Tim Miller: Possible Lawsuit against Casey

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Often it is not a question of what a person knew as much as a question of what they should have known under a given set of circumstances.

A child was missing per her mother, and TES came to Orlando and met with the family. Everyone knows what TES does. People nationwide and likely worldwide knew that TES was searching for Caylee Anthony. It is unreasonable to assume Casey Anthony did not know. Even if there is no way to prove that she knew, it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that under the circumstances she should have known.

Of course she knew. That just won't get TES very far in court. They need to prove that Casey essentially TRICKED them into doing the search, not just that she knew and didn't put a stop to it.
 
Of course she knew. That just won't get TES very far in court. They need to prove that Casey essentially TRICKED them into doing the search, not just that she knew and didn't put a stop to it.

BBM

I think this part right here would be more relevant and helpful to TM's case if it was Casey herself that called TES in the first place. As far as the court is concerned, they could see it as TES being there under the guidance of Cindy, not Casey (as convoluted and backward as that sounds).
 
If a man stands up in the middle of a theater and yells "Fire!" and another movie goer is injured in the resulting tumult, then the man who yelled is liable for damages, right?

But if that man heard his date whispering to the person on her other side that she had just started a fire backstage and then he yells "Fire!" ~ the date would be liable, right?
 
If a man stands up in the middle of a theater and yells "Fire!" and another movie goer is injured in the resulting tumult, then the man who yelled is liable for damages, right?

But if that man heard his date whispering to the person on her other side that she had just started a fire backstage and then he yells "Fire!" ~ the date would be liable, right?

I think the guy would still be liable unless it's proven she actually said that.
 
If a man stands up in the middle of a theater and yells "Fire!" and another movie goer is injured in the resulting tumult, then the man who yelled is liable for damages, right?

But if that man heard his date whispering to the person on her other side that she had just started a fire backstage and then he yells "Fire!" ~ the date would be liable, right?

Probably, if it there was an unreasonable risk that the whisper would cause panic leading to injury. This would be a negligence case. Not what TES is claiming at all.

Someone earlier asked what if you lie and say you don't have fire insurance to get people to rebuild your home? That would be (IMO) an unjust enrichment case. TES did make an unjust enrichment claim, but it's pretty weak because Casey wasn't "enriched" by the search (unlike the homeowner who gets a new home).
 
IIRC, the big search that was called off early was somewhere around Nov. 8. Initially TM had indicated in interviews he was willing to go as long as it took, and searchers came from all over the US to participate. Of course, he abruptly left after a couple of days and LP got to put on his big Jay Blanchard Park show with the divers. When he held the "memorial" at the park, the A's came and made a big stink about the general past-tense connotation of the word (not to mention their proprietary attitude about their trademarked little grandaughter's name being used in vain by people they had already happily exploited for their benefit).

However, I remember Mark N meeting at his club with Tim and the Anthonys (or at least CA if memory serves me right) before that search in November, acting as some kind of arbitrator it appeared. I always thought that perhaps CA was objecting to the wording of the search and insisted on the technicality of it being for a "live" Caylee if that was how it was eventually framed in the media to absolve them of corroborating any idea she was dead.

Which everyone immediately thought was totally absurd. Organizations do not conduct grid searches when looking for a person that has been missing for five months. Did Cindy think they'd find little Caylee in a field somewhere playing with cartoon field mice and raccoons like some Disney movie? No one would have considered that a realistic scenario for a missing adult, much less a tiny, dependent child. She is delusional we all know, but I always thought she was insisting on the technicality as a CYA move. She was very aware from Day 31 she could not voice her belief that Caylee was dead. Even after the memorial and the whole cremains jewelry, she thought that if she came out in public and said she believed Caylee was alive that it would somehow negate any earlier statements she may have slipped up and made so the state couldn't use that at trial or something.

CA is a lot like her daughter in that she not only asks people to suspend disbelief to the nth degree, but that she assumes that all subsequent versions of her spin efforts immediately replace earlier versions with no questions asked. Whether she or her daughter believe their own lies is immaterial; their adamance in insisting others swallow their swill is beyond disrespectful.

I was always reminded of how Pres. Clinton asked the media to "define sex" as if enough parsing words could make him innocent. Looking for loopholes is generally a red flag for someone trying to get off on a technicality as we well know. This whole case is based on stuff like that. Lewis Carroll would have had a field day if he had been an investigative reporter in Orlando.

:rocker: This post bears repeating......... :rocker:
 
BBM

I think this part right here would be more relevant and helpful to TM's case if it was Casey herself that called TES in the first place. As far as the court is concerned, they could see it as TES being there under the guidance of Cindy, not Casey (as convoluted and backward as that sounds).

Doesn't sound convoluted and backward at all to me, it is the truth as far as I know from my reading and watching.

IMO TM made a bad move, and I'm not sure why he did so.
 
If a man stands up in the middle of a theater and yells "Fire!" and another movie goer is injured in the resulting tumult, then the man who yelled is liable for damages, right?

But if that man heard his date whispering to the person on her other side that she had just started a fire backstage and then he yells "Fire!" ~ the date would be liable, right?

This is a bad example:

You tell your friend that you are getting married. Your friend (friend A) asks one of their friends (friend B) if they can DJ the reception. Friend B agrees and sets up a date and time. On said date and time, Friend B travels (because it was far from their location) to the proposed reception location, brings all their equipment and sets up. Then it turns out there was never going to be a wedding (lied about getting married) and so no reception. Friend B is out travel expenses and time. Who do you think is more liable, the friend who actually asked him/her to come out for the reception, or you for lying to Friend A about the wedding in the first place?
 
What KC did was trick her mother into asking for help. Or KC and CA both came up with the idea same as the sudden story change of JBPark. I think TM was tricked into searching on KC/CA terms because they wanted it to appear Caylee was still alive and TM would fill the bill. jmo
 
Maybe OCA will get another jury that "doesn't understand the law" or how to apply it. :innocent:
 
Doesn't sound convoluted and backward at all to me, it is the truth as far as I know from my reading and watching.

IMO TM made a bad move, and I'm not sure why he did so.

No, he just has common sense and didn't think a family would turn on him after asking for help. He talks at length in his interview about how the Anthonys were different than any other family he had ever encountered. Never were they on the search site for support, helping out (families can't search per se but they can be support on the site), nothing whatsoever. I think he was blindsided and now he is being punished for it. Sounds like the court will deconstruct everything to the point of absurdity because FCA didn't call herself.
 
What KC did was trick her mother into asking for help. Or KC and CA both came up with the idea same as the sudden story change of JBPark. I think TM was tricked into searching on KC/CA terms because they wanted it to appear Caylee was still alive and TM would fill the bill. jmo

Seems like FCA did nothing...and naturally knew that CA would fill that void and take control.
 
Seems like FCA did nothing...and naturally knew that CA would fill that void and take control.

ITA. It galls me because the law wasn't written for someone like Casey. It actually works in her favor because she will say she didn't know when she fully did know, but because she is soulless, didn't give a carp about what was going on around her or who was doing what, and just let others take control without ever asking them to, she won't be liable. As long as everyone was on Casey's page, she didn't care, and if someone outside the circle wasn't, then she just let the circle take care of it because someone always takes care of Casey's problems. She just sits back, smiles, and watches her gophers work for her. It just sucks to me that she is the way she is and it works for her legally. Ugh.
 
This is a bad example:

You tell your friend that you are getting married. Your friend (friend A) asks one of their friends (friend B) if they can DJ the reception. Friend B agrees and sets up a date and time. On said date and time, Friend B travels (because it was far from their location) to the proposed reception location, brings all their equipment and sets up. Then it turns out there was never going to be a wedding (lied about getting married) and so no reception. Friend B is out travel expenses and time. Who do you think is more liable, the friend who actually asked him/her to come out for the reception, or you for lying to Friend A about the wedding in the first place?

That is a much better example, cityslick. Thank you. I say say that morally, I believe the liar is responsible. If the wedding was in the local newspapers, announced to the media and a sworn statement signed ~ then perhaps the liar is legally liable, too. I dunno, I can certainly be tripped up by all the legal jargon but I sure as heck can see who is responsible here and who should not have to be suffering any monetary damages.
 
What KC did was trick her mother into asking for help. Or KC and CA both came up with the idea same as the sudden story change of JBPark. I think TM was tricked into searching on KC/CA terms because they wanted it to appear Caylee was still alive and TM would fill the bill. jmo

I actually think Cindy was desperate to believe Caylee might be alive, or at the very least, didn't want someone outside the family dealing with Casey and whatever happened to Caylee. Casey didn't plan anything. She just shut her mouth and let her family do everything, like always. It's like the wedding where she was outed for her pregnancy, but never said a word, only smiled while her mother defended her.
 
That is a much better example, cityslick. Thank you. I say say that morally, I believe the liar is responsible. If the wedding was in the local newspapers, announced to the media and a sworn statement signed ~ then perhaps the liar is legally liable, too. I dunno, I can certainly be tripped up by all the legal jargon but I sure as heck can see who is responsible here and who should not have to be suffering any monetary damages.

Well, it also depends on if the person who got the other person to come was really lied to, or helped the liar spread a false story (ala Cindy and Casey). Cindy was all about covering for Casey no matter what. Caylee had to be alive for the kidnapping story to work and Cindy knew that. I think TES should have sued her too.
 
Well, it also depends on if the person who got the other person to come was really lied to, or helped the liar spread a false story (ala Cindy and Casey). Cindy was all about covering for Casey no matter what. Caylee had to be alive for the kidnapping story to work and Cindy knew that. I think TES should have sued her too.

Completely agree...Cindy has always covered for Casey; this was just more of the same, and then some. If I live to be 100, I'll never understand Cindy's mindset. Her daughter killed her defenseless granddaughter. I don't for a minute believe Cindy thought otherwise, once she and George recovered the car from impound. I just can't wrap my head around it. Never will. They are a bizarre lot.

I don't think anybody suing her will see a dime from OCA. Legally, she seems to be made of Teflon. For now, anyway. Eventually she will reoffend. Then the Anthonys' little house of card will come tumbling down.

:twocents:
 
It baffles me that we have a mother who didn't ask or want any help finding her missing child, so she is protected & rewarded by law for not giving a darn about her baby.
It's unbelievable how she can twist the law in her favour at every turn.
She truly is a child of the devils.....
 
It baffles me that we have a mother who didn't ask or want any help finding her missing child, so she is protected & rewarded by law for not giving a darn about her baby.
It's unbelievable how she can twist the law in her favour at every turn.
She truly is a child of the devils.....

Agree and I think the general pops belief in the two things, that a mother wouldn't kill her beautiful child (wrong) and that a mother wouldn't lie about it for so long, AND tell so many lies (wrong, again) that let this case drag on so long.

The public in general needs to wake up! It's isn't just drugged out desperate monsters who kill their children - it's also the mother next door who looks just like you or I! And yes, some people lie about everything....

I just get into a rage about how OCA manipulated so many people and still does to believe she is not responsible for Caylee's death and she is not the person who murdered her.

Of course she is! And anyone who got kicked in the face and used for their time and money along the way should be compensated. Look at the carp that went on with Roy Kronk! He was of "questionable" character so he had something to do with her death? TES wasn't searching for Caylee dead or alive because OCA/CA wanted them to? Everybody needs to give their heads a shake and "have a word" with themselves.

What appears to be simple - IS!!!

Oh Oh - I see I'm "in a mood" this morning - better go back to work....
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
93
Guests online
460
Total visitors
553

Forum statistics

Threads
608,343
Messages
18,237,977
Members
234,348
Latest member
Allira93
Back
Top