2009.04.09 Cindy's Deposition #2

[DAWN TREADER]

Too bad they don't have time-out corners for grown ups who refuse to play by the rules. Seriously! How hard is it to chew gum and answer questions at the same time with a simple yes or no? Why all the spit and vinegar?

 

[TURBOTHINK]

I used to feel a lot like you do, because I don't for a moment believe they had anything to do with killing their granddaughter. I even get that people initially try to court and handle the monster that is the media, really not recognizing what they're dealing with. Then it devours them. It's exploitative, but they now have apparently chosen to cultivate it when it suits them and I guess there is no turning back. You can't have the benefits without the burdens. I have never expected them to call a press conference and denounce their daughter as a killer. But they seem to have no respect or empathy for anyone else or, most importantly, for the truth. They denounce LE, blame every friend their daughter ever had for causing her to be bad. They never seem to think they or their daughter could be wrong. Despite all the evidence pointing toward their daughter, they maintain her innocence and rail against the system. Yet CA gives the impression that she would be gleeful if some third party she dislikes would be found guilty of this crime on no evidence, or on the suspicion she is trying at every opportunity to create. It's intentional and ugly and sort of compassion killing. There was no excuse for their behavior in the depositions, and in fact a lot of it seems planned. The identical insulting remarks about ZG, which CA seemed to consider a triumph. An oath is an oath. Being in a deposition is the same as if you were testifying in court. They are not in some rarified realm beyond all rules for civil behavior. Besides, when they behave like this, which IS in their control, they further damage themselves.

I am not convinced they WANT their daughter to get out of jail. I have come to believe this is all a front to cover up something deeper.

 

[sumbunny]

I am not convinced they WANT their daughter to get out of jail. I have come to believe this is all a front to cover up something deeper.

ITA- Only because I've never seen grown adults act this way in my entire life.

 

[Sundance]

I just want to say that I'm so proud of CA!
She sat there and answered questions that had nothing to do with the ZG case, and she took it, and she took it. The threats of contempt of court. The repeating the same questions again and again, wearing her down. Grilling is the word! Big shots with all the power. HA
She has the worst atty on the face of the earth. All three attys made me sick, attys like them give the whole lot a bad name. imo
LE will use this to find out how to work her against her daughter in her coming trial.
But in the end of the deposition, CA smack em down.
Good for her.
Congrats CA. I'm proud of you!!!
They looked menacing, but you made em look like fools.
You go girl!

There was only one fool on video in Cindy's depostion. I'm not sure I watched the same deposition as you did.

At any rate, Cindy will have a come Jesus meeting during the trial. That's IF she's called to testify; with her testimony so easily impeached they may not even put her on the stand.

JMO

 

[TURBOTHINK]

I just want to say that I'm so proud of CA!
She sat there and answered questions that had nothing to do with the ZG case, and she took it, and she took it. The threats of contempt of court. The repeating the same questions again and again, wearing her down. Grilling is the word! Big shots with all the power. HA
She has the worst atty on the face of the earth. All three attys made me sick, attys like them give the whole lot a bad name. imo
LE will use this to find out how to work her against her daughter in her coming trial.
But in the end of the deposition, CA smack em down.
Good for her.
Congrats CA. I'm proud of you!!!
They looked menacing, but you made em look like fools.
You go girl!

I am not sure you and I watched the same deposition.

What I saw was a very evil woman lashing out at authority. A woman who has no regard or respect for authority and believes she is above the law.

I saw a woman set herself up to be a defendant in the same lawsuit by admitting she went on TV after LE TOLD her this ZG was CLEARED of any connection and talk about how she was not cleared.

I saw a woman who could care less about her daughter and most likely wants her to stay in jail so she can further her own agenda which is money and power.

I saw an old woman who "thinks" and wants to be KC's age try to manipulate men. The wink was like her "feeling up" other men to get their attention. She really is pitiful with all those wrinkles and saggy neck trying to be young appearing.

I saw a woman who has set herself up to be charged with obstruction of justice and maybe some federal charges.

Yes, this was a "smackdown" all right..........but the one who was smacked down was none other than Cindy. She will pay a high price for her insolence in that deposition.

 

[MAMABEAR]

I am not convinced they WANT their daughter to get out of jail. I have come to believe this is all a front to cover up something deeper.

YUP------YUP-----YUP
Been feelin that way for awhile now.

 

[Sundance]

Followup would be
CA: Oh,that was just a mis-statement.I was confused from lack of sleep and still grieving and on meds and not eating and having to deal with the media and not being able to see KC and having my first lawyer quit and running out of gum and blah,blah,blah........So it's not what I meant to say. So I didn't really mean it,so it doesn't count. And it's not relevent anyway.

:highfive:

 

[Sundance]

Oh you mean that statement your honor (chomping rapidly on gum)!! That was just one of my misstatements, I only had 550 hours sleep that month..

She was mislead by the typos in the discovery documents too don't forget that.
:croc:

 

[nanny1]

I am not sure you and I watched the same deposition.

What I saw was a very evil woman lashing out at authority. A woman who has no regard or respect for authority and believes she is above the law.

I saw a woman set herself up to be a defendant in the same lawsuit by admitting she went on TV after LE TOLD her this ZG was CLEARED of any connection and talk about how she was not cleared.

I saw a woman who could care less about her daughter and most likely wants her to stay in jail so she can further her own agenda which is money and power.

I saw an old woman who "thinks" and wants to be KC's age try to manipulate men. The wink was like her "feeling up" other men to get their attention. She really is pitiful with all those wrinkles and saggy neck trying to be young appearing.

I saw a woman who has set herself up to be charged with obstruction of justice and maybe some federal charges.

Yes, this was a "smackdown" all right..........but the one who was smacked down was none other than Cindy. She will pay a high price for her insolence in that deposition.

Well said !!:clap::clap::clap::clap:

 

[TURBOTHINK]

YUP------YUP-----YUP
Been feelin that way for awhile now.

Going back over all the documents, I am not sure the right one is in jail.

 

[doogiesgirl]

I'm not sure where to put this post so I'll try here first.

CA states in depo that she got home from Mt. Dora with Caylee on the 15th somewhere around 4, b/c she remembers feeding Caylee dinner and then they both got in the pool. She says that KC came home while they were in the pool but that she told her not to get in, b/c the sun was going down, it was getting chilly so they were getting out. Ok isn't the middle of June when the days are longest? The sun doesn't go down until like 8:45 or so? So then does that mean that KC came home around 8:30, CA/Caylee get out of pool, then the mysterious fight must have happened - after 8:30 going on 9:00? Thats info we didn't have before right? I need to check the ping and phone records to see if there is a break around that time due the the argument. Anyway what I'm asking is about the time, do I have the time right? Would 8:45 to 9:00 pm be about the time the sun would set on June 15th in Florida?

Next thing is, CA says that at one time prior to June 15, 2008 that RM lived at Sawgrass apts. I am not remembering this, didn't he live on Greenwood Ave with AH and JPC? Anyone remember? Thanks

 

[sariebell]

I love this case because I love the players. I can't quit watching... like a car crash! All of the Anthonys fancy themselves much more intelligent than the rest of the world. And much more intelligent than they actually are! I am also consistantly entertained by the overall lack of class.


I can't wait for the real trial. I grow concerned, however, that there may be huge delays when most of the players end up in jail. Like sands through the hourglass...

 

[star444]

Too bad they don't have time-out corners for grown ups who refuse to play by the rules. Seriously! How hard is it to chew gum and answer questions at the same time with a simple yes or no? Why all the spit and vinegar?

Oh she may see that time-out corner if she acts that way in court. --- It's called jail! :behindbar

 

[magnolia]

I'm not sure where to put this post so I'll try here first.

CA states in depo that she got home from Mt. Dora with Caylee on the 15th somewhere around 4, b/c she remembers feeding Caylee dinner and then they both got in the pool. She says that KC came home while they were in the pool but that she told her not to get in, b/c the sun was going down, it was getting chilly so they were getting out. Ok isn't the middle of June when the days are longest? The sun doesn't go down until like 8:45 or so? So then does that mean that KC came home around 8:30, CA/Caylee get out of pool, then the mysterious fight must have happened - after 8:30 going on 9:00? Thats info we didn't have before right? I need to check the ping and phone records to see if there is a break around that time due the the argument. Anyway what I'm asking is about the time, do I have the time right? Would 8:45 to 9:00 pm be about the time the sun would set on June 15th in Florida?

Next thing is, CA says that at one time prior to June 15, 2008 that RM lived at Sawgrass apts. I am not remembering this, didn't he live on Greenwood Ave with AH and JPC? Anyone remember? Thanks

Here you go DG~

Rising & setting times (Orlando, Fla.)

 

[nssherlock]

I do not have three way calling. I wonder how that would work. How it would show up.

I was wondering if Cindy didn't know or hadn't spoken with the psychic how did the psychic get Caylee's teddy bear? Does anyone know?

 

[OneLostGrl]

Well, so she said in the depo, but in her MySpace blog entry from July 3rd, she said that she took care of Caylee's medical bills. Very odd.

Cuz she wants everyone to think she's this big friggin' hero- she, like her daughter though, can't keep her lies straight.

 

[WholeLottaRosie]

That's not really true - we tend to allow the witness a lot of latitute because we know the more they explode the more they lose control and the closer we get to them spilling the truth.

And you can always get 'em in the courtroom when they take the stand!

 

[Gma Kat]

In depositions, there does not have to be any relevance proved, because they are fact seeking events.

In this case, I do see the relevance of the questions about Sawgrass and KC's friends there.

I see the relevance in whether they believed the lies she told and how they were lied to about her working. (if no job, no need for a nanny)

I see the relevance about their financial help because if KC did not have a job, she could not be paying a nanny.

I see the relevance to the stolen credit cards, the stolen money from the grandparents and the Anthonys as that establishes that she was not working and needed money for something.

I see the relevance about the income taxes, and who claimed Caylee. All of the things he asked were very relevant if the Anthonys had been straight up and answered appropriately.

Interesting to me, he did not really ask anything which they had not sworn to before in their interviews, but this time they changed their story and became hostile. When a witness like that turns hostile they are usually covering up something by lying and that is normally when attorneys go "in for the kill." They were really very easy on both of them considering how hostile and how they had changed their prior stories.

ITA. I am so frustrated at the idea that the questions were not relevant. The talking heads can't even get this one right. IMO the point is that WE KNOW the Anthony's don't believe there ever was a Zenaida Fernandez Gonzales. WE KNOW IT! I'm puzzled that people believe that they believe the Zanny the Nanny story. Nothing in their behavior backs it up. This is why in the civil case they are trying to solicite statements from them that "prove" they did not believe there was another person named "Zenaida" or "Zanny" or whatever. That is crucial to the defamation case because in lighto f evidence that there was no nanny they continued to perpetuate and probably "fabricate" the myth to protect KC. This kept Zenaida in the spotlight and kept the defamation alive when the Anthony's SHOULD have been forthcoming with the TRUTH. So my questoin is...if they really claim to believe there was a nanny, that JG or AH is "the nanny" (based on KC code) then why would they be running around the country searching for Caylee when JG and AH were still in Florida? aaaaaaaaaaaaa, its already making my ears bleed today!!!!!!

 

[faefrost]

I agree that CA and GA seemed to have rehearsed their deposition "performances". Each of them spouted the hateful/hurtful bit about how this ZG was not the ZG that KC described; because KC described a ZG that was a "10" with "straight white teeth". --- How rude and deliberately hurtful! --- How do you think Cindy would react to being berated like that? (Of course in her mind, she probably thinks she's a 10.)

Cindy complained of being tired and wanting to get it over with, but she was the reason it lasted so long. Many times she could have answered a simple "yes" or "no", but instead she chose to argue. "I'm not answering that because you already asked that. I've already answered that question. Read the transcript back. You already asked that. It's not relevant..... and on, and on, and on." When the simple answer was "yes" or "no". --- Why does she have to be such a "b-word"?

And their sense of self-importance is amazing. It is clear to see that the apple didn't fall far from the tree.

I too loved the part when she took the microphone off and INSISTED that she would NOT put it back on.... fade to black... camera comes back on... there she is with the microphone back on looking like she just ate a live toad. --- Haha. Loved it. Thanks for the laugh Cindy!

I was wondering how the sort of behavior is treated in civil depositions in FL? I mean she certainly did not answer the Plaintiff's questions. She was hostile abusive and interogative to the attorney. It is a good thing they did film the whole thing otherwise noone would have ever believed it.

But it is obvious that the Plaintiff's reasonable questions were not answered. They still exist, and the lawyer has indicated that he is going to ask that they be depossed again. Once the judge get one look at the antics what will happen? can the Plaintiff ask that the next depositions be done in open court under the eye of the judge in order to compel and control the witness?

Also at what point do CA and GA's antics rise to the level of deliberate obstruction and or accesoy to murder?

 

[nyvictoria]

I agree that CA and GA seemed to have rehearsed their deposition "performances". Each of them spouted the hateful/hurtful bit about how this ZG was not the ZG that KC described; because KC described a ZG that was a "10" with "straight white teeth". --- How rude and deliberately hurtful! --- How do you think Cindy would react to being berated like that? (Of course in her mind, she probably thinks she's a 10.)

Cindy complained of being tired and wanting to get it over with, but she was the reason it lasted so long. Many times she could have answered a simple "yes" or "no", but instead she chose to argue. "I'm not answering that because you already asked that. I've already answered that question. Read the transcript back. You already asked that. It's not relevant..... and on, and on, and on." When the simple answer was "yes" or "no". --- Why does she have to be such a "b-word"?

And their sense of self-importance is amazing. It is clear to see that the apple didn't fall far from the tree.

I too loved the part when she took the microphone off and INSISTED that she would NOT put it back on.... fade to black... camera comes back on... there she is with the microphone back on looking like she just ate a live toad. --- Haha. Loved it. Thanks for the laugh Cindy!

my bold

ITA! Seeing her come back wearing the microphone made my day!

And when does Cindy NOT complain about being tired? Every time she's interviewed and even at the bond hearing she claims she's tired! Does she think that gives her an excuse to perjure herself?