2011.03.02 Cindy Anthony's Testimony

[LambChop]

I have never in my life witnessed so many people who have bent over backwards to do things for these people for free. They truly expect it and expect it of everyone. Everyone owes them something free time, money for pictures, free meal, free lodging. Gimme, gimme, gimme.

Off-track here because what I really wanted to ask is, does anyone think the A's are just deliberately telling different stories (lying essentially) about certain events in hopes that SA will not call them at trial? I smell something funny going on here and it's not squirrel.

 

[Purple Iris]

He certainly did. Told them no comments, no reacting to testimony, etc. Cameras went right to them. Not sure which day it was and I'm not sure he mentioned the gum chewing. Did not stop them as they continued to show their reactions but the camera was not on them when HHJP brought it up in court. The judge did say it will be done on a hearing by hearing basis up until the trial. How they behave next week will probably have a lot to do with his decision whether to keep them out or let them sit through the whole trial.

Because of their behavior on the stand when testifying and making such inappropriate comments, CA calling Linda by her first name when the judge's orders were made early on not refer to the attorneys by their first name, it's Ms. Burdsick or Mr. Baez. Then GA with his "Amber Alert" very disrespectful to an officer of the court. GA knows better so there is no excuse. They are clearly hostile and disruptive.

That being said and watching them sometimes is amazing. It does them no good to be in full public view while they have to endure what will be revealed to them at trial. If they were accepting that KC was responsible for whatever happened to their granddaughter they would have better control over their emotions. But they are not and are a hotbed of emotions that are about to explode and that has no place in the courtroom. Not good for KC, not fair to either defense or SA while they are trying to focus on their presentations. They just will not shut up, stop chewing their gum, or stop showing facial emotions, shaking their heads, saying "I did not say that". This is why the judge called them out. He will not tolerate it.

So they right now are under the microscope that GA so hates to be under. Next week are the Frye hearings and we shall see how they react. They are making their own bed and will be judged on their actions. jmo

Just doing some catching up, and not meaning to push anyone's buttons or encite any riots; but, yes, Judge Perry did give his instructions right before they took a break.

When they come back, Cindy is called to the stand, and she is toting her water bottle.
She very meekly asks Judge Perry if it's alright for her to have her water.
He told her yes, but, she KNEW who those directions were directed at in no uncertain terms.
Nothing was said about water, BUT, it is listed in his court room instructions, and the Anthony's are well aware of every single of them.

 

[Purple Iris]

I don't know the exact point as I couldn't watch the hearing, but I know it's in the hearing threads. It was specifically mentioned in those threads. You might be able to find it there.

It's happened a few times over the course of us seeing them in the court room for various hearings and motions.

 

[LambChop]

I remember years ago if you were testifying in court there was usually a pitcher of water available and if you needed a drink you could have a glass of water. But the gallery, no, they can get up and leave to get a drink. I notice CA's friend often has a "sippy cup" with her. I think the court does not want you bringing in any containers because it is a security violation. Who knows what crackpot is in the gallery and what they might have in a bottle or cup so the A's being permitted to get away with it I imagine is a nightmare for the security staff there. But I think trial will be very tight on what you bring into court. jmo

 

[LinasK]

Sign away their rights but not their responsibilities. They are still responsible, they just don't make those important decisions, what doctor to use, where they go to school, where they get to live, etc. And that is fine if that is what they want.

The A's would have had to go to court and the A's clearly did not want the father involved or to even know about Caylee. Why, why would they want that? Maybe they were afraid he'd ask for visitation and when Caylee was old enough to talk my guess KC's parenting skills would be an issue. Better to kill the dad off or present one they knew was deceased. Much better fit for their purposes. They are despicable. So chances are there is a father out there who never got to know his daughter because of the A's.

I hope someone exposes them for what they truly are and I hope Caylee's father comes forward and tells them just how low they really are. It's one thing if the dad wants no part, but another if you try to keep it hidden just to keep him from seeing and enjoying the child. And what about the other grandparents??? Had they all been involved with Caylee's life, she might still be alive today. They were never given the opportunity to say yes or no. jmo

Bingo! These are the things that make me the maddest about this issue- I don't believe for a minute that the father died just because Casey and the Anthony's say so. I think they tried to deny some guy and his family the right to be a father to Caylee...:twocents:

 

[katydid23]

LOL! I know! I know!

But whenever they lie it's because they're trying to cover something up. Even if it's laughable and transparent, at least you can see where they're TRYING to go.

This one, this denial of Kelly as the attorney who drew up the docs, mystifies me. What were they trying to gain?

There is always a motive when someone lies. What's their motive here? They said they went to an attorney. So they're not covering that fact up. They just wouldn't say the attorney's name. CA even went to far as to say it was Mr. Kelly who referred her to another. So she didn't hesitate to bring him up to some extent.

What's the point???? I honestly don't get this one

I think they are trying to cover up the fact that they committed fraud by signing legal papers which are FALSE. I don't think they want anyone to see or research those papers because they are fraudulent. imo

 

[countzero]

O/T somewhat. Concerning the father's rights; he first would have to be acknowledged on the birth certificate prior to giving up his paternal rights at a later date. If he isn't acknowledged as the birth father, there isn't anything to give up. And in my state, it does have to be notarized and filed with the courts.

CA didn't think about that one. Once again, CA has "created" an elaborate story for her own amusement.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

O/T somewhat. Concerning the father's rights; he first would have to be acknowledged on the birth certificate prior to giving up his paternal rights at a later date. If he isn't acknowledged as the birth father, there isn't anything to give up. And in my state, it does have to be notarized and filed with the courts.

CA didn't think about that one. Once again, CA has "created" an elaborate story for her own amusement.

But what would the attorney's motive be to go along with it? I mean (the way the media presents it) it is in his sworn deposition (remembering we have not seen the depo yet). Why would he possibly risk his career for them?

 

[countzero]

But what would the attorney's motive be to go along with it? I mean (the way the media presents it) it is in his sworn deposition (remembering we have not seen the depo yet). Why would he possibly risk his career for them?

Could have been that CA didn't bother to "provide" the birth certificate. Ya know kinda/sorta forgot to bring it. In any case, ICA would have been the individual to "initiate" this type of paper work, not CA or GA.

 

[Purple Iris]

Yep. Just one of three mentioned. ;( Too bad all of his family moved 'somewhere in Italy' so DCF/LE can't follow up, huh?

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/8412112/Casey-Anthony-Eric-Baker-death-certificate

Yes, they "moved" to Italy, but thankfully, before going, they very thoughtfully set up a trust fund for the grand-daughter that their dead son signed all rights over to, or so the Anthony's/Casey said.

 

[krisskross]

But wasn't the answer the guy is dead and his family have moved to Italy c/o Somewhere? Pretty hard for even CA to argue with that IMO. See I don't believe this guy was the real father and ICA kept the real one as her secret bird in a hand....

Would ICA play mind games with her parents? :waitasec: particularly the doting grandmother who had fallen in love with this new baby girl. Seems Cindy's life was pretty dire pre-Caylee, I believe this baby did lessen Cindy's misery and she would have become very possessive of her early on.

Cindy Anthony was right there at the table when ICA told the guy from DCF about Caylee's Italian based grandparents and her trust fund. I dont think Cindy was just hearing this story for the first time.

Im sure Cindy dreaded that knock at the door or the phone call and that's what prompted her to draft up useless documents with P Kelley.

 

[Aedrys]

But what would the attorney's motive be to go along with it? I mean (the way the media presents it) it is in his sworn deposition (remembering we have not seen the depo yet). Why would he possibly risk his career for them?

But he didn't. He got out of there once the publicity got to be too much. You'd think he'd WANT publicity, but no. He was smart and got the heck out before it was too late. Yet he still talks about them like they're upstanding citizens. I don't know if he figured out something underhanded was going on, or if he really did not want bad publicity for some other reason than them, and so no matter how much he liked them, he couldn't continue to stand by them.

It's also possible that he didn't know it was a fraud at the time. The A's have the amazing ability to rope people in and get them to do what the A's want them to do. I bet he didn't ask many questions, and out of friendship to CA, did what they wanted. I'm sure they lied to his face, but he either didn't know it or decided not to question it. Actually, by the sound of his depo, they're still fooling him. He must not be keeping up with this case at all. Which makes me wonder why a little bad publicity made him leave if the A's were so upstanding to him.

 

[Intermezzo]

Would ICA play mind games with her parents? :waitasec: particularly the doting grandmother who had fallen in love with this new baby girl. Seems Cindy's life was pretty dire pre-Caylee, I believe this baby did lessen Cindy's misery and she would have become very possessive of her early on.

Cindy Anthony was right there at the table when ICA told the guy from DCF about Caylee's Italian based grandparents and her trust fund. I dont think Cindy was just hearing this story for the first time.

Im sure Cindy dreaded that knock at the door or the phone call and that's what prompted her to draft up useless documents with P Kelley.

bbm
I agree krisskross
I believe Caylee brought joy and happiness to Cindy, more so to Cindy IMO, than anyone else in the family...
When the DCF worker was at the home Cindy did begin to speak but Casey shut her down and said it was her turn to speak and tell her story...I don't believe Cindy spoke much if at all from then on.

 

[LambChop]

Bingo! These are the things that make me the maddest about this issue- I don't believe for a minute that the father died just because Casey and the Anthony's say so. I think they tried to deny some guy and his family the right to be a father to Caylee...:twocents:

In their minds they are stuck with the father died in an accident because that is what they told the attorney. I'm sure the attorney in question would not be speaking so highly of the A's if he knew they were trying to involve him in some type of fraud by filing papers with the court that were not true. The more that comes out the worse it gets for the A's.

Thinking back about what they tried to do could this have been the reason for the jailhouse visit comment, "We forgive you if you said something." Did the A's think KC told investigators the father's real name?

FYI: Not sure what the laws are in other states but just because a father is not named on the birth certificate should not be a condition as to whether or not he has rights. Not naming a father is negligence on the mother's part, not the father. He has no control if Mom does not report his name. A child has to have two parents. If the father wants out he needs to do so legally but he is still responsible. Too many mom's are getting away with not involving the father and it is irresponsible. Only exception should be a sperm bank. lol Otherwise a child has the right to know and it is the moral responsibility of the Mom to know who her child's father is and put that name on the birth certificate.

 

[strawberry]

I'm confused about this attorney info. When did we first hear about him? Just yesterday from the news? And why isn't all of this client/attorney privilege?

 

[LambChop]

I'm confused about this attorney info. When did we first hear about him? Just yesterday from the news? And why isn't all of this client/attorney privilege?

My guess is they were not clients in this matter, not getting paid, but he did it for them as a friend. The A's never engaged him as an attorney for this matter but he sent them to another attorney (who probably wanted to be paid). How PK ended up with it was probably the result of a sob story and he just gave them some paperwork to fill out for the father. Let them do the work. So the A's may have never retained him as their attorney. Just a guess but when have the A's EVER paid for anything they can charm someone into giving them for free??? jmo

 

[Anais]

I have never in my life witnessed so many people who have bent over backwards to do things for these people for free. They truly expect it and expect it of everyone. Everyone owes them something free time, money for pictures, free meal, free lodging. Gimme, gimme, gimme.

Off-track here because what I really wanted to ask is, does anyone think the A's are just deliberately telling different stories (lying essentially) about certain events in hopes that SA will not call them at trial? I smell something funny going on here and it's not squirrel.

ITA! I have smelled the very same odor and had the same suspicions for quite some time. I don't think it will work because LDB won't let them get away with or off the hook quite that easily! She'll nail them.

 

[shaye]

ITA! I have smelled the very same odor and had the same suspicions for quite some time. I don't think it will work because LDB won't let them get away with or off the hook quite that easily! She'll nail them.

Doe's anyone know when these "documents" were drawn up if at all?? The original story was Jesse Grund was the father of Caylee until the Paternity Test proved otherwise.....according to Richard Grunds interview w/LE he got into it w/Cindy on the phone after Caylee "was kidnapped" & told Cindy that she (Cindy) knew Jesse was not the Father of Caylee because the dates didn't add up....Richard said that George even admitted that to him.....that tells me that Cindy was aware Jesse wasn't the father and chose to believe whatever KC told her again then when that blew up in thier faces, Cindy & KC came up w/this BS story & George just went along like he was told to do.

Cindy was cleaning up another one of Casey's messes by coming up w/this crazy story to save face and embarrassment once again. I think Cindy knew Casey had no idea who the real father could be & instead of guy after guy being tested it was easier to say he was dead & just be done w/it. Lee's LE interview comes to mind where Casey tells him that Cindy called Caylee the best mistake she ever made!!

Before Jesse was proven not to be the father, they were sharing Caylee w/the Grunds so when he turned out not to be her father they realized someone could come in and lay claim to Caylee so all the more reason to have papers drawn up in thier minds. Hope that makes sense, lol.