Focusing Solely on Cindy's Inconsistencies

[kaRN]

What exactly is the topic? I'm sorry, I need help.

CA without bashing but we're focused on inconsistancies and language patterns right now.

 

[Leila]

One Lost Girl, ITA. IMO, CA believes what she wants to believe and to her that is fact. Also, I do believe that she has moments of doubt, that is quickly swept under the carpet. For example, that whole long story that she gave to LE, then ended it by saying that is all wasn't true. But as I read that, I felt like she did believe it was true. Does that make sense?

I re-read the LKL interview and certain statements jumped out at me. I hope it's Ok that I posted them. If not, I'm sorry and please delete. Also, I cut Q and A's and just some answers specific to my point. Bolded by me

CA: I watched my daughter for nearly three years be the best mom. I mean she's loving and caring. And there's nobody that has come forward that said that Casey wasn't anything other than a loving mother. IMO, this is how she feels but not what is fact, she give zero examples of how CA was a loving mother.


LK: Did you ever ask her if she did it?

CA: Yes.

LK: And she says?

CA: No. And I believed her. That's it? She said no and CA believes her?IMO, her feelings would not let her believe that KC could do this, so leave it at no, learn no more. CA does not elaborate with the reasons for the no, just no, leave no room to doubt her feelings


CA: You know, when you are away from someone and something is ripped out of your -- your life so suddenly, I mean the thought of Caylee being with someone else -- I mean, not knowing where she's at. I mean, you know how panicked you get if you lose your car keys or your cell phone?

Imagine a child -- not having that child around. And, you know, weeks into it, not knowing where she was at and what had happened to her was devastating. And it was very hard. It was hard to get up in the morning and, you know, and go on with your day. And, yes, you get -- you get to a point where you feel like there's no hope.

LK: What stopped you?

CA: My faith. You know, I knew that's not the right -- it's not the right thing to do. I mean, you think about it. I mean I think anybody in a -- in a situation where something bad happens to you, you start feeling hopeless. But my faith and my friends.

LK: But none of it had anything to do with the thought that your daughter did it?

CA: No. In fact, at that time, I still -- you know, still believed and had hopes that Caylee was alive. This entire snipet is controdictory IMO, she felt that she had no hope, likely because she did believe KC did something horrific. That feeling was swept away and her feeling of hopelessness became hope and that was the feeling she decided to believe


CA: Yes. I see the love in Casey's eyes. Every single picture that you see of Caylee and Casey together, you can see the love in their eyes. Again, IMO this is how she feels. Again, not one example of that love, like she worked long hours and devoted all her free time to Caylee, she sacrificed. You get the idea.


LK: But she did act kind of weirdly, didn't she, at times?

No?

CA: You know, she's a -- she's a 20 -- she was a 22- year-old kid at the time. I mean she just turned 23 in March. But I don't know, you know, what weirdly means. I mean...

LK: Well, there have been reports that she was, you know, out partying and...

CA: That's not weird. I partied at 21 and 22 years old, too. IMO, here CA is controdicting herself again. She says she doesn't know what werdly means then justifies KC's behavior with the fact that she was 21/22. Her feeling that 21 year old's party outweighs the facts surrounding Caylee


CA: They made an arrest based on the fact that she lied about where she worked. That had nothing to do with Caylee. This statement is absolutely unbelieveable to me, but IMO she feels that this is the real reason for the arrest as absurd as that may be to me


LK: All right. The heart of -- the body is stuffed in a laundry bag. The skull is wrapped in duct tape.

Could you imagine your daughter would do that?

CA: No. And I don't... IMO, this speaks for itself.

From the interview..................my comments in blue

LK: Did you ever ask her if she did it?

CA: Yes.

LK: And she says?

CA: No. And I believed her.

And yet she knows that Casey lies about everything. I think Cindy CHOOSES to believe Casey when Casey says what Cindy wants to hear.

CA: Yes. I see the love in Casey's eyes. Every single picture that you see of Caylee and Casey together, you can see the love in their eyes.

In the pictures we've seen, Casey is smiling for the camera and acting the role of a loving mother, something sociopaths are good at doing - acting. What counts is how she acts when she's not in front of a camera. From all that we've seen and heard, Casey put her own interests ahead of Caylee's.

LK: But she did act kind of weirdly, didn't she, at times?

No?

CA: You know, she's a -- she's a 20 -- she was a 22- year-old kid at the time. I mean she just turned 23 in March. But I don't know, you know, what weirdly means. I mean...

LK: Well, there have been reports that she was, you know, out partying and...

CA: That's not weird. I partied at 21 and 22 years old, too.

Cindy at age 21 or 22 wasn't a mother with a child to take care of.

CA: They made an arrest based on the fact that she lied about where she worked. That had nothing to do with Caylee.

They made an arrest because Casey lied about the circumstances surrounding Caylee disappearance, not about lying where she worked. Casey was initially charged with child neglect, obstruction of justice, and lying to LE. Cindy chose not to acknowledge that LE determined that Casey's story about ZFG is a lie. Cindy believes that Caylee was kidnapped and killed by someone other than Casey, and the "nanny did it" fits her belief.

 

[Mare10]

Thanks so much Leila. ITA and that is what I was getting at. CA chooses everything she believes and her beliefs are from her feelings, not the facts placed before her. She make up her own facts from her feelings. Everything you have added is what I was thinking. Everyone of CA's "facts" needs to be looked at and made clear as to what is fact and what is fiction (feelings). She mentions eyes a couple of times. The love in KC's eyes and she also said something like, something in Caylee's eyes, yet sunglasses where quite the thing in there home. I have never seen so many sunglasses especially for a baby. Maybe the sunglasses hid what they were really feeling, you can't see the eyes. Sorry OT, but thanks again.:blowkiss:

 

[MidAtlanticNative]

I read on one of those body language interpretation sites that a change of tense is supposed to be indicative of deceit. No idea whether or not that's valid, but it's interesting.

Although I think the Anthonys are first class fibbers, the change in tense when recounting an event is not always indicative of lie. Just the other day I was telling someone about something dorky I did and I switched between past and present tense. Example: "I was so embarrassed! I'm walking down the stairs and ...". You get the idea. Anyway, FWIW...

 

[MissJames]

Exactly. IF, and this is one huge IF, CA had the numbers and gave them to LE within 48 hours of Caylee being reported missing, LE would have been able to verify immediately. Of course they couldn't since they didn't have these numbers. These zanny numbers would have been discussed during the LE/FBI interviews and asked of the A's where and when they received them, and if they have called these numbers previous to Caylee being reported missing. The A clan stated no one had ever talked with a zanny/nanny. :bang:

So, like you, I will be interested when and if LE releases these specific zanny numbers. I am betting that they already know who they belong to and will be a part of the trial evidence. I am more interested in seeing what has NOT be released than the carp lies that have been thrown out there.

Somewhere in my fuzzy brain I am remembering Cindy finding an address book in the kitchen that had numbers for Zanny [obviously made up].
I seem to recall CA being upset because in a report an officer wrote that he found the numbers in the car.CA gave it as an example of LE not getting their facts straight because SHE gave him the numbers.
Anyone else remember that?Did I dream it?

 

[Searchfortruth]

Chiquita I snipped this from your post above...

"my husband was a deputy sheriff in Ohio fer uh, nine years before I met him and he, you know is in it for another year and a half until we said no more, that's enough I've, I've I want to have a husband, a son for my, I mean a father for my son"

George was a Deputy for nine years before he met Cindy ?

 

[Searchfortruth]

Somewhere in my fuzzy brain I am remembering Cindy finding an address book in the kitchen that had numbers for Zanny [obviously made up].
I seem to recall CA being upset because in a report an officer wrote that he found the numbers in the car.CA gave it as an example of LE not getting their facts straight because SHE gave him the numbers.
Anyone else remember that?Did I dream it?

I remember it too Miss James, I just don't remember where it was said..I thought in one of the interviews, LE, but am not sure.

 

[Leila]

If there were any such numbers and they were given to LE, it will be interesting to see which friends of Casey's are under Zanny's name come trial time. Cindy had number's for Zanny and Zanny took Caylee, yet Cindy never called any of the numbers she had for Zanny. I can see the look on the jurors faces already...

The prosecution questioning Cindy (and George) on the witness stand at the trial, will be priceless!

 

[Mare10]

Somewhere in my fuzzy brain I am remembering Cindy finding an address book in the kitchen that had numbers for Zanny [obviously made up].
I seem to recall CA being upset because in a report an officer wrote that he found the numbers in the car.CA gave it as an example of LE not getting their facts straight because SHE gave him the numbers.
Anyone else remember that?Did I dream it?

If this is what you are looking for, it's in the CA Civil Case regarding ZFG. I will try to post a link, I really don't know how, but, I'll try. http://www.docstoc.com/docs/5345644/Casey-Anthony-Cindy-Anthony-deposition-in-the-ZFG-civil-case

That's not right I don't think, but if you google the transcripts for those depositions, you will find it.

 

[Mare10]

BTW, it's rough draft number 23.

 

[Pattymarie]

I am still not getting what we are doing on this thread? Are we trying to show that CA knew stuff all along and then lied to LE? I thought this was general knowledge?

 

[Mare10]

I am still not getting what we are doing on this thread? Are we trying to show that CA knew stuff all along and then lied to LE? I thought this was general knowledge?

I'm really not sure. My understanding is we are going to focus on CA to try to lean more about her and lean more about her inconsistency's. I do think that we are leading somewhere with all the wonderful input. I'm enjoying this thread, I am anxious to see where it all leads.

 

[JBean]

keep in mind this thread will be a source of frustration later.
In the future when you would like to discuss one of the topics on this thread, it will be difficult to locate and once you do, the thread will be loaded with other information that is OT and not very helpful.
During trial, you will want to be able to easily retrieve information during testimony. That is why we break discussion into topic specific threads and do not have general discussion threads.
I strongly recommend you do not bottle up several topics on one thread. If the topic is CA's inconsistencies, then make that the topic and I will amend the title.

The topic of Cindy is too broad and needs to be focused.

 

[mitzi]

The prosecution questioning Cindy (and George) on the witness stand at the trial, will be priceless!

I can't wait!...she said, rubbing her hands together in glee!

 

[Marina2]

keep in mind this thread will be a source of frustration later.
In the future when you would like to discuss one of the topics on this thread, it will be difficult to locate and once you do, the thread will be loaded with other information that is OT and not very helpful.
During trial, you will want to be able to easily retrieve information during testimony. That is why we break discussion into topic specific threads and do not have general discussion threads.
I strongly recommend you do not bottle up several topics on one thread. If the topic is CA's inconsistencies, then make that the topic and I will amend the title.

The topic of Cindy is too broad and needs to be focused.

Thanks JBean. Maybe you can do that with the Focusing on GA thread. There's a whole lot of everything in there. A good bit of it already has a dedicated thread.

 

[JBean]

Thanks JBean. Maybe you can do that with the Focusing on GA thread. There's a whole lot of everything in there. A good bit of it already has a dedicated thread.

That's the problem. then when a topic needs to be resurrected, which it will, it is buried in general discussion and it is a source of frustration to everyone. That is why a case gets its own forum, so we don't have to use one thread to discuss a broad topic.
The GA thread will end up like all the general discussion threads. Full of good information, but no way to use it productively in the future.

 

[NocturnalLady]

Although I think the Anthonys are first class fibbers, the change in tense when recounting an event is not always indicative of lie. Just the other day I was telling someone about something dorky thing I did and I switched between past and present tense. Example: "I was so embarrassed! I'm walking down the stairs and ...". You get the idea. Anyway, FWIW...

The reason experts give for thinking changing the tense is indicative of a lie is because it indicates that the person speaking is "living" the event/facts as they are telling them. The example you gave is an excellent illustration of this - you were re-living the event that caused the embarassment & drawing the audience into your (probably funny and self depricating) story by telling it "in real time".

As you say - change in tense is not an iron clad red flag saying lie. But it does indicate the brain working through an event "in real time". This could indicate a lie being made up on the spot or tuthful person who is an engaging story teller who wants to present a dramatic story. The difference here is that in situations where a person is being interrogated or interviewed by LE an innocent person usually answers questions simply and factually - sticking to the bare bones of the story even when questioned over and over again. A person lying will add in all sorts of details to make the story more convincing. Change of tense to the present is also a technique to make a story more engaging - the story teller wants to impress/convince/and even entertain the listener. At the very least, if the change in tense doesn't exactly point to a lie being told it almost certainly indicates a "spin" being put on the information.

 

[NocturnalLady]

The prosecution questioning Cindy (and George) on the witness stand at the trial, will be priceless!

I hope they keep it short and sweet. CA and GA are not the ones on trial and are not even accused of being an accessory to the crime so they don't need to be impeached by their lies. All the prosecution should try to get out of them are the bare facts of where they were and what they knew at relevant times. If the prosecution gets bogged down in trying to "prove" how much Cindy has lied they will only open a pandoras box IMHO. They will just confuse the jury and give Cindy a platform for her self-justifying blah blah blah.

 

[marla]

If there were any such numbers and they were given to LE, it will be interesting to see which friends of Casey's are under Zanny's name come trial time. Cindy had number's for Zanny and Zanny took Caylee, yet Cindy never called any of the numbers she had for Zanny. I can see the look on the jurors faces already...

:clap:

 

[metalcrystal]

I hope they keep it short and sweet. CA and GA are not the ones on trial and are not even accused of being an accessory to the crime so they don't need to be impeached by their lies. All the prosecution should try to get out of them are the bare facts of where they were and what they knew at relevant times. If the prosecution gets bogged down in trying to "prove" how much Cindy has lied they will only open a pandoras box IMHO. They will just confuse the jury and give Cindy a platform for her self-justifying blah blah blah.

I think it is important for the state to show the climate of lies and inconsistancies that surround her testimony, but they should be able to cut thru the BS real quick, John Morgan and Keith Mitnick did,and so did Linda Drane at the bond hearing. Only the media has allowed her to spin, and in a few minutes the state will undo any damage she has done when she is on the stand.