Theories On What Happened to Caylee Part #6 (New Smoking Gun Theories for DP)

[Wudge]

SNIP

thus eliminating any chance of this being an accident.

SNIP

the burden of proof is going to be shifted to you.

SNIP

If a body is never found, do you think the ME can't say a death occurred and that it was murder? Seems to me this happens all the time, so why do you think CASEY IS SO SPECIAL hmmmm

Valid syllogistic deduction can generate proof perfect conclusions. However, that's not possible in this case, because the reliability of the premises are not sufficient (not 100%) to reach such a conclusion -- the reliability of the conclusion cannot exceed the reliability of the premises. So it's impossible to "eliminate any chance of this being an accident".

As regarding shifting the burden of proof to the defense, that would be unconstitutional (re: big problem).

The M.E. could not determine the cause of death, yet they concluded the manner of death to be "homicide" and there is certainly nothing dispositive of murder. Hence, they will be asked to explain (beaten around their head on cross) why the manner of death was listed as "homicide" instead of "undetermined". Moreover, the M.E. will also be asked for the reliability behind their assessment of "homicide" and how they empirically derived that guage -- anticipate that a bad case of babble will follow.

 

[MAMABEAR]

Here it is guys---CA's My Space:

She came into my life unexspectedly, just as she has left me. This precious little angel from above gave me strength and unconditional love. Now she is gone and I don’t know why. All I am guilty of is loving her and providing her a safe home. Jealousy has taken her away. Jealousy from the one person that should be thankfull for all of the love and support given to her. A mother’s love is deep, however there are limits when one is betrayed by the one she loved and trusted the most. A daughter comes to her mother for support when she is pregnant, the mother says without hesitation it will be ok. And it was. But then the lies and betrayal began. First it seemed harmless, ah, love is blind. A mother will look for the good in her child and give them a chance to change. This mother gave chance after chance for her daughter to change, but instead more lies more betrayal. What does the mother get for giving her daughter all of these chances? A broken heart. The daughter who stole money, lots of money, leaves without warning and does not let her mother now speak to the baby that her mother raised, fed, clothed, sheltered, paid her medical bills, etc. Instead tells her friends that her mother is controlling her life and she needs her space. No money, no future. Where did she go? Who is now watching out for the little angel?

 

[countzero]

Aw mama, thank you :clap:, much braver than I was to retype the carp. I owe ya a beer. :toast:

 

[MAMABEAR]

Aw mama, thank you :clap:, much braver than I was to retype the carp. I owe ya a beer. :toast:

Ah shucks---> I just copied and pasted it. LOL:blowkiss:

 

[MAMABEAR]

"Jealousy has taken her away. Jealousy from the one person that should be thankfull for all of the love and support given to her." said by CA in her My Space.

Member what SP said? "I think she hates her mother more then she loved Caylee." Is that what she said, exactly?

Looks pretty bad. That is pretty bad--you know that will be used in court.

 

[mitzi]

Wasn't the postal sticker affixed to their doorknob after 3 July ?

Yes, IIRC, it was found by the Anthonys a couple of days before they went to pick up the car at the towyard on July 15th. I think the day after they found it, GA was working and didn't have a chance to get to the towyard until the following day, which was July 15th.

 

[countzero]

"Jealousy has taken her away. Jealousy from the one person that should be thankfull for all of the love and support given to her." said by CA in her My Space.

Member what SP said? "I think she hates her mother more then she loved Caylee." Is that what she said, exactly?

Looks pretty bad. That is pretty bad--you know that will be used in court.

You are point on right mama. It reads like a eulogy to me. After the fact.

And I will answer her last question, "who is now watching her little angel"

GOD is watching over Caylee now.

 

[essies]

Here on page 28 is KC's Diary of Days, which she posted to her MySpace on 7/7/2008. This is basically KC's response to Cindy's My Caylee is Missing!
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/3868229/...lando-sentinel

You can see that KC truly did hate Cindy more than she loved Caylee!:furious:

 

[jcamille]

Here it is guys---CA's My Space:

...... All I am guilty of is loving her and providing her a safe home. Jealousy has taken her away. Jealousy from the one person that should be thankfull for all of the love and support given to her. .....

The words "providing her a SAFE HOME" just jumped out at me. Is CA saying that Caylee isn't SAFE with KC? Does CA know as far back as July 3rd or previous to that that Caylee could be in danger with KC???

Then CA's statement about jealousy provides the motive for the jury....

 

[Imbackon]

Valid syllogistic deduction can generate proof perfect conclusions. However, that's not possible in this case, because the reliability of the premises are not sufficient (not 100%) to reach such a conclusion -- the reliability of the conclusion cannot exceed the reliability of the premises. So it's impossible to "eliminate any chance of this being an accident".

As regarding shifting the burden of proof to the defense, that would be unconstitutional (re: big problem).

The M.E. could not determine the cause of death, yet they concluded the manner of death to be "homicide" and there is certainly nothing dispositive of murder. Hence, they will be asked to explain (beaten around their head on cross) why the manner of death was listed as "homicide" instead of "undetermined". Moreover, the M.E. will also be asked for the reliability behind their assessment of "homicide" and how they empirically derived that guage -- anticipate that a bad case of babble will follow.

Using your reasoning, then maybe the defense should claim this was a suicide. Since the defense actually doesn't have to say anything, the burden is on the ME as you say, but the jurors are not encumbered by any of this .

The jurors will want to hear an explanation as to what happened to Caylee. And if they can't wrap their head around why a mother would say her child was kidnapped by a seemingly non existent Nanny, coupled with all the other lies as given within the first 24 hours by the mother, when in reality the child died by accident, the burden will be on Casey for this explanation. It's her story, she's sticking with it, and she will have to answer to it.

The fact that Casey delayed the discovery of the body (if this were an accident), is what makes 100% reliability on the premise of murder impossible. This gives Casey motive for delaying discovery and this delay alone makes her suspect.
Jurors can then reasonably infer that the ME's conclusion of murder is correct.

 

[claudicici]

...oh yes,these two myspace entrys supply so much evidence in connection with what is already known....ca provides the motive,she laid it out right there and kc explains her 'ugly coping' and i believe this shows more than anything else,that she acted alone....just by what she wrote herself how could the defense possibly try to get someone else to blame.....

 

[faefrost]

Valid syllogistic deduction can generate proof perfect conclusions. However, that's not possible in this case, because the reliability of the premises are not sufficient (not 100%) to reach such a conclusion -- the reliability of the conclusion cannot exceed the reliability of the premises. So it's impossible to "eliminate any chance of this being an accident".

As regarding shifting the burden of proof to the defense, that would be unconstitutional (re: big problem).

The M.E. could not determine the cause of death, yet they concluded the manner of death to be "homicide" and there is certainly nothing dispositive of murder. Hence, they will be asked to explain (beaten around their head on cross) why the manner of death was listed as "homicide" instead of "undetermined". Moreover, the M.E. will also be asked for the reliability behind their assessment of "homicide" and how they empirically derived that guage -- anticipate that a bad case of babble will follow.

The standard of law is not to eliminate "any chance of this being an accident". The prosecutions burder is beyond a "reasonable" doubt. not beyond any doubt. That "reasonable" often seems to get overlooked, and defense lawyers and talking heads always seem to downplay it.

 

[doobiedoo52]

Does anyone recall when NG was hinting at the Sevendust song--"The Past" in reference to water etc? Anyhoo--not sure if I'm nuts or not but what about their song "Home"---check out the lyrics: (snipped)
Frustrated - OUR SIMPLE LIFE
No one listens - EVERYONE LIES
Who said "HOME IS WHERE YOU HIDE"?...........
and
MEANING - Too deep to swim
When's a good time for the end?
Who said I was YOUR FRIEND?
I'm home - leave it to me
(leave it to me now that you've seen)
and again:
Suffocated - our simple life
No one listens - everyone dies
Never a chance - how could you see?
Is it me or does some of this sound vaguely familiar?

 

[essies]

I don't remember that doobiedoo-but-that is VERY interesting!:waitasec:
Everything KC wrote or copied or posted has a meaning!

 

[RR0004]

OOPS you're right. LOL I had June & July confused. Sorry!

No need to apologize...it's hard for me to keep it all straight...it's been so long. Too long IMO.

 

[RR0004]

The standard of law is not to eliminate "any chance of this being an accident". The prosecutions burder is beyond a "reasonable" doubt. not beyond any doubt. That "reasonable" often seems to get overlooked, and defense lawyers and talking heads always seem to downplay it.

The duct tape may seal the deal as well...unless Casey gets up on the stand and explains THAT.

 

[cecybeans]

Without getting too deep into the swampy synergy of syllogy, I wanted to ask something about the discussion above.

I've seen defense attorneys (admittedly talking media heads) interpret the duct tape over Caylee's mouth as clear evidence of homicide. I've also seen interpretations that say the duct tape infers a staged kidnapping in some after-the-fact death (accidental or otherwise).

From what we have seen so far in the recently released autopsy report (which is, I assume, the one that was issued on Dec 19 or shortly thereafter) the ME has not given a specific COD - or anything we have been able to medically construe from antemortem bone trauma - to assume it was definitively a premeditated (or premedicated) murder, yet she goes on record as saying it is a homicide.

I'm wondering then two things:

1. If the ME, in examining the various layers of duct tape noticed evidence of a struggle (and we have not been told definitively that KC or Caylee's fingerprints do not appear on the tape, have we?), could she have made the initial assumption that the tape was put on while the victim was alive, and waited for confirmation of her findings from subsequent FBI forensics that have not been included yet in discovery? This would immediately bring her to the conclusion it was homicide if the child was alive while the duct tape was applied, and the fact we have now found out it covered both the mouth and nose could lead us to believe she had perhaps asphyxiated.

2. If the ME was unable to determine whether the duct tape was applied antemortem, and then, therefore, if the death was accidental (say by drowning or by suffocation in a hot car), but determined that either way, it was likely through negligence (particularly and most probably because no effort was made to involve professionals in an attempt to treat or revive the child after said accident), then, under FL law, isn't the death of a child under 12 from neglect or through the act of a felony considered homicide?

I know we've been skirted around this issue before, but am just wondering if I overlook something in the previous discussions, legal interpretations or general consensus. TIA for your responses.

 

[RR0004]

"Jealousy has taken her away. Jealousy from the one person that should be thankfull for all of the love and support given to her." said by CA in her My Space.

Member what SP said? "I think she hates her mother more then she loved Caylee." Is that what she said, exactly?

Looks pretty bad. That is pretty bad--you know that will be used in court.

I can understand Cindy wanting to get Casey's attention...but this, the use of the word "jealousy", could very well have incited Casey. It acknowledges the power struggle that existed between the two. I find the whole posting an "in your face" kinda taunting. This family never learned how to talk to one another, sadly enough.

 

[RR0004]

Without getting too deep into the swampy synergy of syllogy, I wanted to ask something about the discussion above.

I've seen defense attorneys (admittedly talking media heads) interpret the duct tape over Caylee's mouth as clear evidence of homicide. I've also seen interpretations that say the duct tape infers a staged kidnapping in some after-the-fact death (accidental or otherwise).

From what we have seen so far in the recently released autopsy report (which is, I assume, the one that was issued on Dec 19 or shortly thereafter) the ME has not given a specific COD - or anything we have been able to medically construe from antemortem bone trauma - to assume it was definitively a premeditated (or premedicated) murder, yet she goes on record as saying it is a homicide.

I'm wondering then two things:

1. If the ME, in examining the various layers of duct tape noticed evidence of a struggle (and we have not been told definitively that KC or Caylee's fingerprints do not appear on the tape, have we?), could she have made the initial assumption that the tape was put on while the victim was alive, and waited for confirmation of her findings from subsequent FBI forensics that have not been included yet in discovery? This would immediately bring her to the conclusion it was homicide if the child was alive while the duct tape was applied, and the fact we have now found out it covered both the mouth and nose could lead us to believe she had perhaps asphyxiated.

2. If the ME was unable to determine whether the duct tape was applied antemortem, and then, therefore, if the death was accidental (say by drowning or by suffocation in a hot car), but determined that either way, it was likely through negligence (particularly and most probably because no effort was made to involve professionals in an attempt to treat or revive the child after said accident), then, under FL law, isn't the death of a child under 12 from neglect or through the act of a felony considered homicide?

I know we've been skirted around this issue before, but am just wondering if I overlook something in the previous discussions, legal interpretations or general consensus. TIA for your responses.

If what I've read is true...the answer could be yes to both.

 

[essies]

I can understand Cindy wanting to get Casey's attention...but this, the use of the word "jealousy", could very well have incited Casey. It acknowledges the power struggle that existed between the two. I find the whole posting an "in your face" kinda taunting. This family never learned how to talk to one another, sadly enough.

I think you are right on!
I think it did incite KC and her response to Cindy was the Diary of Days


diary of days.

On the worst of days,
Remember the words spoken.

Trust no one,
Only yourself.

With great power,
Comes great consequence.

What is given,
Can be taken away.

Everyone lies.
Everyone dies.

Life will never be easy.

On the worst of days,
Remember the words spoken.

Hold your head high.

Smile.

Love unconditionally.

Tomorrow is a brand new day.


So - IMO - KC is saying in so many wordsI - Look what you made happen Mother!!:furious: