OK, I am willing to listen. How does an open, discriminating mind reconcile RK being a suspect with KC's insistence on a ZFG? What connection, other than finding the body, can Kronk be shown to have with Caylee? Why would Kronk have called police to the scene and gone there to meet them if he were involved? He could have called in an anonymous tip, then let LE handle it.
Is every piece of physical evidence (trunk decomp, papertowels, items from home, maggots in trash bag, coffin flies, etc.) that points to KC either a horrible coincidence or just junk science?
Did RK contact DC and tell him where to search? Why wouldn't DC state that? If George really did see KC & Caylee leave that afternoon (and he has no reason to lie if KC is innocent), how and where did Kronk obtain her? Was KC searching for Kronk at Blockbuster that night? Was Kronk known to frequent Fusian, leading KC to search there?
For a predator who was a stranger, the only reason for bagging the remains would be to avoid detection. Why then would that same predator lead police to those remains, knowing that otherwise he has no connection and would never be suspected?
I am all for keeping an open mind, but I cannot be so eager to find ABC (Anyone But Casey) that I suspend all my common sense in the process.
In the sake of justice, I sincerely hope Kronk has documentation proving he was reading meters on the other side of town all day, so the defense will have to float a new patsy.
My apologies for my earlier sarcasm. I do not accept the medias ramblings as fact.
I can accept this motion as reasonable because I have read the forensic report, the entomology report, all the police interviews and statements regarding RK, both of the large doc dumps, etc. RK made numerous contradictory statements in the various interviews and statements. I have had him pegged as a person of interest from the moment I read the first interview with him by the police. I suspected that they had done a thorough background check on him. After reading all his interviews, I was convinced he was being untruthful about something. His story changed to much. The biggest reason I have for suspecting him of something unsavory is that when he finally got officer Cain to the area where he was 99.999% certain he could see a human skull, and the officer said he didnt see anything, at that moment in time, RK did not go the 10 feet to the skull and pick it up and say RIGHT HERE OFFICER RIGHT HERE!!! Had RK done that at that moment, I would not doubt a word he said. His excuse that he did not do that was that he got upset with the officer, and then he waited four months before he cooled off and went back to the area and discovered the body. To me, that whole scenario reeks of suspicion. So, I find the motion reasonable.
As for the circumstantial evidence against Casey, I realize there is a lot of it, and I realize that the forensic experts say that the prosecutions theories are likely to be correct. However, I have read those reports very, very closely. I am a layman, and yet I can see that the conclusions of these reports that say the prosecutions theories are likely, could just as easily conclude that theories presented by the defense could be just as likely.
I do believe some of the forensic evidence has been compromised, and that makes me wonder how much of the forensic evidence has been compromised. Since I believe some of the forensic evidence has been compromised, I cannot be sure that the one hair in the trunk with the alleged decomp ring on it, the smell of the trunk, the chloroform in the trunk, the duct tape found on the remains that was dissimilar to the duct tape found on the gas can, the alleged adipocere on the napkin, the one leg from the fly, the alleged decomp stain in the trunk, and the air sample will even be introduced as evidence. Since I believe that these 8 items may not be introduced into evidence, I am left with the unexplained 31 days. The defense says Casey has a compelling reason for the 31 days, but it wont come out until trial. So, since I believe the majority of the prosecutions circumstantial case is built on maybes, as in maybe it was a decomposing hair but it couldnt be determined without more hairs similar to compare it to, and maybe the duct tape is dissimilar, but the henkel brand matches, I think that the defenses motion that there is as much circumstantial evidence against RK as there is against KC, may be reasonable after all. I wont go through the motion but there is a lot of circumstantial evidence in it that points to RK. This all of course my opinion and based on my interpretations of the evidence we know of. I realize many may disagree with me, and thats fine, but I am entitled to my opinion and I have thought about all this long and hard. I still believe there is a very strong possibility that KC is guilty, but that will have to be proven in court, because out here in the world of public opinion, it looks to me that the states case gets weaker with each new doc dump.
