What questions should Mr. Morgan ask at the second G and C depositions

[Mamabear1963]

Barry Scheck (sp) from the OJ trial...How about that Nanny Zanny!!!! No Dennis Fung to beat up in this trial. JB needs to realize junk science has already been used. I say blame it on the white puppy that belonged to Zanny.:banghead:

Don't throw the puppy under the bus...please...not the puppy...

(sorry, back to the depo questions)

 

[songline]

Morgan is a nut, ZG is exonerated.
and has'nt suffered at all, as she has worked off the books and continues to collect Social Security.
How is she suffering? ZG has become an opportunist. (like many others)
Why isn’t ZG going after Casey, not C&G who have never met her. ?
It amazes me that the lawsuit is even continuing.
EXONERATED

 

[Lexington]

For George:

You made a point of telling FBI/LE about your chasing KC in your car in late June. Why did you feel it necessary to mention this to FBI/LE and what compelled you to chase her? Why did you feel it necessary to not tell Cindy about this chase? Why did both you and Cindy change to date from late June to April or May?

 

[jandkmom]

Morgan is a nut, ZG is exonerated.
and has'nt suffered at all, as she has worked off the books and continues to collect Social Security.
How is she suffering? ZG has become an opportunist. (like many others)
Why isn’t ZG going after Casey, not C&G who have never met her. ?
It amazes me that the lawsuit is even continuing.
EXONERATED

Good morning.

I hate to beat a dead horse as the saying goes, but she has not been exonerated in a court of law.

If Morgan is a nut, then Casey is the squirrel

She was fired from her job and living in a motel with children.

The lawsuit is against KC and she refused to answer the questions. GA and CA are being deposed to determine if there was an actual nanny. If they would come out and say there was no nanny, I believe the lawsuit would be dropped, but they won't. Just because they have said she isn't the nanny doesn't mean anything because they never met the nanny. Should there be as many lawsuits as there are people with the same name and they go through them one at a time? If this woman is determined to not be the nanny, then I hope the will represent the woman in Puerto Rico that is "being watched". They can't just keep claiming someone else murdered and kidnapped Caylee and refuse to give details.

 

[ecs5298]

1. You have stated in sworn statements that you performed searches of myspace pages on your desktop looking for Zenaida's. In these searches did you discover a myspace created on June 16th with the name "zenaida" age 22 with a location of Miami, FL and having a Dora the Dancing Doll as a picture?

If answer is yes or I don't remember...when you found this "zenaida" myspace of the 22 year old zenaida in Miami, FL, and based on the fact Casey had already shared that Zenaida had connections in Miami, and that people should be looking in the Miami area, did you contact law enforcement about what you had found?


<regretfully snipped for space>

Yes or no, Cindy - that's the way you like it.

(Okay, I've got to quit, I'm having too much fun.)

Have you emailed these to John Morgan? If not, you need to. Excellent questioning. Bravo. :clap::clap::clap::clap:

 

[Lexington]

Judging from the depositions, I got the feeling that at times GA did not care what answer he was giving, as long as it was contentious. So, I would like to get some real answers about the Blanchard Park scenario.

Also, why when he smelled death, he wanted the tow yard guy with him when he opened the trunk. As a witness?

Also, if he thought that smell was pizza, why he even bothered to drag that tow yard guy into witnessing him opening the trunk.

I always thought this was very strange. Did George already know that the remains were not there? Or, not able to be seen because they were hidden in the wheel well? I too think that "George knows a lot about a lot of things".

 

[songline]

Good morning.

I hate to beat a dead horse as the saying goes, but she has not been exonerated in a court of law.

If Morgan is a nut, then Casey is the squirrel

She was fired from her job and living in a motel with children.

The lawsuit is against KC and she refused to answer the questions. GA and CA are being deposed to determine if there was an actual nanny. If they would come out and say there was no nanny, I believe the lawsuit would be dropped, but they won't. Just because they have said she isn't the nanny doesn't mean anything because they never met the nanny. Should there be as many lawsuits as there are people with the same name and they go through them one at a time? If this woman is determined to not be the nanny, then I hope the will represent the woman in Puerto Rico that is "being watched". They can't just keep claiming someone else murdered and kidnapped Caylee and refuse to give details.

Good morning
Exonerated is exonerated.Or does he have a right to question them till the case goes to court whenever that may be?
Casey is the one that has to deal with it not G&C who never met this nanny.
I heard them say at the Depo this is not the Nanny; supposedly the real nanny is a "10" based on a Nutty Casey discription.

HERE IS AN INTERESTING THEORY
Could Zenaida gonales be a hint of a location and not a person?
http://******************/2009/01/1...anthonys-location-and-not-just-a-nannys-name/
IT is the SACRED MONKEYS SITE.

 

[USARDOG]

Morgan is a nut, ZG is exonerated.
and has'nt suffered at all, as she has worked off the books and continues to collect Social Security.
How is she suffering? ZG has become an opportunist. (like many others)
Why isn’t ZG going after Casey, not C&G who have never met her. ?
It amazes me that the lawsuit is even continuing.
EXONERATED

Not in a court of law, and no damages have paid or awarded.

Working off the books because no one will give her a real job, collecting social security... Translates into not enough to feed her children.

Suffering because her name has been trashed by people who knew she was not involved in Caylee's disappearance.

She's not going after C&G, they are witnesses in the case against KC, but i'm surprised she doesn't have a case against CA too because of the statements CA has made about ZG in the past.

Exonerated? This will follow her the rest of her life, like a cloud over her head. Her life will never be the same and it wasn't great before. IMO, she deserves damages.

 

[Valhall]

Good morning
Exonerated is exonerated.Or does he have a right to question them till the case goes to court whenever that may be?
Casey is the one that has to deal with it not G&C who never met this nanny.
I heard them say at the Depo this is not the Nanny; supposedly the real nanny is a "10" based on a Nutty Casey discription.

It really doesn't matter if she has been exonerated at this late stage. The damage was done when she was connected via the Sawgrass apartments and questioned by law enforcement and subsequently suffered a negative effect in her life from those events all caused by a lie Casey told (and for that matter Cindy broadcast further to media audiences).

And let's be clear on this, there is more than the damages Zenaida is asking for potentially involved here. The jury of this civil trial will have the option to levy punitive fines which, in my mind, are in order. To be clear, the punitive fines are measure the jury can take to DETER future acts such as what Casey has committed (i.e. accusing your own wrong doing on another person's name). Those punitive fines serve the purpose of sending a message that this will not be tolerated and there can be substantial financial consequences to such actions.

Exonerated does not equal remunerated. And irrespective of what any of us think of the merits of Zenaida's civil case, she has the legal right to attempt to recover remuneration for damages SHE FEELS has already been caused due to Casey (and Cindy's) false statements involving her name.

 

[songline]

Not in a court of law, and no damages have paid or awarded.

Working off the books because no one will give her a real job, collecting social security... Translates into not enough to feed her children.

Suffering because her name has been trashed by people who knew she was not involved in Caylee's disappearance.

She's not going after C&G, they are witnesses in the case against KC, but i'm surprised she doesn't have a case against CA too because of the statements CA has made about ZG in the past.

Exonerated? This will follow her the rest of her life, like a cloud over her head. Her life will never be the same and it wasn't great before. IMO, she deserves damages.

I am glad she was exonerated, and I know that it is Caseys reputation in question, not ZG.
ZG will only benefit in the long run. Her reputation will not be in question.
As a Nanny she must have made the same money she is currently making.
It is not as if she had a Real Job in a company.
While she did have to clear her name. SHE HAS,
Her current work is not any different then it was before this happened.
AS FOR Getting any damages.
You can not get blood out of a stone. (The A's have none)
so she better write a book and make her bundle.
Her life going forward will not suffer at all.
Exonerated.
MOO

 

[jandkmom]

Good morning
Exonerated is exonerated.Or does he have a right to question them till the case goes to court whenever that may be?
Casey is the one that has to deal with it not G&C who never met this nanny.
I heard them say at the Depo this is not the Nanny; supposedly the real nanny is a "10" based on a Nutty Casey discription.

HERE IS AN INTERESTING THEORY
Could Zenaida gonales be a hint of a location and not a person?
http://******************/2009/01/1...anthonys-location-and-not-just-a-nannys-name/

Do you believe that there ever was a nanny? If no, then why haven't GA, CA, KC, and LA come out and said there was no nanny? Because then there would be no extra person to blame this on without naming an ex boyfriend, ex friend etc...

If you believe there was a nanny with that name, then how could GA and CA rule her out since they have never met her? She is the only one close to that name that has been at Sawgrass. Do you think it could be the one in Puerto Rico, or somewhere else, then they will be next to sue and these questions will be asked all over again.

IMO there never was a nanny by that name. There is no proof she ever existed and no one has come forward that ever saw her; therefore that name should never have been thrown out there and that woman should never have lost her job. It appears financially that she doesn't have a lot of money to pick up and move to an area less familiar with her name and in reality she shouldn't have to unless she wants to. She should be financially compensated. If your name was given to LE as a suspect and you had been at the apartments, how would you feel? What if she didn't happen to have an alibi that could confirm where she was? Do you think that CA and GA would let her go to trial in place of KC? I do. I think that they would lie, cheat, and steal to protect someone in their family and couldn't care less about people in other families. They should clear her name as well as anyone else with the same name.

 

[songline]

It really doesn't matter if she has been exonerated at this late stage. The damage was done when she was connected via the Sawgrass apartments and questioned by law enforcement and subsequently suffered a negative effect in her life from those events all caused by a lie Casey told (and for that matter Cindy broadcast further to media audiences).

And let's be clear on this, there is more than the damages Zenaida is asking for potentially involved here. The jury of this civil trial will have the option to levy punitive fines which, in my mind, are in order. To be clear, the punitive fines are measure the jury can take to DETER future acts such as what Casey has committed (i.e. accusing your own wrong doing on another person's name). Those punitive fines serve the purpose of sending a message that this will not be tolerated and there can be substantial financial consequences to such actions.

Exonerated does not equal remunerated. And irrespective of what any of us think of the merits of Zenaida's civil case, she has the legal right to attempt to recover remuneration of damages SHE FEELS has already been caused due to Casey (and Cindy's) false statements involving her name.

OK I respect what you are saying and he is still a nut.
Go after Casey. Keep going after Casey.
Example:
If I said something unkind or untrue to you or about you
and you wanted to go after a relative of mine I would have to say you are crazy.
I do not see why he is going after C&G.
they gave him what he wanted To their knowledge and they have never met the Nanny she is not the "10" that Casey described so it can not be her.

They did not know any Nanny.

 

[Valhall]

OK I respect what you are saying and he is still a nut.
Go after Casey. Keep going after Casey.
Example:
If I said something unkind or untrue to you or about you
and you wanted to go after a relative of mine I would have to say you are crazy.
I do not see why he is going after C&G.
they gave him what he wanted To their knowledge and they have never met the Nanny she is not the "10" that Casey described so it can not be her.

They did not know any Nanny.

If you said something untrue about me that led law enforcement to believe I might have done something to a child, and then a relative of yours went before every mic they could find and repeated it. I'd go after both of you...and I'm not a litigious person, but there's a line I would not allow you or your broadcasting family to cross...and this would be it.

 

[debs]

Good morning
Exonerated is exonerated.Or does he have a right to question them till the case goes to court whenever that may be?
Casey is the one that has to deal with it not G&C who never met this nanny.
I heard them say at the Depo this is not the Nanny; supposedly the real nanny is a "10" based on a Nutty Casey discription.

HERE IS AN INTERESTING THEORY
Could Zenaida gonales be a hint of a location and not a person?
http://******************/2009/01/1...anthonys-location-and-not-just-a-nannys-name/

How do they know that Casey THE LIAR did not mean to cast suspicion on this woman, ZG of the Deposition, when they admit they have never met her, never written a check to her to cover daycare expenses, never spoke with her on the phone though stating they had numerous phone numbers, never driving to her home though stating they had many addresses, and what the woman looks like as compared to the woman sitting in front of them? They have only ONE person's say so as to whether THIS ZG was the woman who Casey says was not the babysitter, and Casey will not go on record as stating that she is not. Yet these people continue to assert that their lying daughter could not have stolen this woman's identity to use to blame for Caylee's disappearance and refuse to back up that statement with any possible means to demonstrate that Casey not only MEANT someone else, but that someone else actually EXISTED.

Mr. Morgan and ZG are not "going after" GACA. The Anthony's only want to say "that's not the one" and be done with it. Yet very real evidence exists that Casey DID mean this one because she thought she was innocuous enough, was expendable enough, and would deflect the truth that Casey herself is responsible for the disappearance and ultimate death of her daughter, Caylee.

Financial matters, daycare arrangements, food and clothing, transportation, relationships between parents and daughter, relationship between grandparents and granddaughter, relationship between husband and wife, all become material to the issue of whether Casey had the means and the wherewithall to support herself and her daughter, whether it caused familial stress and strife, and whether her daughter was exposed to said stress and strife, and whether or not the continued enabling of the 22 year old mother led to the death of Caylee Marie Anthony.

Perpetuating Casey's lies about having a nanny at all in the face of overwhelming evidence that one did not exist points directly back to Casey having stolen ZG's identity to implicate her. She just never thought someone would confront that and say "You cannot do that because there are repercussions." As we have seen, selfish acts for any of the Anthonys have never proven to glean any reliable repercussions. Mr. Morgan and his client may become the first to achieve the incredible: Force the Anthonys to face that they cannot just do what they want and expect others to roll over and take it.

I am one of those who in the beginning believed this to be a frivolous law suit. Not only have I changed my belief on that, I have also begun to believe she should get a group rate and sue the lot of them.

 

[jandkmom]

OK I respect what you are saying and he is still a nut.
Go after Casey. Keep going after Casey.
Example:
If I said something unkind or untrue to you or about you
and you wanted to go after a relative of mine I would have to say you are crazy.
I do not see why he is going after C&G.
they gave him what he wanted To their knowledge and they have never met the Nanny she is not the "10" that Casey described so it can not be her.

They did not know any Nanny.

In the regular trial, KC will not testify against herself then, so GA and CA will be questioned relentlessly, so they better get use to it.

It bothers me that you say she is not a "10". Are you agreeing with CA or just joking? I think she is very pretty and who are they or us to judge who is a "10". This is not a pageant and nobody should be judged on their ranking in looks. They could say she doesn't fit the general description, but that was cruel of them to say that to her. The woman did a good job not to jump up and say something at that time.

Another question that Mr. Morgan should ask CA. Do you consider yourself a "10" or KC a "10"?

 

[jandkmom]

:clap::clap:

How do they know that Casey THE LIAR did not mean to cast suspicion on this woman, ZG of the Deposition, when they admit they have never met her, never written a check to her to cover daycare expenses, never spoke with her on the phone though stating they had numerous phone numbers, never driving to her home though stating they had many addresses, and what the woman looks like as compared to the woman sitting in front of them? They have only ONE person's say so as to whether THIS ZG was the woman who Casey says was not the babysitter, and Casey will not go on record as stating that she is not. Yet these people continue to assert that their lying daughter could not have stolen this woman's identity to use to blame for Caylee's disappearance and refuse to back up that statement with any possible means to demonstrate that Casey not only MEANT someone else, but that someone else actually EXISTED.

Mr. Morgan and ZG are not "going after" GACA. The Anthony's only want to say "that's not the one" and be done with it. Yet very real evidence exists that Casey DID mean this one because she thought she was innocuous enough, was expendable enough, and would deflect the truth that Casey herself is responsible for the disappearance and ultimate death of her daughter, Caylee.

Financial matters, daycare arrangements, food and clothing, transportation, relationships between parents and daughter, relationship between grandparents and granddaughter, relationship between husband and wife, all become material to the issue of whether Casey had the means and the wherewithall to support herself and her daughter, whether it caused familial stress and strife, and whether her daughter was exposed to said stress and strife, and whether or not the continued enabling of the 22 year old mother led to the death of Caylee Marie Anthony.

Perpetuating Casey's lies about having a nanny at all in the face of overwhelming evidence that one did not exist points directly back to Casey having stolen ZG's identity to implicate her. She just never thought someone would confront that and say "You cannot do that because there are repercussions." As we have seen, selfish acts for any of the Anthonys have never proven to glean any reliable repercussions. Mr. Morgan and his client may become the first to achieve the incredible: Force the Anthonys to face that they cannot just do what they want and expect others to roll over and take it.

I am one of those who in the beginning believed this to be a frivolous law suit. Not only have I changed my belief on that, I have also begun to believe she should get a group rate and sue the lot of them.

:clap::clap::clap:

 

[marla]

jandkmom, I could have thanked you a thousand times on these last few posts ..

:blowkiss:
Thanks again ..

 

[EmMomma]

In the regular trial, KC will not testify against herself then, so GA and CA will be questioned relentlessly, so they better get use to it.

It bothers me that you say she is not a "10". Are you agreeing with CA or just joking? I think she is very pretty and who are they or us to judge who is a "10". This is not a pageant and nobody should be judged on their ranking in looks. They could say she doesn't fit the general description, but that was cruel of them to say that to her. The woman did a good job not to jump up and say something at that time.

Another question that Mr. Morgan should ask CA. Do you consider yourself a "10" or KC a "10"?

my bold
OK, the whole post was a good one, but...that last comment...
:rotfl: :rolling: :rotfl:
BTW, ITA. Being a "10" (or not) does not a murderous nanny make...and this has nothing to do with looks...other than the fact that the perp thought hers would help her get away with murder, IMO.

 

[marla]

debs and Valhall, you too!

Thanks!
:blowkiss:

 

[songline]

In the regular trial, KC will not testify against herself then, so GA and CA will be questioned relentlessly, so they better get use to it.

It bothers me that you say she is not a "10". Are you agreeing with CA or just joking? I think she is very pretty and who are they or us to judge who is a "10". This is not a pageant and nobody should be judged on their ranking in looks. They could say she doesn't fit the general description, but that was cruel of them to say that to her. The woman did a good job not to jump up and say something at that time.

Another question that Mr. Morgan should ask CA. Do you consider yourself a "10" or KC a "10"?

No, no, no..... I am not agreeing with CA at all (made bold)- I m just suggesting that they used Casey's description to state that this can not be the same ZG based on Casey's description.
Now just because Casey is not talking, the fact that her parents never met the Nanny - all the questions on earth will not shed any light on this through questioning them.