Caylee Anthony General Discussion Thread #73

[SuziQ]

I notice that in that Mark F interview that is linked he also states at least twice that the Anthony's are very helpful and cooperative. But not too many people are running with that opinion.

I'm not running with it because LE states that all the time to get continued cooperation from witnesses. Then the next thing you know they swoop in and file charges against them. LE could be telling the truth, or they might be playing a game. Not unheard of at all.

 

[ketel0ne]

http://www.foxnews.com/video/index....ralObject=2999811&referralPlaylistId=playlist

This is the link to MF, he didn't say the 18th.

This is what YOU wrote. I just gave you the link where he DID say. End of story.

 

[Patty G]

Read that again, though. It is awkwardly worded but that is NOT what Mark is saying. He is saying the date has not been revealed previously but he and his source--which I am 99.999% SURE IS LE--feel that it is important to LEAK THE DATE of borrowing the shovel FOR THE TIMELINE. A totally made up date that MF pulled out of thin air and/or his own A@@ makes no sense at all. Sorry. MF doesn't use the word leak and it still has not been publicly confirmed by LE but they gave MF the go ahead to leak it to the public. It is clear--to me at least--that that is what Mark is saying.

I believe Mark's theory EVERYONE!!!!! He selected the 18th, which is fine.

This all started over Mark saying the day the shovel was borrowed as FACT and that is still not so.

I don't know who is a source as everyone is using a source to get their information.

 

[JBean]

I believe FACTS and it hasn't been disclosed that the neighbor remembered exactly what date the shovel was borrowed.

Mark clearly stated the "It hasn't been disclosed what day".

Mark gave a theory of the 18th, of which I believe!

I think we have seen a lot of this throughout the case. Statements are taken as fact or out of context and applied as the truth. Most often I see misunderstood statements restated differntly (or as those that read them understood them) and it has created confusion.

 

[TripleA]

Sometimes it is too much for elderly people to have tons of guests at once. Maybe it was just easier to have Cindy take little Caylee with her to the nursing home. I know that my grandmother loves to see the babies of the family. Casey could have been at home with Lee visiting their father George while Cindy and Caylee took a brief trip to the nursing home. I don't find that odd at all.

 

[wishingtree]

IIRC they took out a 50,000 (2nd mortgage)? in 2005 it came up in the bond hearing,to Cindy's surprise. In reference to whether or not they would be able to bail her out.

Thank you, I had missed that.

 

[JBean]

I'm not running with it because LE states that all the time to get continued cooperation from witnesses. Then the next thing you know they swoop in and file charges against them. LE could be telling the truth, or they might be playing a game. Not unheard of at all.

Mark is LE on this case? I thought he was just a talkinghead. Sorry I did not know he was an active investigator on the case. My bad.

 

[tttterri]

My thoughts exactly...WHY would they both ignore her repeated calls? Especially knowing she has Caylee with her...Right away I'd think "Oh My God, something happened to the baby!"

Sometime during these days if gm is honestly speaking, some of those calls should show her and casey with Answered calls instead of all being unanswered. Am I correct or not? soooo confusing! thanks.

 

[maur33]

I agree with Mark on his "theory" of the 18th!

I decided to get the video and watch the thing over again because I remembered hearing him say that june 18th was the day she borrowed the shovel.

What he actually says is that the date hasn't been disclosed but that "his source feels that it is crucial to the timeline as does he" and he then goes on the say that the date was june 18th. Anyway here's the video if anyone wants to see it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEbEbmG9DRs

 

[SuziQ]

I think we have seen a lot of this throughout the case. Statements are taken as fact or out of context and applied as the truth. Most often I see misunderstood statements restated differntly (or as those that read them understood them) and it has created confusion.

You are right, it does cause confusion.

 

[Patty G]

I think we have seen a lot of this throughout the case. Statements are taken as fact or out of context and applied as the truth. Most often I see misunderstood statements restated differntly (or as those that read them understood them) and it has created confusion.

It certainly has caused problems when things are not read correctly or assume something has another hidden meaning.

 

[Shutterfly]

I really held out hope that by some miracle of God that child would be home today...and not in a body bag. 5 pm...nothing...*sigh*
What's next....she's "still close" and "she'll be home by Christmas?" I am so sick of being strung along......

poor Caylee

 

[ketel0ne]

Mark is LE on this case? I thought he was just a talkinghead. Sorry I did not know he was an active investigator on the case. My bad.

He had a 30 minute meet and greet with OCSD.

 

[LindaK]

Another thought I've had that has been forming the last few days and I hadn’t seen addressed much is this--anyone else think that perhaps Casey is relieved (in a way) to be in jail?

Welcome! Like you I've been lurking quite a while and finally had to post LOL!!!
I think perhaps Casey might feel more comfortable in jail especially when she watches the news and realizes she may very well be the most hated woman in America right now. But....when she gets to the "real" jail...well, let me put it this way. Most women incarcerated have children of their own and would give anything to be with them. They won't be happy haveing someone like Casey around. She's in for some REALLY bad times.

 

[Patty G]

I decided to get the video and watch the thing over again because I remembered hearing him say that june 18th was the day she borrowed the shovel.

What he actually says is that the date hasn't been disclosed but that "his source feels that it is crucial to the timeline as does he" and he then goes on the say that the date was june 18th. Anyway here's the video if anyone wants to see it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEbEbmG9DRs

Exactly ... I said this maybe 20 times so far it's getting old!

 

[chrisg]

I believe Mark's theory EVERYONE!!!!! He selected the 18th, which is fine.

This all started over Mark saying the day the shovel was borrowed as FACT and that is still not so.

I don't know who is a source as everyone is using a source to get their information.

Mark Fuhrman is a former police officer. He did not select 6/18 as a theory. His sources ARE LE. These ARE the facts. Just b/c they're leaked does not make them any less true. Whoever wants to speculate about this case w/ far less information is more than welcome to do so but considering this site is 'webslueths' I don't get discounting someone who obviously has LE sources regarding the facts of this case.

 

[JBean]

It certainly has caused problems when things are not read correctly or assume something has another hidden meaning.

I have seen it over and over in this case. Moreover, it is partly what is causing the misperception that the Anthony's are liars.

 

[logic13]

New theory for the shovel :

It's a stretch.. but..

Maybe Casey borrowed the shovel NOT to bury Caylee, but rather to dig up some damning evidence. ( Scoop up blood in the dirt.. grass or dirt area where a body was laying )

She could have put that dirt in truck with body to remove from the scene ??

I know it is a stretch, but wasn't there dirt found in trunk ?? IIRC??

 

[SuziQ]

Mark is LE on this case? I thought he was just a talkinghead. Sorry I did not know he was an active investigator on the case. My bad.

I'm talking about Padilla and other LE statements that the Anthony's have been cooperative. And that's who Mark F referred to in the tape I believe. I should have made that more clear.

 

[JBean]

Mark Fuhrman is a former police officer. He did not select 6/18 as a theory. His sources ARE LE. These ARE the facts. Just b/c they're leaked does not make them any less true. Whoever wants to speculate about this case w/ far less information is more than welcome to do so but considering this site is 'webslueths' I don't get discounting someone who obviously has LE sources regarding the facts of this case.

Can you link to Mark's sources being LE? maybe it is someone at the phone company.