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

[MissJames]

Shifting gears a bit,maybe the defense is building a case against the A's or one of the A's.
Cindy was last one seen with Caylee,for sure.
They didn't report Caylee missing or in danger,even though KC keeping Caylee away so long was completely out of the norm.
They really pushed the Caylee is alive story to the nth degree.
They never looked for Caylee and discouraged TM and others from looking for a dead Caylee.
They never attached themselves to a reputable missing kids foundation.
They have been uncooperative and obstructive with LE's investigation.
All the evidence from the house could be just as easily attributed to one of them.
They didn't report the decomp smell when they found KC's car.
I don't think they had anything to do with the murder,but I wonder if the defense will go there.

 

[countzero]

Shifting gears a bit,maybe the defense is building a case against the A's or one of the A's.
Cindy was last one seen with Caylee,for sure.
They didn't report Caylee missing or in danger,even though KC keeping Caylee away so long was completely out of the norm.
They really pushed the Caylee is alive story to the nth degree.
They never looked for Caylee and discouraged TM and others from looking for a dead Caylee.
They never attached themselves to a reputable missing kids foundation.
They have been uncooperative and obstructive with LE's investigation.
All the evidence from the house could be just as easily attributed to one of them.
They didn't report the decomp smell when they found KC's car.
I don't think they had anything to do with the murder,but I wonder if the defense will go there.

Is JB and crew's bus too far away to hear the roar of the engine :wink::wink:

 

[MissJames]

Is JB and crew's bus too far away to hear the roar of the engine :wink::wink:

Not THAT far away.I bet they've heard it.If not their lawyer surely has.

 

[USARDOG]

Bold above, by me. I have to state again, if it is my opinion I will say so. I have made up no statements. Here are a couple of the articles I was referring to. These are published, obviously.

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache...rcentage+of+accuracy&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us...One former
Scotland Yard dog handler talking about the McCann case hypothesized that the scent wouldn't last more than a month...The McCanns have sought out attorneys who convinced a judge in Wisconsin that certain dogs were accurate just 22 percent to 38 percent of the time. (The prosecution claimed a success rate of 60 percent to 69 percent.)...

http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/dogs/index.html...One possible factor in the variable success rates in the Alabama study could be that in warmer weather, dogs face difficulties such as panting and fatigue. To accurately detect the faint scent of buried human remains cadaver dogs must sniff the air slowly and carefully. "Even with multiple breaks and water availability at all times, dogs panted and thus were limited in their smelling ability" the study noted...The Alberta and Alabama studies, though limited in their scope and number of trials, show both positive and negative results for scent detection dogs. In both studies, dogs were able to locate human remains but the overall reliability of individual dog and handler teams remains in question. In the Alberta study, the recovery percentage for one dog was 55% while another was 95%. The Alabama study showed a much larger number of false alerts and no alerts than correct alerts. Together, the studies show a definite variance in accuracy and reliability among dog and handler teams. Possible factors affecting dog and handler team ability could be weather, soil condition, training, and dog-handler communication. Given such findings and a lack of thorough studies, the Alabama team hopes to study scent detection dogs more extensively in the future...

I personally, have never seen a dog "sniff the air slowly and carefully." I would suggest you put on your hip waders while reading this article. It is against the nature of most working dogs I have ever known. They tend to be very high drive dogs. To describe what I mean, we had a saying, "You can barely stand to live with a good search dog."

There is no indication in what I have read, as to the certification body, or training given to these dogs or handlers. South Florida dogs train and work in Florida every day, and do very well in the heat. I have personally never owned a cadaver dog, but have trained with them on several occasions. I never recall a time when we had to go show a certified dog where the scent article was.

Statistics are easy to manipulate, which is why they will undoubtedly play a prominent part in this trial.

 

[ZubenElSchemali]

I personally, have never seen a dog "sniff the air slowly and carefully." I would suggest you put on your hip waders while reading this article. It is against the nature of most working dogs I have ever seen. They tend to be very high drive dogs. To describe what I mean, we had a saying, "You can barely stand to live with a good search dog."

There is no indication in what I have read, as to the certification body, or training given to these dogs. South Florida dogs train and work in Florida every day, and do very well in the heat. I have personally never owned a cadaver dog, but have trained with them on several occasions. I never recall a time when we had to go show a certified dog where the scent article was.

Statistics are easy to manipulate, which is why they will undoubtedly play a prominent part in this trial.

Well, first an anthropologist's credentials are challenged and now a publication of the Archaeological Institute of America. I would think that this orginization wouldn't publish nonsense. The other article was simply reporting, not publishing their opinion. And Ms. Enwere was good enough to have her thesis excepted and published, so I would give it due respect. But we all must make our choices as to how we form our opinions and gather information in which to do that in a well balanced way. I have been very careful to not state opinions that are not based on the actual documents in this case, balanced with research through reputable sources, where I don't already have enough knowledge. That isn't to say that I won't have my opinion changed as more real facts come forth in this case. At this point, her guilt can not be determined reasonably. That can't happen till both sides present all the evidence.

 

[USARDOG]

Well, first an anthropologist's credentials are challenged and now a publication of the Archaeological Institute of America. I would think that this orginization wouldn't publish nonsense. The other article was simply reporting, not publishing their opinion. And Ms. Enwere was good enough to have her thesis excepted and published, so I would give it due respect. But we all must make our choices as to how we form our opinions and gather information in which to do that in a well balanced way. I have been very careful to not state opinions that are not based on the actual documents in this case, balanced with research through reputable sources, where I don't already have enough knowledge. That isn't to say that I won't have my opinion changed as more real facts come forth in this case. At this point, her guilt can not be determined reasonably. That can't happen till both sides present all the evidence.

Well put.

My experience is that gathered over time and is personal. My opinions are just that.

 

[cecybeans]

Well, first an anthropologist's credentials are challenged and now a publication of the Archaeological Institute of America. I would think that this orginization wouldn't publish nonsense. The other article was simply reporting, not publishing their opinion. And Ms. Enwere was good enough to have her thesis excepted and published, so I would give it due respect. But we all must make our choices as to how we form our opinions and gather information in which to do that in a well balanced way. I have been very careful to not state opinions that are not based on the actual documents in this case, balanced with research through reputable sources, where I don't already have enough knowledge. That isn't to say that I won't have my opinion changed as more real facts come forth in this case. At this point, her guilt can not be determined reasonably. That can't happen till both sides present all the evidence.

As a former member and chapter president when I lived in FL, I can assure you that AIA is an established and highly thought of organization. However, as you must know, any study in academia has those experts who agree and disagree with any given set of facts or their interpretation. Scholarly debates are the norm not the exception.

However, even if the cadaver dog info is correct, what everyone is missing is that we have always managed to assume that any decomp fluid the dogs hit on in the back yard was due to something KC herself did with Caylee's body the month prior. We have another alternative available to us and that would be if, after picking up the car at Johnsons, either of the Anthonys took either the wheel well cover (if the stain was decomp fluid) and pants, shoes or any other items and propped them up against the sandbox or playhouse and rinsed them off with a hose. If the trunk had been cleaned with a wet vac and the water dumped out using the garage back door, it would be next to the pool and could explain that hit as well. That would make the deposit of decomp within a day or two and not over a month and would explain why two sets of cadaver dogs managed to hit the same places.

Circumstantial evidence is not strong because it is scientifically irrefutable, it's because, when it is considered in toto it presents a pattern any reasonable person would see and agree with. Three or four separate sources pointing to decomp (humans, animals and scientific instruments) would indicate the likelihood of something being true more than it being false.

 

[USARDOG]

However, even if the cadaver dog info is correct, what everyone is missing is that we have always managed to assume that any decomp fluid the dogs hit on in the back yard was due to something KC herself did with Caylee's body the month prior. We have another alternative available to us and that would be if, after picking up the car at Johnsons, either of the Anthonys took either the wheel well cover (if the stain was decomp fluid) and pants, shoes or any other items and propped them up against the sandbox or playhouse and rinsed them off with a hose. If the trunk had been cleaned with a wet vac and the water dumped out using the garage back door, it would be next to the pool and could explain that hit as well. That would make the deposit of decomp within a day or two and not over a month and would explain why two sets of cadaver dogs managed to hit the same places.

Circumstantial evidence is not strong because it is scientifically irrefutable, it's because, when it is considered in toto it presents a pattern any reasonable person would see and agree with. Three or four separate sources pointing to decomp (humans, animals and scientific instruments) would indicate the likelihood of something being true more than it being false.

Great thought! Excellent post!

 

[Gaia713]

As a former member and chapter president when I lived in FL, I can assure you that AIA is an established and highly thought of organization. However, as you must know, any study in academia has those experts who agree and disagree with any given set of facts or their interpretation. Scholarly debates are the norm not the exception.

However, even if the cadaver dog info is correct, what everyone is missing is that we have always managed to assume that any decomp fluid the dogs hit on in the back yard was due to something KC herself did with Caylee's body the month prior. We have another alternative available to us and that would be if, after picking up the car at Johnsons, either of the Anthonys took either the wheel well cover (if the stain was decomp fluid) and pants, shoes or any other items and propped them up against the sandbox or playhouse and rinsed them off with a hose. If the trunk had been cleaned with a wet vac and the water dumped out using the garage back door, it would be next to the pool and could explain that hit as well. That would make the deposit of decomp within a day or two and not over a month and would explain why two sets of cadaver dogs managed to hit the same places.

Circumstantial evidence is not strong because it is scientifically irrefutable, it's because, when it is considered in toto it presents a pattern any reasonable person would see and agree with. Three or four separate sources pointing to decomp (humans, animals and scientific instruments) would indicate the likelihood of something being true more than it being false.

I woujld think it would BE strong, because it is hard to deny. Pardon me if I misunderstood your meaning.

 

[Baxter]

I have been very careful to not state opinions that are not based on the actual documents in this case, balanced with research through reputable sources, where I don't already have enough knowledge. That isn't to say that I won't have my opinion changed as more real facts come forth in this case. At this point, her guilt can not be determined reasonably. That can't happen till both sides present all the evidence.

I think with the documents that the prosecution has shown so far, I know her guilt can be determined REASONABLY.

 

[USARDOG]

Well, first an anthropologist's credentials are challenged and now a publication of the Archaeological Institute of America. I would think that this orginization wouldn't publish nonsense.

your post edited for brevity.

I can tell you the assertion that a sent dog must sniff the air slowly and carefully, marks the write as someone who knows little about dogs. Search dogs work and train in Florida every day, summer and winter. I recall in the middle of the summer working a search problem and had to stop my dog as he was over heating. I cooled his head, wet his nose, and rested in the shade for a while, and we continued on. This is where care has to be taken, as a good dog will work 'till they drop.

As I stated earlier, no sanctioning body for the dog team is sited. FEMA certified dogs are held to a high standard. Careful training records are kept for each training session and will be produced in court.

It would be like stating deaths during operations run in the 75% range, but not mentioning that the doctors surveyed were not licensed. While the statistic may be accurate, it is very misleading.

 

[Balthazar]

If it's usual procedure, how do you know they haven't since investigated him?

And again.. how did he get access to the A house, the yard, the locked tow yard, and the car? One of these might be explained away. Not all of them. How did the SO get over the tow yard fence with the child's body, and why would he put the body into KC's trunk? How did he get KC to lie for him, and carry her dead baby in her car? Why hasn't KC "owned up," though Caylee cannot now be protected, nor can she hide Caylee's "abduction" from her parents? Why not now just "come clean?" She's already lost all of her former friends.

And, if the evidence against KC is so weak, why did the Grand Jury indict?

I know this may come as a shock to you, but Grand Juries HAVE indicted innocent people before on weak or inconclusive evidence. It does happen.

I'm not saying that is the case here - I have no idea what the Grand Jury heard - but it has happened.

 

[cecybeans]

I woujld think it would BE strong, because it is hard to deny. Pardon me if I misunderstood your meaning.

I just meant that very few things in science are 100% positive or cannot be argued (by other scientists, not necessarily by reasonable human beings), but that in no way makes them less likely. I think they tend to back up or support any anecdotal evidence or evidence gathered from other (perhaps also imperfect) sources like humans or animals. If several sources each have even just a 90% probability of being true, I'd say they are strengthened when they are applied in concert and raise the odds even higher when conjoined.

In the OJ trial, the forensics people would not commit to 100% on dna, scientists rarely like to do that. What they did was give odds that were so insanely skewed as to the probability it was OJ that only a kook would think otherwise (because the odds that maybe three other human beings on the planet could share the exact dna and would have the opportunity to commit the crime are ridiculous). The "CSI Syndrome" in which people are beginning to expect unrealistic levels of accuracy with forensic evidence before they consider it exculpatory has put an unfair burden on the sciences. Just because there is a miniscule or slight chance of variance doesn't mean a piece of evidence isn't valuable. And, as I mentioned before, if it agrees with or is strengthened by other sources, then it is pretty unreasonable to question the overall validity, imo.

I am hoping that FL jurors are not so hypercritical of such minor margins of error or prone to quibbling over minutiae that they will overlook the extremely strong pattern that multiple sources confirm is the presence of decomp in the trunk of that Sunfire. This trial doesn't need to drill down to the subatomic level.

 

[Balthazar]

Princess Rose, I understand you wish to remain objective, and that's a good thing because it shows you are not one to jump to conclusions. But your statement that Casey hadn't lied to anybody is incredulous. Casey has done nothing but lie, spin and mislead since this case began. Surely you must not believe she has been truthful, really? Nothing she said has stood up: the job, the imaginanny and her imagirelatives, the relationship with JHopkins, the imagiwreck . . .

Casey has zero credibility. Period.

You are taking my statement out of context. From the time of Casey's first arrest and hiring of Baez, forward, she has not told the police any lies because she hasn't talked to police. Yes, I agree, she has zero credibility regarding all the stuff she told police up until her arrest. My response was to those who keep saying that Casey has continued to lie to police, when in fact, she has said nothing more to police.

 

[Balthazar]

Remember a grand jury would indict a ham sandwhich....lol.
Never said the case was weak...just that I have not seen any investigation into So's in docs which is really odd to me .And I like to see the loose ends tied up.
Why not come clean? why not tell the truth about who caylees father is?Why tell people for years about a fake job?
Because she's a pathalogical liar, and on top of that has an atty who has convinced her that if she keeps her trap shut, she could walk.

Again, I think the most likely scenario is that KC killed caylee, but if an SO defense is attempted at trial, I'd like to know that the state has the evidence to refute it, and am left wondering, not why the most recent SO hasnt been investigated, but why we havent seen any so's investigated in the dumps.

Why would an abductor have to jump the fence of the towyard? There's no evidence that caylee was in the trunk while it was sitting waiting to be picked up by the A's.
why would he put the body in KC's trunk? I dunno. I dont even know for certain that her decomp was in the trunk.(likely, but enough room for doubt re the technique used)
Dont know why in the recent attempted abduction the so would take the chance of being caught and stay in the house for so long either, or place moms shoes near the victim...Hopefully I will never understand an SO's reasoning.
JMO

I agree with you. We have seen no evidence of any SO being looked at. I hope that this is not tunnel vision on the part of LE. While Casey certainly did EVERYTHING possible to make herself look bad to LE, I do think that at the very least SO's should have been considered. I hope LE did that and we just don't know. If not, that is a hole in the case that the defense will exploit to show reasonable doubt.

I really hate to think what the lawyers (both defense and prosecution) may make of this case once it goes to trial. What is presented may be so drastically different from what we have all read and know about that we barely recognize the case.

 

[Balthazar]

Not trying to be Rude to you Princess Rose.... but.

* * * * * YES KC HAS LIED ! ! !

* * * * * * Yes KC took LE to UNIVERSAL Studios and led them
down the hall of a Office bldg.... then............
KC SAID " OK I LIED>> I DON'T REALLY HAVE AN OFFICE HERE I DON't
WORK HERE ! "

She ADMITTED SHE LIED !

* * * ALSO she told LE " I left Caylee with ZFG at SawGrass Apts"

then she changed her story... " said I met ZFG at the
JBlanchard Park & ZFG gave me a S C R I P T to follow
and she took Caylee with her to teach me a lesson.


SO.... besides those lies....

SHE USED AH Checks at the Target Store.... that's lying also
saying she is AH when she is really KCA


Oh I give up...

AT LEAST ~ I BELIEVE ~ KC IS A LIAR ! ! !:liar::liar::liar::liar:
:Banane12: Door # 1 KC THE LIAR
:Banane12: Door #2 KC The Liar
:Banane12: Door #3 KC T H E L I A R

Anyway you L @ @ K at KC she is a :liar: :liar: :liar:

JMO

God Bless !
jjgram

Again, my comment was taken out of context. I simply meant since being arrested and hiring JB Casey has not lied to LE because she has not talked to them.

 

[Balthazar]

When George went to pick up the car, he used his extra set of keys to Casey's car. Casey had her own set of keys with her at Tony's

Thank you for clearing that up. Earlier in the week other poster's claimed it was NOT likely that ANYONE had the other set of keys to Casey's car. But now we know the truth. That's very helpful.

 

[cecybeans]

You are taking my statement out of context. From the time of Casey's first arrest and hiring of Baez, forward, she has not told the police any lies because she hasn't talked to police. Yes, I agree, she has zero credibility regarding all the stuff she told police up until her arrest. My response was to those who keep saying that Casey has continued to lie to police, when in fact, she has said nothing more to police.

This appears to more of a matter of semantics than a matter of intent to communicate.

Yes, technically KC has not lied to the police because she has not spoken with them since she has been in jail. Police, and not FBI because I think she may have said a few things in her interview in October that weren't 100% kosher).

However, the fact that she has not corrected the lies she originally told police can be seen as her continuing to lie.

Yes, Cindy could technically say that Zenaida Gonzales is not the Zenaida GonzalE. But she failed to mention that for all intents and purposes it was the same human being, by her own admission and the rental agents, that KC saw and that the ONLY reason her name was misspelled was NOT because she signed it herself, but because another human being filled out the card and made a minor typo.

We probably could communicate with each other better if we avoid making statements that could be literally true but in essence may be interpreted otherwise.

 

[Balthazar]

Shifting gears a bit,maybe the defense is building a case against the A's or one of the A's.
Cindy was last one seen with Caylee,for sure.
They didn't report Caylee missing or in danger,even though KC keeping Caylee away so long was completely out of the norm.
They really pushed the Caylee is alive story to the nth degree.
They never looked for Caylee and discouraged TM and others from looking for a dead Caylee.
They never attached themselves to a reputable missing kids foundation.
They have been uncooperative and obstructive with LE's investigation.
All the evidence from the house could be just as easily attributed to one of them.
They didn't report the decomp smell when they found KC's car.
I don't think they had anything to do with the murder,but I wonder if the defense will go there.

I've wondered about this possibility myself. You've laid out a very interesting theoretical Defense case. If the defense goes this direction, how do you think they will explain the odor in Casey's car?

 

[Brini]

You are taking my statement out of context. From the time of Casey's first arrest and hiring of Baez, forward, she has not told the police any lies because she hasn't talked to police. Yes, I agree, she has zero credibility regarding all the stuff she told police up until her arrest. My response was to those who keep saying that Casey has continued to lie to police, when in fact, she has said nothing more to police.

I think that what people are saying is that every, single thing that KC has said to police (and to everyone else) is a lie. That, in and of itself, is incriminating. It doesn't matter WHEN she said it. The fact is that she cannot be believed about anything. When that fact is added to her refusal to report her child missing, the dog hits, the DNA, and the other evidence, it makes a very nasty picture.

One can nit-pick and speculate that "maybe GA left the door open." But, it's going to be awfully hard for a jury to believe that all the "maybes" and "nothing is perfects" add up to innocence for KC, against all the evidence of her guilt.

Especially since none of us can come up with a SOD without doing some very far reaches. Motive, method, and opportunity are just not there for anyone else, without creating some highly implausible scenarios. There is also the fact the the evidence does not point to anyone else.

For instance, the idea that a SO somehow got access to the A house and KC's car, and managed to climb a tall wire fence into a locked tow yard with a child's body in his arms, then climb out, unobserved, on a main drag is hard to buy. Then, he coincidentally picked a place close to an area where KC partied during her high school years, and where she buried deceased pets, to dispose of the body. Then, the SO coincidentally made off with Caylee on or shortly after KC and CA had a big fight. Couple that with the incredible assertion that KC would lie and sacrifice her freedom to cover for said SO, after her child is dead, and her friends have abandoned her. She has nothing whatever to gain from that. She has more to gain, if she was innocent, by simply and truthfully explaining what happened to Caylee. The only reason for her lies and silence is guilt.

Compare that to Occam's Razor-- the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. That KC killed her child, accidentally or deliberately and is trying to get out of being punished. Which is more believable?

One can certainly say that crazy things DO happen and there ARE the occasional conspiracies. But, the fact is that the usual perp is the most obvious perp.