Motion to Compel Reciprocal Discovery - What is the Defense Trying to Hide??

[okiedokietoo]

That searcher was JJ and he was a part of Tes. He didn't change his mind about anything. He was totally confused about where Caylee was actually found. He was asking Le in the interview if Caylee was 40 to 50 feet in. He is way off on where they found her. She was only 19 feet in from the road. He talks about the blue cooler. I was studying his interview, and I believe that he was within a few feet of where Caylee was found. Certainly within eye shot. He is their proof that Caylee was put in those woods later. I call it substantial. Under cross, there are several of them that are going to have to admit under oath that they looked at that spot. IMO

But if you concede that he was confused about Caylee's location and by that possibly confused about his location and even if I agree that he was within a few feet of Caylee - unless he looked at every single square foot of that area, he could have overlooked Caylee - The area was full of trash. Did he know that he was supposed to be looking for a specific black trash bag?

 

[Just Jayla]

I think I had an epiphany because last week I would have gone WHAT! but now you tickle me. And I am not being sarcastic.
In another state with no Sunshine Laws, you are right we wouldn't know, we wouldn't have a clue as to what was going on but, I think, in Florida it applies to the prosecutor and defense, so we would have known about it if it had been turned over to the State imo

You bet your sweet hiney we'd know about it-The state is not about to trash this case by breaking the rules. Even if you are not a fan of the state in all of this, we must remember that they are elected officials-Costing Floridians this kind of money and then turning around and hiding things, not so good come election time.
I think the only thing the defense is hiding is that the people that they have spoken to are not going to be of much help to them. Didn't they already interview AH? Yeah, I'm thinking she was not going to be able to provide anything that would help KC....Geez, if they could just find one person that met this Zenaida, can't imagine why they haven't. Or maybe someone who knew the connection between RK and KC-Nah, nothing there either.
At this point, it would be a much more reserved move for the defense to proclaim that they will not counter the state at all-and they don't have to. Perhaps take the position that their client is so confident in the state's inability to pin this on her that she won't even dignify them with a response.

 

[kaRN]

Have we seen the defense team's discovery released yet??

What are they waiting for? (Aside from the obvious...there may be nothing to discover on their end)

I'm pretty sure they've discovered their client is stone cold guilty and there will be no aha moment in court.

 

[logicalgirl]

That searcher was JJ and he was a part of Tes. He didn't change his mind about anything. He was totally confused about where Caylee was actually found. He was asking Le in the interview if Caylee was 40 to 50 feet in. He is way off on where they found her. She was only 19 feet in from the road. He talks about the blue cooler. I was studying his interview, and I believe that he was within a few feet of where Caylee was found. Certainly within eye shot. He is their proof that Caylee was put in those woods later. I call it substantial. Under cross, there are several of them that are going to have to admit under oath that they looked at that spot. IMO

Which interview? His recanted testimony to the LE and the tape have not been released. And he clearly states although he did search with TES, he was not searching FOR TES, as a part of their group, as their representative when he was searching the area where Caylee was eventually found. He clearly states that. And documents and other searchers testify to the exact area being under water during the time he was close to the area.

 

[logicalgirl]

I'm pretty sure they've discovered their client is stone cold guilty and there will be no aha moment in court.

kaRN! I've missed you lately!:blowkiss: fellow Canuck!

 

[Sdavidson11]

That searcher was JJ and he was a part of Tes. He didn't change his mind about anything. He was totally confused about where Caylee was actually found. He was asking Le in the interview if Caylee was 40 to 50 feet in. He is way off on where they found her. She was only 19 feet in from the road. He talks about the blue cooler. I was studying his interview, and I believe that he was within a few feet of where Caylee was found. Certainly within eye shot. He is their proof that Caylee was put in those woods later. I call it substantial. Under cross, there are several of them that are going to have to admit under oath that they looked at that spot. IMO

I thought the blue cooler was closer to the school. Any how unless you have been in a Florida swamp there is no such thing as being within eye shot or to be sure they looked in that spot. General vicinity maybe and even then you could miss something that you know is there. I grew up in Florida and have spent quite a bit of time in swamps. Going swamp buggy riding, mudding, and there is a river and swampland behind my house. For example, my neighbors cat went missing it was a Siamese. We went in to search for it. It was light in color, we new exactly what we were looking for but could not find it. It was later found floating in our pond. The swamp trees are not like the woods up North. The pictures LE took do not do justice to the density of swamp and palmetto bushes. It is hard to describe but the swamp lacks distinction or definition of what is around you. In the bushes hides snakes, gators, raccoons, armadillos, squirrels, bobcats, eagles, falcons, owls and a variety of other creatures. You know they are there but the are disguised. I am not questioning your opinion only giving you facts based on my first hand knowledge because unless you have been here words really can't describe how easy it is for things to be right in front of you and not be seen by the naked eye.

 

[lauriej]

Originally Posted by notthatsmart [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5070059#post5070059"]

[/ame]
....... I was studying his interview, and I believe that he was within a few feet of where Caylee was found. Certainly within eye shot. He is their proof that Caylee was put in those woods later. I call it substantial. Under cross, there are several of them that are going to have to admit under oath that they looked at that spot. IMO

......there have been many searches over the years where the search teams have walked right PAST the person/body they were looking for. and then , practically stepped ON the body during their further search of the area.

.."Under cross, there are several of them that are going to have to admit under oath that they looked at that spot. IMO"

..that "spot" ?

..my point is------even if someone WAS within feet of the garbage bag prior to oct. 14th when kc was hauled off to jail------it doesn't matter.

..just b/c JJ, or others, didn't see something in "that spot" doesn't mean it wasn't there.

..thank god for technology---------the plant growth will truthfully tell the story of caylee's 'burial' site.

 

[butterfly1978]

Originally Posted by notthatsmart
....... I was studying his interview, and I believe that he was within a few feet of where Caylee was found. Certainly within eye shot. He is their proof that Caylee was put in those woods later. I call it substantial. Under cross, there are several of them that are going to have to admit under oath that they looked at that spot. IMO

......there have been many searches over the years where the search teams have walked right PAST the person/body they were looking for. and then , practically stepped ON the body during their further search of the area.

.."Under cross, there are several of them that are going to have to admit under oath that they looked at that spot. IMO"

..that "spot" ?

..my point is------even if someone WAS within feet of the garbage bag prior to oct. 14th when kc was hauled off to jail------it doesn't matter.

..just b/c JJ, or others, didn't see something in "that spot" doesn't mean it wasn't there.

..thank god for technology---------the plant growth will truthfully tell the story of caylee's 'burial' site.

You are correct, however I think the problem may be, how is it that so many searchers were within feet of her and never saw nor smelled her, but Kronk did three diffrent times, I think that may be the problem and what the defense will suggest.

I totally do not think Kronk had anything to do with this I'm just playing devil's advocate

 

[magic-cat]

They could have been standing right on top of her and not seen her. The entire area EXACTLY where she was found was underwater during each and every search, per each and every searcher interviewed. The blue cooler was not "within a couple of feet" of where Caylee's remains (the bags part anyway) were found. It was a substantial distance away...and not one single searcher has verified they searched that EXACT spot.

And if I recall correctly? It was the Laura Buchannon lady found by the defense who went off on her own searching in the Suburban area when she was assigned to Jay Blanchard Park...not Joe J...He WAS on Suburban with TES, but the remainder of, or most of the group was searching closer down by the school and he and a small group went the other way in the general area where Caylee was eventually unearthed by CSI agents crawling around on their hands and knees and excavating the entire area...Her little tiny bones were in the mud, on the ground for the most part, and would NOT have been visible underwater.

 

[LambChop]

And what was there for JJ to see. In September there was a lot of water and the remains were in the black bags. JJ was looking for a body in September not a black garbage bag (of which there were many in that area used as a dumping ground) so for defense to say people saw no body....well, of course they didn't unless they had x-ray eyes. Fact is she was there. I do not think this is a defense they will be able to run with. JMO

 

[Pensfan]

Even if they were standing feet from Caylee's body, there was not much left to her body for searchers to find . Maggots can consume up to 60% of a human body in 7 days. Bodies exposed to water decompose twice as fast as those left unburied on land.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/body-farm1.htm

 

[magic-cat]

Pg 12 of 52 of JJ's interview he references A cooler...he does not say a blue cooler at that point...:waitasec:

Pg 8 of 52 he says they did not even GO into the the deep woods. They searched ALONG Suburban drive...

Pg 27 of 52 he says "the pink baby blanket and uh the cooler" again no reference to the color of the cooler there.

Pg 29 of 52 he states (referring to the blanket, the cooler and the towels he had another members dog sniff) " they were literally maybe, I, I want to say 5 feet but five to ten feet from the road. I mean, they didn't go into..."

Pg 29 of 52 he discusses the fact that he does NOT believe the body was moved to that location AFTER the search.

Pg 30 of 52 he discusses the black bag that had the towels and the male shoes and that it was right next to the road. Then he talks about the dog smelling the cooler (again not referenced as blue) and the pink blanket.

Pg 32 of 52 he refers to the pink blanket and the cooler again (does not designate the color blue here either) and he says it was five feet from the road, that they literally did not go in more than five feet from the road.

Pg 32 of 52 he references that there was a "mound" and this was at an entryway into the wooded area and THAT is where the blanket and the cooler were found.

At no time does he ever call the cooler a BLUE cooler during this interview. Perhaps we know that info from other discovery...just wanted to clear up that Joe J. did not call it a BLUE cooler. A tiny detail, and perhaps inconsequential? But the facts are the facts.

If someone knows of a map of where the cooler and the blanket were found then we could eradicate this argument right there. Anyone?

 

[ZsaZsa]

Here is what Suburban Drive looked like on 4/9/10 .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uyBwsKqPuQ&feature=player_embedded#!

I can only imagine what it looked like before it was all cleared out. You could be on top of something and not see it.

 

[magic-cat]

ZsaZsa we must think just alike because I was off looking at pictures of how dense it actually WAS where Caylee was found. You could not see an inch into that...she could have been RIGHT THERE and they would not have seen her...add in water? Not a chance.:blushing:

 

[ZsaZsa]

I'm just surprised anyone would set foot in there, I certainly wouldn't...!
I don't have what it takes to search in a veritable Jungle. You have to admire the TES folks who will do that.

 

[Nore]

I thought the blue cooler was closer to the school. Any how unless you have been in a Florida swamp there is no such thing as being within eye shot or to be sure they looked in that spot. General vicinity maybe and even then you could miss something that you know is there. I grew up in Florida and have spent quite a bit of time in swamps. Going swamp buggy riding, mudding, and there is a river and swampland behind my house. For example, my neighbors cat went missing it was a Siamese. We went in to search for it. It was light in color, we new exactly what we were looking for but could not find it. It was later found floating in our pond. The swamp trees are not like the woods up North. The pictures LE took do not do justice to the density of swamp and palmetto bushes. It is hard to describe but the swamp lacks distinction or definition of what is around you. In the bushes hides snakes, gators, raccoons, armadillos, squirrels, bobcats, eagles, falcons, owls and a variety of other creatures. You know they are there but the are disguised. I am not questioning your opinion only giving you facts based on my first hand knowledge because unless you have been here words really can't describe how easy it is for things to be right in front of you and not be seen by the naked eye.

-----------------------
Hi SDavidson, I've been thinking about what you wrote.Someone should post some of the snaps from areas near where Caylee was found.I remember seeing them way back, the book episde etc..The overgrowth shows up so well. Someone who has n't seen that would never realize how dense the land is with growth.Broad daylight looks like night! T'd be happy to do this but "Dumbo"doesnt know how...Take care.
:innocent:

 

[RainyGirl]

I think they probably did turn over discovery and the state is afraid to release it. IMO

Are you serious?????

 

[AZlawyer]

Pg 12 of 52 of JJ's interview he references A cooler...he does not say a blue cooler at that point...:waitasec:

Pg 8 of 52 he says they did not even GO into the the deep woods. They searched ALONG Suburban drive...

Pg 27 of 52 he says "the pink baby blanket and uh the cooler" again no reference to the color of the cooler there.

Pg 29 of 52 he states (referring to the blanket, the cooler and the towels he had another members dog sniff) " they were literally maybe, I, I want to say 5 feet but five to ten feet from the road. I mean, they didn't go into..."

Pg 29 of 52 he discusses the fact that he does NOT believe the body was moved to that location AFTER the search.

Pg 30 of 52 he discusses the black bag that had the towels and the male shoes and that it was right next to the road. Then he talks about the dog smelling the cooler (again not referenced as blue) and the pink blanket.

Pg 32 of 52 he refers to the pink blanket and the cooler again (does not designate the color blue here either) and he says it was five feet from the road, that they literally did not go in more than five feet from the road.

Pg 32 of 52 he references that there was a "mound" and this was at an entryway into the wooded area and THAT is where the blanket and the cooler were found.

At no time does he ever call the cooler a BLUE cooler during this interview. Perhaps we know that info from other discovery...just wanted to clear up that Joe J. did not call it a BLUE cooler. A tiny detail, and perhaps inconsequential? But the facts are the facts.

If someone knows of a map of where the cooler and the blanket were found then we could eradicate this argument right there. Anyone?

Valhall went into great detail about this on her blog (includes JJ's map re: where the cooler and blanket were found):

http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2010/04/03/the-searchers-richard-creque-joseph-jordan-and-danny-ibison/

 

[USARDOG]

That searcher was JJ and he was a part of Tes. He didn't change his mind about anything. He was totally confused about where Caylee was actually found. He was asking Le in the interview if Caylee was 40 to 50 feet in. He is way off on where they found her. She was only 19 feet in from the road. He talks about the blue cooler. I was studying his interview, and I believe that he was within a few feet of where Caylee was found. Certainly within eye shot. He is their proof that Caylee was put in those woods later. I call it substantial. Under cross, there are several of them that are going to have to admit under oath that they looked at that spot. IMO

I also have spent a great deal of time in the rural areas down that way, and can tell you it would have been possible to be within inches, and still not see little Caylee's remains. If that is their proof, they are going to have a very difficult time.

 

[countzero]

I also have spent a great deal of time in the rural areas down that way, and can tell you it would have been possible to be within inches, and still not see little Caylee's remains. If that is their proof, they are going to have a very difficult time.

Again, I agree with ya. What some here are forgetting is the jury pool and those chosen to sit on the jury will be from Orlando and they know the Orlando area extensively as they live and work there full time.

They won't be judging what could or could not been seen as we have been.