The SODDI Defense (Some Other Dude Did It)...If not KC, who?

[Balthazar]

Although LKB alluded to a SODDI defense some time ago when she mentioned the Sam Shepherd case, I think they switched gears and decided to attack LE and the forensic science in this case. Look at the people the defense have deposed. It's quite evident they haven't deposed any of the key players yet. UNLESS they are going to insinuate that Caylee's body was not on Suburban when it was searched prior to the discovery on December 11, so far their actions tell me they will not go the SODDI route. HOWEVER, now that ALy is on board, this could all change.

OMG, I can see tons of motions flying into court from this new attorney. I think prosecutors will be kept pretty busy just responding to them. :bang:

It will be interesting to see which road ALy will take, if given the chance. I do think CA will play a role in this case (i.e., what drove KC to commit this horrendous murder). I say that only as a possible defense that ALy might try to put before the jury.

JMO

If in court the Defense proves the forensics are wrong and LE failed to conduct a thorough investigation, what conclusion, do you believe this will lead the jury to? In my opinion, the logical conclusion would be that SODDI. But what do you think?

 

[whiteangora]

You are mistaken, Casey's wallet was NOT in the purse left in the car, it was found at TL's apartment with her things when Lee went to get them the night of July 15.

The car was completely out of gas, so it would have been impossible to steal. Casey also contacted 2 people to try to get gasoline. So I'm not 100% convinced that she didn't want to get the car back. Yes, it might have been she was trying to plant evidence with the 2 she contacted to get gas from. It's very hard to know for sure what was going on there. But I am reasonably certain she didn't want the car to be stolen because she left is locked and totally out of gas.

bold,me

I'm in agreement about the purse. That seems to be another one of Cindy's lies and it spread like wildfire. There was a black leather bag and a leather CD case left in the car. Her purse was left at Tony's.
Which 2 people did Casey try to contact for gas? I thought it was shown that there was a large gas station directly behind Amscot.
Besides, Casey told Tony she had car trouble and that her father would be taking care of it.

 

[MissJames]

If in court the Defense proves the forensics are wrong and LE failed to conduct a thorough investigation, what conclusion, do you believe this will lead the jury to? In my opinion, the logical conclusion would be that SODDI. But what do you think?

That can often be a sticking point...you can have dueling experts and the jury has to decide what makes the most sense.One of the biggest pieces of evidence,in my mind ,is the decomp in the car.The defense would have to prove the smell WAS something else,not just suggest it might be.For me,anyway,just speaking for myself.
The only other SOD I could accapt would be one of the A's.You have to make sense of all of the evidence in it's totality,not just the forensics.
I know you have a theory on why KC didn't report Caylee missing,but considering all the other evidence it doesn't make sense to me.YET anyway.

 

[Balthazar]

bold,me

I'm in agreement about the purse. That seems to be another one of Cindy's lies and it spread like wildfire. There was a black leather bag and a leather CD case left in the car. Her purse was left at Tony's.
Which 2 people did Casey try to contact for gas? I thought it was shown that there was a large gas station directly behind Amscot.
Besides, Casey told Tony she had car trouble and that her father would be taking care of it.

First Casey called JG and asked him to bring a gas can from home, but he was across town and told her he could not help. After that, Casey got AH to buy a gas can for her at Target, but failed to get gas. I believe AH had to go to work or go somewhere and didn't have time to get the gas.

Some people believe that Casey was attempting to set one of these two people up by getting them to bring gas to her car and put their fingerprints on the car while it was at the Amscott.

Framing these two incidents:

Beforehand: Casey called TL and had him come pick her up at her car at the Amscott. At that time, he asked her if there was anything he could do to help with the car, but she refused his offer of help saying her dad was going to take care of it. She was standing outside of her car when TL arrived with a white plastic trashbag containing freezer pops and frozen chicken of some sort. It is believed she had taken these items from the Anthony house.

Afterwards: The car was towed BEFORE Casey got anyone to bring gas to the car.

Anomalies: Usually, when someone is trying to frame someone, it is one specific victim or a family/couple and it is usually done because of some negative feelings/grudge/anger/rage against that person or family/couple. The person attempting to frame someone else, will manufacture evidence that points to the person they are trying to frame. In this case, Casey called two different people for gas. If she was, in fact, attempting to frame either one of them, how would that fit with the manufactured evidence flow - if one exists? (And yes, I can think of some things which might be part of the manufactured evidence for JG, but not for AH.)

The problem with this scenario, IMO, is that Amy and Jesse had no relationship at the time this occurred. If the two of them had gotten together prior to these two incidents, then, attempting to frame either of them would make perfect sense. But they were not a couple.

This whole scenario is probably worthy of it's own thread.

 

[Devon]

bold,me

I'm in agreement about the purse. That seems to be another one of Cindy's lies and it spread like wildfire. There was a black leather bag and a leather CD case left in the car. Her purse was left at Tony's.
Which 2 people did Casey try to contact for gas? I thought it was shown that there was a large gas station directly behind Amscot.
Besides, Casey told Tony she had car trouble and that her father would be taking care of it.

She had no gas can. IIRC she first asked JG if he could help her, but he was at his parent's home on the other side of town and said he couldn't assist. She then asked AH, who took her to a store and actually paid for a gas can for her. AH couldn't lend KC her own, as it was with the rest of her stuff in storage, awaiting the 'move to Hopespring' that never was! This info. is all in the text message discovery.

When KC finally had a gas can on June 30 though, it was too late, the car had been towed. I believe she had every intention of retrieving her car, and only told AL that the car had problems so that she wouldn't have to use it to drive him to the airport for his trip to NY (remember it had a squirrel problem by then! ).

 

[Balthazar]

Before I present my findings about the information that exists as to at least one other person that may be involved, a little background.

The information comes from something known as Reverse Speech. Which is messages from our unconscious mind embedded backward into speech. This communication in reverse, is received perfectly by our unconscious mind. Electroencephalograph (EEG) tests have shown that brain activity alters significantly when Reverse Speech occurs. Speech reversals can be found in any language.The uncovering of this embedded information, amongst the gibberish in reverse, can and does reveal the true beliefs, thoughts, and knowledge of one’s communication.

Speech reversals will add to information left out in forward speech, and negate forward speech with the truth if a lie is told. A speech reversal can occur even if someone is talking about one subject, but thinking of another.

I believe I have more than 60 reversals from Casey. As well as some examples of reverse speech from Cindy, Lee, Caylee, and Jesse Grund.

edited by me, with respect.

Thank you for taking the time to post this. I know little to nothing about reverse speech, but this was very interesting, indeed! Has this ever been used in a courtroom as a defense or is it strictly used as an investigational tool?

Would you happen to have any links to articles or such that discuss the validity of reverse speech? I would like to learn more about it.

 

[Balthazar]

That can often be a sticking point...you can have dueling experts and the jury has to decide what makes the most sense.One of the biggest pieces of evidence,in my mind ,is the decomp in the car.The defense would have to prove the smell WAS something else,not just suggest it might be.For me,anyway,just speaking for myself.
The only other SOD I could accapt would be one of the A's.You have to make sense of all of the evidence in it's totality,not just the forensics.
I know you have a theory on why KC didn't report Caylee missing,but considering all the other evidence it doesn't make sense to me.YET anyway.

Actually, I have several theories as to what may have happened and alternative versions of each theory as well. In some, Casey is guilty, in a few, she is innocent. I have only showed you all one of my "innocent" theories here, but I'm not 100% convinced ANY of my theories are right.

 

[whiteangora]

She had no gas can. IIRC she first asked JG if he could help her, but he was at his parent's home on the other side of town and said he couldn't assist. She then asked AH, who took her to a store and actually paid for a gas can for her. AH couldn't lend KC her own, as it was with the rest of her stuff in storage, awaiting the 'move to Hopespring' that never was! This info. is all in the text message discovery.

When KC finally had a gas can on June 30 though, it was too late, the car had been towed. I believe she had every intention of retrieving her car, and only told AL that the car had problems so that she wouldn't have to use it to drive him to the airport for his trip to NY (remember it had a squirrel problem by then! ).

OK, I've got it now. My only question now would be, if her car smelled so bad, why would she want to get it back?

 

[SoSueMe]

If in court the Defense proves the forensics are wrong and LE failed to conduct a thorough investigation, what conclusion, do you believe this will lead the jury to? In my opinion, the logical conclusion would be that SODDI. But what do you think?

Quite frankly, I don't think they need to rely on the scientific evidence in this case. I think there is enough circumstantial evidence to convict KC. I do NOT think the jury will think SODDI just because they don't believe in the air samples and/or death band on Caylee's hair found in the trunk.

As far as LE failing to conduct a through investigation, I don't think that is the case. They seem pretty thorough to me, even making reports of people's dreams.

 

[SoSueMe]

Before I present my findings about the information that exists as to at least one other person that may be involved, a little background.

The information comes from something known as Reverse Speech. Which is messages from our unconscious mind embedded backward into speech. This communication in reverse, is received perfectly by our unconscious mind. Electroencephalograph (EEG) tests have shown that brain activity alters significantly when Reverse Speech occurs. Speech reversals can be found in any language.The uncovering of this embedded information, amongst the gibberish in reverse, can and does reveal the true beliefs, thoughts, and knowledge of one’s communication.

Speech reversals will add to information left out in forward speech, and negate forward speech with the truth if a lie is told. A speech reversal can occur even if someone is talking about one subject, but thinking of another.

I believe I have more than 60 reversals from Casey. As well as some examples of reverse speech from Cindy, Lee, Caylee, and Jesse Grund.

The following are the reverse speech examples from Casey, among other things, that suggest someone else may be involved:

(Investigator: I would have called the police immediately, and that's the part that I just don't understand.)
I didn't know what to do. (Crosstalk) (Investigator: We could, we got so many resources...)
Reason is the boy. (Crosstalk) (Investigator reversal: "Don't see a reason. What's the deal?")

If she was with her family right now she'd be in the best place.
When I give you my proof, they'll do sh**.
{"They" - seems to be obvious that there may be more than one other person she is afraid of.}

You don't know what my involvement is and stuff?
Must see the involvement. I'm the one choice.
{Casey seems to be very upset that she is going to be the obvious choice to be investigated. If she the one, or perhaps the only one involved, why would she be so upset?}

Waste my call sitting in oh, the the jail.
Boys did this. Warned me against the law help you. (Partial cross talk with Cindy Anthony)
{Seems to be clear she is stating not only "boy" but plural. More than one other male involved? And she has been warned not to go to police. People ask why didn't she call 911? Perhaps this is the reason. If the scenario could exist that she witnessed her daughter’s murder, Casey already knows what this person(s) is capable of, maybe self preservation of herself and her family is now what she believed to be the right choice of action by now contacting police. She had stated in the police interview "I didn't know what to do".}

It' was just that every single thing...
No one hear what necessary. (Cross talk with Lee Anthony)
{Does this reversal mean there is more going on that needs to be told?}

Because he's my boyfriend and I would actually try to sit and talk to him.
They are still scared when they're not guilty...
{Reversals are known to occur in the third person. Since she is referencing her boyfriend in the forward speech, could "they" be referring to Casey and him, or does someone else know what happened?}

...because I got arrested on a...
...in all the terror.
{An indicator she is afraid?}

Sweetheart if I...
I'm helping guard you. (cross talking)
{Does Casey not want to tell her friend what happened believing it will protect her friend?}

I will call you tomorrow. I want to talk to him really quick now. I don't want to close minds....
Just to show that I'm the killer. Then it goes to nowhere.
{This reversal is from her call from jail on 7-16-08. It appears to reveal a couple of things. First she references "the killer" this would seem to indicate that Caylee is dead and she knows it. Remember, all the public knows at this point is Caylee is missing. The second thing is, she is not willing to have a discussion if it revolves around Casey as being "the killer". If the conversation will lead "to nowhere" then it is futile to have it be about Casey.}


I was with them all day today.
Had to stay low.
{Is she afraid to be seen with the police?}

(Cindy - "Jose said that you said everything would make sense once we found Caylee.")
Well yeah. Once you have someone that you can talk to that you can get real explanation from that, notes, knows where she's been...
Be sure no one's been with Mark Meschino (sp)
{This conversation occurs on 7-25-08, 9 days later, she seems to be concerned that no one has contacted a certain person. It seems she is revealing a name. In my opinion it sounds like a persons name. Could it be an alias that someone is using, but that is the name she knows? From what I understand Casey's whereabouts at all times have not been confirmed. Could she have been leading some type of double life where she got herself, and her daughter into a bad situation?}

(Question: Is there anybody else that knew you were searching for Caylee?)
Outside of them no.
I'm not the despot.

(Question from Lee: I'm just curious if anything has changed as far as who I can trust and those type of things?)
As far as I'm concerned here, I don't really know on that level.
Hold out on that dealer.
{This conversation is on 7-26-08, 1 day after talking with her parents, and revealing a name. Could this be "Mark Meschino" sp?}

I guess understandably just...
Just kill. The nature in that fa****.
{Another indicator early on that Caylee may be dead, and at the hands of this person?}

...being out of contact but...
That guy not what I need.

The opportunity was there that I probably could've helped. I'm trying. I was trying. There's, there's nothing more that I can say or do until I'm home.
My wish that we agree to sneak out of the home. If unobserved I'll show ya.
{First, notice what she is saying in forward speech. Casey's reverse speech seems to be indicating that if given the chance she would show her parents where Caylee was. If she was the one that killed her daughter, why would she want to do that?}

(Casey is commenting on the media.)
...I'll do whatever the hell I have to, to get my family back together.
Wish the he** I had a way to respond.
{This conversation with her parents took place on 8-14-08. People may say if she was afraid to go to police before, she's now in jail, what could she be afraid of? My opinion from this statement is on one hand she seems to be emphatic that she wants her family back together, but at the same time her reversal seems to indicate she still doesn't know how to do it.}
________________________________

Side note: In one of the released audios with Casey and her parents. Casey is talking with her mother about one of her visits where she was only allowed one visitor. She chose her father, and went into detail why she chose him. During her initial call from jail on 7-16-08 she is indicating, by a reversal, then she wanted to talk with her father when she said "Bring in my father.". In the end that is what happened, she met with her father. I believe this is a simple example of the validity, and accuracy of reverse speech. If this reversal is accurate, how about all the others? If she were given the chance to have talked with her father sooner, could this case have evolved differently?
_________________________________

In another reversal from Casey she says "Not this guilty." Does this mean she is professing innocence? Perhaps. Perhaps not. When you factor in other reversals "I'm not the despot.,and Just to show that I'm the killer. Then it goes to nowhere. , Reason is the boy. , Boys did this. ,it doesn't seem to me she is "the one" who killed her daughter. Perhaps she had a hand in it, or maybe she feels some responsibility for her daughter's death, I don't know. What is certain to me is that there is not one speech reversal of Casey that I have found where she is indicating direct involvement. She does not reveal any motives of any nature either. By all accounts she was known to be a good mother to her daughter. What Casey does seem to be indicating several times is - someone else is involved.

That's my two cents with the evidence presented that it is quite possible, and even probable, that SODDI.

Okay, well, good luck with this one. I understand the part about speech reversal (thanks for the links to each one), but your interpretation of the reversal is not what I would necessarily interpret it to be. For instance, on "The reason is the boy" why couldn't that mean: "The reason I killed Caylee is because of the boy?" See what I mean?

 

[MissJames]

I wonder if GA ,CA, and LA are being kept in the defense team loop.If not ,that would be a big indicator as to where the defense team may be headed.

 

[countzero]

She had no gas can. IIRC she first asked JG if he could help her, but he was at his parent's home on the other side of town and said he couldn't assist. She then asked AH, who took her to a store and actually paid for a gas can for her. AH couldn't lend KC her own, as it was with the rest of her stuff in storage, awaiting the 'move to Hopespring' that never was! This info. is all in the text message discovery.

When KC finally had a gas can on June 30 though, it was too late, the car had been towed. I believe she had every intention of retrieving her car, and only told AL that the car had problems so that she wouldn't have to use it to drive him to the airport for his trip to NY (remember it had a squirrel problem by then! ).

Don't forget that KC told people that GA was going to take care of the car after she left it at Amscot. She had no plans to retrieve it IMO. She probably figured like CA would that the "odor" was a combo of rotten pizza and squirrels on the undercarriage. Both were proved to be false. I don't think KC even considered the car to be an issue. Simply being sloppy with stories as was her norm.

 

[countzero]

I wonder if GA ,CA, and LA are being kept in the defense team loop.If not ,that would be a big indicator as to where the defense team may be headed.

Me too at one time or another during the past long months. Based on the statements that GA has made, they didn't like him from July 16, 08 on. And CA's ego up against JB's ego would be a PPV event.

The other reason why I don't think they have contact with them is self-family preservation of what actually happened with Caylee in the 36 hours of June 15-16, 08. This to me, is the only time CA's lips have been zipped, locked and tossed that key far, far away in never, never A'land.

 

[ShawnHS]

Okay, well, good luck with this one. I understand the part about speech reversal (thanks for the links to each one), but your interpretation of the reversal is not what I would necessarily interpret it to be. For instance, on "The reason is the boy" why couldn't that mean: "The reason I killed Caylee is because of the boy?" See what I mean?

The investigator says "I would have called police immediately, and that's the part that I just don't understand". Here reversal in response is "The reason is the boy." That is the reason she did not contact police, not that she killed her daughter for a boy. She is not making any reference whatsoever to killing anybody.

 

[ShawnHS]

Has this ever been used in a courtroom as a defense or is it strictly used as an investigational tool?

It has been used in aiding investigators. It has not been used directly in a courtroom.

Would you happen to have any links to articles or such that discuss the validity of reverse speech?

David Oates discovered Reverse Speech over 25 yrs. ago. He has extensive articles on his site: http://www..com . Go to the "Library" section.

 

[Balthazar]

Don't forget that KC told people that GA was going to take care of the car after she left it at Amscot. She had no plans to retrieve it IMO. She probably figured like CA would that the "odor" was a combo of rotten pizza and squirrels on the undercarriage. Both were proved to be false. I don't think KC even considered the car to be an issue. Simply being sloppy with stories as was her norm.

She only told AL this as far as I know. Can you cite documentation that she told anyone else that GA was going to take care of it?

 

[RR0004]

First Casey called JG and asked him to bring a gas can from home, but he was across town and told her he could not help. After that, Casey got AH to buy a gas can for her at Target, but failed to get gas. I believe AH had to go to work or go somewhere and didn't have time to get the gas.

Some people believe that Casey was attempting to set one of these two people up by getting them to bring gas to her car and put their fingerprints on the car while it was at the Amscott.

Framing these two incidents:

Beforehand: Casey called TL and had him come pick her up at her car at the Amscott. At that time, he asked her if there was anything he could do to help with the car, but she refused his offer of help saying her dad was going to take care of it. She was standing outside of her car when TL arrived with a white plastic trashbag containing freezer pops and frozen chicken of some sort. It is believed she had taken these items from the Anthony house.

Afterwards: The car was towed BEFORE Casey got anyone to bring gas to the car.

Anomalies: Usually, when someone is trying to frame someone, it is one specific victim or a family/couple and it is usually done because of some negative feelings/grudge/anger/rage against that person or family/couple. The person attempting to frame someone else, will manufacture evidence that points to the person they are trying to frame. In this case, Casey called two different people for gas. If she was, in fact, attempting to frame either one of them, how would that fit with the manufactured evidence flow - if one exists? (And yes, I can think of some things which might be part of the manufactured evidence for JG, but not for AH.)

The problem with this scenario, IMO, is that Amy and Jesse had no relationship at the time this occurred. If the two of them had gotten together prior to these two incidents, then, attempting to frame either of them would make perfect sense. But they were not a couple.

This whole scenario is probably worthy of it's own thread.

According to Amy, they went on the 30th to get the gas can (per her interview). Casey had 3 days to bring gas to the car. I got the impression there really wasn't any urgency.

 

[Tuffy]

It has been used in aiding investigators. It has not been used directly in a courtroom.



David Oates discovered Reverse Speech over 25 yrs. ago. He has extensive articles on his site: http://www..com . Go to the "Library" section.

Reverse speech would not be admissible in court, and is not backed by science. It is a pseudoscience.

AFAIK most investigators would not use this in a criminal investigation.

 

[RR0004]

Okay, well, good luck with this one. I understand the part about speech reversal (thanks for the links to each one), but your interpretation of the reversal is not what I would necessarily interpret it to be. For instance, on "The reason is the boy" why couldn't that mean: "The reason I killed Caylee is because of the boy?" See what I mean?

I have to admit I played Revolution #9 backwards...convinced I heard "Paul was dead". Of course, until I saw that he was very much alive. Sometimes it is what it is.

 

[Pattymarie]

i have to admit i played revolution #9 backwards...convinced i heard "paul was dead". Of course, until i saw that he was very much alive. Sometimes it is what it is.

lolololol!