2009.11.19 Defense files motion suggesting Kronk as the killer. #3

[LambChop]

Kronk's girlfriend, not wife, died of Cancer in 2007. Kronk's ex-wife had leukemia and is in remission according to an article posted in an article from her hometown paper. I don't have a link but it is in one of the postings here somewhere and maybe whoever posted it originally will be so kind as to repost it here so you can take a looky see. Leukemia has a 90% recovery rate if caught in time. Nasty disease but better than some Cancers and obviously better than what Kronk's girlfriend unfortunately had.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Hello WS

I have come to the understanding that the defense must look at every possible alternative to the killer being Casey to defend her. What I still do not understand, is why this is not being done in court? Why is the defense speaking to the media?

respectfully snipped bm.

Now, I still feel the information shows that Casey is the killer of Caylee. No matter how hard I try to take the information in the direction that she is innocent, as a juror(that I am not)I would see her as guilty. BUT: all I am doing here is saying that for Casey to be innocent we are looking at a very corrupt legal system and a very corrupt or inept LE in Florida. The only way I see that Casey is innocent would be a corrupt system because they would be the only one's to have the power to do this, in fact they are the only one's because no matter how guilty I or anyone else in the public may think she is: we are not the one's who have arrested her and charged her. Nor do we have the power to do so.

Can't her parents do something about this? Can't anyone?

If Casey is innocent, and RK had something to do with Caylee's death, if anyone else had something to do with Caylee's death: what I still do not understand and what makes me feel she is guilty the most, is the story of the nanny. Even in the jailhouse interview this story is spoken of as if it is very true. The nanny took Caylee. Maybe the nanny is JG? Maybe the nanny is RK...

But, unless Casey is lying in this conversation she did not feel that "this person" the "nanny" had done anything to harm Caylee.

Cindy A. : Do you still think she's okay?
CA: I know in my heart mom, I know in my gut she's alright, I can feel it, everyday that gets stronger and I still know that she's comin' home. I can still feel that, that she's comin' home.
Cindy A. : You think she's gonna change her mind and let her, I mean, what can I say to her on the air, because I can get one person to let me say, what I need to say or what you want me to say to Zanny. What do you want me to tell her that's going to make her bring her back?
CA: spfff...tell her that we forgive her.

And, it seems that even though Casey says she is innocent, and going with the idea that she is...she is forgiving of the person who took her daughter. Of course, if she is/was innocent: at this point she did not know that the "nanny" had killed Caylee and maybe that is why she is willing to be forgiving?

Either Casey is guilty and the state has evidence we have not seen, or we have a very corrupt legal system in Florida. I wish the authorities wanted to clear this up.


:cow:

IMO all KC would have to do is tell who the real Nanny is/was - I mean the one who is a real living person. If she did that, I'm sure that LE would be more than happy to investigate the legitimacy of her claim.

KC is either guilty or she's willing to take the fall for someone else. She has lied over and over again regarding the details of her life and Caylee's whereabouts. It really is in her hands. I wouldn't feel so sorry for her because she is not a victim; she's only trying to look like she is one. She said so herself.

They're all playing the big mixup confuse everyone game imo. She is either guilty or she can begin telling the legitimate story as to why she is not. Case closed imo.

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

The acronym JVM stands for what?

As regards motions-in-limine, they are certainly not just used by prosecutors. Defense attorneys use them in an effort to get as much alleged probative evidence excluded prior to the start of a trial as possible. Moreover, a pre-trial motion requesting the trial judge to rule on including evidence (as well as excluding it) is entirely proper.

Sorry...JVM = Jane Velez Mitchell

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Kronk's girlfriend, not wife, died of Cancer in 2007. Kronk's ex-wife had leukemia and is in remission according to an article posted in an article from her hometown paper. I don't have a link but it is in one of the postings here somewhere and maybe whoever posted it originally will be so kind as to repost it here so you can take a looky see. Leukemia has a 90% recovery rate if caught in time. Nasty disease but better than some Cancers and obviously better than what Kronk's girlfriend unfortunately had.

Who was his girlfriend? Death Certificate? Funeral Notification? Newspaper clipping?

The reason I'm suspicious is that I thought I heard him say he got distracted by his wife's death between August of 2008 and December 2008 which is why the skull he had witnessed got put on the back burner of his priorities. People automatically thought, poor man, etc. Now I want to see evidence of his personal saga. Do we know who the girlfriend was? She won't care as she is not here to be bothered. I'm not believing anything that cannot be substantiated. I have never witnessed a bigger bunch of liars in my life.

 

[christee]

Kronk's girlfriend, not wife, died of Cancer in 2007. Kronk's ex-wife had leukemia and is in remission according to an article posted in an article from her hometown paper. I don't have a link but it is in one of the postings here somewhere and maybe whoever posted it originally will be so kind as to repost it here so you can take a looky see. Leukemia has a 90% recovery rate if caught in time. Nasty disease but better than some Cancers and obviously better than what Kronk's girlfriend unfortunately had.

Hi Lambchop,

I don't know if this is the article you mentioned but thought I'd go ahead and bump this up from the 1st thread:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4465752&postcount=799"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Defense files motion suggesting Kronk as the killer. 11/19/09[/ame]


:smile:

 

[Hot Dogs]

The reason I'm suspicious is that I thought I heard him say he got distracted by his wife's death between August of 2008 and December 2008 which is why the skull he had witnessed got put on the back burner of his priorities. People automatically thought, poor man, etc. Now I want to see evidence of his personal saga. Do we know who the girlfriend was? She won't care as she is not here to be bothered. I'm not believing anything that cannot be substantiated. I have never witnessed a bigger bunch of liars in my life.

He's on record only saying "personal issues". His attorney said he was on his last dime because his wife had died from cancer the prior year.

 

[LambChop]

Who was his girlfriend? Death Certificate? Funeral Notification? Newspaper clipping?

The reason I'm suspicious is that I thought I heard him say he got distracted by his wife's death between August of 2008 and December 2008 which is why the skull he had witnessed got put on the back burner of his priorities. People automatically thought, poor man, etc. Now I want to see evidence of his personal saga. Do we know who the girlfriend was? She won't care as she is not here to be bothered. I'm not believing anything that cannot be substantiated. I have never witnessed a bigger bunch of liars in my life.

I believe her name was Sandy, but her daughter gave a statement to the PI that Kronk was so interested in a video game he was playing (forgetting to mention he had headphones on, I guess) that her mother was left in the tub awhile because she could not get out herself. Guess daughter felt this was some type of abuse. Not sure what the daughter was doing at the time but I guess Mom got pruned. As I said, I read about it here, so it is in here somewhere. And while she may not be here I am sure the rest of her family would prefer to be left out of this circus.

 

[Wudge]

Sorry...JVM = Jane Velez Mitchell

Thank You.

She has not a clue.

 

[Just Jayla]

I checked:
Sparks - Kronk's son
Snow - KC's friend

Whew...close one.

 

[Just Jayla]

It still doesn't make sense to me as to why this motion would be filed in this way, why defense would reveal their strategy-unless perhaps they were getting ready to or have recently sent discovery to the state in regards to this, and their strategy cover will be blown regardless...
In the event the defense had tangible discovery, it clearly must not rule KC out completely, or else I believe a different motion would be in order.

I think a poster here earlier on this thread was onto something in regards to an impending plea negotiation or maybe even an ugly bit of discovery headed their way from the state, that perhaps this motion is preemptive...

Or is it that the defense is simply putting this out there for the jury pool?

Any atty here who can explain the reason for this motion from a tactical standpoint, would be greatly appreciated-Why would they reveal their gameplan so early on?

 

[Just Jayla]

Thank You.

She has not a clue.

Not a fan-You would not glean anything new or frankly reliable re: RK or any aspect of this case from her show, whether or not she "sides" with me, that's my opinion on that... I have found her to be way off on a variety of issues, not just true crime.

If she references a doc, I guess that's fine, but as with everything, why not go straight to the sources? The docs are readily accessible.

My recollection is that she is an entertainment journalist, which might account for why JB would show up there....(had to get in my dig!)

 

[Woe.be.gone]

He's on record only saying "personal issues". His attorney said he was on his last dime because his wife had died from cancer the prior year.

When was he married to the woman who has cancer and claims that he had used duck tape to keep her from leaving? Do we know? I'm real curious to see how the facts line up.

First wife - had Brandon - long time ago. Kronk did not keep up with his relationship with his son.

Recent wife? When? Anybody know? The Lawyer should know better than to state "wife" when it was a "girlfriend". Kronk would have no financial obligations for his girlfriend's medical bills.

I'm curious about the truth here. Do we know how many wives he's had? There was a young woman who was interviewed and while crying she said the doctor had told her that if her mother had gotten to the hospital sooner that her mother may have lived. She was extremely dehydrated and apparently Kronk was the one overseeing the woman. The girl also said that her mom had told her that she would be yelling for assistance and that Kronk would not come to help her for long periods of time as he had headphones on and was in his own little world even though he knew he lived with a sick woman who would be in need of assistance. He was living in HER house. Is this the woman who died in 2007? What was that about?

The girl also stated that Kronk had a weird sense of boundaries as he would come into the bathroom to pee while she was already in there taking a bath.

 

[ZsaZsa]

Not a fan-You would not glean anything new or frankly reliable re: RK or any aspect of this case from her show, whether or not she "sides" with me, that's my opinion on that... I have found her to be way off on a variety of issues, not just true crime.

If she references a doc, I guess that's fine, but as with everything, why not go straight to the sources? The docs are readily accessible.

My recollection is that she is an entertainment journalist, which might account for why JB would show up there....(had to get in my dig!)

She was an on-site court reporter for cable TV for years. High profile cases, OJ, Michael Jackson, that sort of thing..

 

[Woe.be.gone]

I believe her name was Sandy, but her daughter gave a statement to the PI that Kronk was so interested in a video game he was playing (forgetting to mention he had headphones on, I guess) that her mother was left in the tub awhile because she could not get out herself. Guess daughter felt this was some type of abuse. Not sure what the daughter was doing at the time but I guess Mom got pruned. As I said, I read about it here, so it is in here somewhere. And while she may not be here I am sure the rest of her family would prefer to be left out of this circus.

Yes, abuse or uncaring or selfish or stupid or (fill in the blank but none of the words are nice).

I listened to the interview. He was living in the woman's house, not his. Least he could do would be to lend her helpless hand a hand. imo.

 

[Wudge]

It still doesn't make sense to me as to why this motion would be filed in this way, why defense would reveal their strategy-unless perhaps they were getting ready to or have recently sent discovery to the state in regards to this, and their strategy cover will be blown regardless...
In the event the defense had tangible discovery, it clearly must not rule KC out completely, or else I believe a different motion would be in order.

I think a poster here earlier on this thread was onto something in regards to an impending plea negotiation or maybe even an ugly bit of discovery headed their way from the state, that perhaps this motion is preemptive...

Or is it that the defense is simply putting this out there for the jury pool?

Any atty here who can explain the reason for this motion from a tactical standpoint, would be greatly appreciated-Why would they reveal their gameplan so early on?

It's quite simple. The defense considers Kronk to be an equally likely suspect. In essense, Baez's motion asks Judge Strickland to rule on their intended defense.

If Judge Strickland rules in favor of the defense, Kronk will be deconstructed inside the courtroom. If Judge Strickland rules that Casey's attorneys cannot give her the best possible defense, he will have handed her an incredibly strong appeal issue.

Look for Judge Strickland to give the defense enough to proceed as intended.

 

[Kentjbkent]

Who was his girlfriend? Death Certificate? Funeral Notification? Newspaper clipping?

The reason I'm suspicious is that I thought I heard him say he got distracted by his wife's death between August of 2008 and December 2008 which is why the skull he had witnessed got put on the back burner of his priorities. People automatically thought, poor man, etc. Now I want to see evidence of his personal saga. Do we know who the girlfriend was? She won't care as she is not here to be bothered. I'm not believing anything that cannot be substantiated. I have never witnessed a bigger bunch of liars in my life.

I am recalling that as well, but it was not in written media. It was during a news conference (audio) he held (can still see in my head! LOL) If I recall correctly, it was the first tv press conference he held?

 

[Just Jayla]

It's quite simple. The defense considers Kronk to be an equally likely suspect. In essense, Baez's motion asks Judge Strickland to rule on their intended defense.

If Judge Strickland rules in favor of the defense, Kronk will be deconstructed inside the courtroom. If Judge Strickland rules that Casey's attorneys cannot give her the best possible defense, he will have handed her an incredibly strong appeal issue.

Look for Judge Strickland to give the defense enough to proceed as intended.

Thanks for answering from a procedural POV , this is exactly what I was trying to understand....so the defense in any given case (or just capital cases?) has to advise the judge and the state as to thier intent prior to trial, and in order to take a certain course with other potential suspects, correct?

I kinda thought they could keep it all to themselves if it was not a discoverable item, did not realize they had to have a rule on intended defense. Seems like another layer of protection for the accused, and if that is the case I would have to agree that JS will carefully consider this.

 

[Hot Dogs]

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-hjgzC6dCU"]YouTube- Broadcast Yourself.[/nomedia] Kronk's first press conference. He doesn't mention wife, girlfriend, cancer or anything like that. The video doesn't show everything his attorney said, but I know he concluded by asking the media not to contact Roy. That was after the body was discovered.

The question right now being asked is what was his state of mind after Aug 13 and why he didn't pursue again. We only know he said that he had personal issues. Nobody interviewed him then and he had not gotten a lawyer.

 

[Hot Dogs]

Whoa. I don't remember this part of Roy's call to OC dispatch on Dec. 11 (after finding Caylee).

Unknown voice to Roy: "I told you. I told you, Ray (Roy?)"
Roy: "No. I told you she was here."

He had already told people at the facility that Caylee was there in the woods?

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-rbaga9KEU"]YouTube- Broadcast Yourself.[/nomedia] Short audio clip.

 

[Just Jayla]

YouTube- Broadcast Yourself. Kronk's first press conference. He doesn't mention wife, girlfriend, cancer or anything like that. The video doesn't show everything his attorney said, but I know he concluded by asking the media not to contact Roy. That was after the body was discovered.

The question right now being asked is what was his state of mind after Aug 13 and why he didn't pursue again. We only know he said that he had personal issues. Nobody interviewed him then and he had not gotten a lawyer.

IIRC, in his LE interview, he elaborated a little by saying he had just reunited with his son at that time, this was part of the other things he had going on.

9:15 marker

http://cfnews13.com/uploadedfiles/audio/RoyKronkJan.wma

He did eventually pursue it again after the area dried.