GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 August 2014 - #38 *Arrest*

[heather.scissorhands]

SteveS, thank you for your reply.

No, they specifically stated that she had been sexually abused by her father since age 8 with no proof. Then they said that she didn't murder her child, but instead her father found Caylee drowned in a pool and forced her to cover it up. They used the weak defense that because her father had molested her she was incapable of telling the truth.

There was no one to prove these things. They were crazy. At the end, Jose actually brought out a board with all of Carey's "imaginary friends" (ie all the people that she knew or didn't know and lied about) and said that she was damaged and that even though those people weren't real, her lies did not mean she killed her aughter.

It's actually pretty fascinating. You might consider looking into that case. It definitely makes me uncomfortable.

But, they really did bring all that in without anyone to confirm it. So, how is that possible? Why did that happen? I'm genuinely confused.

And, this relates to this case to me,,because I obviously am confused with how defense works.

 

[Lrc143]

SteveS, can you please explain how the defense was able to use unprovable evidence in the Casey Anthony case for me? That's part of why I cant seem to comprehend what you are trying to say. No disrespect.... I'm seriously curious why the defense was able to make completely unprovable theories that sidetracked the jury? I don't believe the defense was the only reason she got off, so you don't have to explain where the prosecution went wrong or any of that. Just please explain to me how they were able to construct their defense on completely no proveable evidence?

the CA case was so long ago that i could be wrong on this: BUT didn't Jose just bring up the molestation in his opening but then didn't present any evidence or witnesses? Both sides asked George and he said no ( and I think that was it). Didn't Jose by the end of the trial say that it was a swimming accident and George covered it up? I thought that the judge had said he couldn't mention it again since he didn't have the evidence. From what I understand, it's rather rare for a lawyer to say something in opening statements, then not present evidence on it or mention it again. Of course, we'll probably never know what the jury held on to to create reasonable doubt.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Well, isn't it bath salts that are supposed to be more dangerous? I am not saying molly isn't and it is hard to get it pure. All drugs are dangerous in many instances. The people at the party had probably already done plenty. Believe me, with all the young people I have friended on Facebook, I have found open drug discussion to be not at all uncommon. "This could be bad for you. Take that instead." And then a little mini debate ensues, only friendlier -- if you know what I mean. I would like to invent a drug called NICE. You take it and all discussions flow smoothly.

I am off to bed, having already taken my melatonin.

When I was younger, I was the nicest person you'd ever want to meet and am still very nice.
Back then tough I wouldn't say what I felt or thought because I didn't want to hurt the feelings of other people.
Speaking directly versus intending to be rude are two different things.
If I unintentionally hurt anyone's feelings, they'll get over it just as I have had to do on many occasions.
My writing lacks finesse at times when better word choices aren't forthcoming.

 

[heather.scissorhands]

I actually think that you would find her case more satisfying. I don't know what you said to me. I am not going to worry about it. However, I sense a great and understandable frustration. It is just that you don't have the tie-in to Arochi that amounts to admissible evidence. It may be a long way to trial. Sometimes things just are what they are.

I think you may be right about Mystique's case. I will devote more energy in that direction as I seem to just be hitting a dead end with Christina's case. I am frustrated. I am sad. I am upset. I know too much about her, honestly. I think I learned too much.. Weird things, like her favorite song and movie and her favorite quotes. How she was feeling the months up to her disappearance and what crutches she was using to deal with those emotions. I have talked in depth with her true BFF. I know too much about how funny she is and how creative and fun she is. And I don't have a single tie in to Arochi, you are right. I can't dig up anything on him and neither can any of her friends that have talked to me. He was a stranger to them. It's like he barely has a past.

Ok, ok...I have my suspicions and I will continue to voice them, but I'll try not to be so emotional and defensive. Truce, level headed thinkers?

 

[Bootsctr]

HS, I need to put my beer goggles on... I want reassurance that all of the people that night have been investigated fully and cleared. I want to know what the fight was about, and of course I want Christina found..... For all we know Christina could have been pregnant and the argument was about that. IMO that would certainly put a different light on the "fight".

 

[heather.scissorhands]

BOOTS...I do too. I want that information. I want to know what's happened that night with the 5 people you mentioned. I don't really trust anyone in this scenario. I think, for good reason.

Keep on thinking. At this point, we need to find her. I don't think she is alive, unfortunately. I'm very saddened by that.

I wish these damn "burner phones" weren't a part of these kid's lives. It just makes it so hard to sort out the truth from the fiction.

Does ANYONE know if PPs apt was searched? CM and HFs?

 

[SeeAlice]

Ha, thanks, bootsctr! sorry that got snipped all to heck. I didn't think it was that bad, but hey, I'm fairly forward, so im sure it was...

OT: And, Daisy, I like you, so none of this is personal to me. I'm still working on Mystique 'scase with the anime community. I had her picture out at my autograph panels and several kids have reposted her picture. Unfortunately, I have no leads on that at all.

Are you famous, Heather?

 

[heather.scissorhands]

Lol. Not really. I'm a voice actress. Z-list.

ETA: Voice actors are like pseudo celebs. We have a lot of fans because the anime community is really tight. So, am I famous at an Anime Convention? Yes. To a bunch of 14 year olds. LOL. It's hard to explain that community. But, it is a big deal to the youth. Just not anyone else.

Most of my acting is done in a recording booth with my director and sound engineer. Then it is mass produced and I have an audience of thousands at that point. I never see them and they never see me unless they are an online fan or we meet at a con.

 

[Helen_Ready]

We do not know all the facts.

And, so far, I believe a jury could have reasonable doubt and that's all it takes for EA to walk. The case is even weaker until we have a body, and even then, the body will be so decomposed it's going to e hard to prove how she died (unless there is blunt force or bullets, as was stated above.)

DNA is weak evidence.... That's a new one.

 

[heather.scissorhands]

Oh, and I guess I should say that being a voice actor means I do voices for cartoons and video games and cheesy Asian overdubs. As well as many other voice projects, lie radio and stuff like that...

 

[Helen_Ready]

And this is exactly the reason I can NOT say without a doubt that he will be convicted. Because we do not know all the facts. Quite a few people have already decided this is an open and shut case, without having all the facts. I find that very confusing. I mean, Yall have seen people get a not guilty verdict, right? I just don't think ANYONE can say with certainty what happened to Christina. With the exception of EA, of course.

I'm more confused that you see the DNA as weak evidence.

 

[heather.scissorhands]

Well, let's talk about the DNA. We don't know much, but what we do know is that there was enough DNA for them to believe she was in bodily harm, right?

I think I remember that there were only two spots that were "faintly luminescent." Is that right? They did testify that they thought it was enough that she did not survive, right?

And, I think this was brought up earlier, but we don't actually know yet what the DNA was? Most likely a combination of fluids?

 

[heather.scissorhands]

And, just FYI, neither quote of mine that you pulled up mentions DNA at all. And I will say it again--I do not doubt that she was in that trunk. And I do not doubt that EA is involved/guilty as f*ck.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Oh well. That was not quite what I was talking about. I was merely explaining the effects of Adderall on helping people stay awake for a long drive. In a circumstance like that the XR version would be helpful.

I'm not picking on you but just trying to explain my reaction to your response to my post.
I wondered if the drug given to CM before going out at 11PM could have been Molly versus Adderall.
We know CM used Adderall but we don't know the details from that day.
Still, I'm wondering if she had taken Molly.

I felt your response negated my questioning what drug CM may have consumed.
Plus CM didn't take whatever drug it was that EA (the liar) mentioned prior to her leaving to drive home.
She took it earlier in the evening.
Therefore, I didn't understand the logic of your post as replying to my post.
Since I was tired and frustrated I wrote a brief reply that must have come across as being curt.
For that, I'm sorry daisy as I don't ever wish to hurt your feelings.

One thing I learned about Molly on Drugs, Inc. is that frequent users build up the feel good chemical in the brain so they take another one in order to achieve the same 'high'. A body can overheat and there's also a danger involving dehydration or over hydration. Considering Christina had a pint size physical body may have put her at even greater risk for bad reactions.
Plus the fact she was feeling down when Molly is supposed to bring people up.

If someone wants to debate a point, I'm ok with that but would appreciate a direct debate versus a diversion from the point I'm making.
Does this make sense? It's like using an eraser.

 

[Helen_Ready]

Well, let's talk about the DNA. We don't know much, but what we do know is that there was enough DNA for them to believe she was in bodily harm, right?

I think I remember that there were only two spots that were "faintly luminescent." Is that right? They did testify that they thought it was enough that she did not survive, right?

And, I think this was brought up earlier, but we don't actually know yet what the DNA was? Most likely a combination of fluids?

PPD could have even more DNA....

 

[heather.scissorhands]

PPD could have even more DNA....

I certainly hope so. But, since we don't know if they do, where does that leave us in this debate?

 

[Helen_Ready]

I think you may be right about Mystique's case. I will devote more energy in that direction as I seem to just be hitting a dead end with Christina's case. I am frustrated. I am sad. I am upset. I know too much about her, honestly. I think I learned too much.. Weird things, like her favorite song and movie and her favorite quotes. How she was feeling the months up to her disappearance and what crutches she was using to deal with those emotions. I have talked in depth with her true BFF. I know too much about how funny she is and how creative and fun she is. And I don't have a single tie in to Arochi, you are right. I can't dig up anything on him and neither can any of her friends that have talked to me. He was a stranger to them. It's like he barely has a past.

Ok, ok...I have my suspicions and I will continue to voice them, but I'll try not to be so emotional and defensive. Truce, level headed thinkers?

You have a tie in with EA.. The DNA... Remember we are dealing with a police force that has a great reputation.....

 

[Bootsctr]

I find it confounding that LE didn't find CM's DNA when they first took EA's car. Secondly, how much blood or saliva does LE think was in the trunk? I mean if he cold-cocked her at the garage and threw her into the trunk by the time he reached home and popped the trunk Christina could have shot out of that trunk like a mad pitbull. LE is going to have to show proof of a second crime scene at EA's home, I'm thinking.

Plus, maybe EA had the coke to sell instead of HF? Maybe the text to HF "how about some of that good rock?" was letting HF know EA had some for sale.

 

[heather.scissorhands]

You know, boots, you are starting to ask a lot of questions...be careful...

That text means something. I don't know wtf it means, but my gut feeling is that it's important.,and maybe not accidental.

Can anyone give me a solid motive for why EA would do this alone?

 

[SteveS]

SteveS, thank you for your reply.

No, they specifically stated that she had been sexually abused by her father since age 8 with no proof. Then they said that she didn't murder her child, but instead her father found Caylee drowned in a pool and forced her to cover it up. They used the weak defense that because her father had molested her she was incapable of telling the truth.

There was no one to prove these things. They were crazy. At the end, Jose actually brought out a board with all of Carey's "imaginary friends" (ie all the people that she knew or didn't know and lied about) and said that she was damaged and that even though those people weren't real, her lies did not mean she killed her aughter.

It's actually pretty fascinating. You might consider looking into that case. It definitely makes me uncomfortable.

But, they really did bring all that in without anyone to confirm it. So, how is that possible? Why did that happen? I'm genuinely confused.

And, this relates to this case to me,,because I obviously am confused with how defense works.

It sounds to me like some of that was simply opening arguments, not presented as part of the case. No evidence needed there. And I wouldn't know how other things that might have been examined were allowable into that trial without having followed it closely, and I think it was a fairly long one.

In general, you may have simply had a case where there was evidence of something, but it wasn't very limiting. For example, there was evidence in a car trunk, but didn't many others have easy and regular access to the same trunk? Wasn't a body found, but lots of people had an equal opportunity to put it there?

Not knowing the case details, it's kinda futile for me to try to tell you why it went down like it did. Now if you want me to explain the OJ case.... LOL :smile: