Is there more?

[impatientredhead]

I have always believed that JCP is significant. There is a huge reason CA did not want to show LE that.

http://www4.jcpenney.com/jcp/X6.asp...ize=15&CmCatId=searchresults&Search1Prod=True

 

[Short_Stuff]

I dont think LE has any more evidence than we know. (but I hope they do)

 

[LI_Mom]

Do you think Cindy is so stupid that she wouldn't realize that LE would subpeno JCP for a copy of the receipt? She didn't hand it over, so what? She didn't stymie LE and she knew she wasn't going to stymie them.

What does she gain by making LE's job harder?

Her actions here are a major lose-lose for Casey but more importantly for CAYLEE.

 

[LI_Mom]

http://www4.jcpenney.com/jcp/X6.asp...ize=15&CmCatId=searchresults&Search1Prod=True

Or.....

http://www4.jcpenney.com/jcp/Search...Department.aspx&S2Filter=FN21|$20.00+-+$29.99

 

[JaJo]

I have always believed that JCP is significant. There is a huge reason CA did not want to show LE that.

I think it's significant, too, because how will KC give an account for stealing her mother's charge card after stating in her written police report:

I have lied and stolen from friends & family to do whatever I could by any means to find my daughter. I avoided calling police or even my own family out of fear.

Makes you wonder what she found at JCP that helped in finding her daughter, huh? LOL

Edited to ask when it was she stole from her grandfather??? I've not read about that, yet, or how much she stole from him. Anyone know where I can find this info. I'm sure, though, she didn't steal from him after Caylee was "kidnapped" but before.

 

[DotsEyes]

And why did the FBI conclude that the tests they did on the pizza did not yield any maggots if maggots were not somehow involved in their investigation? Why would they even bring up the fact that the pizza did not grow maggots if there were no maggots being tested?

Magic-Cat - I didn't put 2 and 2 together on that one! You are 100% correct. There is a reason that the body farm mentioned the no maggot status of the pizza. LE has maggots from the trunk and/or bag! This could be the "smoking gun" - DNA filled maggots.

 

[kgeaux]

What does she gain by making LE's job harder?

Her actions here are a major lose-lose for Casey but more importantly for CAYLEE.

Of course, we're assuming the receipt has pertinent info, and it's highly possible that it doesn't.

Let me explain my thought process to you:

As a parent, Cindy is not obligated to turn over evidence that could be used against her child without a warrent for that evidence. It takes five minutes to get a judge to sign a warrent. LE gets the receipt, Cindy gets to sleep at night knowing that she did not put a nail in Casey's coffin, she also preserves her relationship with Casey on the off chance that Casey ever decides to 'fess up. And all it did was take a few minutes longer!

I'm a mom. I can see myself telling LE, could you go get a search warrent for this? ESPECIALLY in a state with the death warrent.

Caylee is gone. Cindy probably knows deep in her heart that Caylee isn't coming home, ever again. Cindy may hate what Casey has done, but I don't think Cindy will ever hate CASEY. Love for a child is probably the most powerful force on earth. I just tried to put myself in Cindy's shoes, and the above is what I came up with.

 

[JaJo]

Of course, we're assuming the receipt has pertinent info, and it's highly possible that it doesn't.

Let me explain my thought process to you:

As a parent, Cindy is not obligated to turn over evidence that could be used against her child without a warrent for that evidence. It takes five minutes to get a judge to sign a warrent. LE gets the receipt, Cindy gets to sleep at night knowing that she did not put a nail in Casey's coffin, she also preserves her relationship with Casey on the off chance that Casey ever decides to 'fess up. And all it did was take a few minutes longer!

I'm a mom. I can see myself telling LE, could you go get a search warrent for this? ESPECIALLY in a state with the death warrent.

Caylee is gone. Cindy probably knows deep in her heart that Caylee isn't coming home, ever again. Cindy may hate what Casey has done, but I don't think Cindy will ever hate CASEY. Love for a child is probably the most powerful force on earth. I just tried to put myself in Cindy's shoes, and the above is what I came up with.

I think CA and GA have fallen for the cockamamie kidnap story KC has built around her reasons for lying and stealing just so they have a shred of hope to hold on to. I don't think they can even conceive in their minds that their own daughter could do something so horrid as kill her own child. My heart truly goes out to them.

 

[impatientredhead]

And why did the FBI conclude that the tests they did on the pizza did not yield any maggots if maggots were not somehow involved in their investigation? Why would they even bring up the fact that the pizza did not grow maggots if there were no maggots being tested?

Magic-Cat - I didn't put 2 and 2 together on that one! You are 100% correct. There is a reason that the body farm mentioned the no maggot status of the pizza. LE has maggots from the trunk and/or bag! This could be the "smoking gun" - DNA filled maggots.

I just pulled up the forensic reports, it specifically says that previous reports of a decomposing pizza were false, a control sample included a slice of pizza even though there was no pizza found in the car, it then says it is interesting to note that no maggots were found on the (control sample) of decomposed pizza.

To me that sounds like they are taking Cindy's theory about the source of the smell and just trashing it. A. there was no pizza found B. decomposed pizza does not equal maggots.

 

[DotsEyes]

kgeaux - excellent observation of behavior. This makes perfect sense to me.

 

[DotsEyes]

Rest assured there is more than we know to this case.

Many of the interviews I read were obviously follow-up reports.

When is this trial?

 

[CentralFLMama]

I want to say January 5 but I am not 100% sure on that.

 

[mhazelton]

I thought this may help to explain some things. These are he rules that the prosecution has to abide by concerning Discovery.

<SNIP>

RULE 3.220. DISCOVERY​

(a) Notice of Discovery. After the filing of the charging document, a defendant may elect to participate in the discovery process provided by these rules, including the taking of discovery depositions, by filing with the court and serving on the prosecuting attorney a “Notice of Discovery” which shall bind both the prosecution and defendant to all discovery procedures contained in these rules. Participation by a defendant in the discovery process, including the taking of any deposition by a defendant or the filing of a public records request under chapter 119, Florida Statutes,for law enforcement records relating to the defendant’s pending prosecution, which are nonexempt as a result of a codefendant’s participation in discovery, shall be an election to participate in discovery and triggers a reciprocal discovery obligation for the defendant. If any defendant knowingly or purposely shares in discovery obtained by a codefendant, the defendant shall be deemed to have elected to participate in discovery.

(b) Prosecutor’s Discovery Obligation.

(1) Within 15 days after service of the Notice of Discovery, the prosecutor shall serve a written Discovery Exhibit which shall disclose to the defendant and permit the defendant to inspect, copy, test, and photograph the
following information and material within the state’s possession or control:

(A) a list of the names and addresses of all persons known to the prosecutor to have information that may be relevant to any offense charged or any defense thereto, or to any similar fact evidence to be presented at trial under
section 90.404(2), Florida Statutes. The names and addresses of persons listed shall be clearly designated in the following categories:

(i) Category A. These witnesses shall include (1) eye witnesses, (2) alibi witnesses and rebuttal to alibi witnesses, (3) witnesses who were present when a recorded or unrecorded statement was taken from or made by a
defendant or codefendant, which shall be separately identified within this category, (4) investigating officers, (5) witnesses known by the prosecutor to have any material information that tends to negate the guilt of the defendant as to any offense charged, (6) child hearsay witnesses, and (7) expert witnesses who have not provided a written report and a curriculum vitae or who are going to testify to test results or give opinions that will have to meet the test set forth in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).

(ii) Category B. All witnesses not listed in either Category A or Category C.

(iii) Category C. All witnesses who performed only ministerial functions or whom the prosecutor does not intend to call at trial and whose involvement with and knowledge of the case is fully set out in a police report or
other statement furnished to the defense;

(B) the statement of any person whose name is furnished in compliance with the preceding subdivision. The term “statement” as used herein includes a written statement made by the person and signed or otherwise adopted or
approved by the person and also includes any statement of any kind or manner made by the person and written or recorded or summarized in any writing or recording. The term “statement” is specifically intended to include all police and investigative reports of any kind prepared for or in connection with the case, but shall not include the notes from which those reports are compiled;

(C) any written or recorded statements and the substance of any oral statements made by the defendant, including a copy of any statements contained in police reports or report summaries, together with the name and
address of each witness to the statements;

(D) any written or recorded statements and the substance of any oral statements made by a codefendant if the trial is to be a joint one;

(E) those portions of recorded grand jury minutes that contain testimony of the defendant;

(F) any tangible papers or objects that were obtained from or belonged to the defendant;

(G) whether the state has any material or information that has been provided by a confidential informant;

(H) whether there has been any electronic surveillance, including wiretapping, of the premises of the defendant or of conversations to which the defendant was a party and any documents relating thereto;

(I) whether there has been any search or seizure and any documents relating thereto;

(J) reports or statements of experts made in connection with the particular case, including results of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests, experiments, or comparisons; and

(K) any tangible papers or objects that the prosecuting attorney intends to use in the hearing or trial and that were not obtained from or that did not belong to the defendant.

(2) If the court determines, in camera, that any police or investigative report contains irrelevant, sensitive information or information interrelated with other crimes or criminal activities and the disclosure of the contents of the police report may seriously impair law enforcement or jeopardize the investigation of those other crimes or activities, the court may prohibit or partially restrict the disclosure.

(3) The court may prohibit the state from introducing into evidence any of the foregoing material not disclosed, so as to secure and maintain fairness in the just determination of the cause.

(4) As soon as practicable after the filing of the charging document the prosecutor shall disclose to the defendant any material information within the state’s possession or control that tends to negate the guilt of the defendant as to any offense charged, regardless of whether the defendant has incurred reciprocal discovery obligations.
<SNIP>

 

[Macushla]

Someone asked this earlier and I didn't see an answer. I just read the discovery rules post, but didn't see an answer there either. Do we know whether the Freedom of Information act or Florida's Sunshine Law pertains to pre trial discovery? I would think not because it would play havoc with both the prosecution's case and with the defense's case if all the info they had was splashed across the TV, newspapers, Internet, etc. before a trial started, but am not sure. Anyone have any info on this?

 

[Pink Panther]

Someone asked this earlier and I didn't see an answer. I just read the discovery rules post, but didn't see an answer there either. Do we know whether the Freedom of Information act or Florida's Sunshine Law pertains to pre trial discovery? I would think not because it would play havoc with both the prosecution's case and with the defense's case if all the info they had was splashed across the TV, newspapers, Internet, etc. before a trial started, but am not sure. Anyone have any info on this?

I am really curious about this as well! How much and what information is released to the public???

 

[Chilly Willy]

There is more, but I don't think there's anything jaw-dropping. We don't have the analysis of the stain in the trunk, for one thing.

The JCP receipt is much ado about nothing, IMO. Casey disposed of Caylee's body long before she shopped at JCP on the 27th.

 

[Pink Panther]

There is more, but I don't think there's anything jaw-dropping. We don't have the analysis of the stain in the trunk, for one thing.

The JCP receipt is much ado about nothing, IMO. Casey disposed of Caylee's body long before she shopped at JCP on the 27th.

What did KC and Tony talk about on the night between the 15th and the 16th? What did they text each other? I think that that information could be quite interesting. Also, we're still missing some forensics...The stain, the other items that were in the car, the bag, maybe some maggot juice (I am hoping)...

I tend to agree with you on the JCP receipt. Unfortunately, I don't think that there is much there but it might just turn around and surprise us! I also tend to think that KC had disposed of Caylee by then. I believe that she was wherever KC placed her by the 20th (no later). But, I guess she could have gone back to place something with her?

 

[passionflower]

My thought is that we really know little.......LE keeping allot secret til trial.........

 

[impatientredhead]

I am really curious about this as well! How much and what information is released to the public???

Florida has ridiculously liberal laws about public info, but from what I could find unless there is a gag order issued, which the prosecution has asked for at this time, documents will continue to be released as they are given to JB. They can exclude individual pieces from public dispersement if it would harm an ongoing investigation, say they thought she had an accomplice and they are being watched that info would not be released.

Witness statements can be excluded if they feel the witness would be harassed or intimidated during the wait for trial (Annie, Tony, and a couple of others they have withheld). The basic summation I found said that if the arrested person, or the counsel acting on their behalf, received the document it was public record. There has to be a gag order on the horizon?

That is what I came up with from reading the sections related to the sunshine law. Hopefully a legal eagle will chime in with a specific section that covers discovery specifically.

 

[Jadestar]

http://www4.jcpenney.com/jcp/X6.asp...ize=15&CmCatId=searchresults&Search1Prod=True[/QUOTE

Creepy, but possible. Maybe she saw it online and then called the local JCP to see if they had it in stock?