggest a different approach and way of thinking of the SODDI defense. In this approach, pretend that you were selected to be juror on the case and that you were selected because you don't know much of anything about this case.

Pretend that all you know about the Anthony's and Casey is that
1. Caylee disappeared and Casey is her mom and George and Cindy her grandparents
2. you know that her body was found, where it was found and about the shorts and the duct tape, blanket and toys found with her

Then read this, knowing the suspect lives close to the Anthony's - in fact almost a straight line from Hopespring to his house. Then tell me if you didn't know ALL the other stuff about Casey and the Anthony's, would you think this was someone who should be investigated?

http://www.wftv.com/news/19489838/detail.html

 

[butwhatif?]

BBM: if that is your case, then why the attempted SODDI that does not correlate with the pings, texts, and phone records which is evidence so far released? Are these not considered evidence? Do you feel they are "doctored" by LE or that JB and crew will somehow say this isn't evidence? How do you reconcile all of this to fit a SO did it? And pray tell, who is this SO running loose around Orlando or where ever they are now? Again, how did this SO removed personal items from the A's house that were found with Caylee? How do you do it?

Predictions belong to the weather forecasters on local news channels. Now those, I don't trust

For all we know an SO could have phone records that ping in the area at the time in question.
The only way to disprove an SO's involvement is to investigate them.
So wouldnt it make sense that a good prosecution would have the evidence to refute any SO claims made in court by the defense to prove KC's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?
If JB brings it up, the state cant just say "all evidence pointed to the defendant, so we didnt bother checking into anyone else". They need to be prepared for that defence and have evidence that proves they could not have been involved, which bolsters their case against KC.
jmo

 

[JBean]

Come on you guys. self edit, quit bickering and just dicuss.

 

[MissJames]

Let me suggest a different approach and way of thinking of the SODDI defense. In this approach, pretend that you were selected to be juror on the case and that you were selected because you don't know much of anything about this case.

Pretend that all you know about the Anthony's and Casey is that
1. Caylee disappeared and Casey is her mom and George and Cindy her grandparents
2. you know that her body was found, where it was found and about the shorts and the duct tape, blanket and toys found with her

Then read this, knowing the suspect lives close to the Anthony's - in fact almost a straight line from Hopespring to his house. Then tell me if you didn't know ALL the other stuff about Casey and the Anthony's, would you think this was someone who should be investigated?

http://www.wftv.com/news/19489838/detail.html

Not if KC's statements come out.It would make no sense to me that a SO abducted and murdered my child from her bedroom and the family made up a completely different story.I mean ,the jury will hear KC's statements and the fact that she never reported Caylee missing,so even if I didn't know before the hearing I would eventually find out.KC did this to herself and her family helped set it in stone.

 

[MissJames]

For all we know an SO could have phone records that ping in the area at the time in question.
The only way to disprove an SO's involvement is to investigate them.
So wouldnt it make sense that a good prosecution would have the evidence to refute any SO claims made in court by the defense to prove KC's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?
If JB brings it up, the state cant just say "all evidence pointed to the defendant, so we didnt bother checking into anyone else". They need to be prepared for that defence and have evidence that proves they could not have been involved, which bolsters their case against KC.
jmo

I can go with that if someone would give a scenario WHEN an SO would have taken her,WHERE he might have taken her from and WHY KC and family made up a completely different story .Also why they didn't report it.

 

[Balthazar]

But that doesn't fit this case because of the A's own words and not reporting Caylee missing.

My defense theory on why Casey did not report Caylee missing is that she had a lot to lose by calling 911, so she "tried to handle it" on her own - as she said "which was stupid" as she said. Further, in my defense theory, Casey thinks that one of her friends took Caylee to teach her a lesson, so, she doesn't realize that a SO took her. She thinks it is one of her friends who has access to the Anthony house. But the truth of the situation is a SO broke into the house and took Caylee. So while Casey is busy covering up that she doesn't know where Caylee is to everyone (both her parents and friends) while trying to figure out which friend has Caylee and where he/she has her, unbeknowst to her, Caylee is killed or has been killed by the SO.

If the SO is this person:

http://www.wftv.com/news/19489838/detail.html

Well, what the heck was he doing with the 4 year old child in the garage? Was his plan to molest her and then kill her? Was he going to triple bag her with the toys, shorts and blanket and put her in the trunk of her parent's car? We have no way of knowing what his intentions were because, thank God, the child was able to get the duct tape loose enough to scream alerting her parents to the intruder. The report also mentions beer cans at the scene. There were beer cans where Caylee was found, along with a bunch of other junk, but that doesn't discount that there were beer cans there. And the perp has apparently been doing this since at least 2007. He tried kidnap an 8 year old in 2007 - but these are ONLY the ones we know about! AND if you read the report about the 8 year old, it appears the man tried to enter the home on more than one occaission.

So why did Casey lie to police?

I think because her friends were the MOST important thing to her, she didn't want to lose them, especially not the new boyfriend, so she made up the lie about the nanny hoping to pacify Cindy until she could go to her friends and ask for help - I think she didn't want to get her friends in trouble. Then Casey was stuck telling the lie to police because her mom was sitting right there. She really had no story, nothing to tell them. I think she didn't anticipate being questioned and arrested and figured she'd get away from police and beg her friends to return Caylee. But, of course, that wouldn't work if her friends never had Caylee to begin with.

Why didn't Casey tell the police the truth when they confronted her with her lies?

Because she thought the person who had Caylee was someone she has feelings for and didn't want to get them in trouble.

Why not talk to police afterwards and straighten the situation out?

Because her attorney advised her not to.

Again, I think Casey is probably guilty (like 99% - I'm giving her a 1% chance she could perhaps be innocent until the trial is over). But if I set aside personal prejudices, I do see how a SODDI case could be made and this is my attempt predict what the defense case may be.

 

[countzero]

I have not put any alleged discrepancies of LE reports/statements in this thread nor have I accused LE of falsifying reports or anything else. I have only pointed out that we have NO evidence that LE ever investigated known SO's in the area regarding this case and now we have a known SO who lived less than 4 miles from the Anthony's who has been charged with a crime in which he took a 4 year old out of her bed and duct taped her mouth, arms and legs.

Don't take my second sentence personally. It was a general statement, not directed to you personally, but I did say it in context of my reply to your reply.

And since I am replying to your reply, an error should be noted. We DO NOT know what SO's if any have been investigated since we have not had a doc release that addresses SO's which either acknowledges or eliminates one or more SO's. So that statement is false at the present time.

 

[butwhatif?]

Let me suggest a different approach and way of thinking of the SODDI defense. In this approach, pretend that you were selected to be juror on the case and that you were selected because you don't know much of anything about this case.

Pretend that all you know about the Anthony's and Casey is that
1. Caylee disappeared and Casey is her mom and George and Cindy her grandparents
2. you know that her body was found, where it was found and about the shorts and the duct tape, blanket and toys found with her

Then read this, knowing the suspect lives close to the Anthony's - in fact almost a straight line from Hopespring to his house. Then tell me if you didn't know ALL the other stuff about Casey and the Anthony's, would you think this was someone who should be investigated?

http://www.wftv.com/news/19489838/detail.html

When I first heard about this SO I started a list of similarities in the two cases.

Similarities:
hispanic perpetrator (ie:zanny)
preference for young girls
drives jeep (neighbour saw jeep outside anthony home)
duct tape/rag to silence victim
same area(5 miles or 14 mins drive between hopespring and attempted abduction)
houses have attatched garages
back fence leads to very isolated area for watching victim/staking out house
sliding glass doors
shorts involved
backyards both had pool and childrens toys

Of course this doesnt mean that I automatically believe that he killed Caylee.

But it does show that when you have information to work off, you can begin to piece it together to see them as possible suspects, or rule them out.
I would like to see LE rule out this guy along with the many other SO's in the area...just to see that they are dotting their I's and crossing all their t's in preparation for the defense at trial.
JMO

 

[butwhatif?]

Which is exactly why we need to wait before ALL evidence is released before determining a defendants guilt.

 

[MissJames]

My defense theory on why Casey did not report Caylee missing is that she had a lot to lose by calling 911, so she "tried to handle it" on her own - as she said "which was stupid" as she said. Further, in my defense theory, Casey thinks that one of her friends took Caylee to teach her a lesson, so, she doesn't realize that a SO took her. She thinks it is one of her friends who has access to the Anthony house. But the truth of the situation is a SO broke into the house and took Caylee. So while Casey is busy covering up that she doesn't know where Caylee is to everyone (both her parents and friends) while trying to figure out which friend has Caylee and where he/she has her, unbeknowst to her, Caylee is killed or has been killed by the SO.

If the SO is this person:

http://www.wftv.com/news/19489838/detail.html

Well, what the heck was he doing with the 4 year old child in the garage? Was his plan to molest her and then kill her? Was he going to triple bag her with the toys, shorts and blanket and put her in the trunk of her parent's car? We have no way of knowing what his intentions were because, thank God, the child was able to get the duct tape loose enough to scream alerting her parents to the intruder. The report also mentions beer cans at the scene. There were beer cans where Caylee was found, along with a bunch of other junk, but that doesn't discount that there were beer cans there. And the perp has apparently been doing this since at least 2007. He tried kidnap an 8 year old in 2007 - but these are ONLY the ones we know about! AND if you read the report about the 8 year old, it appears the man tried to enter the home on more than one occaission.

So why did Casey lie to police?

I think because her friends were the MOST important thing to her, she didn't want to lose them, especially not the new boyfriend, so she made up the lie about the nanny hoping to pacify Cindy until she could go to her friends and ask for help - I think she didn't want to get her friends in trouble. Then Casey was stuck telling the lie to police because her mom was sitting right there. She really had no story, nothing to tell them. I think she didn't anticipate being questioned and arrested and figured she'd get away from police and beg her friends to return Caylee. But, of course, that wouldn't work if her friends never had Caylee to begin with.

Why didn't Casey tell the police the truth when they confronted her with her lies?

Because she thought the person who had Caylee was someone she has feelings for and didn't want to get them in trouble.

Why not talk to police afterwards and straighten the situation out?

Because her attorney advised her not to.

Again, I think Casey is probably guilty (like 99% - I'm giving her a 1% chance she could perhaps be innocent until the trial is over). But if I set aside personal prejudices, I do see how a SODDI case could be made and this is my attempt predict what the defense case may be.

What do you mean by personal prejudices? That term confuses me in this context.
For myself my first inclination is not to suspect a 22 year old mom who seems to have a lot going on for herself. Her family supported her ,she had tons of friends ,a social life and she seemed very likable.She had other options with Caylee ,so I don't understand why she would kill her child.
It would be easier to stomach a sicko SO from nearby,than her own mother.I believe KC did it.I've heard other theories on this thread that could give me reason to reconsider if their was more evidence [like the homeless Zanny],but a local SO just doesn't make sense to me because of what KC and the Anthoney's have stated. Personal prejudices have nothing to do with it.

 

[Balthazar]

Could you please cite the source for this information? I am curious to read it for myself.

I researched this on the internet looking up detistry sites and reading about human decomposition. You can look it up through Yahoo and Google and see the information I saw regarding the dentistry aspects. There are human child skulls thousands of years old with all their teeth still in place. I also talked it over with a friend of mine who is retired FBI who picked up on the significance of the teeth being out of the skull before I did and told me it was "significant" and "out of the norm." My friend then told me about a terrible child molestation case, that I don't want to go into here, which resulted in a 4 year old losing a lot of teeth. It would be one thing if Caylee's teeth were in bad shape, but her teeth looked clean and white. No sign of peridontal disease. So there's no clear reason for the teeth to be separated from the skull.

 

[Balthazar]

What do you mean by personal prejudices? That term confuses me in this context.
For myself my first inclination is not to suspect a 22 year old mom who seems to have a lot going on for herself. Her family supported her ,she had tons of friends ,a social life and she seemed very likable.She had other options with Caylee ,so I don't understand why she would kill her child.
It would be easier to stomach a sicko SO from nearby,than her own mother.I believe KC did it.I've heard other theories on this thread that could give me reason to reconsider if their was more evidence [like the homeless Zanny],but a local SO just doesn't make sense to me because of what KC and the Anthoney's have stated. Personal prejudices have nothing to do with it.

My personal prejudices are that Casey is likely guilty. That's what I set aside to come up with the SO as SODDI Defense theory.

 

[MissJames]

When I first heard about this SO I started a list of similarities in the two cases.

Similarities:
hispanic perpetrator (ie:zanny)
preference for young girls
drives jeep (neighbour saw jeep outside anthony home)
duct tape/rag to silence victim
same area(5 miles or 14 mins drive between hopespring and attempted abduction)
houses have attatched garages
back fence leads to very isolated area for watching victim/staking out house
sliding glass doors
shorts involved
backyards both had pool and childrens toys

Of course this doesnt mean that I automatically believe that he killed Caylee.

But it does show that when you have information to work off, you can begin to piece it together to see them as possible suspects, or rule them out.
I would like to see LE rule out this guy along with the many other SO's in the area...just to see that they are dotting their I's and crossing all their t's in preparation for the defense at trial.
JMO

The LE detectives and the SA seem pretty sharp to me.I'll bet they do what they need to to rule him out in anticipation of the defense jumping on it.

 

[Balthazar]

I only play pretend games with my grandchildren. But since you asked, I will play along with ya.

My answer would be NO. I am intelligent enough to know and understand that LE would have immediately investigated this person and ruled him/her out.

How would LE know to rule him out on July 15, 2008 when he just committed the crime on May 18, 2009?