What do you think of the bag of bones and toys?

[Analys1]

Hi there - this is my first post. And I appoligize if this has been brought up already - but when I woke up this morning I had a thought about this. Were the rocks in the bag collected by LE? I am just thinking that they could be from the A backyard. Could the rocks be the reason for the shovel that was borrowed from the neighbors? To fill a bag with something to everything down in the river? It would explain why the need for a shovel and why the shovel was relatively clean when returned.

 

[concentric]

Hi there - this is my first post. And I appoligize if this has been brought up already - but when I woke up this morning I had a thought about this. Were the rocks in the bag collected by LE? I am just thinking that they could be from the A backyard. Could the rocks be the reason for the shovel that was borrowed from the neighbors? To fill a bag with something to everything down in the river? It would explain why the need for a shovel and why the shovel was relatively clean when returned.

I said earlier that there is nothing to stop her from putting rocks in the bag to weigh it down. I was thinking more AFTER she arrived at the location, as there might be rocks that are of a larger size and she couldn't carry the rocks with her.

 

[concentric]

When I first posted here, If thought if she wanted to get rid of a body she could totally submerge it in the mud. She might need a shovel, using it as an extension and to push the body further down or out into deeper water/swamp. It wouldn't be that difficult to then rinse it off, with bottled water or bleach mixture she brought with.

 

[tiredofthis]

Hi everyone, first post, although been reading here since the start of the case.

This incident really bothers me for many reasons. LP has, for me, been all over the map regarding what he knows/what he doesn't know. At first, I was thinking he was doing the good cop(although he was a bounty hunter)/bad cop role: trying to ingratiate himself to the Anthony family.

Now, I am concerned he is a liability for several reasons. One, a bounty hunter is normally pretty darn serious, with one thing in mind: get you man. This case generated so much publicity, once his role in the bail was over, I do believe he developed a taste for the media and suddenly he backtracked; before, all we heard was he heard/learned nothing while he was around CA or the family. Now, he started talking about things

Two, I do believe that searches have to be conducted with LE's cooperation and guidelines. People just can't go out with a team and do such a search totally on their own. Chain of evidence could make or break this case when/if Caylee is found.

Three, for all the "fighting" with the Anthonys and Tim with TE, this does not sit well for me. I have to wonder, why is he really doing this? I'm afraid I'm not comfotable with believing he just wants to find Caylee. What could be another reason?

I think, for me, I have to consider that he might be trying to sidetrack the searches, trying to redirect LE's attention from areas they are concentrating on.

I know, for a first time poster, this is a little long, and believe me, I've gone back and forth as to LP: first, I just thought he was a funny character. Then, he kinda convinced me that he was trying to help LE/Tim as it appeared one of his people had learned something while in the house (that female BH). Then, I thought he was out for publicity, which still might be the case, but now, I question his motives for this latest "search" and falling out with Tim( and possibly LE).

I wish Caylee was off, in PR, safe and sound, but after seeing the dynamics of that family, I am 98% certain she is dead, by the hands of her mother..done to some degree to get back at her mother in an subconscious manner.

Welcome to the board. I completely disagree with you, but all opinions are welcome here.

 

[kgeaux]

It has to do with the media there. There were no pictures allowed at the TES searches, so even if they found something which was relevant, but the team leader didn't think so, it is gone forever. It cannot be photographed.

snipped a little, just for conciseness:

Yes, it has to do with the media. (I'm not discussing individual's cameras, I am speaking about media.) They were at Leonard's search & recovery because he invited them. They were not at TEQ search because they were not invited....indeed would have been kept away from any evidence found. That is why we are discussing rocks/bones/toys/bags pulled from the river. One search gave media access, the other did not.

Yes they definately look like 'car toys'. But that makes me think someone was just cleaning out thier car, threw the stuff in a bag and dumped it. Although I dont have a justification for it being weighted down.

I think so too. When my kids were little, and we ate Happy Meals, I always asked for the "little kid" toys.....there are alternative toys available for kiddos under the age of three. So while my car might have had toys in it, the ones I discarded would have been age appropriate.

I have a thought that I'll just throw out there:

The diver who spoke on Nancy Grace about recovering the bag said that when he initially lifted it up, he did not realize the bag was torn. So he then made efforts to retain the contents of the bag......which he said had the concrete "on top." He really didn't say the concrete was inside.

Has anybody else thought that the bag just flew into the water? And the concrete came to rest on top of the bag later? Is it possible the two articles do not necessarily belong one to the other?

 

[zadari]

It has to do with the media there. There were no pictures allowed at the TES searches, so even if they found something which was relevant, but the team leader didn't think so, it is gone forever. It cannot be photographed.

That is one thing I have a real problem with. Everything needs to be photographed EXCEPT bones, or remains in my opinion. You never know when it might become relevant.

Obviously on a search like that not everything can be saved, but they should be photographed if it is a "find" regardless if the team leader thinks it is relevant because many of the team leaders have no real training in search protocol except the few minutes in TES training.

i agree with this too .. the photos should be allowed ..something could be captured in that picture that the eye didnt see at the time too.

 

[interested_in_facts]

Can anyone imagine with 1000 + people searching with TES how many things were found? Garbage, toys, clothes, bones, weird things??? Why is it that whatever LP pulls up/finds is scrutinized to this degree as either being relevant to the case or a plant? This makes no sense to me! We've seen clothes, underwear, tank tops, bones, gas cans, empty bleach bottles, etc...And very limited discussion as a result. So this, an interesting find but one that has already been deemed "insignificant" has to keep going on and on and on???

I completely agree with what you just posted here. Also on all those TES searches, howmany times did the LE make a statment on TV about the findings AND change what the finds were over and over? It all the changing, fighting and accusing that keeps it dragging on and its really stupid. It also has to do with mis-reporting also. Many eye witness to all those events that happened that day at the park swear they saw <fill in the blank> and media reports<fill in the blank>. IMO the media is not doing their job all that well and THAT is playing a HUGE part in all of it.

EDIT TO ADD: I dont believe LP invited media. I actually believe that because the aea LP was planning on searching as revealed live on murts cam that soemone thought it would be funny to call media and tell them where and what time. I believe this because alot of things being said in his chat during all of this is plastered all over different blogs to the world to read and because there is alot of trouble makers watching and blogging on different sites and alot of those people believe 100% Caylee is alive and HATE LP,Murt and anyone else who believes Caylee is not longer with us.I have been VERY surprised at how many people actually support the A's and the search for a live Caylee.

 

[justbetweenus]

I have a thought that I'll just throw out there:

The diver who spoke on Nancy Grace about recovering the bag said that when he initially lifted it up, he did not realize the bag was torn. So he then made efforts to retain the contents of the bag......which he said had the concrete "on top." He really didn't say the concrete was inside.

Has anybody else thought that the bag just flew into the water? And the concrete came to rest on top of the bag later? Is it possible the two articles do not necessarily belong one to the other?[/quote]

This last part of your post I bolded, is exactly what I understood from my first viewing of a recorded video of NG. My speakers went so I wasn't able to watch it again yet.

Yes I also believe it's very possible this bag flew into the water. IMO its a happy meal, and left over food put into a garabge bag (It's a picnic area) and made its way to where it was found during the hurricane.

 

[Brini]

I used to have shamrock (or clover) shaped tags for my cats. They're fairly common.

I don't think the find has anything to do with Caylee. Sure wish it did, but I seriously doubt it. Sounds to me like someone laid their pet to rest with toys and tag.

That's what I'm thinking.

 

[Brini]

Well, I'm not sure what to BELIEVE, but what I **Think** is that all the items retrieved from and with the bag should at least be checked to determine if there is any evidence of decomp on them. What occurs to me is that these toys sound like the kind of thing that might accumulate in a car that frequently has a young child as a passenger -- Happy Meal toys, little stuff to keep a child occupied. Many children aged 2 - 3 are fine with small toys that technically are for older age groups because of their size. My son didn't put things in his mouth, for example, so I was able to allow him to play with small toys at an early age.

And if the bones are Bones and were not rocks, then even chicken bones might have been in Casey's car.

If in fact there was a shamrock charm, that would make me feel even more sure that the items at least should be checked closely and thoroughly to rule them in or out. A shamrock charm, and if the cross on the tree in fact does have beads that match beads Casey is known to have owned, are enough reason to me to check the area well.

As far as sonar, I don't know anything about it except what I've seen on deep-sea search programs, but I suspect that their sensitivity lies more along the lines of basic shapes, outlines and sizes and less along the lines of fine details such as those that bones and toys would produce. If I'm right, then TM's sidescan sonar search likely was looking for something the size and shape of a suitcase, duffel bag, plastic storage container, etc. A thin plastic garbage bag buried under silt and containing small objects wouldn't show up looking like anything much, seems to me.

Yes, TM said his Sonar didn't pick up a BODY.

 

[Gaia713]

LE wouldn't have taken it if they thought it was nothing. moo

 

[Chilly Willy]

It has to do with the media there. There were no pictures allowed at the TES searches, so even if they found something which was relevant, but the team leader didn't think so, it is gone forever. It cannot be photographed.

That is one thing I have a real problem with. Everything needs to be photographed EXCEPT bones, or remains in my opinion. You never know when it might become relevant.

Obviously on a search like that not everything can be saved, but they should be photographed if it is a "find" regardless if the team leader thinks it is relevant because many of the team leaders have no real training in search protocol except the few minutes in TES training.

The cross on the tree was photographed, supposedly during a TES search.

 

[Chilly Willy]

snipped a little, just for conciseness:

Yes, it has to do with the media. (I'm not discussing individual's cameras, I am speaking about media.) They were at Leonard's search & recovery because he invited them. They were not at TEQ search because they were not invited....indeed would have been kept away from any evidence found. That is why we are discussing rocks/bones/toys/bags pulled from the river. One search gave media access, the other did not.



I think so too. When my kids were little, and we ate Happy Meals, I always asked for the "little kid" toys.....there are alternative toys available for kiddos under the age of three. So while my car might have had toys in it, the ones I discarded would have been age appropriate.

I have a thought that I'll just throw out there:

The diver who spoke on Nancy Grace about recovering the bag said that when he initially lifted it up, he did not realize the bag was torn. So he then made efforts to retain the contents of the bag......which he said had the concrete "on top." He really didn't say the concrete was inside.

Has anybody else thought that the bag just flew into the water? And the concrete came to rest on top of the bag later? Is it possible the two articles do not necessarily belong one to the other?

I've wondered about that too, it's not been said clearly that the bricks, concrete, whatever, was actually inside the bag. I heard that same comment about it being on top of the bag.

 

[kgeaux]

I have a thought that I'll just throw out there:

The diver who spoke on Nancy Grace about recovering the bag said that when he initially lifted it up, he did not realize the bag was torn. So he then made efforts to retain the contents of the bag......which he said had the concrete "on top." He really didn't say the concrete was inside.

Has anybody else thought that the bag just flew into the water? And the concrete came to rest on top of the bag later? Is it possible the two articles do not necessarily belong one to the other?[/quote]

This last part of your post I bolded, is exactly what I understood from my first viewing of a recorded video of NG. My speakers went so I wasn't able to watch it again yet.

Yes I also believe it's very possible this bag flew into the water. IMO its a happy meal, and left over food put into a garabge bag (It's a picnic area) and made its way to where it was found during the hurricane.

I'm so glad I wasn't the only one who heard what was NOT said as well as what was said! It looked to me like a little quart baggie of the types of mess you'd clean out of a car, too.

The cross on the tree was photographed, supposedly during a TES search.

True. And once it became clear that the cross had nothing to do with Casey, Caylee or ANY Anthony, suddenly there came to be "another" cross......the one that supposedly 'does match' but which has no photo to back it up. Leonard's evidence never becomes "irrelevant" it just morphs into a new, exciting piece of evidence.

The diver said the shamrock was green, plastic and embedded in the cement. He said when it was dislodged, it was found to be a gumby magnet. So the gumby is irrelevant, right???? It means that there never was a shamrock, right???? NOPE. Now suddenly there is a shamrock CHARM that exactly matches the one Casey was wearing, and stupid LE and even stupider FBI didn't even collect it!

Don't know about you, but I sure am glad Leonard is here to teach the local law enforcement and fbi how to do their jobs......

I've wondered about that too, it's not been said clearly that the bricks, concrete, whatever, was actually inside the bag. I heard that same comment about it being on top of the bag.

Thank you!