Dr. Phil w/George and Cindy Anthony Air Date 9/13 and 9/14 2011 Thead # 2

[sumbunny]

I have a feeling George's stealing earlier in the year, caused him to be more submissive to Cindys demands.
He was still a part of the family so long as he put up and shut up.

 

[MsMacGyver]

I believe Dr. Phil had all the information from the trial. He said in the opening of the first interview that he watched the trial as it sometimes facinated him, sometimes frustrated him. I think, as a former doctor, he knows that CA is denying the truth. If you force a person to come to the truth before their ready, it can do ALOT of damage. I don't believe CA will EVER admit the truth. She will die believing the felon was not capable of killing Caylee. For me, I don't care if she ever admits it, that's none of my business. My problem is Grandparents going on National TV asking for donations for a foundation for grandparents rights, when these two never even used their lawful rights as citizens to seek justice for their daughter stealing from them. If they had addressed the problem then, it's possible that Caylee would still be alive. Thats something we will never know but the fact that Dr. Phil is basically endorsing their foundation by donating to it may lead some to believe that this foundation is credible. They promised not to use Dr. Phils money to line their pockets, but they never said anything about other peoples money. The world is filled with good hearted people who will gladly hand over donations without investigating the foundation before hand. If they had tried to go through channels to protect Caylee ..if CA would have just once stood up for Caylee during the interviews, I might be able to understand their motives. Instead they let the felon run amuck, never taking numerous opportunities to check into anything this girl was up to. To me it appears their motive is future salaries for themselves. Just another platform for these two to address their own personal issues.
I agree , I believe what we are seeing is grieving interrupted on both CA & GA part. I can't imagine they had time with the "show" going on to really grieve properly. Where I respectively disagree is the performance put on by this family during the trial...JMO
I don't believe this family is evil and I do believe that they are not much different than any other dysfunctional family. I think it just boils down to the fact it was so highly publicized. Add to this the bizzarre comments made by alot of players in this game. Add to this the choices made to profit from this tragic case. We can guess that CA has been "in control" of alot of decisions made throughout and we can draw from her statements and the outcome of her decisions, she isn't someone who should be in control of anything. She is standing alone with the destruction of her choices obvious for all to see, still causing more damage everytime she opens her mouth.
Much like JB, she is a media addict and they don't know when to stop talking!

I love JA and the whole States gang, LE, but I have to admit..IMO..I think they thought it was a slam dunk which caused them to let down their guard. I believe they should have stalled the trial until after the holiday and flooded the DT with all the evidence they could get their hands on. They just might have underestimated the reaction of the jury to the felon and the OS effect on the jury.

 

[Solace]

I believe if you learn shame about your lack of abilities, and that you are useless and worthless,when you are very young you search out and remain in situations all your life that reinforce that belief because it is the only belief about yourself you know - so it feels in a very weird way - safe. And that's what Cindy gives George.

The same sort of way an abused child still loves their abuser.

Yep - right again Logical. And it takes character to change.

 

[sumbunny]

According to DrP's opening statements on the first show. The A's will not be withdrawing a salary from the foundation. It is going 100% to missing children and grandparents rights. *guffaw*
But, he also claimed, until the foundation is completely set up, the money is not yet in the account. No idea if you can set up a foundation, and put in the contract that no salaries will be withdrawn from 'said fund'

 

[Aedrys]

Logical Girl-

I'm sure I missed out on good company by not being here for the past 3 years, yourself included, but I'm otherwise glad I didn't follow this from the very beginning.

Given how I already felt at the verdict and have felt since, I can't imagine how infuriating, disgusting and disillusioning it would have been had I invested an iota of involvement more, much less 3 years' worth.

Oh My GOD, you have no idea. My world was shattered. I watched this from day one, and never DREAMED she would be acquitted. I don't think I will ever get as involved in a case ever again. I just can't take this all over again. Heck, I'm still here because I'm still dealing with three of years of this disgusting, immoral, greedy family, and as of the end of the trial, it was like they danced out the door with devil.

Be glad, so glad, you didn't follow this from day one. You are probably a lot saner than I am right now! :crazy:

But I will say, the very reason I haven't completely lost my mind is my friends I've made here! It's so nice to be able to commiserate together! I'd be in a looney bin without you all! Love ya and big hugs!

 

[logicalgirl]

Logical Girl-

I'm sure I missed out on good company by not being here for the past 3 years, yourself included, but I'm otherwise glad I didn't follow this from the very beginning.

Given how I already felt at the verdict and have felt since, I can't imagine how infuriating, disgusting and disillusioning it would have been had I invested an iota of involvement more, much less 3 years' worth.

Thank you Hope4More - I wish you had been here. You see before you many many broken hearts. And knowing the invested time and hope, helps to understand the very deep anger that will linger for a long time. Many posters just did not return after the verdict - posters who were deeply involved for all that time. And we still miss them but understand why they just can't bear to come back.

 

[krkrjx]

According to DrP's opening statements on the first show. The A's will not be withdrawing a salary from the foundation. It is going 100% to missing children and grandparents rights. *guffaw*
But, he also claimed, until the foundation is completely set up, the money is not yet in the account. No idea if you can set up a foundation, and put in the contract that no salaries will be withdrawn from 'said fund'

Yes, you can. No one is required to take a salary and in fact many people do work for causes they believe in without earning a dime from it. Only their expenses are reimbursed--such as for fundraising, office supplies, etc.

OTOH, money can be paid to the A's from the fund without labeling it a "salary." But giving it a different name does not change the fact that it is someone else's money going into their pockets--all because their devil spawn killed her daughter, their grandchild. I fail to see what "grandparents rights" they did not have that now requires them to set up this foundation. I really hope the state refuses to license this mega-fraud.

 

[Hope4More]

Logical Girl- one last thought about how our own lives color our perspectives on the Rorshat blot that is the Ant family. .

I remember an acquaintance I had in the "mommy and me" programs stage of my child's life. She recited a children's book to me about a mother and son, the son saying I'll go here and here and here and the mother always replying, and I'll go there and there and there to find you and love you.

Having a mother in name only, I said, how touching. That mother really loves her child. She, having a mother who she said suffocated her with "love" and who was extremely controlling, said- what an awful, scary mother, not allowing her child to have his own space, and who threatens him-- there is no place you can hide from me.

Perspective.

BTW, Something else about this acquaintance seems relevant as well.

I told her one day that she seemed like an amazing mom- and she did, to outward appearances. She took meticulous care of her 2 year old's diet, she took him to every mommy and me thing available, she bought every last good and right toy and book for her son, she painted an amazing mural on his bedroom wall.... all that.

Next moment she was confessing to me that putting on the show of being an amazing mom was effortless to her, that in order to emotionally "hide" from her mother, she had learned as a child how to put on whatever show was called for to deflect any prying or additional attention.

She added that gee, she felt bad about it, but that for months she has been torturing her 2 year old son... deliberately provoking him until he got upset and angry, then punishing him- including hitting him- for being upset.

That WILL make an otherwise could-have-been-normal child crazy.

 

[fifteen89]

Ya know, I'm just thinking back to the earlier Dr. Phil segments where he said "you never verified her employment". What parents verify their 22 year old daughters employment? I do not in any way want to stick up for Cindy, but what would have told her to try and verify Casey's employment? Casey was already showing her the nametag and fake emails.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

So glad the Dr. Phil crap is over and these lying opportunists can begin to fade away. Bets on how long it will be before Cindy craves attention again? She's living a pretty nice life for not having a job and the fillers, Botox, facials and colored contacts look really good. They did this interview for the money because they certainly didn't seem very forthcoming with anything truthful in telling "their story" - more like the same dance...where Cindy is the sympathetic mother in denial and George is the destroyed grandpa who appears more realistic...they have been creating this "story line" for a long time. I find them all very suspect in anything they say or do. Their phoney foundations should fail and American should forget them - but will the Ants let that happen? I think they are now addicted to celebrity. Watch for them in the future folks, they aren't going away sadly.

BBM: I agree.

Cindy's "looks" -- her "new" ? face make-up, contacts, clothing -- may look "good" on the outside ...

But ... on the INSIDE she is "pure evil" ....

And WHY in the hades Phil McGraw did NOT challenge Cindy to the point of "breaking her down" -- as well as George -- was a HUGE WASTE of 3 hours of air time !

MOO ...

 

[Solace]

BBM: I agree.

Cindy's "looks" -- her "new" ? face make-up, contacts, clothing -- may look "good" on the outside ...

But ... on the INSIDE she is "pure evil" ....

And WHY in the hades Phil McGraw did NOT challenge Cindy to the point of "breaking her down" -- as well as George -- was a HUGE WASTE of 3 hours of air time !

MOO ...

You are certainly entitled to you opinion. But where you get Cindy is "pure evil" I don't see it. She is in profound denial and she is protecting herself from being responsible for her grandchild's death. It is just too hard to face it. That is not evil it is denial. If she were pure evil, we would see a lot more death associated with her.

 

[MsMacGyver]

BBM -JMO but CA saying this is the equivalent of someone saying "Yes, it's fine to put the baby in the lion's cage, he's been declawed".

I was surprised to even hear he had asked this question. It's not up to CA, it's up to LA & M...If I were LA, I would have been ticked. Why does anyone assume she has any say on what they allow for their children? She did such a good job with the felon and Caylee?...:banghead:

 

[Solace]

Ya know, I'm just thinking back to the earlier Dr. Phil segments where he said "you never verified her employment". What parents verify their 22 year old daughters employment? I do not in any way want to stick up for Cindy, but what would have told her to try and verify Casey's employment? Casey was already showing her the nametag and fake emails.

She had no money; she was stealing at hte least 3 to 4 hundred a month and at the most over a 1000. That should have been a clue.

 

[chakti]

Any monies for administrative expenses will have to be itemized to show how every administrative dollar was spent. While they can take a "salary" as managers, there are guidelines in most states on how much that salary can be. Laws vary with states but I cannot see the a charity fund's officers being allowed to just take cash from the fund whenever they feel like it.

I manage a trust fund (not a charity but licensed by the state and approved by the IRS). This is extremely small potatoes compared to the fund the Anthonys are setting up. I am allowed a payment for my services in managing this trust, i.e., I pay bills that come in, make deposits, keep records for tax purposes, etc. I am required by law to prepare an annual accounting. All expenditures are broken down into categories. I was told by the attorney who set up the trust that I could pay myself $ per hour for number of hours per year. Some years are more work than other years and those years I had to spend more than the allocated hours to do the job. Each time that happens, I have to explain why I needed extra hours.

If their charity is set up for a specific "salary" for each of the officers, they can take that amount likely without question. If they want to take more, they will have some explaining to do. When setting up a charity, an administrative budget is set up. This and each officer's salary must be approved by the state (or whatever agency licenses the fund). How much explaining the A's might have to do in any given year will be up to whatever government agency will be monitoring their fund. Some agencies are more diligent than others, as are some states.

But, what is to stop them from grabbing the money and heading out of the U.S. ???????

 

[logicalgirl]

Logical Girl- one last thought about how our own lives color our perspectives on the Rorshat blot that is the Ant family. .

I remember an acquaintance I had in the "mommy and me" programs stage of my child's life. She recited a children's book to me about a mother and son, the son saying I'll go here and here and here and the mother always replying, and I'll go there and there and there to find you and love you.

Having a mother in name only, I said, how touching. That mother really loves her child. She, having a mother who she said suffocated her with "love" and who was extremely controlling, said- what an awful, scary mother, not allowing her child to have his own space, and who threatens him-- there is no place you can hide from me.

Perspective.

BTW, Something else about this acquaintance seems relevant as well.

I told her one day that she seemed like an amazing mom- and she did, to outward appearances. She took meticulous care of her 2 year old's diet, she took him to every mommy and me thing available, she bought every last good and right toy and book for her son, she painted an amazing mural on his bedroom wall.... all that.

Next moment she was confessing to me that putting on the show of being an amazing mom was effortless to her, that in order to emotionally "hide" from her mother, she had learned as a child how to put on whatever show was called for to deflect any prying or additional attention.

She added that gee, she felt bad about it, but that for months she has been torturing her 2 year old son... deliberately provoking him until he got upset and angry, then punishing him- including hitting him- for being upset.

That WILL make an otherwise could-have-been-normal child crazy.

Yes, thank you. A brilliant and extremely painful example of how our own experiences colour our perspectives.

Many posters are aware I grew up as a foster child. So I don't really understand the parent/child bond from the child's point of view, but would say I am "overly bonded" with my own children, which I constantly over work to control. So I rarely post from my own point of view with my "parent(s)" as I simply am detached and unfamiliar with that bond.

But in terms of grieving - let me give you two examples. Two "primary" people in my life died "recently". The first was a very close friend who battled cancer for three years. The doctors tried every resource available, she fought bravely, and accepted her death before she died peacefully with her friends by her side. The second death was the death of my younger sister who died suddenly and shockingly from a massive heart attack brought on by the acute stages of alcoholism. Alcoholism that she managed to hide successfully until the last year of her life.

Which loss do you think I have struggled with, fought against accepting and still mourn dreadfully?

 

[logicalgirl]

But, what is to stop them from grabbing the money and heading out of the U.S. ???????

The familiarity of media attention which I suspect they love and need more than money.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

I do think a panel from WS to sit down with Dr. Phil before he asked some of his questions would have benefitted the show. But then he may have asked these questions and they are on the cutting room floor. lol

:rocker: Love this idea ! Too bad Phil did not read here before the interview ...

:waitasec: Aha ... just had a thought ... :innocent: maybe Tricia and WS Radio could interview them ... Tricia and Kimster do great interviews, and I think they could "pull it off" !

Oh ... could you just imagine a WS Radio Interview with the Anthony's ? :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

:innocent: I guess I can only dream, right ? :innocent:

MOO ...

 

[oceanblueeyes]

One thing I've often pondered, especially in regards to any guilt Cindy may be feeling in regards to Caylee's death... She said that after returning home from the visit to her father in the nursing home, she and Caylee went swimming. Then Casey came home, but did not join them in the pool. I believe she said that she handed Caylee to Casey, who too her inside and put her in the bathtub... and then of course, came the loving moments on the couch, watching the videos (which I don't buy for a second...). What if what actually happened is that, when Casey showed up, Cindy and Caylee are indeed in the pool, and Cindy immediately starts in on Casey regarding the theft of the money from her grandfather's nursing home account... Being both furious and distracted, Cindy does indeed forget to take down the pool ladder that evening... I'm not saying that I think Caylee did drown in the swimming pool, but if this scenario is possible, I can see where Cindy would believe it was her fault... and I'm sure Casey did everything possible to make sure she felt that way!

I don't believe the ladder was left up for one second. Cindy had taken the ladder down each time for so long that it had become second nature to her.

If that were remotely true Baez would have had her supposed coworkers :innocent: on the witness stand backing up Cindy's story and none ever testified she told them that.

Another spun lie on Planet Cindy, imo.

IMO

 

[Hope4More]

Solace-

depends on one's definition of "evil." Mine is similiar to Scott Peck's, which he describes in People of the Lie, which I 've mentioned here before:

An evil person is one who chooses to inflict emotional harm on others, or even to destroy them emotionally, rather than to accept responsibility for one's own hollow self.

Look around Cindy. See any whole people?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

You are certainly entitled to you opinion. But where you get Cindy is "pure evil" I don't see it. She is in profound denial and she is protecting herself from being responsible for her grandchild's death. It is just too hard to face it. That is not evil it is denial. If she were pure evil, we would see a lot more death associated with her.

I don't think she is in denial at all. I think she wants to project the false notion that she is.

If this had just happened maybe a year or so ago then maybe denial but to have these bizarre theories after three plus years is not denial. It is purposefully done rather than saying publicly she knows her daughter killed Caylee.

imo