The Verdict - Do you agree or disagree?

[Baznme]

:waitasec:

Oh, yes........I forgot........anything to do with Caylee was soooo upsetting to her. Puleeezzeeee!

As the thread goes on, it seems to get more and more bizarre. The explanations as to why KC gets to excuse her behavior and why GA doesn't get any free passes is beginning to get a little ridiculous. It was HER daughter, HER car (to drive), HER that Caylee was last seen with (upon her own admission).

 

[logicalgirl]

The car WAS out of gas. The car would not start at the tow yard. GA even took gas with him to the tow yard. However, he never had anyone that we know of tell him before hand that it was out of gas. Just thinking, maybe Casey told him. hmmmm

FCA had run out of gas three or four times that we know of in the preceding 1.5 months, including taking George's gas cans - so it would be a natural assumption on the part of her father to assume this was why the car was towed. And she did have money - Amy's checking account - which she freely spent during this period of time. If the car was out of gas, she could have walked across the street to the nearest gas station, some 100 yards away.

We know George took gas with him, we do not know if he actually put gas in the tank.

 

[logicalgirl]

I'm just curious...What kind of "important stuff" would you expect to find? :waitasec: Maybe copies of routing numbers off the bank accounts? Like those of her grandmother or the one dedicated for her grandfather's nursing home expenses? Some stolen checks from her friends that she hadn't written YET?

Considering she had no job, didn't attend college and her life mainly consisted of texting, communicating online via social media sites and hanging out with her friends... She didn't pay ANY bills, so that wouldn't be an issue.

Seriously. What are you considering "important stuff"? I can't imagine.

Important stuff like the only thing found in the "work bag" for the person who didn't have a job - Amy's resume.....

 

[beccalecca1]

FCA had run out of gas three or four times that we know of in the preceding 1.5 months, including taking George's gas cans - so it would be a natural assumption on the part of her father to assume this was why the car was towed. And she did have money - Amy's checking account - which she freely spent during this period of time. If the car was out of gas, she could have walked across the street to the nearest gas station, some 100 yards away.

We know George took gas with him, we do not know if he actually put gas in the tank.

IIRC, she didn't have access to Amy's account until later. Amy went with her the day the car was towed to Target to buy her a gas can instead of going to her storage shed.

 

[KarmaGet'em]

YW for the links

I'm not sure how she could've intentionally ran out of gas at the Amscot. Is this suggesting maybe she parked her car there and left it running? Why wouldn't someone see it and just steal it then?

IMO, she stayed with the car until it ran out. I don't recall if it was said whether the keys were in the ignition or just in the car or not with the car at all... If she abandoned it while running, the keys would have been in the car (in the ignition). My guess is she took the keys with her (or has someone heard otherwise?) after allowing the car to run out of gas.

 

[imagirlgeek]

I heard something interesting a few days after trial on Dr. Drew. He said if you google chlorophyll, on the very first page of the search you will see "how to make chloroform".

Now, I just tried it myself and didn't see the same results, but at the bottom of the page with related searches I do see chloroform. But, that doesn't mean that wasn't how it was back in 2008.

What he was talking about was the autofill/autocomplete in Google search. This is what a lot of the TH were saying after the trial. It drove me a little crazy because search engines use an algorithm that pull from the masses to bring the most popular results.

How autocomplete works:

"As you type, Google's algorithm predicts and displays search queries based on other users' search activities. In addition, if you're signed in to your Google Account and have Web History enabled, you may see search queries from relevant searches that you've done in the past. All of the predicted queries that are shown in the drop-down list have been typed previously by Google users.

Predicted queries are algorithmically determined based on a number of purely objective factors (including popularity of search terms) without human intervention. The autocomplete data is updated frequently to offer fresh and rising search queries.

Why do some searches seem so strange?

"In some cases, there may be a search term that seems surprising to you, but after doing some searching on the web, you may discover that it's a popular phrase online for some reason that you didn't anticipate. Queries in autocomplete are algorithmically determined based on a number of objective factors (including search term popularity) without manual intervention."

http://www.google.com/support/websearch/bin/static.py?page=guide.cs&guide=1186810&answer=106230

I typed in chlorophyll immediately after CA stated that's what she did and could not get chloroform to pop up as a search term no matter how I spelled/misspelled chlorophyll, much less 'How to make chloroform'. But a few days later, after hearing all the TH's say that they were able to get the same results CA got by googling Chlorophyll, I typed in chloroform and all kinds of variations came up. It's because of that algorithm. There is no link between chlorophyll and chloroform outside of what CA said on the stand, so IMO there is no way typing chlorophyll in 2008 would have resulted in How to make chloroform, or chloroform.

 

[suzihawk]

Oh, yes........I forgot........anything to do with Caylee was soooo upsetting to her. Puleeezzeeee!

As the thread goes on, it seems to get more and more bizarre. The explanations as to why KC gets to excuse her behavior and why GA doesn't get any free passes is beginning to get a little ridiculous. It was HER daughter, HER car (to drive), HER that Caylee was last seen with (upon her own admission).

I couldn't agree with you more. Which is why I've decided not to participate in these discussions any longer. It's an excercise in futility, raises my blood pressure and just fans the flames on the ongoing and everlasting fire, IYKWIM.

:seeya:

 

[yolorado]

This doesn't make sense. If GA was supposed to be so involved with the coverup of Caylee's death, why wouldn't KC get on the phone to ask her father to help get that car out of there rather than allow it to be towed? If they were in on this plan together, seems to me he would have been the one to help out with this.

Of course, almost certainly, imo and maybe in yours too, there was no plan between George and KC. On what planet would there be? George was suspicious of KC, doted on Caylee and searched for her frantically from Day 31, something KC never did. KC never, ever said that either, that George had any involvement. Baez did. Come from her? Come from him? Who knows. What she did say, infer and do ... for three years was: (1) Insist Baby was kidnapped at a time when she, not George, she, KC had custody of Caylee, in a couple of permutations, which is why OC incurred beau coup costs chasing after a missing child and leads in several states; (2) Apparently, lead her family to believe she was protecting them somehow by letting the missing child stay missing; (3) Insist over and over that she knew or felt Caylee was still alive and that the police were shirking their duty by not looking hard enough in NY, Puerto Rico, etc, etc, etc, leading to even more $$$ on more wild goose chase. There is no indication what-so-ever, even from KC that there was any plan. KC dumped the car. It smelled. She didn't want anyone else to smell it. She left it and was taking time to think about how to handle the car and the whole situ, but planning isn't really her strong suit, and she hadn't come up with one before the car was gone...poof. So, she needed "another" day to figure out what to do about that now too.

 

[beccalecca1]

What he was talking about was the autofill/autocomplete in Google search. This is what a lot of the TH were saying after the trial. It drove me a little crazy because search engines use an algorithm that pull from the masses to bring the most popular results.

How autocomplete works:

"As you type, Google's algorithm predicts and displays search queries based on other users' search activities. In addition, if you're signed in to your Google Account and have Web History enabled, you may see search queries from relevant searches that you've done in the past. All of the predicted queries that are shown in the drop-down list have been typed previously by Google users.

Predicted queries are algorithmically determined based on a number of purely objective factors (including popularity of search terms) without human intervention. The autocomplete data is updated frequently to offer fresh and rising search queries.

Why do some searches seem so strange?

"In some cases, there may be a search term that seems surprising to you, but after doing some searching on the web, you may discover that it's a popular phrase online for some reason that you didn't anticipate. Queries in autocomplete are algorithmically determined based on a number of objective factors (including search term popularity) without manual intervention."

http://www.google.com/support/websearch/bin/static.py?page=guide.cs&guide=1186810&answer=106230

I typed in chlorophyll immediately after CA stated that's what she did and could not get chloroform to pop up as a search term no matter how I spelled/misspelled chlorophyll, much less 'How to make chloroform'. But a few days later, after hearing all the TH's say that they were able to get the same results CA got by googling Chlorophyll, I typed in chloroform and all kinds of variations came up. It's because of that algorithm. There is no link between chlorophyll and chloroform outside of what CA said on the stand, so IMO there is no way typing chlorophyll in 2008 would have resulted in How to make chloroform, or chloroform.

I tried to look up the transcripts from his show and can't find them posted anywhere on the net. I'm about 99.9% positive he was referring to search results, not auto-fill. He stated this on his July 7,2011 show though. I think, in fact, I saw a search result directed to websleuths.com; so I'm sure there's a thread here on it. I'm going to search the thread to see if it'll help me and I'll ETA if I have more information showing it was search results, not auto-fill.

 

[Italy]

I couldn't agree with you more. Which is why I've decided not to participate in these discussions any longer. It's an excercise in futility, raises my blood pressure and just fans the flames on the ongoing and everlasting fire, IYKWIM.

:seeya:

Me too. Thanks Suzihawk.

I must admit though, I had to look up IYKWIM before I left this board.

 

[yolorado]

I couldn't agree with you more. Which is why I've decided not to participate in these discussions any longer. It's an excercise in futility, raises my blood pressure and just fans the flames on the ongoing and everlasting fire, IYKWIM.

:seeya:

Not even if you're helping with some sort of research, possibly, maybe scientific, perhaps market, maybe some sort of school project even which might benefit,,,oh I don't know, poor victims..., somehow, or something. Nah, never mind, just call me crazy. Ignore me.

 

[Sustained]

I couldn't agree with you more. Which is why I've decided not to participate in these discussions any longer. It's an excercise in futility, raises my blood pressure and just fans the flames on the ongoing and everlasting fire, IYKWIM.

:seeya:

Add me to the club please ... this whole conspiracy thing is rivaling the JFK assassination, the staged moon landing, or that 9/11 was staged by the US government.

 

[KarmaGet'em]

I tried to look up the transcripts from his show and can't find them posted anywhere on the net. I'm about 99.9% positive he was referring to search results, not auto-fill. He stated this on his July 7,2011 show though. I think, in fact, I saw a search result directed to websleuths.com; so I'm sure there's a thread here on it. I'm going to search the thread to see if it'll help me and I'll ETA if I have more information showing it was search results, not auto-fill.

Yes, I heard Dr. Drew say that and I knew immediately that he did not know what he was talking about. He was mixing "search results" with "autofill" and mixing "searches" with "visits". The TH are usually way off base on their translation of the evidence which is why I would rather listen to the experts and see the data for myself.

 

[beccalecca1]

Yes, I heard Dr. Drew say that and I knew immediately that he did not know what he was talking about. He was mixing "search results" with "autofill" and mixing "searches" with "visits". The TH are usually way off base on their translation of the evidence which is why I would rather listen to the experts and see the data for myself.

Well, I can't find anything on it, not even a youtube video with that clip. However he said it, I was under the impression that when you google "chlorophyll", you come up with one of the results of "how to make chloroform". When I googled this with Dr. Drew, I found his facebook page with many asking him to elaborate because they didn't find that when searching chlorophyll. I'm not the only one who thought that was what he meant. And, I usually can see when the TH's got their info messed up and they're referring to auto-fill, etc.

 

[imagirlgeek]

Well, I can't find anything on it, not even a youtube video with that clip. However he said it, I was under the impression that when you google "chlorophyll", you come up with one of the results of "how to make chloroform". When I googled this with Dr. Drew, I found his facebook page with many asking him to elaborate because they didn't find that when searching chlorophyll. I'm not the only one who thought that was what he meant. And, I usually can see when the TH's got their info messed up and they're referring to auto-fill, etc.

I think he made reference to it a couple of times. I 'might' still have one of the shows where he mentioned it saved. I haven't cleaned the disk in a while...I'll check, but no promises.

But either way, the search results are determined by keywords and Pagerank. And while now, post trial, there are likely some websites containing both chlorophyll and chloroform, I'm doubtful they would have a high pagerank. Even less likely back in 2008 when there was no reason for those 2 things to be associated.

I'll let you know if I still have one of Dr. Drew's shows saved where he was talking about his search.

 

[pcrum12]

I'm just curious...What kind of "important stuff" would you expect to find? :waitasec: Maybe copies of routing numbers off the bank accounts? Like those of her grandmother or the one dedicated for her grandfather's nursing home expenses? Some stolen checks from her friends that she hadn't written YET?

Considering she had no job, didn't attend college and her life mainly consisted of texting, communicating online via social media sites and hanging out with her friends... She didn't pay ANY bills, so that wouldn't be an issue.

Seriously. What are you considering "important stuff"? I can't imagine.

her DL, pictures, normal stuff you carry in you everyday purse. Geez

 

[logicalgirl]

I think he made reference to it a couple of times. I 'might' still have one of the shows where he mentioned it saved. I haven't cleaned the disk in a while...I'll check, but no promises.

But either way, the search results are determined by keywords and Pagerank. And while now, post trial, there are likely some websites containing both chlorophyll and chloroform, I'm doubtful they would have a high pagerank. Even less likely back in 2008 when there was no reason for those 2 things to be associated.

I'll let you know if I still have one of Dr. Drew's shows saved where he was talking about his search.

Dr Drew is not in the business of being accurate - it's the very nature of his profession not to be.... it's all about probably, likely, seems like, getting other opinions, etc. I saw many many instances in just a couple of weeks of watching his show, that he is incredibly inaccurate in both his openings and comments during his shows... He's "fun" but could never be considered a "source".

 

[MissJames]

IMO, she stayed with the car until it ran out. I don't recall if it was said whether the keys were in the ignition or just in the car or not with the car at all... If she abandoned it while running, the keys would have been in the car (in the ignition). My guess is she took the keys with her (or has someone heard otherwise?) after allowing the car to run out of gas.

I doubt if she was filling up the tank,either. I would bet she only put small amounts of gas in at a time and knew it was about to run out.

 

[MissJames]

Dr Drew is not in the business of being accurate - it's the very nature of his profession not to be.... it's all about probably, likely, seems like, getting other opinions, etc. I saw many many instances in just a couple of weeks of watching his show, that he is incredibly inaccurate in both his openings and comments during his shows... He's "fun" but could never be considered a "source".

I noticed that ,also. I actually got frustrated watching him because he was so off on some of the facts.

 

[EPfan]

IIRC, the hair with the banding was "consistent" with post-mortem root banding, not conclusive.

What bothered me was that prosecution didn't even show this important evidence. WHY? It made me conclude that is was very vague and would have caused doubt.