New Spokes Person For Anthonys???

[fay]

They are trying too hard to entrap the LE into investigating sightings, such as this one at the Mall. They know the sighting is not credible but they are trying to gather public opinion against LE by making a big deal about LE not investigating.

Why? It is vital for KC's Defense for JB to be able to say that Caylee being alive is credible and will be found soon. How? Because LE are currently investigating Caylee sightings and they would not be doing that if there wasn't a chance Caylee is alive = Reasonable Doubt.

'A' Family supporters are leaving in droves because this is stepping over the line and risking obstruction of justice.

The LE Trap -- to bait them into investigating Caylee look-alikes and if not, make them look really bad.

That is a very good theory, I never thought of that. If that is what they are doing then it has nothing to do with finding Caylee they are working on Caseys defense. :furious:
They are really sick people and shallow and sneaky and .......
I just can't believe this.

 

[RR0004]

They are trying too hard to entrap the LE into investigating sightings, such as this one at the Mall. They know the sighting is not credible but they are trying to gather public opinion against LE by making a big deal about LE not investigating.

Why? It is vital for KC's Defense for JB to be able to say that Caylee being alive is credible and will be found soon. How? Because LE are currently investigating Caylee sightings and they would not be doing that if there wasn't a chance Caylee is alive = Reasonable Doubt.

'A' Family supporters are leaving in droves because this is stepping over the line and risking obstruction of justice.

The LE Trap -- to bait them into investigating Caylee look-alikes and if not, make them look really bad.

Ya know they could always cut to the chase and ask Casey where Caylee is at.

And shame on the As for not being able to figure out the code by now. They've had 4 months. I mean, it is THEIR daughter. Who would know her better?

 

[fay]

Ya know they could always cut to the chase and ask Casey where Caylee is at.

And shame on the As for not being able to figure out the code by now. They've had 4 months. I mean, it is THEIR daughter. Who would know her better?

Did I miss something? What code are you talking about?

 

[cyberborg]

Ya know they could always cut to the chase and ask Casey where Caylee is at.

And shame on the As for not being able to figure out the code by now. They've had 4 months. I mean, it is THEIR daughter. Who would know her better?

ITA. That's my always 'final answer' - Ask KC!!!!!!!

It is just a distraction to chase sightings, you need to start at the source and that's KC. That should be/is LE's position, when KC provides reliable verifiable leads we will investigate. Not one day before.

MN Quote, "I believe that the singular person out of the 6 billion people in the world who holds the key to finding Caylee is her mother, Casey Anthony."

http://blogs.discovery.com/criminal_report/2008/11/mark-nejame-pre.html

 

[LaLaw2000]

Disclaimer: This comment has absolutely nothing to do with retrieving Caylee nor recovering her body should she be deceased...

I would expect attorneys on BOTH sides to ask potential jurors if they have ever visited, read and/or commented on websites/blogs such as WebSleuths, TDBS, SM, etc. Any response in the affirmative would likely result in the immediate dismissal of said potential juror.

I just cannot see that question being asked in qualifying potential jurors. It would seem to also be tantamount to asking, "Do you ever read newspapers?, Have you heard about this case on the news?" That is ridiculous, IMO. We have some great legal minds here that can certainly comment on your statement much better than I can, but IMO, the standard questioning of potential jurors is what will happen.

What about witnesses at trial? Some of the witnesses have blogged and commented on forums. Just how far should the defense go in disqualifying potential jurors in your opinion?

***I have quoted your original post, meta, BEFORE you changed it.

 

[cyberborg]

Did I miss something? What code are you talking about?

The 'code' is KC talking in half-truths and also saying things indirectly, example with LA on the jail phone calls. KC code.

KC thinks she is clever and more intelligent than most with her lies when in reality they are paper thin and easily debunked. Childish. She never tells the truth though, only weaves lies and evolves them until the truth seeker tires of them <yawn> or finds the latest lie more reasonable. Still a lie.

ETA: What RR0004 said below too, clues to find Caylee. :clap::clap:

 

[cyberborg]

I just cannot see that question being asked in qualifying potential jurors. It would seem to also be tantamount to asking, "Do you ever read newspapers?, Have you heard about this case on the news?" That is ridiculous, IMO. We have some great legal minds here that can certainly comment on your statement much better than I can, but IMO, the standard questioning of potential jurors is what will happen.

What about witnesses at trial? Some of the witnesses have blogged and commented on forums. Just how far should the defense go in disqualifying potential jurors in your opinion?

***I have quoted your original post, meta, BEFORE you changed it.

To me it is not so much familiarity in the case, more whether you have formed a final opinion of innocence or guilt versus being able to fairly assess the testimony and discuss with peers to reach a conclusion based on the evidence and only the evidence.

 

[MaedchenX]

Disclaimer: This comment has absolutely nothing to do with retrieving Caylee nor recovering her body should she be deceased...

I would expect attorneys on BOTH sides to ask potential jurors if they have ever visited, read and/or commented on websites/blogs such as WebSleuths, TDBS, SM, etc. Any response in the affirmative would likely result in the immediate dismissal of said potential juror.

ETA: Ugh. The more I think about Dolly's post, the more I am inclined to do some research on the USSR under Stalin. I'm going to be up all night.

Do what you must. I thought it quite clear her comment was meant to be facetious.

 

[LaLaw2000]

To me it is not so much familiarity in the case, more whether you have formed a final opinion of innocence or guilt versus being able to fairly assess the testimony and discuss with peers to reach a conclusion based on the evidence and only the evidence.

Exactly! And that is what I mean by the usual questions in selecting a jury!

 

[LaLaw2000]

Do what you must. I thought it quite clear her comment was meant to be facetious.

LOL, of course it was! I don't see how anyone could take it any other way!

 

[RR0004]

Did I miss something? What code are you talking about?

Oh, sorry Fay. The As have asserted for quite some time that Casey was giving them clues to where Caylee is.

ETA: and what Cyberborg said, too. LOL

 

[Gaia713]

Exactly! And that is what I mean by the usual questions in selecting a jury!

It is possible to have formed an opinionj, and STILL be able to be non-judmental in a court room. I think she did it, but the prosecution would have to prove it in court. Most jurors go into the jury room with an open mind. Those proclaiming htat a fair trial cannot be had have no faith watsoever in the jury system.

 

[cyberborg]

It is possible to have formed an opinionj, and STILL be able to be non-judmental in a court room. I think she did it, but the prosecution would have to prove it in court. Most jurors go into the jury room with an open mind. Those proclaiming htat a fair trial cannot be had have no faith watsoever in the jury system.

Is that your final formed opinion? :blowkiss: :crazy:

 

[Brini]

LOL.

Well, ok. Don't know where her degree is from. Know the Foothill area. <<this is me laughing>>> Nothing against the good people of the Foothill area, but it has gone downhill and isn't what it once was.

Perhaps her next class should be in the area of personal hygiene and appearance?

I'm sorry, but the woman didn't look like she'd even washed her face, much less bathed and combed her hair.

If anyone would have presented her, or had she presented herself to me, as my "spokesperson/spokeswoman" I'd have run the other direction.

That is a woman who is in it for the money and doesn't believe a word of what she's spewing. Either that or she has serious issues. Body language and eyes say a lot.

Not only that, but she isn't even well-spoken.

That's one that needs to hire someone to type script for her. And teach her how to bathe and present herself on behalf of someone else.

Did I happen to say "NOT IMPRESSED!"?

Disagree re: the Foothills. I lived there for 20 years. We have La Canada (where Kevin Costner used to live). In fact, he lived next door to my parents, for awhile. There's Sierra Madre (BEAUTIFUL small town- a bit expensive) where the Rose Parade floats are exhibited. Actually, a lot of stuff is filmed in Sierra Madre, because of the fine, old houses. There is the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (the folks that send up the space and planetary probes).....There are lots of really nice, and even ritzy areas, in the San Gabriel Foothills. Most of "Legally Blonde" was filmed in Monrovia, BTW. "A Mighty Wind" was filmed in Sierra Madre and Pasadena.

That being said... for a person who works with the "elite" and "Hollywood" types (most of whom now work out of Burbank).. I never heard of this babe. And, she does seem to live in one of the much less glitzy or celebrated areas along the 210. I think she lives in Glendora? That's a respectable Scots town, but nothing special. She hasn't made any of the published stuff that anyone has heard of. Nobody sees her at the hot spots.

 

[DianeB]

Another example showing that Miss Bart is evidently uninformed.

http://missingchild.wordpress.com/2008/11/17/helpful-handbook/

 

[whiteangora]

Another example showing that Miss Bart is evidently uninformed.

http://missingchild.wordpress.com/2008/11/17/helpful-handbook/

It's no wonder she is uninformed, this quote comes from one of the most uninformed websites ever!

We think: Profiting from Caylee Anthony’s disappearance is reprehensible
November 14, 2008
There’s a trail of dirty money in the case of a young girl

snipped because it's bs

​

 

[faefrost]

They are trying too hard to entrap the LE into investigating sightings, such as this one at the Mall. They know the sighting is not credible but they are trying to gather public opinion against LE by making a big deal about LE not investigating.

Why? It is vital for KC's Defense for JB to be able to say that Caylee being alive is credible and will be found soon. How? Because LE are currently investigating Caylee sightings and they would not be doing that if there wasn't a chance Caylee is alive = Reasonable Doubt.

'A' Family supporters are leaving in droves because this is stepping over the line and risking obstruction of justice.

The LE Trap -- to bait them into investigating Caylee look-alikes and if not, make them look really bad.

I strongly suspect that this is the big reason why MN dropped the A's as clients and walked away. he was hired or brought in to protect G and C's interests. Instead he was being rather blatantly used to provide cover and literally work for KC's defense. That is all these sightings are now.

 

[Gaia713]

Disagree re: the Foothills. I lived there for 20 years. We have La Canada (where Kevin Costner used to live). In fact, he lived next door to my parents, for awhile. There's Sierra Madre (BEAUTIFUL small town- a bit expensive) where the Rose Parade floats are exhibited. Actually, a lot of stuff is filmed in Sierra Madre, because of the fine, old houses. There is the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (the folks that send up the space and planetary probes).....There are lots of really nice, and even ritzy areas, in the San Gabriel Foothills. Most of "Legally Blonde" was filmed in Monrovia, BTW. "A Mighty Wind" was filmed in Sierra Madre and Pasadena.

That being said... for a person who works with the "elite" and "Hollywood" types (most of whom now work out of Burbank).. I never heard of this babe. And, she does seem to live in one of the much less glitzy or celebrated areas along the 210. I think she lives in Glendora? That's a respectable Scots town, but nothing special. She hasn't made any of the published stuff that anyone has heard of. Nobody sees her at the hot spots.

She claims to now live in Portland OR and her "ortganization" has a PO box in Vancouver, WA (across the river from Portland), U can find no listing for her or her organization in either OR or WA

 

[whiteangora]

She claims to now live in Portland OR and her "ortganization" has a PO box in Vancouver, WA (across the river from Portland), U can find no listing for her or her organization in either OR or WA

Nothing under any of her three names (that we know of so far)?
How odd.

 

[Janis396]

Nothing under any of her three names (that we know of so far)?
How odd.

How highly suspect.