- Joined
- Aug 21, 2008
- Messages
- 3,871
- Reaction score
- 15,063
anyone have the link handy to reference Casey's account of the 7/15 call...either the audio the transcript or both. That might help us stay focused on-topic a bit.
IMO Caylee expressed her fear while in her grandfather's arms.
anyone have the link handy to reference Casey's account of the 7/15 call...either the audio the transcript or both. That might help us stay focused on-topic a bit.
snippedThese?
snipped
Thanks, Tulessa. Actually I was referring to the account Casey gave of talking to Caylee 7/15. I could be wrong...more often than not I am :bang: ... but thinking it is in one of the interviews at Universal. You know...in Casey's office![]()
snipped
Thanks, Tulessa. Actually I was referring to the account Casey gave of talking to Caylee 7/15. I could be wrong...more often than not I am :bang: ... but thinking it is in one of the interviews at Universal. You know...in Casey's office![]()
Could this alleged call play into a defense strategy that Caylee was not murdered until after July 15th? This, in addition to the report saying the remains could have been in the woods as late as sometime in July?
I don't disagree, Tweety. IMHO, the most valuable element of "ZFG" is that it gives SA a solid launching point to build on. For example, ladies & gentlemen of the jury, we've established that Ms. Anthony lied. The defense told you that doesn't mean she's guilty of murder. Let's focus now on WHY she lied. What was her motive?
More to come...![]()
BBM
She was also asked if Caylee was upset about not being able to see her mother...IIRC Casey said No...and then went off into a story involving Cindy.
IMO, a child that has not seen his/her parent in awhile would be sad, and would tell the parent to come get them and that they want to go home and not IMO launch into a happy story.
Curious as to why Casey brought up Caylee speaking of Shoes. Just curious.
This call is so huge, IMO, because I can think of no scenario where lying about a Caylee call would somehow protect Caylee or keep her safe from those who abducted her/could do her harm. None that would make logical sense to any sane person, at least. KC never really expressed fear that Caylee wasn't alive, just that she was taken. So what was her incentive to lie? It'd been far more believable to say she hadn't heard from Caylee in weeks.
To me the psychological inference is interesting, because it's KC basically yelling "She's not dead! Nope, not dead! I talked to her today!" She basically used that to show LE "See, I didn't report her missing and she's fine!" If she didn't kill Caylee, that is so completely obstructionist and her ability not to come clean at that moment speaks more to her guilt and sociopathic tendencies than anything else in this case, IMO.
IMO Caylee expressed her fear while in her grandfather's arms.
Ha Ha. Yes this will be very interesting to hear..............
Gosh...this interview just gets me more and more upset. I hear the smugness in her voice...but very little else.Here you go. At point 5:10 she talks about the phone call.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nig-ITwHAWM&feature=related
I could just kiss you, Tweety! :blowkiss: This is such a logical, almost inarguable statement! Why in the world would the worried, distraught mother of a missing 2 year old lie about a phone conversation they had had just the day before? There is, IMO, no other reasonable explanation except that she was trying to hide the fact that the child was dead. Period. I sure hope the SA has thought about this.
I just reviewed the 1-2-3 cheese video of Caylee and it is quite telling. Actually, many of you made comments about the videographer not engaging with her, despite her many attempts to engage them. I would assume it is KC videotaping, but who knows. Caylee was definately able to self-regulate, as demonstrated by her talking to herself and coloring. She gave strong disengagement cues, including looking away, freezing, and turning partially away and finally fully away. She also gave strong engagement cues and attempted to please the videographer. It is apparent the family used `1-2-3 cheese as a means to get her to smile for pics and she knew this routine well. She tried on nunmerous occassions to comply with what she thought the person videotaping wanted. When she did not get the response she was expecting, it was confusing for her and she became overstimulated and needed to self calm - thus the disengagement cues. Although this video is quite short and we do not see the interaction between the parent/child - the lack of interaction is equally telling. In the parent/child attachment realm, this type of non-responsiveness is actually built into the assessment (commonly referred to as the 'still face'). The still face allows the assessor to gauge how far the child will go to engage the parent and what happens to the child emotionally when they do not get their needs met in a timely manner. Fear not fellow posters, although this feels terribly uncomfortable and cruel, it happens hundreds of times a day to every child, because parents cannot meet the child's needs 100% of the time, nor should they.
I have not seen videos of this child, except in the nursing home and now the 1-2-3 cheese. I would be very interested in looking at the one on the floor, I have seen only snipits on NG and others but not the video itself.