Tim Miller: Possible Lawsuit against Casey

[MaryAnn]

She told two different psychiatrists her whole story about Caylee dying and being brought to her in George's arms.

I'm shocked, she told the same story twice! Wow, FCA was slipping up there!! :banghead:

 

[MissJames]

It's about Caylee being dead and OCA knowing it! Not about calling at all!!!

Either she explains that it didn't happen and she lied or she admits she should have called and Caylee was indeed dead on that day.

I think I'm posting in invisible ink trying to make a point here! LOL

I can see it!! Does that make me exceptional? :floorlaugh:

My brain is fried so I'm glad you spelled it out for us . Between Casey,the other Anthony's and the (former? ex? ) DT I hesitate to tip toe back in here ,much less try to figure anything out.

It always helps to see you're here keeping the candle lit for Caylee. :rose:

 

[logicalgirl]

I can see it!! Does that make me exceptional? :floorlaugh:

My brain is fried so I'm glad you spelled it out for us . Between Casey,the other Anthony's and the (former? ex? ) DT I hesitate to tip toe back in here ,much less try to figure anything out.

It always helps to see you're here keeping the candle lit for Caylee. :rose:

....... :blowkiss: ...... :heartluv:

 

[MissJames]

I think #1 is not about did Caylee drown or about George.

Question #1 - IMO - was did OCA know Caylee was dead on June 16th.
Not how, not who, not why. Just yes or no.

In question #1 - she does not have to admit guilt - just knowledge. She knew Caylee was dead.

If she says no, I did not know Caylee was dead - then I'd need some legal advice for what happens when you let your lawyer present a defense that isn't true. And what about all those statements to the psychiatrists? All lies too.

How can she possibly win a civil case if she says no to the question and so she admits to lying again?

I think her lawyer can only say that Casey didn't ask TES to come,Cindy did. Cindy will probably get on the stand and say Casey didn't even want him there and that Tim blah blah blah,blah blah blah..............All the stuff she spewed about him before.
Cindy is probably hoping the case moves forward so she can testify again and tell her version of the truth ,so help her,God. Worked out for her the first time.:banghead:

 

[logicalgirl]

I think her lawyer can only say that Casey didn't ask TES to come,Cindy did. Cindy will probably get on the stand and say Casey didn't even want him there and that Tim blah blah blah,blah blah blah..............All the stuff she spewed about him before.
Cindy is probably hoping the case moves forward so she can testify again and tell her version of the truth ,so help her,God. Worked out for her the first time.:banghead:

Yes, you are right, they can. But I don't think the question was - did you ask TES to search for Caylee, or who asked TES to search for Caylee.

I understood the question to be: Did OCA know TES was searching for Caylee during those dates listed.

That questions excludes many of the escape trapdoors OCA could use - IMO.

 

[MissJames]

Yes, you are right, they can. But I don't think the question was - did you ask TES to search for Caylee, or who asked TES to search for Caylee.

I understood the question to be: Did OCA know TES was searching for Caylee during those dates listed.

That questions excludes many of the escape trapdoors OCA could use - IMO.

Yes,but I think her team will push that it was not her responsibility to tell TES where Caylee was. I'm not agreeing ,just think that if she says she knew Caylee was dead that they still have an argument.

This really is quite convoluted. Wish Cindy could get sued or arrested for something,too. I'm mean,that way.

 

[katydid23]

Yes,but I think her team will push that it was not her responsibility to tell TES where Caylee was. I'm not agreeing ,just think that if she says she knew Caylee was dead that they still have an argument.

This really is quite convoluted. Wish Cindy could get sued or arrested for something,too. I'm mean,that way.

But if TES comes to their home and asks for maps so they know where to search, then it is their responsibility to give an honest answer. I think Cindy complained because she wanted them to ONLY search for a living child. So Casey really had a problem on her hands and she failed.

 

[MissJames]

having TES spend money looking for your kidnapped daughter (that you know is dead...from an accident...and put into the woods...somehow by someone cause she was just a shell) then to have the nerve to investigate TES folks for the search cause maybe the body wasn't there or there is someone is covering up the documentation - sheesh. I can't wait until this goes to court. The defense will just sound desperate trying to get her out of this one. Not unlike the first trial.

I don't understand how the DT can get away with using public money that they requested,to investigate all the TES searchers ,when they knew Casey's story all along (or at least since she told the drs).
They should be sued ,also. That was pure harrassment .

 

[MaryAnn]

Yes,but I think her team will push that it was not her responsibility to tell TES where Caylee was. I'm not agreeing ,just think that if she says she knew Caylee was dead that they still have an argument.

This really is quite convoluted. Wish Cindy could get sued or arrested for something,too. I'm mean,that way.

You're right MissJames. I think Cindy should be sued too. #1 her lieing on the stand is one of the reasons that FCA walked free so she should also be held accountable for the money spent searching for little Caylee. Not to mention the ridiculous stories she told Dr Phil about Caylee being a shell. She should be arrested for that statement alone. Joking of course, but it's so rude it's unbelievable.

 

[MissJames]

But if TES comes to their home and asks for maps so they know where to search, then it is their responsibility to give an honest answer. I think Cindy complained because she wanted them to ONLY search for a living child. So Casey really had a problem on her hands and she failed.

I know,and I agree with you . I'm just suggesting what the lawyers might argue if Casey admits knowing Caylee was dead .Hopefully ,if they do argue it was not Casey's responsibility ,they'll still lose.
You know,Casey can always claim only George knew where she was and she wanted TES to find Caylee. Then George can sue her for slander. : )

 

[logicalgirl]

Yes,but I think her team will push that it was not her responsibility to tell TES where Caylee was. I'm not agreeing ,just think that if she says she knew Caylee was dead that they still have an argument.

This really is quite convoluted. Wish Cindy could get sued or arrested for something,too. I'm mean,that way.

Umm - I think you might still be going down the garden path about this. Aren't they just asking - did you know TES was searching for Caylee? JUST that.

And yes, I don't understand why Cindy can't get nailed on something big time. She's gotten even worse since the verdict - IMO

 

[BigMomma]

Umm - I think you might still be going down the garden path about this. Aren't they just asking - did you know TES was searching for Caylee? JUST that.

And yes, I don't understand why Cindy can't get nailed on something big time. She's gotten even worse since the verdict - IMO

Yes, Thank You! No rehash needed regarding who called who to get TM involved, but always interesting to note how TM was treated and discarded in this dire situation. Then there's the little turn of the screw that got the A's into full foundation mode iow, a real good way to get out of being sued. I still have the hinkydoo feeling any monies OCA might get probably has been floated through the foundation as a buffer. I don't think this family is as estranged as the media says they are, jmo.

 

[Sleuths4Me]

Even if CA asked for TES to search couldn't KC still be held accountable since she was the legal guardian of Caylee? sorry can't type the word "mother" there

 

[logicalgirl]

Even if CA asked for TES to search couldn't KC still be held accountable since she was the legal guardian of Caylee? sorry can't type the word "mother" there

I don't think the question cares if she is accountable - just did she know TES was searching?

It's just a yes to that question is all they want.

Two Yes's - A Yes to the question - Did she know/acknowledge Caylee was dead on June 16th
And Yes to the question - Did she know TES was searching.

That's it.

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

I don't think the question cares if she is accountable - just did she know TES was searching?

It's just a yes to that question is all they want.

Two Yes's - A Yes to the question - Did she know/acknowledge Caylee was dead on June 16th
And Yes to the question - Did she know TES was searching.

That's it.

I cannot wait to see the tortured legal rhetoric that comes slouching toward the OC Courthouse to be born in reply

 

[NavySubMom]

Munyons Order:
http://www.cfnews13.com/static/articles/images/documents/casey-equusearch-judge-order.pdf

Plaintiff's Request for Admissions and Interrogatories
http://www.cfnews13.com/static/articles/images/documents/casey-equusearch-interrogatories.pdf

I am wondering how Question #5 in the INTERROGATORIES on p. 5
"State the name, address and telephone number of the biological father of your daughter, Caylee Marie Anthony"

how does the above question, per Judge Munyons Order, indicate that this question would "provide a link in the chain of evidence at any retrial of the conviction currently on appeal" with regard to FCA's assertion of her Fifth Amendment Privilege, since she disallowed it being asked of FCA.

As I recall, didn't Judge Perry rule that in regards to GA/LA, even though JB asked the questions which he was NOT alllowed to ask about Caylee's paternity, the questions were Objected by PT/Sustained by JP, but JB asked it anyway, about the FBI doing the DNA tests about who fathered Caylee.....

I am trying to figure out why this question is not allowed to be asked re: FCA's Fifth Amendent rights in the TES suit. what "link" in what "chain of evidence" would this question be referreing to?

Thanks.
(oops, thought I was in the Ask The Lawyer Thread, I was in this thread getting the document links, going to re-ask this over there. sorry)

 

[logicalgirl]

Munyons Order:
http://www.cfnews13.com/static/articles/images/documents/casey-equusearch-judge-order.pdf

Plaintiff's Request for Admissions and Interrogatories
http://www.cfnews13.com/static/articles/images/documents/casey-equusearch-interrogatories.pdf

I am wondering how Question #5 in the INTERROGATORIES on p. 5
"State the name, address and telephone number of the biological father of your daughter, Caylee Marie Anthony"

how does the above question, per Judge Munyons Order, indicate that this question would "provide a link in the chain of evidence at any retrial of the conviction currently on appeal" with regard to FCA's assertion of her Fifth Amendment Privilege, since she disallowed it being asked of FCA.

As I recall, didn't Judge Perry rule that in regards to GA/LA, even though JB asked the questions which he was NOT alllowed to ask about Caylee's paternity, the questions were Objected by PT/Sustained by JP, but JB asked it anyway, about the FBI doing the DNA tests about who fathered Caylee.....

I am trying to figure out why this question is not allowed to be asked re: FCA's Fifth Amendent rights in the TES suit. what "link" in what "chain of evidence" would this question be referreing to?

Thanks.
(oops, thought I was in the Ask The Lawyer Thread, I was in this thread getting the document links, going to re-ask this over there. sorry)

I don't believe that was one of the two questions that Judge Munyon ruled OCA had to answer was it?

One was: About George finding Caylee drowned and calling 911 and did she know?
And the other was Did OCA know TES was searching for Caylee in August and September.

I believe Judge M. believed OCA did not have to answer the others.

 

[NavySubMom]

I don't believe that was one of the two questions that Judge Munyon ruled OCA had to answer was it?

One was: About George finding Caylee drowned and calling 911 and did she know?
And the other was Did OCA know TES was searching for Caylee in August and September.

I believe Judge M. believed OCA did not have to answer the others.

Yes, I know, I am trying to figure out why OCA does NOT have to answer that question about Caylee's paternity. AZ's answer pasted below from lawyer's thread. Munyon indicated she could only answer the 2 questions, she could NOT answer any of the other questions because those questions would "provide a link in the chain of evidence at any retrial of the conviction currently on appeal" with regard to FCA's assertion of her Fifth Amendment Privilege, I was asking what "link" to what "chain of evidence" in the appeal, what does Casey being asked who Caylee's father was have to do with that?

Good question. Let's see, what were the lies she was convicted on?

1. Universal Studios employment;
2. Left Caylee at Sawgrass with ZFG;
3. Told Jeffrey MICHAEL Hopkins (not the other Jeffrey Hopkins) and Juliette Lewis about the kidnapping;
4. Received a call from Caylee July 15, 2008 around noon.

I don't see how the identity of the father would have anything to do with any of this. I could certainly see sustaining an objection to this interrogatory on the grounds of RELEVANCE, but not on 5th Amendment grounds. But I have to assume, based on the order, that (during the closed-door meeting) (1) the TES lawyers somehow explained how the information would fit into their case, and then (2) Mason or his associate somehow explained how the information could be used to show that Casey intentionally lied about one of the four things listed above. :waitasec:

 

[logicalgirl]

Yes, I know, I am trying to figure out why OCA does NOT have to answer that question about Caylee's paternity. AZ's answer pasted below from lawyer's thread. Munyon indicated she could only answer the 2 questions, she could NOT answer any of the other questions because those questions would "provide a link in the chain of evidence at any retrial of the conviction currently on appeal" with regard to FCA's assertion of her Fifth Amendment Privilege, I was asking what "link" to what "chain of evidence" in the appeal, what does Casey being asked who Caylee's father was have to do with that?

Sorry - misunderstood you. I have no idea what the question of Caylee's paternity has to do with anything at all.

Clearly OCA was a bit of a party gal and has no idea who it was. The father hasn't ever been in Caylee's life, isn't on her birth certificate as far as I know so why they asked that question I have no idea except to further perpetuate how much she lies...IMO

Am I way off base here? Why do you think it is important? I'm interested...

 

[MaryAnn]

Sorry - misunderstood you. I have no idea what the question of Caylee's paternity has to do with anything at all.

Clearly OCA was a bit of a party gal and has no idea who it was. The father hasn't ever been in Caylee's life, isn't on her birth certificate as far as I know so why they asked that question I have no idea except to further perpetuate how much she lies...IMO

Am I way off base here? Why do you think it is important? I'm interested...

It would have been important to Caylee!! I was adopted and although it was a huge letdown, I'm still glad I found out my nationality and where I came from. Everyone needs to know their roots! I'm sure little Caylee knows who he is now. :