Anthony's Deceptions and Seeking Full Immunity#3 Poll Added

[Sdavidson11]

IMO using only common sense and visual observation of the A's appearance and demeanor, MN no longer representing the A's, and the time frame of the alleged tape of the PI's I think the A's new something. From there inconsistent and untrue statements to LE and the FBI the OJ charge is there. No Immunity!

 

[ziggy]

I just can't believe that they are able to separate the truth from what they want to believe at this point. They have been caught up in the psychopathy of CA and KC for so long now, even before this tragedy. I was watching the jail visits on video and it struck me how ON EGGSHELLS everyone is with KC. They never confront her even when she gives non-answers - they don't try to break anything down and piece by piece make her answer and make sense of anything. They accept ridiculous answers.

They have spoken enough with their testimony, press appearances and the videotaped sessions at the jail. It's pretty easy to see they have been fairly uncooperative at least, obstructing at best.

I just don't think they can be trusted to know the truth from their fantasies anymore. I also think they would get away with whatever is possible to save their necks and KC's because they suffer from the same problem as KC - no moral compass.

 

[MissJames]

Zucker, there's no solid evidence that the A's knew where the body was. All of this PI videotaping stuff is too confusing to really understand why they were there/who sent them there. We need more information. I'm sticking with the belief that the A's are following an instinct to defend and protect their own daughter in this harrowing situation. Granted, they've taken it way too far, their denial went way too far, and they're not the smartest tools in the shed. But I'll go out on a limb and say I still don't believe they knew where Caylee's remains were. I have a lot of sympathy for the A's.

Respectfully disagreeing,they knew that the picture of the little girl at the mall was not Caylee.It was obviously not her ,yet they kept up the pressure on LE and held a news conference with MB to create reasonable doubt.
You don't protect your child by throwing innocent bystanders to the wolves.That's called covering for your child and there's a difference.
I am a parent who lost a child and had sympathy initially,but I acn agree with you on that part,they went TOO FAR.So far that now they need immunity.

 

[Rumpole]

I have posted elsewhere questions about CA and GA admitting to Greta that they had recently dug up a plant and moved it to other side of garden. Ostensibly so that they could move box of pool equipment away so that Caylee couldn't climb up and fall in pool.
The digging was done, but the box was still next to the pool.
The A's explanation made sense, but moving the plant did mask 2 potential areas where KC could have tried digging.
Can anybody pin point the date of the great plant relocation?
CA said, couple weeks ago. A bit vague, could have been just after Caylee "went missing"
If G & C did find signs of Caylee having been digging and covered it up intentionally, surely that is blatant Accessory After the fact or whatever?

 

[SWEETSPYRIT]

Ok, this is my first response, new to WS and am completely impressed with all of the posts and information.

And, now have to throw in my 2 cents. Why at this point would the A's tell the truth? Immunity or not? I have watched and read from day one and WOW what a family. The jail telephone visits with both GP's and LA really creep me out. I can't believe that KC didn't say something during the times she was out of jail. I believe the GP's at this point look at it like - Caylee is gone, now we need to get KC out of this mess, no matter what. I am having a very hard time with the GP's saying we won't talk or give info without immunity???? Since when do we get to pick and choose within our justice system - especially this type of case. I am still trying to wrap my brain around 1/8th of what is going on with this case, but, IMMUNITY - the vote is NO for me.

 

[MissJames]

IMO using only common sense and visual observation of the A's appearance and demeanor, MN no longer representing the A's, and the time frame of the alleged tape of the PI's I think the A's new something. From there inconsistent and untrue statements to LE and the FBI the OJ charge is there. No Immunity!

Remember the week that they announced a big news conference with Big Evidence? That was about Nov 15th. Then they said it was postponed until MN returned from out of town.Then nothing, but the photos of the little girl at the mall showed up.Larry Garrisson was fired just before this big announcement.
Then they have the house tour with the Local 6 reporter.MN resigns and they have the news conference.Michelle B. looked awful and Cindy kept her head down and looked like she was ill.We all assumed it was because of the document dump and MN resigning,but maybe it was because they found out where Caylee's body was.All speculation,but could be.
Oh yeah,then CA claims her e-mail acct was hacked into .Would love to see what was in those........

 

[whiteangora]

Ok, this is my first response, new to WS and am completely impressed with all of the posts and information.

And, now have to throw in my 2 cents. Why at this point would the A's tell the truth? Immunity or not? I have watched and read from day one and WOW what a family. The jail telephone visits with both GP's and LA really creep me out. I can't believe that KC didn't say something during the times she was out of jail. I believe the GP's at this point look at it like - Caylee is gone, now we need to get KC out of this mess, no matter what. I am having a very hard time with the GP's saying we won't talk or give info without immunity???? Since when do we get to pick and choose within our justice system - especially this type of case. I am still trying to wrap my brain around 1/8th of what is going on with this case, but, IMMUNITY - the vote is NO for me.

:Welcome-12-june:sweetespyrit

I agree with you. Cindy would need some miraculous intervention to introduce her to the truth.

 

[Rumpole]

Ok, this is my first response, new to WS and am completely impressed with all of the posts and information.

And, now have to throw in my 2 cents. Why at this point would the A's tell the truth? Immunity or not? I have watched and read from day one and WOW what a family. The jail telephone visits with both GP's and LA really creep me out. I can't believe that KC didn't say something during the times she was out of jail. I believe the GP's at this point look at it like - Caylee is gone, now we need to get KC out of this mess, no matter what. I am having a very hard time with the GP's saying we won't talk or give info without immunity???? Since when do we get to pick and choose within our justice system - especially this type of case. I am still trying to wrap my brain around 1/8th of what is going on with this case, but, IMMUNITY - the vote is NO for me.

It's just possible they might start telling the truth because unlike KC they can see the reality that there is proof they are lying and LE don't believe them. Perhaps they can see the consequences. Shame they didn't teach that to their daughter. They might bargain a little immunity for minor "misspeaks", but I think like most people they wiil behave properly to avoid prison IMO

Also WELCOME I ain't been here long either!

 

[SuziQ]

I am going out on a limb here, but I believe LE has more than enough to prosecute KC and I don't believe there will be any immunity deal. They don't need the Anthonys now, like they did in the beginning when they could not get their cooperation. I believe they will take a hard line and go for the prosecution with what they have and the Anthonys will be prosecuted to keep them from profiting off the death of the baby.

ITA. It's all too little too late. There is nothing to benefit the SA by giving immunity.

 

[SuziQ]

I see we have alot of new posters...welcome to WS!

 

[ShadowGal]

I have posted elsewhere questions about CA and GA admitting to Greta that they had recently dug up a plant and moved it to other side of garden. Ostensibly so that they could move box of pool equipment away so that Caylee couldn't climb up and fall in pool.
The digging was done, but the box was still next to the pool.
The A's explanation made sense, but moving the plant did mask 2 potential areas where KC could have tried digging.
Can anybody pin point the date of the great plant relocation?
CA said, couple weeks ago. A bit vague, could have been just after Caylee "went missing"
If G & C did find signs of Caylee having been digging and covered it up intentionally, surely that is blatant Accessory After the fact or whatever?[/QUOTE]


Bold by me.
Well, monsieur air-cyool, I don't know the correct legal terminology for your transplanting scenario, but in layperson speak, 'hinky' comes to mind! :crazy: And that, along with a host of other little issues, I believe, will land the A's in some very chaud l'eau or is it l'eau chaud...oh, je ne sais pas, j'ai oublie beaucoup des mots. Mer&e. Hot water. Yes, that's what they're gonna land. Water that is hot.

 

[Lovejac]

I voted NO.

I'm unsure if they can be completely honest, mainly meaning Cindy. While watching the FBI interview it was disturbing to see cindy relay the elaborate lies that casey had told her because, to me, it seemed like cindy actually believed them.

I think George could, if he was completely away from cindy and lee

 

[Rumpole]

I have posted elsewhere questions about CA and GA admitting to Greta that they had recently dug up a plant and moved it to other side of garden. Ostensibly so that they could move box of pool equipment away so that Caylee couldn't climb up and fall in pool.
The digging was done, but the box was still next to the pool.
The A's explanation made sense, but moving the plant did mask 2 potential areas where KC could have tried digging.
Can anybody pin point the date of the great plant relocation?
CA said, couple weeks ago. A bit vague, could have been just after Caylee "went missing"
If G & C did find signs of Caylee having been digging and covered it up intentionally, surely that is blatant Accessory After the fact or whatever?[/QUOTE]


Bold by me.
Well, monsieur air-cyool, I don't know the correct legal terminology for your transplanting scenario, but in layperson speak, 'hinky' comes to mind! :crazy: And that, along with a host of other little issues, I believe, will land the A's in some very chaud l'eau or is it l'eau chaud...oh, je ne sais pas, j'ai oublie beaucoup des mots. Mer&e. Hot water. Yes, that's what they're gonna land. Water that is hot.

Merci beaucoup!

il y a beaucoup d'éléphants dans le jardin!

I think that says it all. I am sure you can take it from there yourself.

But seriously, apart from the Greta interview I can not find a reference.

It looks like they found the pool ladder out of place and did some urgent digging just after Caylee vanished.

 

[SuziQ]

Great post....I totally agree. The A's had to align themselves with shady people because no one else would listen to their nonsense. And they were looking for people who would go along with their "Caylee is Alive" theory. Most intelligent people wouldn't go along with this, so they had no choice but to involve themselves with those who believed their theories or would pretend to believe their theories.

Whether it was by design or not, this is what I believe is what's happened.

 

[suspicious mind]

I voted no. It takes a conscience to tell the truth.

 

[SuziQ]

Ok, this is my first response, new to WS and am completely impressed with all of the posts and information.

And, now have to throw in my 2 cents. Why at this point would the A's tell the truth? Immunity or not? I have watched and read from day one and WOW what a family. The jail telephone visits with both GP's and LA really creep me out. I can't believe that KC didn't say something during the times she was out of jail. I believe the GP's at this point look at it like - Caylee is gone, now we need to get KC out of this mess, no matter what. I am having a very hard time with the GP's saying we won't talk or give info without immunity???? Since when do we get to pick and choose within our justice system - especially this type of case. I am still trying to wrap my brain around 1/8th of what is going on with this case, but, IMMUNITY - the vote is NO for me.

Great first post, Welcome to WS!

 

[CPP]

Agree. I really don't know if the Anthony's have committed any chargeable offense. If they have, and it's grave, I suppose we'll find out over time but the police should charge them with anything substantial and then deal if they feel like it. However, I don't think the police and state have ever really wanted to go after the Anthonys. Seems to me they've always been sympathetic to their position and if the Anthonys have done low-level obstruction, I don't see the police pushing that. They don't want to put these people in jail for being in the bind they're in...if they haven't done anything major. I'd go ahead and solicit their co-operation. If they wanted to give it, fine. If not, fine. They're around. They're not the defendents. You could always put them on the stand knowing they were a wildcard and let them either co-operate or obstruct or deny, just be ready for either way they went. They could be friendly or hostile, just prepare for both. If they told the truth, fine. If they became angry, confrontational and evasive, go with that as well. Everything they've said is on tape. If they lie in court, I'm pretty sure the tapes could come in to impeach their false testimony. The jury will get their number fast if they try to obstruct. My fear in cutting a deal would be that they aren't particularly trustworthy. I wouldn't necessarily want to prosecute them for something relatively minor but I wouldn't trust them to go through with the deal. Of course, if they wanted to come in and cop to Casey having spilled the beans to them about what actually happened and if having her confession to them would send her down the river without any doubt, it might be hard not to deal.

Hello Yolorado, and Happy New Year.

I don't believe there are degrees of obstruction. Obstruction / lying to LE in a homicide investigation doesn't strike me as low-level. If they lied to law enforcement to prevent KC's prosecution or the discovery of little Caylee, I can't imagine that to be a minor offense. Then again, I'm not familiar with Florida law. Also, at what point does obstruction turn into accessory after the fact, or aiding and abetting?? The Anthonys have shown themselves to be conniving, disingenuous and dishonest people, especially Cindy. I wish I could have faith that their consciences, love for Caylee and basis human decency would propel the As to open up to LE. But I guess I'm extremely jaded, I don't see it happening without an inducement of some kind, and would rather it not be immunity .

 

[BonKai]

I do not believe the GP's are capable of adopting the attitude 'its all about Caylee' when it concerns justice. So far 'its all about Casey' and protecting the family's image.

We tell our children at this age to tell the truth regardless of the consequences and I am sure the family has asked this of Caylee many times. Her family even when it involves the death of their own child wants the truth to be conditional of them not having to face the consequences of their actions. Yet, they have asked the same of Caylee many times.

The unconditional truth would have shown some token of love and respect for this poor child and would brought about some closure and forgiveness. It would have shown others, as they have asked Caylee to tell the truth and face the consequences ... they are willing to do the same for her.

In the end, Caylee has given so much more to her family (the truth) then what they are willing to give to her.

What do you think?

Would the GP's be totally candid and truthful if provided full immunity?

George = yes
Cindy = no

JMO

 

[PrintGal]

Even if they were to be granted immunity and stated that they would actually tell the truth this time, how would LE be assured that they were being truthful this time around? The arrogant posturing of their attorney regarding the immunity issue is disgusting and has undermined any goodwill his earlier actions and statements generated for his clients with me. (For what that is worth...)

It is my hope that this point is moot and that LE has enough evidence from the bag and the dump site and what has been removed from the house to make the case, in which case CA and GAs version of the truth will not be needed, and they can face the consequences of their dissembling and misleading.

As Sweetspyrit said above, the jailhouse tapes were really creepy and showed a very disordered family. I have posted previously that I believe they were trying to appease KC to get information because at that time they truly hoped that Caylee was recoverable. That is why they were telling her what she wanted to hear ("Hi, Gorgeous" and so on- yuck!) It reminded me of the Twilight Episode with Billy Mumy ("It's a Good Life") where everyone has to kow-tow to the child with the special powers or he'll 'wish them into the cornfield'.

But it is apparent that at some point they realized the awful truth and chose to circle the wagons to protect KC rather than deal with the situation head-on and make moral choices. If the concept of morality is too subjective for some, then please subsitute the 'correct legal choice under the judicial code of the United State and state of Florida.'

 

[passionflower]

IMO, I don't think the family knows how to tell the absolute truth.......they just don't.
My opinion is that they will still do ANYTHING to keep kc from prison. I think that LE/FBI have enough evidence and tapes to use against kc that they really do not need help from ca/ga/la so don't give them immunity. They did this all to themselves. Had plenty of time to be honest!! IMO