Originally Posted by ynotdivein
From page one of this tattoo-related motion:
“…The tattoo in question is a script tattoo that reads “La Bella Vita” (The Beautiful Life), and was obtained on July 2, 2008, approximately two weeks after Caylee was reported missing.”
Not quite as glaring as it was for them to say the duct tape was recovered "NEAR" the remains--but still, rather a factual stretch for us what have studied the facts.
I hope HHSS is not sitting on his rainbow right above HHJP's head Monday because he will get knocked cattywhompus when HHJP's chair rocks fast enough to finally achieve liftoff...
Originally posted by 'Beach: Out of everything that has been filed by the defense in this case over 2 years, this is without a doubt the most careless, glaring error I have seen yet. I have been shaking my head for 2 days about this one and still can't get over it. I am almost embarrassed for them.
I keep envisioning Ashton addressing this one. He is not even going to have to use his usual passionate voice when arguing. His biggest obstacle is going to be suppressing his laughter.
Seriously folks....It is downright scary that there are hundreds of us "bloggers" who know the ins and outs of this case SO MUCH BETTER than the defense that is now being funded by FL taxpayers.
I have no more words about this one.
__________________
Wait a minute though ~ There MAY be something to this.
During the indengcy hearing, Baez was asked under oath when he had been retained or hired by Casey.
He lowers his head, and mumbles, June 16th, and is asked to repeat it.
Which he did, with the exact same day. And, what threw me for a loop that day was that no one questioned, or, corrected that date.
I know that we talked about here, and some thought that it was just a nervous slip up. I never did, then, or now esp in light of that particular motion now, as it reads. We know that they are dense, but, they are also sly and sneaky.
So, if that's the case, would Baez come back and say that "yes, she was reported missing, but to ME"?
He wouldn't have to dilvudge any reason for telling her to wait it out, as it were, I suppose, would he??
Which would bring us to FaeFrost's comment, that if they claim she told Lee, Cindy or George, that they would have to take the stand, or, Casey, null.
We would have Baez stating it, and that it had been client/attorney private info.
It would also explain how Baez made it to the court house in record time as Richard Hornsby wrote about on his blog one time.
Course, Baez would have to produce some paperwork to attest to that June 16th hire date, and we all know how his book-keeping has been.
But, its an interesting thought.........maybe???
Using THAT date, it would make the above true then.
