CNN News 1/1/09 (Videos Of Show Included)

[SuziQ]

The video existing is now questionable... D Casey is on the record saying that the guy that claimed to have the video doesn't even work for him, and is now saying the video doesn't exist because he (dude that took the video) taped over it. D Casey admits going to that area to check it out... and his reasoning is logical, in my eyes. HE did take pictures and he did turn them over to the A's attorney.

http://www.myfoxorlando.com/myfox/p...n=3&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=1.1.1

But they were all supposed to be looking for a live Caylee. That was right around the time that DC had his presser where he announced that there were leads and he was close to finding her. IIRC, that's also when they insanely put that picture out of the little girl at the mall that looked nothing like Caylee. The latest information goes against what they were trying to get the public to believe.

What I want to know did DC really call Jim H and tell him about going to get Caylee's body?

 

[warbuckle]

Isn't continuing to let them look for her "alive" daughter when she knows where she put the body a continuation of her obstruction of justice crime?

No, he is not representing the As. Any info KC told him he would not be allowed to disclose to the As. So if the As did know the body was there because KC told them via letter then yes the As might possiblely be obstruction justice, but KC or JB are not.

 

[Jolynna]

I happen to be a lawyer and went to school in Florida, however, with that said my area of practice is NOT criminal law unless I am appointed by the court and have not choice.

So, if KC told JB where the body was then its priviledge info. He does not have a duty to reveal this information unless there is a crime in the process or a continuation of some type of crime. Since the murder already happened there is not current criminal activities taking place in which his client is apart of.

Also, it is a good thing someone else did find the body because this priviledge never goes away. Even if your client dies. There was a pretty famious case about this a while back. Can't remember the names, but there was a lady who told her attorney she was with a group of people who ran over a child. They freaked and hide the body. Her client I believe did serve time for the crime, but would never tell where the body was. Client died and Victims family wanted to know where the body was. Lawyer refused and it was a huge deal, but in the end. Lawyer was right. The rules of conduct do not stated the privilage ends with death.

More than you cared to know right?

By the way, for the record I am verified with Tricia!

If your client has confessed and told you where the body is would you go on national television and say your client is 100% innocent and Caylee is alive?

Baez did that the day before Caylee's skull was discovered.

 

[warbuckle]

If your client has confessed and told you where the body is would you go on national television and say your client is 100% innocent and Caylee is alive?

Baez did that the day before Caylee's skull was discovered.

Well, I personally would not do that if in fact I knew she was dead and my client did it.

 

[SuziQ]

I don't see it that way at all. I think the defense fells like they have been bullied by the state the entire time. Then JB had hired experts to look at the scene. I am guessing they would have wanted to see the untouched scene or at least look at it while the state was working it.

I would think he wanted to make sure the state processed everything correctly and have his experts there to make sure nothing in his clients best intrest was over looked.

You saw it once they released the scene, it was clean and looked nothing like the orginal crime scene. I wouldn't have gone their either. No point.

According to JB, DC was not working for him at the time. DC was working for the A's since October. So again, why was DC at a location a live Caylee would not be at, while at the same time telling the public and the A's he was chasing down solid leads as to where a live Caylee was?

 

[SuziQ]

Well, I personally would not do that if in fact I knew she was dead and my client did it.

Is that because it's not ethical? Or are there more serious ramifications? TIA.

 

[warbuckle]

According to JB, DC was not working for him at the time. DC was working for the A's since October. So again, why was DC at a location a live Caylee would not be at, while at the same time telling the public and the A's he was chasing down solid leads as to where a live Caylee was?

I don't think DC was the forescenic experts JB hired after he found out about the remains. I am not sure about your questions except perhaps he was hiring DC to investigate all the tips that came in on the tip line. So that he could ensure the police were following up on all the leads. That is the only way I can explain why he would be there if they were looking for a live Caylee.

 

[SuziQ]

Does anyone know when the hearing requesting a special master going to be held?

 

[absolut_alexis]

No, he is not representing the As. Any info KC told him he would not be allowed to disclose to the As. So if the As did know the body was there because KC told them via letter then yes the As might possiblely be obstruction justice, but KC or JB are not.

I mean KC's four obstruction of justice charges...wasn't she continuing those crimes by not indicating where the body was? It isn't her silence, it is her lies.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Does anyone know when the hearing requesting a special master going to be held?

Great question.

 

[SuziQ]

I don't think DC was the forescenic experts JB hired after he found out about the remains. I am not sure about your questions except perhaps he was hiring DC to investigate all the tips that came in on the tip line. So that he could ensure the police were following up on all the leads. That is the only way I can explain why he would be there if they were looking for a live Caylee.

Sorry, I missed what experts you were referring to. Yes, what concerns me is that JB said that DC no longer was working for him since October and began working for the A's. The pics he took were in November when he was no longer working for Baez.

 

[warbuckle]

Is that because it's not ethical? Or are there more serious ramifications? TIA.

Like I said if I knew for a fact that my client killed their daughter then it would be a mistruth to state otherwise. So I would think it would be both, unethical and OJ. But you would have to prove JB had a confession from KC which would be extremely hard to do.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I don't think DC was the forescenic experts JB hired after he found out about the remains. I am not sure about your questions except perhaps he was hiring DC to investigate all the tips that came in on the tip line. So that he could ensure the police were following up on all the leads. That is the only way I can explain why he would be there if they were looking for a live Caylee.

The problem is that at the time, JB had not bothered to pick up the documents he requested to be turned over to him which were the tips received by LE. He wouldn't have known about such a lead without those.

 

[amethyst221]

According to JB, DC was not working for him at the time. DC was working for the A's since October. So again, why was DC at a location a live Caylee would not be at, while at the same time telling the public and the A's he was chasing down solid leads as to where a live Caylee was?

Why would 2 guys show up at a place to take photos or film on the same day at the same time, when they weren't working together, or for the defense, to document the presence or absence of litter left behind by partying teens? What's the point? Why would the former defense PI tell the other guy that to film this junk or it's absence would be inappropriate? Supposedly, it wasn't known at the time to be Caylee's resting place. It seems nonsensical. They all need to shut up and stop inviting suspicion on themselves if they don't want it.

 

[warbuckle]

Sorry, I missed what experts you were referring to. Yes, what concerns me is that JB said that DC no longer was working for him since October and began working for the A's. The pics he took were in November when he was no longer working for Baez.

Well, if he wasn't working for JB and took the pictures in November then it would lead one to believe the As asked him to do this. Then you have to ask why would the As ask him to do this, unless again the As had the tips from the police and were doing an independent investigation or KC told them she put the body there and he was asked to video to show the body wasn't there.

As I writing that last part it just doesn't sound right. If the As knew the body was there, then if he in fact filmed the same site then you would see the bag. If the video is not same exact site then in my opinion its useless.

Hope I didn't make that confusing

 

[TxLady2]

First post by a former lurker.



That seems to suggest that the bag had not moved in a long time. If the hurricane and flooding moved the bag around - a long term indentation could not begin to form until the bag stopped moving. The same would be true for movement by animals or humans.

If one wants to speculate that the bag was placed there in (say) June or July and the indentation supports that - then they cannot also say that the bag was being moved around by whatever means. FWIW.

EXACTLY!!! I'm so glad that someone pointed this out! And if the bag had been in that same spot long enough to form an indentation in the ground, then it had to have something heavier in it than just a child's skull. It could not have been moving around if that is true.
I keep hearing that the bones were scattered over an entire acre. I doubt that the bones they found were all Caylee's... I'm sure they just searched that whole acre to try to gather as much as they could of the remains, and while some of her bones were scattered, some could still have been in the bag, but it still would require some weight to have formed that indentation Tim was talking about. I've seen a bag of garbage left out on the ground for a couple weeks... when we moved the bag, there was dead grass, etc. under that spot and there was a slight indentation of the ground. I don't know what Tim saw, but if it was a deep indentation then that bag was probably in that spot for several weeks, maybe months.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Why would 2 guys show up at a place to take photos or film on the same day at the same time, when they weren't working together, or for the defense, to document the presence or absence of litter left behind by partying teens? What's the point? Why would the former defense PI tell the other guy that to film this junk or it's absence would be inappropriate? Supposedly, it wasn't known at the time to be Caylee's resting place. It seems nonsensical. They all need to shut up and stop inviting suspicion on themselves if they don't want it.

Especially since HE was admittedly taking photos himself of the area.

 

[SuziQ]

Like I said if I knew for a fact that my client killed their daughter then it would be a mistruth to state otherwise. So I would think it would be both, unethical and OJ. But you would have to prove JB had a confession from KC which would be extremely hard to do.

Interesting. Maybe that's what Baez is worried about. Let's say DC got that info through Baez, would it be considered hearesay? Or would DC have to actually be in the same room as Baez and Casey?

Also, given what we know now. Do you think that Baez will go with the Nanny did it defense at trial? And will he need to show that the nanny was a real person by throwing a real person under the bus, like AH or RG? I remember Geragos never said anything more about the traveling van gypsies after his opening argument because he had no proof they were real.

 

[warbuckle]

The problem with this whole mess is you have LP saying he heard from someone else about this. So where is the tape. Let's see it. If it can't be produced then to me it kinda sounds like LP is trying to keep the sunsationalism going. I mean it has spurred gossip since Caylee was found. I am sure every time LP is on NG he is collecting a paycheck.

 

[SuziQ]

Well, if he wasn't working for JB and took the pictures in November then it would lead one to believe the As asked him to do this. Then you have to ask why would the As ask him to do this, unless again the As had the tips from the police and were doing an independent investigation or KC told them she put the body there and he was asked to video to show the body wasn't there.

As I writing that last part it just doesn't sound right. If the As knew the body was there, then if he in fact filmed the same site then you would see the bag. If the video is not same exact site then in my opinion its useless.

Hope I didn't make that confusing

Not at all. The list of motivation for being at the crime scene before it was a crime scene is endless depending on who knew what when. Was DC ripping off the A's? Was DC helping perpetuate reasonable doubt of the future jury pool?