Why Have George and Cindy Requested a Video Visitation With Casey?

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
My question now is this, if it is only personal stuff and not related to the case, and they don't try to talk in code, why is ICA so desperate to talk to her parent/s? Keeping in mind that her parents get next to nothing from her in court.

:waitasec: I thought it was the Anthony's that want to talk to Casey and that the Anthony's are waiting for a response from Casey.
 
Let's all try and forget forget for a moment that ICA is a major manipulator & habitual liar, (tough to do I know), why wouldn't her lawyers WANT her to have contact with her parents? If only for love and support reasons (no talk regarding the case/trial). I feel it would certainly play INTO ICA's favor, showing that she has natural 'feelings' for her parents. Almost like reaching out to them saying "help me, this is terrible, I didn't do it and you have to believe me..."
Could it be that CA is not capable of watching her p's and q's during any visit??? Or ICA for that matter? They all seem to have such volitile relationships with one another...

IMO, a jury would feel a 'softer spot' for ICA if she shows emotion and love for her family during trial, more so than sitting there 'doodling' with her pens and paper during the actual trial!

JMO
 
Who was responsible for ending the visits in the first place?
 
I think ICA is capable of faking and mimicking a lot of things. I don't think love for her family is one of them. Any meeting with her parents will only hurt her case further. The Defense knows how damaging the tapes are. ICA is not the least bit interested in seeing them. They are of no use to her. Other than the occasional commissary funding. MOO
 
What I don't understand is that Judge Perry has told them that HE can do nothing about it... he has no juristiction over Orange County jail... so why don't they file this with the proper courts? I am so confused?

Exactly. Last time they filed a motion HHJP told them to take it up with the Jail.
 
It could be possible that CA/GA's new attorney have told them they need to tell the truth on stand or they are going to go down with KC. Perhaps, LA talked some sense into them and said if we lie on the stand not only will KC be in jail but we can also ended up with her. Perhaps they want to meet with KC to tell them that they love her, but will have to be honest on the stand??
Either that or they are going to try to convice her to take a plea and save her life.
 
I can not bestow upon GA/CA any other motives for this request other than those along the manipulative and self-serving bent. (pun intended)
It does not escape me that they are ok with the DT and SA having access to this visitation.
I predict this headline: CASEY AGREES TO FAMILY REQUEST.
I also predict this scripted visit, between three of the most prolific liars on the face of the Earth, will amazingly be introduced as new discovery. AHA!!!
Please, Anthonys...

Thank you to SOS, LLL, and Darn and all for finding the hearing. I would have been looking for quite sometime...LOL!! This is one funny hearing. Watching AF as she sees the calibre of attorney she has signed on with is almost as priceless as listening to Baez complain that he called the jail lawyer so for her to say his trying to slip it into his motion is a surprise...well, this is just hilarious!!
 
I can not bestow upon GA/CA any other motives for this request other than those along the manipulative and self-serving bent. (pun intended)
It does not escape me that they are ok with the DT and SA having access to this visitation.
I predict this headline: CASEY AGREES TO FAMILY REQUEST.
I also predict this scripted visit, between three of the most prolific liars on the face of the Earth, will amazingly be introduced as new discovery. AHA!!!
Please, Anthonys...

Thank you to SOS, LLL, and Darn for finding the hearing. I would have been looking for quite sometime...LOL!!

BUT - isn't ICA part of the sequestration process once the jury selection starts? If GA and CA are not allowed into the courtroom until they complete their testimony, surely this includes visitation rights with ICA while the trial is underway?? Makes no sense at all to me that they would be allowed to have visits with ICA but not attend the trial.:waitasec:
 
Very strange! Maybe CA is going to beg her to tell the truth so her daughter can request a plea deal??? We all know ICA wont tell the truth, but maybe this is CA & GA final attempt to save their daughter from the death penalty?!?
 
Let's try and stay on the topic of this thread especially as the trial date approaches.
Remember one off topic post turns into a host of other off topic posts as members come in to see what was written since they last visited.

This post lands at random.

ETA: Please acknowledge my post by hitting the thanks button. Thank you.
 
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that after that crazy inmate in MI sent in a pleading that the Judge told the Clerk of the Court not to accept any pleadings that were not from relevant parties.

Do the A's have standing to even bring this pleading to the Court?

I also thought that it would be funny if the request was granted and the jail scheduled the first visit for 3 months or longer from now! Mr. and Mrs. A, the inmate can see you November 5, 2011 at 4:30 pm. (I have a quirky sense of humor)
 
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that after that crazy inmate in MI sent in a pleading that the Judge told the Clerk of the Court not to accept any pleadings that were not from relevant parties.

Do the A's have standing to even bring this pleading to the Court?

I also thought that it would be funny if the request was granted and the jail scheduled the first visit for 3 months or longer from now! Mr. and Mrs. A, the inmate can see you November 5, 2011 at 4:30 pm. (I have a quirky sense of humor)

Good question!! And I like your sense of humor.
 
Over the past week or so, I believe we have seen the scene set for an accident theory. First we have LKB say the nanny story was a lie, then we have Cheney talking "tragic accident" on IS. And let's not forget that River Cruz stated in her interview/deposition that GA stated it was an accident that snowballed out of control. All we need now is for CA and GA to visit Casey, get her to talk about the accident, have George admit on the stand that he knew it was an accident (and perhaps that he helped Casey cover it up). That may be just enough for one juror to find reasonable doubt.

After what Cheney said about an accident, IMHO the defense has no other option at this point than to admit to something, and this is where they are going. Too bad so much time, money and resources have been wasted. Why couldn't they have just done this 3 years ago? (this is a rhetorical question -- I do know the answer).
 
BUT - isn't ICA part of the sequestration process once the jury selection starts? If GA and CA are not allowed into the courtroom until they complete their testimony, surely this includes visitation rights with ICA while the trial is underway?? Makes no sense at all to me that they would be allowed to have visits with ICA but not attend the trial.:waitasec:

I agree, it makes no sense. They seem to want it both ways. And I'm not sure the court can do anything about the videos in the first place.
 
Very strange! Maybe CA is going to beg her to tell the truth so her daughter can request a plea deal??? We all know ICA wont tell the truth, but maybe this is CA & GA final attempt to save their daughter from the death penalty?!?

I am sort of in the same place on this. I think it is going to be some kind of "come to Jesus" meeting - based on some truth or non-truth (and non-truth is my guess) The prosecution will get the tape, but not the public who will probably (and perhaps rightfuly) ridicule the desperation strategy to somehow change testimony.
 
I agree with all other posters who smell a rat...(or a squirrel). It is a set up to bring false evidence in. I'm sure SA won't be fooled!
 
I am sort of in the same place on this. I think it is going to be some kind of "come to Jesus" meeting - based on some truth or non-truth (and non-truth is my guess) The prosecution will get the tape, but not the public who will probably (and perhaps rightfuly) ridicule the desperation strategy to somehow change testimony.

They should be moving KC soon to the local jailhouse in the location of the jury selection. I'm sure they want her settled in prior to the court disclosing the location so the A's would not be seeing her unless they get it approved within the next 24 hours. Also the jail has rules as to which days they can visit and it has to be with prior notice so I doubt they will see her prior to the beginning of her trial, if at all. jmo
 
Maybe the legal thread is where I should ask this but:
1. Will there be a hearing possibly on this motion?
2. Could they call GA and CA to testify if so?
3. Would the judge allow their attorney to ask why they want to visit and potentially get (accident/abuse/etc) out and in the record that way?

NOTHING the a's do is just because.........nothing. I would bet a toothbrush and a hairbrush and a diary on it.
 
Maybe the legal thread is where I should ask this but:
1. Will there be a hearing possibly on this motion?
2. Could they call GA and CA to testify if so?
3. Would the judge allow their attorney to ask why they want to visit and potentially get (accident/abuse/etc) out and in the record that way?

NOTHING the a's do is just because.........nothing. I would bet a toothbrush and a hairbrush and a diary on it.

I'm still puzzled as to whey they filed this with HHJP? Last time they objected to visits being videotaped he shrugged and said Take it up with the Jail...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
108
Guests online
248
Total visitors
356

Forum statistics

Threads
609,479
Messages
18,254,720
Members
234,664
Latest member
wrongplatform
Back
Top