Why take "rocks" into evidence??

[MOMto5]

Oh, my bad! I wasnt being snarky AT you...I was just kindof narrating to myself. Sitting here going, "yah, sure!". Im just contradicting the facts...not trying to direct it at any individual.

No problem...I believe I just misunderstood. :blowkiss:

 

[Sunshinegirl]

Could these "ROCKS" that were found be "man-made" for example using whatever the Anthony's had to make pavers in their back yard???

 

[interested_in_facts]

I was also watchign and listening to everything going on. Alot of people not jsut one or two saw SMALL BONES not rocks. As for the whole stretcher thing I never saw that all I saw was they net they used to drag the bottom of the river.It is likely that was mistaken for a stretcher but I do not think a couple of bones would be put on a stretcher and taken away. I also am not bying the "rocks" the are trying to make us believe.I think LP is doing the right thing because like someone else posted just because you went over it with sonar, you did not put a diver in and feel under the silt that was there and make sure there was nothing there.

 

[justbetweenus]

I was there at Jay Blanchard today, sister in law called me at work and I just got off. I work about 2 miles form Jay Blanchard and i went over there... LE did take something..I also heard talk that it would take about 3-5 days maybe even a week to get back results of what it is. And also this was bout 3:00 i got there by 4:00 police were guarding both entrances not letting anyone else in there.. They let people leave but not go in. IMO they were saying (that this has been in the water for a long time) I dont see anyone planting anything over a period of a week then LE saying its been there for a long time, and also I dont see anyone taking a family pet putting it in a black bag and using any kind of bricks or rocks to weigh it down ... just bury it in your back yard..Y not Casey did at some point and time...IMO.

Thanks to you, and others, for your on the scene opinions. I really don't think anyone planted anything either. Do you think with the recent hurricane, this bag could have made it's way into the water from land somewhere. I guess...though with bricks being in the bag makes one think it was intentionally put in the water.

 

[wedavis]

I have been read threads for hours now. I need to get to bed. Can someone kindly point me in the right direction for information about umarked police cars that were reported to have shown up at the Anthony's today and left with something in a brown bag.

TIA!

 

[wedavis]

Thanks to you, and others, for your on the scene opinions. I really don't think anyone planted anything either. Do you think with the recent hurricane, this bag could have made it's way into the water from land somewhere. I guess...though with bricks being in the bag makes one think it was intentionally put in the water.

When TM says he searched the area LP found bony rocks at today does he mean this past weekend or during his last visit?

 

[Hailiejade77]

so you think this is what LE is doing for damage control until the results are in?

yes. The reason I believe this is because any other suspected evidence it wasn't like it was today. It even was on MY tv channels and I live in PA! I don't believe all the hoopla about LP called the media first and blah blah blah. I watched on Murts site all day and the media was there even before I was up at 8:00! All the people but LE that have seen the evidence say it looked like bones to them. Those divers know what they are doing. They have been around the block a time or two and I am sure they can tell between rocks and bones. JMO

 

[cocoamom]

I have been read threads for hours now. I need to get to bed. Can someone kindly point me in the right direction for information about umarked police cars that were reported to have shown up at the Anthony's today and left with something in a brown bag.

TIA!

WHOA!!!! That's news to me! early day? late day? hmmmm very interesting. Do tell!!!!!! anyone?

 

[wedavis]

WHOA!!!! That's news to me! early day? late day? hmmmm very interesting. Do tell!!!!!! anyone?

It would have been around 5PM CST.

 

[Laece]

yes. The reason I believe this is because any other suspected evidence it wasn't like it was today. It even was on MY tv channels and I live in PA! I don't believe all the hoopla about LP called the media first and blah blah blah. I watched on Murts site all day and the media was there even before I was up at 8:00! All the people but LE that have seen the evidence say it looked like bones to them. Those divers know what they are doing. They have been around the block a time or two and I am sure they can tell between rocks and bones. JMO

i want so badly to believe in this, and yet i don't want to believe it at the same time. i am so tired of being disappointed that even hope drains me at this point. how sad is that?

 

[cocowiley]

Why take anything at all into evidence??If there was NO EVIDENTUARY value in what they found, then why take the supposed "rocks"??? Something is ROTTEN in what just happened!!!

because they already had the paper and scissors? :crazy:

 

[Coley]

As I stated, I "read" about the stretcher in this post:

Originally Posted by believe09
JMO but knowing Who Tim is just doesn't seem as important to me as knowing what his qualifications are. If this dive team is expert, then it is legitimate to state that things might have been missed based on someone's level of expertise.

If I get the location correctly, then it is a slow moving river that was under at least 2 feet more of muddy water during the time Caylee went missing. Beyond that, the bottom is silt and there is animal activity. How does someone say for sure that they cleared the river with sonar, even after 3.5 hours, if they never sent a diver in to get a feel for the bottom and what might be there.

I am not defending LP because I cannot wrap my head around these last few hours....but I heard the live stream of the media that was there-some of the reporters saw what almost looked like chicken bones. They stated it flat out. Not rocks-SMALL BONES. Which were then carried away on a stretcher.
It boggles the mind to listen to OSCO spin it as nonsense and that it was not significant-they took ROCKS away on a stretcher? I think not...even if it was not Caylee, the whole thing was BIZARRE.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2940249&highlight=stretcher#post2940249

*bolded mine

I did not state it as fact, but from what I have read, several either watching on live cam or at the search claim that this is what happened.

Yes, I heard Holly from myfoxorlando saying "what looks like a chicken bone" when she was reporting right when Nick S. from the FBI was looking through the sludge.

 

[ScreenName]

Okay...found property? Why would LE want to return "rocks" or other items weighted down and submerged in water? Hmmm..... Not sure what to think on this one.

 

[hornswoggled]

The evidence that was collected today could mean something.....or not....

However, it should not be overlooked. The plastic bag alone needs to be analyzed and checked for hair and fibers and to see what kind of plastic bag it is....does it match one from a roll in the A's home? I'm curious to know if plastic bags were taken from the home when the search warrant was executed. They seemed to dismiss it too quickly, which raises suspicion. I believe it was taken into the lab to be checked out. Not to do so would be irresponsible.

 

[Coley]

Why would LE lie about it ? they would just look foolish when they had to admit it was bone later and I dont see them wanting to look like fools.

I believe LE would not admit to anything like that because of how much media coverage is going on with this case. Just image what would happen if they were to admit it was human bones. Gosh, the Anthony's would have to go into hiding. This might be exactly the reason why they DO NOT want media involved with any searches. IMO, I agree with LE, for once in the past few weeks, not to say it was human bones.

 

[LetJusticePrevail]

Per this link from their website http://www.ocso.com/LinkClick.aspx?link=Policies/48.0.pdf&tabid=233&mid=1824ORANGE

COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
SPECIAL ORDER
Effective Date: July 20, 2007

Rescinds - S.O. 48.0 (January 18, 2006)
 Amends Number: 48.0
SUBJECT: PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING EVIDENCE
Print Date:This order consists of the following:
1. Purpose
2. Definitions
3. Procedures
1. Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for handling evidence within the Evidence Unit to ensure property integrity.

2. Definitions
A. Evidence - property which may be related to a crime or designated as evidentiary by a law enforcement officer.
B. Found property - non-evidentiary property that has been determined to be lost or abandoned, and is not known or suspected to be connected with a criminal offense.
C. Property held for safekeeping - non-evidentiary property placed into custody for temporary protection.
D. Documentary property – documents, papers, letters, maps, photographs, films, tapes or recordings held by Evidence in accordance with F.S.S. 119.01.

 

[ScreenName]

Per this link from their website http://www.ocso.com/LinkClick.aspx?link=Policies/48.0.pdf&tabid=233&mid=1824ORANGE

COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
SPECIAL ORDER
Effective Date: July 20, 2007

Rescinds - S.O. 48.0 (January 18, 2006)
 Amends Number: 48.0
SUBJECT: PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING EVIDENCE
Print Date:This order consists of the following:
1. Purpose
2. Definitions
3. Procedures
1. Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for handling evidence within the Evidence Unit to ensure property integrity.

2. Definitions
A. Evidence - property which may be related to a crime or designated as evidentiary by a law enforcement officer.
B. Found property - non-evidentiary property that has been determined to be lost or abandoned, and is not known or suspected to be connected with a criminal offense.
C. Property held for safekeeping - non-evidentiary property placed into custody for temporary protection.
D. Documentary property – documents, papers, letters, maps, photographs, films, tapes or recordings held by Evidence in accordance with F.S.S. 119.01.

Ok..But why take it?

 

[Coley]

Per this link from their website http://www.ocso.com/LinkClick.aspx?link=Policies/48.0.pdf&tabid=233&mid=1824ORANGE

COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
SPECIAL ORDER
Effective Date: July 20, 2007

Rescinds - S.O. 48.0 (January 18, 2006)
 Amends Number: 48.0
SUBJECT: PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING EVIDENCE
Print Date:This order consists of the following:
1. Purpose
2. Definitions
3. Procedures
1. Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for handling evidence within the Evidence Unit to ensure property integrity.

2. Definitions
A. Evidence - property which may be related to a crime or designated as evidentiary by a law enforcement officer.
B. Found property - non-evidentiary property that has been determined to be lost or abandoned, and is not known or suspected to be connected with a criminal offense.
C. Property held for safekeeping - non-evidentiary property placed into custody for temporary protection.
D. Documentary property – documents, papers, letters, maps, photographs, films, tapes or recordings held by Evidence in accordance with F.S.S. 119.01.

Dang, maybe Cindy lost her "rocks".

 

[whittymom4]

I posted this on the NG site also, still mad.

I just watched NG again. How many parent's, mom's, grandparent's know exactly how many and what kind of toy your child or children have?

I almost came out of my chair when the lady called and asked how could LE determine so fast that the find had nothing to do with Caylee? The answer... BECAUSE LE KNOWS WHAT TOYS CAYLEE HAD, THEY HAD BEEN AT HER HOUSE. IS THAT WHAT HE SAID?
Watch LE come back and say that bag had been there for years.

 

[Charge Them All]

Does anybody have a pic or link to the close up of the rocks? I have looked everywhere and can not seem to find one.