Respectfully, to all parents who have photographed a crying child for any reason:
The topic of this thread is not whether or not (1) KC is a bad parent, (2) 2 year olds have tantrums, (3) people who take photos of crying children can do so for good reasons or (4) that it is a sad photo of Caylee when we know what ultimately happened to her and it invokes tears or emotional responses in good, feeling people. Those are not really relevant. I remember those were discussed on a previous thread.
The photo is being discussed on this thread to see if it might shed some light on whether or not:
(1) It might show that
Caylee is damp -- as if she has been swimming recently as CA said she was on the evening of June 15, 2008 when it was getting dark.
(2) Was the photo in existence before the evening of June 15, 2008 or not. If it was, it is not relevant to the crime. If it was not in existence before that time, it may have been taken near midnight on June 15, 2008 and may be the last photo of Caylee taken while she was still alive.
(3) If it was not in existence before nightfall on June 15, 2008, it may be a clue as to the specific location of Caylee's death.
(4)
If it was taken in a hotel room near the Anthony home
as per LP's statement saying KC was observed and a few
WSers recall seeing a still photo or video (like a security camera) of KC pacing in a parking lot of a hotel after dark, then why was KC at the hotel.
(5) It appears the ping map could be helpful to show that this is possible and was a focus of intense observation earlier.
(6) It could help prove the time of death is around midnight on June 15, 2008.
(7) It could lead a reasonable person, looking at the totality of the circumstances of the case including the
soft 


photos of KC,
the wild nightlife, the going-off-to-work but not having what people understand as a traditional "job," and
the unexplained flow of money from June 15, 2008 to the present paying for an expensive lifestyle without visible means of support and
expensive criminal defense without any explanation of the source of the funds. It is, under this totality of the circumstances, somewhat possible that a reasonable person could believe that KC might have been instrumental in
something nepharious and that
some third person might have been involved and might now be
paying huge amounts of money so as not to be identified as being involved. It warrants at least some second look by responsible people into whether or not the
darker side of "entertrainment" in the area could have been involved now that we know that Caylee died,
chloroform was somehow involved,
duct tape was used and a young mother is on trial. Add that to the mystery about how the body was found, what JB might have told DC, the hearing on a possible conflict of interest for JB and the selling of a story, the story that an investigator was terminated from a job for failure to follow up leads and the underlying low credibility meter throughout this case.
The photo raises issues and clues that under a totality of the circumstances view, it is appropriate to go back and take another look at the information to see if there are further clues that KC might not have acted alone or may have aided and abetted somebody else. Threads of truth through KC's lies and stories? We've seen that. What if her chatter about being fearful of someone is a thread of truth? If no one wants to sleuth and discuss, that's fine. These points are not linkable, to "evidence" and ready to prove elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. These points are JMHO and as a reasonable person, it appears to be what rational sleuthers might consider -- looking at the June 15, 2008 date again to see if there is more to this story than we already believe we know; maybe the truth?