The Roy Kronk Connection- Opening Statements-Kronk takes the stand 2011.06.28

[Hot Dogs]

It had more to do with the possibility of disturbing or destroying possible forensic evidence and her remains! Tim and TES are ultimate in searching for missing and always professional with many years experience!

What good is that proper procedure for TES (don't tromp through the swamp) if that particular flooded area apparently wasn't even scheduled for any subsequent search?

It wasn't until December 11th that RK found Caylee right there out of his own voluntary effort. If we take him out of the equation we could begin to wonder when or even if she would have been found.

What was OCSO waiting for to intensively search this prime location that TES could not search?

 

[DawnTCB]

Ok, now pretend that there wasn't a dead rattlesnake which scared the guys off. He gets them to come over and look at his skull find. They see that it obviously isn't a skull (as you say) and RK has to agree. Maybe they poke around a little bit further but they don't find anything because they are far from the actual remains (as you say). At that point, there is nothing for RK to call in to OCSO and no good reason for the guys to recommend that he call either.

What would Kronk do at that point (according to your theory)?

Interesting question.


It is interesting, to me anyway , that his one coworker DD remembers the "I see a skull statement" and then the snake, so he doesn't remember looking for himself. The other coworker CG remembers only the snake, no statement about a skull or bones or anything. So he doesn't remember looking because there was nothing to look at but the snake. And then MR remembers the snake first and then both of them looking and dismissing him:

YM: Okay, and when you pointed it out to Dave and Chris...
RK: Right...
YM: ...and said hey, look at that...
RK: Yeah...
YM: ... what did they say?
RK: I think Chris said "I couldn't see it" and David told me I was crazy. He said he didn't see it. And he didn't think it was what I thought it was.
YM: Okay. Was this before or after I guess Dave screamed about the snake, or discovered the snake?
RK: Uh, it was right after Dave screamed about the snake.

He goes on to reiterate this, Yuri asks about what happened after they put the snake in the truck and MR remembers it this way:
RK: Yeah, I was just standing there looking at the water and I said, "Look at that..." And they went and came over and I was pointing and they were looking. And I said, you know. And they're saying "Yeah? And?" and I said, "The..."
YM: Did you say look, that's a skull or, look....
RK: Yeah, I said, "Look, it looks like a skull." And they're like, you know, I think Dave told me I was crazy or something."


So one remembers starting to look first, but stopped because then they saw a snake. One doesn't remember looking at all. And MR himself remembers them finding the snake first, then both of them looking and thinking he is wrong.

So if MR himself is to be believed, my answer to the question "what would have happened if there wasn't a snake?" is "Nothing different." All he wanted was to make note of the fact that he saw something and they were with him when he sent up the first alert.

But let's say they didn't give up so easy. Let's say they wanted to go out and wade through the water, even though Dave said he had a fear of water moccasins, and poke the bag and see for sure, and find nothing. I think MR would have insisted he saw something, insisted they not get too close (Hey, this could be a crime scene, man!) and called the cops.

Personally, I think DD's interview sounds more likely - that he went to look and was derailed by the snake discovery. It just makes more sense that they would have loaded up the snake and left than that they loaded up the snake and then MR stood around looking at the water a while. But it is possible they loaded the snake and he was going to try again to get them to look and so he loitered around pointing at the water for a bit.

I wish I understood what the water level was in this area at the time. :dunno: These three witnesses talk about the bags being partially submerged, looking out over the water, and that the area beyond the treeline was dry. From the crime scene photos it appeared the actual main area was above the roadway level, so it is hard to imagine it was covered in water but the road was dry. RC didn't want to wade into the water to see this bag. Was the first bag in standing water? And can we say for sure the actual remains were probably underwater at that time too? I just don't understand why all the reports are different. :dunno:

 

[DawnTCB]

What good is that proper procedure for TES (don't tromp through the swamp) if that particular flooded area apparently wasn't even scheduled for any subsequent search?

It wasn't until December 11th that RK found Caylee right there out of his own voluntary effort. If we take him out of the equation we could begin to wonder when or even if she would have been found.

What was OCSO waiting for to intensively search this prime location that TES could not search?

I think I agree with both of you on this... I do remember reading that TES will not go barreling into swamps and standing water in cars or on horses because they could destroy a crime scene or even the remains themselves. But it would also seem they could have made a list of the places they didn't search (within the area) so that OCSO could schedule a search of those spots later when the water went down. I mean, if they had searched every backyard except the ones with angry dogs, I would think they would give a list of those unsearched areas to LE to follow up on. If they searched every empty lot in the area except the ones under water, I think they could have provided a similar list. :waitasec: Who knows, maybe they did.

 

[LolaMoon08]

FWIW, water does not stop the authorities from finding bodies. They get them from rivers, lakes, oceans, etc. Knee deep water in a small swampy area a few blocks from the house should have been no problem at all.

It's really quite ridiculous and unfortunate that Caylee wasn't found until December. She wasn't even buried.

I agree that Caylee could have been found in August and should have been if it weren't for one very lazy... and obviously irritated deputy. After hearing Deputy Hosey talk about how many calls they went on to search for Caylee... I do realize how much effort went into finding Caylee. It seems the entire Orlando LE was on overtime following up tips, collecting evidence, etc... Of course, this is no excuse.

Once Tropical Storm Fay hit... which dumped record amounts of rain all over Florida. From August 18th - August 21st... Tropical Storm Fay hit Florida four times... there is no way that anyone should have been in that area. Like Tim Miller said... it was too dangerous for not only the searchers... but for Caylee! What if someone had stepped on Caylee's skull and tore the duct tape off her skull?? We wouldn't have that evidence? Also, most Oceans, Lakes, and Rivers don't have alligators. I won't even go into a swimming pool without looking in it first for alligators (happens all the time!).

It's sad that Caylee was not found sooner... but there is no going back. She is now safe and protected now. It's just time for Justice.

 

[Hot Dogs]

I wish I understood what the water level was in this area at the time. :dunno: These three witnesses talk about the bags being partially submerged, looking out over the water, and that the area beyond the treeline was dry. From the crime scene photos it appeared the actual main area was above the roadway level, so it is hard to imagine it was covered in water but the road was dry.

The actual remains location was well below the level of the road and grassy shoulder. You can look at the ME report map again (pg 6473) and see the elevations of the whole area. This is a topographic map. The concentric irregular circles indicate elevation changes. Area A is where the skull and bags were found and is suggested to be the actual original dump site. It appears to be something like 3 feet lower in elevation than the road.

 

[Hot Dogs]

I think I agree with both of you on this... I do remember reading that TES will not go barreling into swamps and standing water in cars or on horses because they could destroy a crime scene or even the remains themselves. But it would also seem they could have made a list of the places they didn't search (within the area) so that OCSO could schedule a search of those spots later when the water went down. I mean, if they had searched every backyard except the ones with angry dogs, I would think they would give a list of those unsearched areas to LE to follow up on. If they searched every empty lot in the area except the ones under water, I think they could have provided a similar list. :waitasec: Who knows, maybe they did.

OCSO would never have to wait for the swamp to dry up. They are trained and equipped to search in waters which are even much more formidable than a knee-deep and not-very-large swamp. They are also equipped or could easily contract to have the swamp drained by large pumps. Once they got the water level down to under a foot or so they could begin to visually scan for larger suspicious objects.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

OCSO would never have to wait for the swamp to dry up. They are trained and equipped to search in waters which are even much more formidable than a knee-deep and not-very-large swamp. They are also equipped or could easily contract to have the swamp drained by large pumps. Once they got the water level down to under a foot or so they could begin to visually scan for larger suspicious objects.

Has it ever been determined one way or the other whether or not OCSO searched the area where Caylee's remains were found? It seems like in the deputy who answered the RK call deposition, it had said something about this area had already been searched, but I'm not sure about that, or to what extent it had been searched even if that were true.

 

[DawnTCB]

OCSO would never have to wait for the swamp to dry up.

Oh, ITA, sorry if I made it sound different. It sounds like in this supplemental report that they thought they did search it prior to RK's calls in August (and prior to the hurricane as well:

Deputy Jason Forgey and his cadaver dog had checked the east end of Suburban Drive in July so it was presumed that this area was also checked. This tip was cleared based on this. As a note, Deputy Forgey responded to the area where the body was found after its discovery and I asked if he had ever deployed his cadaver dog there. He said he had not, and they had focused their efforts to the east end of Suburban Drive and the area of the school. Corporal Edwards later interviewed Detective Jerald White regarding clearing this tip.

I'm just thinking it does seem like kind of a big miss if they didn't go back and check at least the spots closest to the house that TES declined to search because of dangerous conditions.

And back to my other topic, DD also says the spot where MR says he saw a bag and the spot where he says he saw a skull are forty feet apart, with the snake in the middle. :waitasec:

 

[crucibelle]

IIRC before the LE team came in and dug/sifted out the entire remains site to a depth of 6 inches, there was a draping of kudzu or some other vine near the roadway that would have provided a nice shield for anyone who needed to take a "special break" there.

I have tried to see RK as a villain in all this and I just can't. Crucibelle, help me out here?

Hi, ynotdivein -- sorry I'm answering this so late. I often times forget where I post on here.. lol. Anyhow, I hope I didn't insinuate that I thought that Kronk is a villain? That's certainly not what I was trying to get across. I just have a very hinky feeling about the circumstances surrounding where the body was found, how it was found, etc. Even IF Kronk placed leaves over the body or moved it closer to the road (as I suggested in my OP), I still wouldn't consider him a villain... just not very smart and possibly not aware of the gravity of his actions. Roy Kronk doesn't strike me as someone who is very bright. JMO.

Just to be clear, I DON'T really think that RK moved the body. I was just saying (in my original post) that IF he did anything, it would be something like placing leaves over the body, or just moving it a bit closer to the road... as opposed to taking the body home with him or something like that.

 

[cyberborg]

I do believe he found her more than once. The fact that they didn't take him seriously the first time he called it in might have encouraged a "relocation", HOWEVER, forensics show (from plant growth entertwining with remains) that she was right where they recovered her for a long long long time (ie since the day KC left her there...the same spot she buried her pets).

Completely agree. I don't see how RK "moved" the remains when there was plant growth growing through the intact remains but many bones were scattered over 1/2 acre to a depth of 6" in mud and animal burrows all covered in undergrowth. As we saw it took days to sift the soil and recover bones and -- they never did recover them all. So how did RK hide or move the body?

The DT goal is more to taint the dump site crime scene to keep the focus and blame on GA and taint RK out of spite than anything since everything ties to the A's home and ICA. ICA wants to be completely blameless ... The victim.

 

[azwriter]

That whole Roy Kronk thing really had me scratching my head. Where in the world would he have come across her body, to hide it, and then place it in that swamp?? Makes no sense to me, at all. JB said "we'll never know" where Kronk got her body. That's the easy way out, IMO. If JB expects anyone to believe that theory, he needs to connect the dots a little better. JMO.

Great post crucibelle. Thanks for bringing out Jose's comment about "we'll never know." I suppose he and his client believe that gets them off the hook as to explaining or connecting the story of how Kronk got possession of the body.

But, it was important to include Kronk in the opening statement, I think because in the defense's mind Casey could not be guilty of anything Her daughter died by accident, her dad released her from worry about the remains and someone had to hide the body - and since Kronk found Caylee, he was the best man for the job.

I have to admit, even with my full-on creativity, I'm stumped. Tying the meter reader to the body is not something the defense is going to touch in this trial.
jmo

 

[DollyPardonMe]

I just can't believe that in 3 years this is the best JB can do in involving RK! How many people does ICA have to throw under the bus to feel vindicated!

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I do believe he found her more than once. The fact that they didn't take him seriously the first time he called it in might have encouraged a "relocation", HOWEVER, forensics show (from plant growth entertwining with remains) that she was right where they recovered her for a long long long time (ie since the day KC left her there...the same spot she buried her pets).

You think he would move a body and then call the police?? In what way does that make sense? No one would do such a thing it defies logic.

 

[DawnTCB]

Well, I don't think he found her in August but I think he knew for certain she was there. According to the various statements, it appears that where MR in August is different from where MR was in December. And I think the August location is the same location as where the PIs were in November. I don't think the body ever was moved, and it would be ridiculous to think he would have picked up the body at any point.

But the problem is, if MR sticks with the statement that he is 100% sure what he saw in August is what he found in December, but the other statements show the two places were different, we have a "who moved the body?" scenario. I think that is where we get hung up in this thread. I don't think anyone here is trying to make MR a villain, just saying he knows more than he is saying... and he needs to tell all of the story or we end up with an inconsistency that comes kinda close to MR having "custody" of the body. I don't think he had custody of the body. I think his statements conflict with others and for them all to be true, he would likely have to have moved the body. Someone is not telling all that they know.

 

[LinasK]

Well, I don't think he found her in August but I think he knew for certain she was there. According to the various statements, it appears that where MR in August is different from where MR was in December. And I think the August location is the same location as where the PIs were in November. I don't think the body ever was moved, and it would be ridiculous to think he would have picked up the body at any point.

But the problem is, if MR sticks with the statement that he is 100% sure what he saw in August is what he found in December, but the other statements show the two places were different, we have a "who moved the body?" scenario. I think that is where we get hung up in this thread. I don't think anyone here is trying to make MR a villain, just saying he knows more than he is saying... and he needs to tell all of the story or we end up with an inconsistency that comes kinda close to MR having "custody" of the body. I don't think he had custody of the body. I think his statements conflict with others and for them all to be true, he would likely have to have moved the body. Someone is not telling all that they know.

Red by me. What other statements prove that there were two different locations???:waitasec: I believe Roy Kronk (his past is irrelevant, he's not on trial here). I think he is Caylee's hero. Were it not for him, her remains never would have been recovered!

 

[DawnTCB]

Red by me. What other statements prove that there were two different locations???:waitasec: I believe Roy Kronk (his past is irrelevant, he's not on trial here). I think he is Caylee's hero. Were it not for him, her remains never would have been recovered!

Just to be clear, I didn't say so far it is proven that they were two different locations. What I am saying is that it appears like they were two different locations... enough for JB to make a point of it to bolster his theory, it seems to me.

The main things are all things I have posted in this thread already.

1. RC took YM to the place he searched with MR. He made this trip WHILE the crime scene was being actively cleared. The area he says MR took him to was east of the crime scene, and they were able to visit this location without disturbing the active crime scene. (BTW, the second officer, as I recall, arrived after the "search" was complete but confirmed RC's story as to where they were standing when she arrived... east of the crime scene.)
2. MR saw what was “100% a skull” in his mind from 25 feet away, but RC could not see the skull when he was (by the MR’s account) less than six feet away.
3. According to MR's testimony, both of his two coworkers looked at what he saw from 4-6 feet away across the water and one couldn't see it and one didn't think what he was seeing was what he thought he saw.
4. DD (one of the coworkers) testified that the statement MR made that he saw a bag, and the statement MR made that he saw a skull we made in two different locations that day, at least 40-50 feet apart and maybe more. He states that they were in two locations twice in his deposition, clarifying that MR made the bag comment after walking down the tree line west of the trucks about 40 feet, and then crossing back behind the trucks and 40-50 feet up the road to the east.
5. Description on the MR’s 911 calls in August as well as his call to Crimeline mention several non-unique landmarks (trees, bags, and white items), but does not mention the six foot tall solid wooden fence visible in the crime scene photos. The same fence LE states in the official crime scene report that the remains were "just past".
6. RC tells YM he never saw the six foot tall wooden fence when he searched with MR. YM makes a point about it - he is clearly verifying whether RC is certain the fence was not nearby. RC reiterates this.
7. MR says he is 99.9% sure that the remains he saw in August were the same ones he directed LE to in December. But he is less than 50% sure that they were in the same place.
   

I personally think he was east of the crime scene as RC indicated, following the same wrong tip as the PIs got in November. Their video shows them reviewing the same non-unique landmarks (fallen tree, bags, and white items) but they are far from the fence as well.


I do think MR showed persistance when everyone else gave up, so for that he is a hero. But I think it is clear that he knew absolutely for certain that the body was in that wooded area when he showed up August 11. He just didn't know exactly where. And he has stated he is less than 50% sure he was in the same place in December. I think he knows he was not in the same place, but to admit that, he has to admit he got a tip - in other words, he did not just happen to figure it out using his bounty hunter background. So far, he hasn't admitted to a tip.


If he doesn't admit to the tip, continues to say he is sure these are the same things he saw in August, continues to say he is not so sure they are in the same spot from August to December, and three people (the one coworker who actually remembered the skull comment, the fired deputy and the second deputy) will testify MR was east of what would eventually be the crime scene when he made his first discovery, then it certainly looks like someone moved the body. Which is of course, ridiculous. :sigh: The only way for MR, RC, DD and the second officer whose name I have forgotten for the moment - she has already been on the stand once I believe - to all be telling the truth in their depositions is if someone moved the body.

Does that make sense? I am in no way trying to make MR out to be a villain. The story just doesn't fit the other depositions, at this point, and I really think this is why JB is pointing to him.

 

[SMK]

Just wondering about this June 11 ABC post: Is ABC just trying to stir the pot, or is there any truth in the theory about Kronk?: does not seem likely after CSI said body had been there 6 months, but what is the Defense basing this all on?

Casey Anthony: Could Body Tampering Allegation Shake Case?

It's a theory that could eliminate one of the prosecution's key pieces of evidence in the murder trial of Casey Anthony: Someone tampered with the body of Caylee Anthony, the 2-year-old girl allegedly murdered by her mother.[. . . ]

Lyon said the prosecution "cannot prove that the remains were not moved or that duct tape wasn't placed there later."

In his opening statement, Baez said that Kronk told his son in November 2008 that he had found Caylee's body. Kronk didn't report the body to authorities, Baez said, until a day after he received a $1,000 bill related to car trouble in December.

"He called his son and he said, 'I'm going to be famous, I'm going to be rich. You know, watch the news, I'm going to be on the news,'" Lyon said.

That call, she said, was made "before he found the body in December, and he took a day off and then just decided to wander into this area that had been searched and searched and searched... and he finds the body," Lyon told "20/20." "That's very suspicious.". . . Caylee's remains were found in an area that had been searched several times earlier, Baez said in his opening statement.

The toddler's body, he said, "was placed there to be found, not to be hidden."



http://abcnews.go.com/2020/casey-anthony-body-tampering-allegation-shake-case/story?id=13814284

 

[SMK]

Just to be clear, I didn't say so far it is proven that they were two different locations. What I am saying is that it appears like they were two different locations... enough for JB to make a point of it to bolster his theory, it seems to me.

The main things are all things I have posted in this thread already.

1. RC took YM to the place he searched with MR. He made this trip WHILE the crime scene was being actively cleared. The area he says MR took him to was east of the crime scene, and they were able to visit this location without disturbing the active crime scene. (BTW, the second officer, as I recall, arrived after the "search" was complete but confirmed RC's story as to where they were standing when she arrived... east of the crime scene.)
2. MR saw what was “100% a skull” in his mind from 25 feet away, but RC could not see the skull when he was (by the MR’s account) less than six feet away.
3. According to MR's testimony, both of his two coworkers looked at what he saw from 4-6 feet away across the water and one couldn't see it and one didn't think what he was seeing was what he thought he saw.
4. DD (one of the coworkers) testified that the statement MR made that he saw a bag, and the statement MR made that he saw a skull we made in two different locations that day, at least 40-50 feet apart and maybe more. He states that they were in two locations twice in his deposition, clarifying that MR made the bag comment after walking down the tree line west of the trucks about 40 feet, and then crossing back behind the trucks and 40-50 feet up the road to the east.
5. Description on the MR’s 911 calls in August as well as his call to Crimeline mention several non-unique landmarks (trees, bags, and white items), but does not mention the six foot tall solid wooden fence visible in the crime scene photos. The same fence LE states in the official crime scene report that the remains were "just past".
6. RC tells YM he never saw the six foot tall wooden fence when he searched with MR. YM makes a point about it - he is clearly verifying whether RC is certain the fence was not nearby. RC reiterates this.
7. MR says he is 99.9% sure that the remains he saw in August were the same ones he directed LE to in December. But he is less than 50% sure that they were in the same place.
   

I personally think he was east of the crime scene as RC indicated, following the same wrong tip as the PIs got in November. Their video shows them reviewing the same non-unique landmarks (fallen tree, bags, and white items) but they are far from the fence as well.


I do think MR showed persistance when everyone else gave up, so for that he is a hero. But I think it is clear that he knew absolutely for certain that the body was in that wooded area when he showed up August 11. He just didn't know exactly where. And he has stated he is less than 50% sure he was in the same place in December. I think he knows he was not in the same place, but to admit that, he has to admit he got a tip - in other words, he did not just happen to figure it out using his bounty hunter background. So far, he hasn't admitted to a tip.


If he doesn't admit to the tip, continues to say he is sure these are the same things he saw in August, continues to say he is not so sure they are in the same spot from August to December, and three people (the one coworker who actually remembered the skull comment, the fired deputy and the second deputy) will testify MR was east of what would eventually be the crime scene when he made his first discovery, then it certainly looks like someone moved the body. Which is of course, ridiculous. :sigh: The only way for MR, RC, DD and the second officer whose name I have forgotten for the moment - she has already been on the stand once I believe - to all be telling the truth in their depositions is if someone moved the body.

Does that make sense? I am in no way trying to make MR out to be a villain. The story just doesn't fit the other depositions, at this point, and I really think this is why JB is pointing to him.

Yes, it does make a lot of sense to me.

 

[MADJGNLAW]

Just wondering about this June 11 ABC post: Is ABC just trying to stir the pot, or is there any truth in the theory about Kronk?: does not seem likely after CSI said body had been there 6 months, but what is the Defense basing this all on?

Casey Anthony: Could Body Tampering Allegation Shake Case?

It's a theory that could eliminate one of the prosecution's key pieces of evidence in the murder trial of Casey Anthony: Someone tampered with the body of Caylee Anthony, the 2-year-old girl allegedly murdered by her mother.[. . . ]

Lyon said the prosecution "cannot prove that the remains were not moved or that duct tape wasn't placed there later."

In his opening statement, Baez said that Kronk told his son in November 2008 that he had found Caylee's body. Kronk didn't report the body to authorities, Baez said, until a day after he received a $1,000 bill related to car trouble in December.

"He called his son and he said, 'I'm going to be famous, I'm going to be rich. You know, watch the news, I'm going to be on the news,'" Lyon said.

That call, she said, was made "before he found the body in December, and he took a day off and then just decided to wander into this area that had been searched and searched and searched... and he finds the body," Lyon told "20/20." "That's very suspicious.". . . Caylee's remains were found in an area that had been searched several times earlier, Baez said in his opening statement.

The toddler's body, he said, "was placed there to be found, not to be hidden."



http://abcnews.go.com/2020/casey-anthony-body-tampering-allegation-shake-case/story?id=13814284

IMO, the only tampering would of came when tropical storm Fae came and that is why IMO the remains may of been moved around and could be why some were so buried in the ground. You have to think about the floods, winds, scavengers eating away at Caylee's flesh, and the time that past. IMO, that would be the reason the remains where in the condition they were in. I to would of done the same thing Kronk did...if I thought I saw something and nobody did anything about it I would call again and go back out to the location. Many searchers searched the same areas more than once..not saying this particular area just saying other areas in Orlando. The brush and storms make it hard to search for such a little body. :cow:

 

[kpalma715]

i do not believe Kronk stole the body or put her there, but I also have a slight believe that Kronk and ICA are connected in some way. Maybe he helped her? Maybe there is something else that, I dont really want to write here, if you get my point on wht I want to say as far as Kronk possibly being a creepy Nanny in a bad way? I feel sick to my stomach when I think of it, but something is just not right on this part of the case. He called 3 differnet times about a possible body being there? Also, he said the skull fell out of the bag? IMO, the skull looks as if it was there for months?!? I am sure the jury is wondering about that link also? Did he ever take a lie detector?