Casey's Diary Entry for June 21st & Missing Pages #1

[Steely Dan]

I just can't imagine JB letting KC on the stand for any reason.

If he does it would be a slam-dunk for an "inadequate counsel" appeal.

Hey! Maybe JB's gonna throw himself under the bus.

That would be must see TV!!!! :woohoo:

 

[LinasK]

I just can't imagine JB letting KC on the stand for any reason.

If he does it would be a slam-dunk for an "inadequate counsel" appeal.

Hey! Maybe JB's gonna throw himself under the bus.

So he's gonna fall on his own sword/hoisted by his own petard???

 

[chefmom]

I agree with you 100%. I am waiting and reserving judgement on this diary entry until I see more of it. Right now, I would have to toss it as not necessarily significant because of the '03 date written in the same ink. The entry is just too vague to make a call. But if behind it she has written more...then that could change things. But why not put those pages into evidence as well? Why just this page? Could LE be grasping at straws a bit? Possibly. I saw the heart stickers they found at the house...but frankly none of them match the one at the crime scene IMO. Not to say that having all those heart stickers around isn't significant in it's own right. It is. But I am not convinced that the "backing" they found matches the sticker found at the scene. I don't yet believe this is an absolute match.

I believe we are supposed to get another doc dump later this week. At least they are being released, supposedly, so we will see more very soon. Hopefully, these new docs will help answer some of the questions raised by the last dump. *Keeping fingers crossed*

 

[fortytwo]

So he's gonna fall on his own sword/hoisted by his own petard???

Oh goody.

A cliche contest.

 

[Macushla]

(bold above by me)

I would really, honestly like to agree with this. But I can't.

It could also mean that it's on a list we haven't seen yet.

Please prove me wrong. Find me the list that shows the piece of duct tape that was over Caylee's mouth.

Fortytwo: You won't find an OCSO list with the duct tape that was found over Caylee's mouth. The duct tape was removed at the ME's office - and the ME's office sent the duct tape off to the FBI Lab. Page 55 of the doc dump that contains all the FBI reports. They state Items from Medical Examiner's Office Q62 - Q64 Tape.

 

[TxRose]

I believe we are supposed to get another doc dump later this week. At least they are being released, supposedly, so we will see more very soon. Hopefully, these new docs will help answer some of the questions raised by the last dump. *Keeping fingers crossed*

Good. I certainly hope that they have more on this diary...because as it stands right now...I don't feel like it is enough to reach a conclusion. I would have to exclude it from consideration if I were on the jury right now.

Come on document dump!!!

 

[Tess]

She could've written this in 08. I've done the same thing...found an old notebook with blank pages left, sometimes I skip a few pages so there are just some plain blank pages inbetween whatever was in there earlier and sometimes I tear the pages out. There could've been pages that she tore out, maybe with things about Caylee and she decided to get rid of it like she did with all those pictures, I believe it was hundreds of Caylee that she deleted online.............so it was like Caylee never existed. Let's face it, if Cindy hadn't of found Casey over by Tony's we wouldn't even know there ever was a Caylee.....she would still be conducting her own "investigatioin"...........going on about her "la bella vita"............beautiful life.................

 

[fortytwo]

Fortytwo: You won't find an OCSO list with the duct tape that was found over Caylee's mouth. The duct tape was removed at the ME's office - and the ME's office sent the duct tape off to the FBI Lab. Page 55 of the doc dump that contains all the FBI reports. They state Items from Medical Examiner's Office Q62 - Q64 Tape.

Yes. I know.

That's the point I was trying to make. The Q62 -64 labels are FBI designations assigned after the OCSO submitted the evidence. We know that the FBI had the tape, but we also know that it wasn't included in any of the OCSO property reports that we have seen yet.

That's why I was stressing that just because we haven't seen something on a property report yet doesn't mean it hasn't been taken in as evidence.

 

[lin]

You are right that she won't be able to testify about it. She won't be put on the stand. Much of the entry is vague and she could be writing about anything....without her testimony it could not be proven that she was talking about her decision to murder her child. But if it can be shown (with more evidence) that it was written in 2008 - some of the statements are damning in and of themselves. The fact that she could possibly say "this is the happiest I have ever been" immediately after her child has disappeared would be shocking to say the least.

Exactly. If this is from 2008 and the state can prove it, it can be submitted to the jury to show state of mind and let them draw whatever conclusions they will from it.

 

[ecs5298]

Yes. I know.

That's the point I was trying to make. The Q62 -64 labels are FBI designations assigned after the OCSO submitted the evidence. We know that the FBI had the tape, but we also know that it wasn't included in any of the OCSO property reports that we have seen yet.

That's why I was stressing that just because we haven't seen something on a property report yet doesn't mean it hasn't been taken in as evidence.

You missed Mac's point. The tape across her mouth was technically not recovered or inventoried by OCSO. Since it was attached to the remains, it was the responsibility of the Medical Examiner's office to document it, preserve it and send it out for forensic testing at the FBI labs in Quantico. Of course this will be rolled into the investigation but you will not see it on an OCSO property form since it was the ME's office that had the tape.

 

[TxRose]

Exactly. If this is from 2008 and the state can prove it, it can be submitted to the jury to show state of mind and let them draw whatever conclusions they will from it.

Precisely. It is not likely to be presented as some sort of confession....or proof she killed Caylee. It would be shown to demonstrate her state of mind. That she was not distraught or fearful over the disappearance of her daughter - but rather was having the time of her life....AND SHE HOPED IT CONTINUED. Now how do you write that when your daughter has just been kidnapped?

But we still need to see if they can prove it was written in 2008 and not 2003 - because I still believe that is what the defense will argue if it is presented.

 

[fortytwo]

You missed Mac's point. The tape across her mouth was technically not recovered or inventoried by OCSO. Since it was attached to the remains, it was the responsibility of the Medical Examiner's office to document it, preserve it and send it out for forensic testing at the FBI labs in Quantico. Of course this will be rolled into the investigation but you will not see it on an OCSO property form since it was the ME's office that had the tape.

I don't think so.

I think that there were probably one or more "Tag #'s" assigned to the things that went to the M.E. even before they left the site. Maybe some preliminary "Item #'s" with more being developed as the material was being analyzed by the M.E.

I'm nearly certain that these designations would have been assigned before anything was transferred from the custody of the OCSO to the custody of the FBI. Thus there would have been a property form. From the OCSO.

Reading the chain of custody and examination reports of the FBI makes it clear that they assigned new labels as they received the evidence. They state as much in simple language. OCSO item Q-76 "gas can and duct tape" became FBI item Q-65 "gas can" and FBI item Q-66 "duct tape".

It's not too much of a reach from the number sequencing to assume that Q62-64 are also new FBI numbers, and as I said above, a near certainty that there were OCSO #'s before the new FBI ones.

I believe that there's one or more property forms we haven't seen yet.

ETA:
Just because something went to the M.E.'s office doesn't mean it left the custody of the OCSO. As long as an officer went with it I believe it's still in their custody. IIRC, and I'm busy cooking so I can't go look right now, the docs we read suggests that an officer was present during the M.E. review.

 

[Djane]

I don't think you should be convinced it's a recent writing. We don't have enough evidence to show that, imo. However, posters have certainly posted persuasively and logically enough for me to keep an open mind to it; to not just assume it is 2003 and the end of the matter.

Thanks for the welcome!
I really don't feel there is enough evidence either, however, JB was just on the TV saying they can absolutely prove that it was written in 03. LOL, whatever JB!

 

[ecs5298]

ETA:
Just because something went to the M.E.'s office doesn't mean it left the custody of the OCSO. As long as an officer went with it I believe it's still in their custody. IIRC, and I'm busy cooking so I can't go look right now, the docs we read suggests that an officer was present during the M.E. review.

While there may be documents that we haven't seen I still don't think the diary will amount to much.

Regarding the last part that you ETA: I'm going to have to correct you on that. The ME's office is soley responsible for the collection, analysis and disposition of the remains and anything attached to the remains. The evidence they collect may be analyzed by the same sources as the sheriffs department but it is submitted to the FBI by the ME's office and the results are submitted to the SA's office from the ME's office

 

[JaneInOz]

Thanks for the welcome!
I really don't feel there is enough evidence either, however, JB was just on the TV saying they can absolutely prove that it was written in 03. LOL, whatever JB!

Why do you say that ?

He could easily have the evidence

 

[fortytwo]

While there may be documents that we haven't seen I still don't think the diary will amount to much.

Regarding the last part that you ETA: I'm going to have to correct you on that. The ME's office is soley responsible for the collection, analysis and disposition of the remains and anything attached to the remains. The evidence they collect may be analyzed by the same sources as the sheriffs department but it is submitted to the FBI by the ME's office and the results are submitted to the SA's office from the ME's office

I agree about the diary. It's great theater, but would be tough in court, I think.

I'll certainly defer to your knowledge of procedure. I'm convinced, though, that there are additional evidence reports out there.

I may be having a senior moment here, so be patient with me, but I think my point remains the same whether the chain of custody report comes from OCSO or the M.E.s office. Something is tracking custody. That tracking would be part of discovery, and whatever is being tracked will be labeled with some sort of designation by the State before it gets one from the FBI.

Did that make sense?

 

[ecs5298]

I agree about the diary. It's great theater, but would be tough in court, I think.

I'll certainly defer to your knowledge of procedure. I'm convinced, though, that there are additional evidence reports out there.

I may be having a senior moment here, so be patient with me, but I think my point remains the same whether the chain of custody report comes from OCSO or the M.E.s office. Something is tracking custody. That tracking would be part of discovery, and whatever is being tracked will be labeled with some sort of designation by the State before it gets one from the FBI.

Did that make sense?

Absolutely correct. There are probably evidence reports that we won't ever see until the trial such as fingerprint data on the duct tape, plastic bags, chemical analysis of the Gatoraide bottle, etc. The SA and defense can ask that certain items be excluded from the Sunshine Law. That's why we may never see the "smoking gun" evidence.

 

[Djane]

Why do you say that ?

He could easily have the evidence

I apologize, I should have elaborated. It was the reasoning he gave...he said because the date says '03 and the cell phone pings show KC being nowhere near the A residence on June 21, 2008. I don't think that "absolutely" proves anything, as he would like us to believe. JMO

 

[fortytwo]

Absolutely correct. There are probably evidence reports that we won't ever see until the trial such as fingerprint data on the duct tape, plastic bags, chemical analysis of the Gatoraide bottle, etc. The SA and defense can ask that certain items be excluded from the Sunshine Law. That's why we may never see the "smoking gun" evidence.

What records would we be expecting to see in the event of such requests. At least the record of such requests being made? Would the request itself be in camera?

 

[JaneInOz]

I apologize, I should have elaborated. It was the reasoning he gave...he said because the date says '03 and the cell phone pings show KC being nowhere near the A residence on June 21, 2008. I don't think that "absolutely" proves anything, as he would like us to believe. JMO

WEll I agree that is a Silly reason !

That doesnt prove anything one way or tother !