I'm not at all convinced that GA's recollection of the events of June 16 is accurate. I think it's more likely that he was recalling what happened on June 9, a date that was initially firmly fixed in CA's mind (and subsequently in GA's) as the last date either of them had seen Caylee, and a date on which KC
and Caylee did
in fact spend the night away from the house - at RM's.
I really don't accept that he could have recalled any particular day that was at least a month past, in so much detail as he appears to have done with June 16, particularly in respect of what KC and Caylee were wearing/carrying and what was said between them. If it had been a significant day in any other respect, one might expect to have certain particular memories, but there is no evidence that, for GA at least, Monday June 16 was anything other than a normal day and of no particular significance at the time. He was not privy to the alleged fight of the evening before, and it's quite likely that he was told very little, if anything, of the details. Also, the items of Caylee's found in the car/at the disposal site
do not match his descriptions of her clothes and backpack.
So.......if we take out of the equation his testimony about that day, this leaves us with some alternative possibilities for the chain of events that may have happened. We know that KC was most likely at home throughout the night/early morning of 15/16 and there appears to be PC activity by her during both the morning and afternoon of the 16th, with various breaks in that activity. The first is around Caylee's likely breakfast/getting washed/dressed time. The 2nd is around 1 o'clock, when it is still possible that KC went out with Caylee for a while in order to perpetuate the 'going to work' story, but it
may not be true that she
stated any intention of staying elsewhere
that night with Caylee.
I have thought that maybe they didn't leave the house at all, but instead KC put Caylee down to sleep and carried on with her phone chats/PC use. But that wouldn't explain why the Mama doll was left in the car, unless it wasn't strictly true that Caylee wouldn't go
anywhere without it, in which case it could have been left there from a previous car trip. Or it means that Caylee
was in the car at some point on that date. Whether or not it's true that Caylee was so firmly attached to the doll is of great significance IMO, because if so, it's unlikely that she would have electively left it behind, meaning that she must have been either asleep or otherwise not conscious
![Eek! :eek: :eek:]()
when she was taken out of the car.
As to what happened to her that day, I haven't any firm theories, but there's a few things I just don't think are likely. First, I don't think she died (however caused) overnight, because GA was at home on weekday mornings, there's no evidence (yet) that he went anywhere that morning, and it's just not feasible that he wouldn't query KC's obvious presence in the house, but with no visible 'alive' Caylee. I also can't see KC secreting a dead Caylee anywhere in the house with GA around.
I also don't believe it's necessarily true that KC
planned to go and see AL that evening, much less stay overnight. It was a Monday, there was no Fusion, nor any evidence of any other event happening (they ended up renting videos) and also it was supposed to be college as usual for AL the following day, although he ended up staying home with KC, apparently not a preplanned decision. I think she pitched up there unexpectedly, and only because she needed to hide from her parents.
I'm still not convinced that there was any intent, malice, motive or planning involved in Caylee's death. It's easy to weave together the known clues and evidence to fit, if you
start from a belief that KC did
murder Caylee, but there are still far too many assumptions that have to be built into those theories to make them plausible IMO.
I haven't ruled out a killing that occurred during a loss of control by a tired/upset/angry/frustrated KC, and I still think an accident is possible, but to explain her behaviour afterwards, it has to have been due to some negligence or fault on her part, either perceived or actual.
To all those who say that they are 'certain' that they would never harm their child even if they were pushed to the brink, all I can say is you have to actually have been teetering on the edge of that abyss, either physically, emotionally or psychologically before you can be
sure that your grip on self-control wouldn't fail you.
It does happen, to all sorts of people, including those who would never otherwise, consciously or deliberately, hurt any living thing.