Paperwork Details Elisa Baker’s Involvement In Investigation

[impatientredhead]

What in the world were her attorney's thinking picking up "physical evidence"? And what if it was THE piece of evidence that would have proven someone's guilt?????? Now it's worthless. Charges should be filed for tampering or something, that's just ludicrous!!

I am very curious to see what it turns out to be.
If it is a camera or a laptop, something like that I can see where it was done.
As I said in my earlier example if I give my attorney a gun that was used in a crime, he can take, but he has turn it over, he can't hide it or destroy it.

But he cannot go into a crime scene unbeknownst to the police and remove the gun from there. That is tampering with evidence. There is a distinction.

I am still holding out hope that there is a logical explanation for this.

 

[ynotdivein]

“Our reporter spent the past 90 minutes with Adam Baker and his attorney.
They watched the vigil for the girl together … then Adam Baker answered the questions everyone has been asking.”

———–” THE girl ” ????????????? ( good grief!! )

“Like was he involved in Zahra’s death? And Did he help hide his own daughter’s body? He did not hold anything back.”

Dear reporters, "the girl" has a name.

And we are to believe that AB, his atty, and the reporters all watched the vigil together, and then AB "answered the questions everyone has been asking"?

So, like, they watched the vigil, and then the reporter turned to AB and his lawyer and asked, "So AB, you're in this up to your goolies, aint'cha?"

And AB said "Yep. Sure am." </dream sequence>

Oh I do look forward to seeing this. But his choice to come out of media silence on this of all days... :furious:

 

[summermood32]

Will someone be posting the wbtv news show, when it is over? Please, Even though I know someone at WS will! =) I hate I cant watch it when it will be on? I'm sure it will be interesting to see him after all this time to open his mouth now!

 

[lauriej]

Oh I do look forward to seeing this. But his choice to come out of media silence on this of all days... :furious:

---this would be THE day for him to do the interview.
---the tears might actually be REAL---BECAUSE of the vigil, and he'll get a few votes of sympathy.

---and----when asked a question he would rather avoid---i expect to see the the "fake blubbering" we saw in the GMA interview , back when.

 

[AnaTeresa]

I'm thinking that whatever evidence Dubs recovered, it had to be such that their removal wouldn't tamper with it. From all reports, she's an ace attorney - she would know better than to contaminate evidence that could exonerate or a least mitigate her client's sentence.

I'll wait till we have more official information. I really can't imagine Dubs being so incompetent as to compromise evidence.

 

[WhyaDuck?]

Will someone be posting the wbtv news show, when it is over? Please, Even though I know someone at WS will! =) I hate I cant watch it when it will be on? I'm sure it will be interesting to see him after all this time to open his mouth now!

There is a thread on the interview in the forum, and we will have transcripts or video there when we can.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

---this would be THE day for him to do the interview.
---the tears might actually be REAL---BECAUSE of the vigil, and he'll get a few votes of sympathy.

---and----when asked a question he would rather avoid---i expect to see the the "fake blubbering" we saw in the GMA interview , back when.

I think along with the fake blubbering, we'll see a whole lot of finger pointing at Elisa. Everything else will be, "My attorney has aadvised me not to answer that."

This is damage control, nothing else. Mark my words.

 

[raisincharlie]

That question has bugged me since last night! What piece of evidence did the defense team go and collect in the middle of the night that verified EB's evidence to be reliable??? I hate thinking the thoughts I have had about this. If I were LE, the only thing that would prove beyond any doubt that EB was telling the truth would be a body part. Please, someone come up with something else. :sick:

Dunno but if EB's information was so reliable and truthful, especially about Dudley Shoals, why was LE searching at the waterfall area 350-400 feet away from where the remains of a child were actually found ? If her information was so reliable and truthful, did it take until November 10 to recover the remains of a body consistent with a child at the Dudley Shoals site ? 16 days later LE finds these remains, after EB supposedly told them specifically where to find this? I'm not buying for a minute that EB was all that truthful in her "specifically" telling LE anything. No way in hades if EB pointed the exact location out would LE have not immediately recovered the remains at Dudley Shoals on October 25th or 26th. They, LE, sure as heck would not have waited until November 10th to do so.

Cooperating my #$%3 - EB has used Zahra's remains as a bargaining chip and nothing more. The information in this motion doesn't make sense when one considers the Dudley Shoals site and the timing.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Dunno but if EB's information was so reliable and truthful, especially about Dudley Shoals, why was LE searching at the waterfall area 350-400 feet away from where the remains of a child were actually found ? If her information was so reliable and truthful, did it take until November 10 to recover the remains of a body consistent with a child at the Dudley Shoals site ? 16 days later LE finds these remains, after EB supposedly told them specifically where to find this? I'm not buying for a minute that EB was all that truthful in her "specifically" telling LE anything. No way in hades if EB pointed the exact location out would LE have not immediately recovered the remains at Dudley Shoals on October 25th or 26th. They, LE, sure as heck would not have waited until November 10th to do so.

Cooperating my #$%3 - EB has used Zahra's remains as a bargaining chip and nothing more. The information in this motion doesn't make sense when one considers the Dudley Shoals site and the timing.

Unless, of course, she didn't do the dumping and only knew the general area.

 

[Virgogalsue]

Does anyone know when AB's interview is going to be aired?? That clip is not enough!!
:banghead:

 

[raisincharlie]

Unless, of course, she didn't do the dumping and only knew the general area.

Then the return to Dudley Shoals and the finding of the remains near the bridge would imply that someone knew and someone clarafied the area wouldn't it ? Its kind of a stretch to just on whim decide to look near the bridge if someone has pointed out an area with lots of bones (camoflauge?) Which is what I think by the way.

16 days, a lot can happen...Gaither is willing to put on evidence she hasn't been that cooperative, just saying.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Then the return to Dudley Shoals and the finding of the remains near the bridge would imply that someone knew and someone clarafied the area wouldn't it ? Its kind of a stretch to just on whim decide to look near the bridge if someone has pointed out an area with lots of bones (camoflauge?) Which is what I think by the way.

Not neccesarily, she could have just insisted that remains were there, and LE decided to extend the search.

I mean, I honestly have no idea...just offering another possibility.

 

[raisincharlie]

Not neccesarily, she could have just insisted that remains were there, and LE decided to extend the search.

I mean, I honestly have no idea...just offering another possibility.

I know, we don't know but I find great difficulty in believing LE would not have extended the search area during the first search on Dudley Shoals since they found nothing the first go round, you know, with EB being so cooperative and reliable.

Doesn't add up for me. This is just a picture her lawyer is trying to paint. I don't much like that art work.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I know, we don't know but I find great difficulty in believing LE would not have extended the search area during the first search on Dudley Shoals since they found nothing the first go round, you know, with EB being so cooperative and reliable.

Doesn't add up for me. This is just a picture her lawyer is trying to paint. I don't much like that art work.

Well, I definitely think she's been cooperating. I think she realized pretty early on that she would have to. Is she doing that to help LE? Highly doubt it. She's doing it to save her own youknowwhat...whether that's because her part really wasn't the worst part, or whether it's because her part was the worst and she wants to pin that of AB.

They found these remains because SOMEONE was talking...and no way that someone was AB, imo. He's not admitting to squat.

 

[sayd]

Hi everyone. I am having a very hard time with this. I am just a grandma of a 5 year old, 3 year old, and 1 year old, and I had cancer. I wish so much I could have snatched Zahra up and held her and loved her.

I know this is so stupid; I'm half way across the country, but this is just so very, very sad. Just sharing how I feel. Yesterday I was mad; today I am heartbroken.

The older I get, the more I learn. If ever we see a child abused; please stomp the earth, ring the telephones, send the emails, show up in someone's office, until you get an answer you are satisfied with. But don't say, "I sent a letter; I did my part." Not in any way, shape or form am I trying to point a finger at those who tried; let's all just do more until the point where someone, somewhere hears us.

 

[LCoastMom]

http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/DA-S...ake-Arrest-in-Zahra-Baker-Case-108503144.html

"Gaither also raised questions about Lisa Dubbs, the lawyer who has been appointed to represent Elisa Baker if she is charged with murder. Gaither questioned why Dubbs and a private investigator working for her went out and picked up important physical evidence in the case.

Dubbs told NewsChannel 36 that Gaither should know that the defense always has the right to look for evidence. She says that in this case the unspecified item was brought to Gaither himself to prove that Elisa Baker would cooperate truthfully.

Gaither says that is a matter he will continue to look into.
"I believe there are some reasonable minds that differ on whether that is an appropriate function of defense council," said Gaither."

IMO This is quite similar to the ICA defense team wanting at the crime scene! LE said not only NO! BUT H3LL NO!

I would like to see the look on EB's face when she sees what exactly the judge has to say about her request for lower bail, no doubt HE$$ NO!

This whole event with ELESA and Dubbs supplying evidence to the state reeks desperation AKA DP!!

 

[Clue Hopper]

If the information that LB and team turned over was so "significant" with them handling it and contaminating the location, it could be inadmissible along with any other evidence found in that vicinity.

 

[NancyA]

If the information that LB and team turned over was so "significant" with them handling it and contaminating the location, it could be inadmissible along with any other evidence found in that vicinity.

My thoughts exactly. I just don't see how LE can use evidence provided to them where the chain of custody starts with EB's attorneys in a case against AB without the judge throwing it out??!! Clearly Gaither feels the same way, he didn't exactly come across as grateful.

 

[morayne]

Morning! I've been a lurker for about 2 years, but this is my first post! I live in the boonies, about 30 minutes south of Hickory, and was stuck on dial-up until about 6 months ago. Even though I had registered, I would time out on logging in, so I just got used to reading and not contributing

I was just wondering, though, if perhaps the "evidence" was less tangible than actual evidence of the crime itself. It could have been ANYTHING, from a time stamped receipt, ATM/bank records, a cell phone picture taken in the general area, a text/call sent or received from one of the locations...not necessarily something related to ZBs death, but just something that would prove EB's info was reliable. I don't think any of those things have been subpoenaed yet, since she hasn't been charged with anything besides obstruction of justice and bad checks yet.

 

[Donjeta]

Welcome, Morayne!

They could have subpoenaed a whole lot of stuff on Day 1 just because there was a child missing in the household, I think.

If they had to go and get it in the middle of the night it doesn't say bank records to me but who knows.

The logic behind, "I know about the death and dismemberment of a child and can prove it, and this is why you should make it easier for me to get outta jail" escapes me for the time being.