I know he called LE. And he was directed to call the Caylee Tip Line being monitored BY LE. But he also called Crime Stoppers Tip Line, at least that is what has been stated since it was discovered that he had made other reports of the area. I was just saying that maybe he was interested in the reward and I do not see a thing wrong with THAT. He deserves it.
She DID report it to her mother and her brother which is what lead Cindy to report it to LE. What I stated was that she did not tell one single soul that her daughter was missing at all for 31 days...
He was likely directed to call the Caylee Tip Line that was being administered by OC...NOT the Crime Stoppers Tip Line which is something else altogether.
Not according to this site:
http://www.answers.com/topic/work-product-rule
According to this site and several others (actually every single one that I could find in a short look) the work product doctrine applies to attorneys and the persons they have hired or consulted with on a case. It does not seem to apply to individuals...??? Do you have a link stating otherwise that you could share with us?
She did not report her missing to the police but she did report her missing to her brother and to her mother before Cindy reported it to the police. That is how they found out-she told them...
Can you provide a basis for this in the form of a link where we can read up on it?