She thinks it's the money! Surprise OCA! Nobody wants to give you any! And guess what? It's your turn to give and give and give!!! :woot:
Yes, ho ho ho (giving the gift that keeps on giving).
Back to my corner.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
She thinks it's the money! Surprise OCA! Nobody wants to give you any! And guess what? It's your turn to give and give and give!!! :woot:
I agree that she may be "hiding". I think it is either:
She is in emotional hiding. She knows the world knows she is a liar, even her beloved JB said so, right?
It is all about the money. No one wants her face shown so she can remain mysterious (in her mind) until someone forks up the magic dollar amount for her to remove her glasses.
I really think it is the money.
Possibly nothing more than yet another childish attempt to draw attention to herself.You know - I've been up to my (dangerous) thinking again - and I usually try to strip things down to the simplest explanation...cause that's often the answer.
We know OCA is not a sophisticated person or a deep thinker. And this "disguise" could simply have been a kneejerk reaction from a "bratchild" emotional level.
Something really "heavy" like - well you people out there have made my life so difficult I have to hide instead of going out and enjoying my life again (insert wah-wahing). So okay - so I have to hide - so here I am hiding! How do you like them apples?
Like I said - someone from an immature "bratchild" level of development. Nine year old stuff.
Possibly nothing more than yet another childish attempt to draw attention to herself.
Remember, the whole story is about Casey Anthony, the centrepiece.
She thinks just like her mother really .. Caylee, ZG et al - they may have a role to play in the 'Casey against the world' show but they're irrelevant.
Attention seeking at its finest.
The question is, why is she allowed to continue to get away with it? Anybody else who turned up looking like that would've been told in no uncertain terms to take it off. Not doing so has probably only fuelled her thinking that she's special, and she would consider those who allow her to flaunt it as fools and unequal.
IMO
One question I have is who swore her in for her testimony and did she take off the disguise for that person in order to prove she was oca? Could she later claim she never gave this deposition?
The way this person operates it would not surprise me at all.
One question I have is who swore her in for her testimony and did she take off the disguise for that person in order to prove she was oca? Could she later claim she never gave this deposition?
The way this person operates it would not surprise me at all.
I used to work in a law office and then a corporate law department and at the time, the court reporter acted as the agent for the court and was able to swear in the witnesses. Not sure if that is different for different states. The depo would consist of the court reporter, the attorneys and the witness being deposed. They would take place in the conference rooms of the different law offices at the time. or the corporation. I guess the plaintiff themselves could be there. But judges were not there.
I remember in the FCA case, during the depo of one of the psychological witnesses, one of the DT drs. who examined FCA, the judge was called during the depo when problems arose, so the judge was able to intervene via phone, judges are not at depos.
Seems like Morgan would have been the one to object to the disguise, but, for his "own" reasons, lol, probably let the disguise slide. Morgan was probably more amused than anything. Glad he did let it slide and did not object, hopefully it will become public and we will be able to see it, IMO, MOO.
IMO, MOO, etc.
Good point - for all we know that was Cindy under that black wig, Philly's cap and Dolce G sunglasses - they look so much alike....
Oh Hi OCA! :seeya:
After CA, KC could only be considered "comic relief". jmo lol
Although she'd never normally expect him speak on her behalf - because, after all, how could he possibly be smarter than her - it's hard to forget that longing look of CA's to her attorney as if to say 'are you going to let them get away with treating ME like this?'.Oh no, oh no. It could not have possibly been CA. She would never let her attorney speak, E_V_E_R. And she would have never plead the 5th....it would have been "What's the relevance of that question....it's not relevant...how can it be relevant?" ....wink, wink. lol
Although she'd never normally expect him speak on her behalf - because, after all, how could he possibly be smarter than her - it's hard to forget that longing look of CA's to her attorney as if to say 'are you going to let them get away with treating ME like this?'.
Not to mention the smug condascention she displayed at the end when she thought she'd won the game.
Actually, I might save a copy of that video just for those times I need to get fired up about something.
I used to work in a law office and then a corporate law department and at the time, the court reporter acted as the agent for the court and was able to swear in the witnesses. Not sure if that is different for different states. The depo would consist of the court reporter, the attorneys and the witness being deposed. They would take place in the conference rooms of the different law offices at the time. or the corporation. I guess the plaintiff themselves could be there. But judges were not there.
I remember in the FCA case, during the depo of one of the psychological witnesses, one of the DT drs. who examined FCA, the judge was called during the depo when problems arose, so the judge was able to intervene via phone, judges are not at depos.
Seems like Morgan would have been the one to object to the disguise, but, for his "own" reasons, lol, probably let the disguise slide. Morgan was probably more amused than anything. Glad he did let it slide and did not object, hopefully it will become public and we will be able to see it, IMO, MOO.
IMO, MOO, etc.
Oh no, oh no. It could not have possibly been CA. She would never let her attorney speak, E_V_E_R. And she would have never plead the 5th....it would have been "What's the relevance of that question....it's not relevant...how can it be relevant?" ....wink, wink. lol
One question I have is who swore her in for her testimony and did she take off the disguise for that person in order to prove she was oca? Could she later claim she never gave this deposition?
The way this person operates it would not surprise me at all.
In California the Court Reporter is also a Notary Public who is responsible for positively identifying the deponent, putting them under oath, and then attaching an affidavit to the deposition to that affect. The Notary keeps in her journal the manner used to positively identify the deponent (e.g., valid ID).........I imagine Florida has a similar method???
I fail to understand why anyone would think that Casey would have someone else pretend to be her for the deposition or would think that Morgan is too stupid to recognize her. What benefit would there be to Casey having another person plead the fifth in her place and possibly be brought up on charges of fraud? Some of the theories in this case get really outrageous, IMO.