BigMomma
Former Member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2011
- Messages
- 1,070
- Reaction score
- 0
But wait..wait....hmmm - is this the Judge saying this is a felon who was convicted of lying to the LE? So anything she said to them was a lie?
So just what is the flip side of this? We do know she did not admit to her mother that she had ever been shown a picture of ZG - so how many other really obvious lies can we count?
And is it enough to convince a jury that even through omission she defamed (is that a word?) ZG? Baez spoke for FCA his client - we heard no public denial....
Maybe before we fall into the dark side - we might want to do some pluses and minuses of this decision. Cause I'm thinking this judge has FCA's number.....:waitasec:
:seeya:I read that article and my impression is the same, that nothing FCA said to LE is going to be admitted as evidence because it was a lie, but on the other hand, she did make those statements to her mother and good ol mom took the perogative to run to the media with it. Hmmm, does this mean no questions about thie connection to Sawgrass? Probably not because that lie got mixed in with some facts, the main fact ZG did go there, same place mentioned by FCA as being one of the places she dropped off Caylee-until the other lie surfaced that it was then a kidnapping at the park by this same 'Nanny':waitasec:
It's those words that gets everybody so confused-people thought nanny and Zanny and ZG were all 1 and the same, that was the somewhat play on words, to confuse everybody, so if somebody asks now 'didn't you say ZG was the 1 who was watching Caylee, the answer would be 'no, it was the nanny' -they are playing with everybody, kwim?