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

[Baxter]

I do not have a thread at all. Nanny's often work off the books, and that is what one of the sites/links have said
I put the link up somewhere.
I think it said she was cleaning homes. but we have so many threads I could not find it. I will try again.
The bottom line of that article was that she is an opportunist because she is STILL working off the books and collecting SS; That she has not lost any money.
I am not suggesting that she should not clear her name - SHE SHOULD and she HAS. good for her.
My point is only that enough is enough and going after the A's will produce ziltch.....
In this scenario.
I say go after the criminal side; the reason they did not call 911 much sooner, the reason they cleaned the car, the reason there are no GA finger prints on his shed (all cleaned up). that is what needs to happen in the proper arena.
BUT here we are Off topic again. so I will drop it here.
We can go further on another thread

Why would you call a person who cleans homes a nanny? I call a person who cleans homes a cleaning lady or house cleaning service. A nanny watches children.

 

[BondJamesBond]

Question for GA:

1) What was the purpose of the calls you placed:

a) 6/16 @ 3:03PM to the home phone @ 4937 Hopespring Dr. for 17 seconds?

, then, immediately following to,

b) 6/16 @ 3:04PM Casey's cell phone for 26 seconds?

You stated earlier that you observed Casey & Caylee leaving 4937 Hopespring Dr. ~12:50PM prior to your leaving for work 6/16. Why did you call the Hopespring address, then, immediately call Casey's cell phone after waiting 17seconds? Where you waiting for Casey to pick up the Hopespring home phone?

When you stated that you observed Casey leave with Caylee @ ~12:50PM, and Casey stated she dropped Caylee off @ Sawgrass apartments in the care of my client..."between 9am and 1pm" 6/16, what explanation do you have for calling the Hopespring phone @ 3:03PM?

Is it possible you have recalled the events of 6/9 in your statement of having witnessed Casey & Caylee leave Hopespring Dr. @ 12:50PM?

If you observed Casey & Caylee prior to your leaving for work at, say typically ~2:30PM, AT Hopespring Dr. compelling you to place a call to that location in what was an obvious attempt to reach Casey @ 3:03PM, please explain how you have stated in conflict with those actions that Casey & Caylee left Hopespring Dr. @ ~12:50PM.

If Casey and Caylee were @ Hopespring Dr. @ ~2:30PM, how is it possible that Casey left Caylee with my client, "between 9am and 1pm" on Monday, 6/16/08?

 

[songline]

Question for GA:

1) What was the purpose of the calls you placed:

a) 6/16 @ 3:03PM to the home phone @ 4937 Hopespring Dr. for 17 seconds?

, then, immediately following to,

b) 6/16 @ 3:04PM Casey's cell phone for 26 seconds?

You stated earlier that you observed Casey & Caylee leaving 4937 Hopespring Dr. ~12:50PM prior to your leaving for work 6/16. Why did you call the Hopespring address, then, immediately call Casey's cell phone after waiting 17seconds? Where you waiting for Casey to pick up the Hopespring home phone?

When you stated that you observed Casey leave with Caylee @ ~12:50PM, and Casey stated she dropped Caylee off @ Sawgrass apartments in the care of my client..."between 9am and 1pm" 6/16, what explanation do you have for calling the Hopespring phone @ 3:03PM?

Is it possible you have recalled the events of 6/9 in your statement of having witnessed Casey & Caylee leave Hopespring Dr. @ 12:50PM?

If you observed Casey & Caylee prior to your leaving for work at, say typically ~2:30PM, AT Hopespring Dr. compelling you to place a call to that location in what was an obvious attempt to reach Casey @ 3:03PM, please explain how you have stated in conflict with those actions that Casey & Caylee left Hopespring Dr. @ ~12:50PM.

If Casey and Caylee were @ Hopespring Dr. @ ~2:30PM, how is it possible that Casey left Caylee with my client, "between 9am and 1pm" on Monday, 6/16/08?

these are all good questions for the criminal court. JMO
I can not see the relevance in the ZG case.

 

[cecybeans]

these are all good questions for the criminal court. JMO
I can not see the relevance in the ZG case.

The criminal case and the attendant coverup by the defendant and her entire family is at the center of the civil case. If the criminal case did not exist, the civil case would not exist.

Because, as you are aware, civil case questions have much more latitude, "relevance" has a much broader interpretation.

Proving that the entire nanny story is a fabrication to begin with, and KC's extrapolation of her nanny story into a specific person named ZG, who was at Sawgrass the week Caylee disappeared, had the same car and NY plates undeniably intermingles and connects the two events. The fact that her parents privately doubted the story in their LE and FBI interviews but kept the fabrication alive in the media is definitely relevant.

Showing that the family never believed there was a nanny and that their support of the spurious story that implicated this ZG in the media - for whatever duration - due to the SPECIFIC elements that tie her and her alone to the location KC says her child was abducted - are absolutely relevant.

ANY piece of information about the family's personal condition that impacts whether the nanny story in general and this nanny story in particular is germaine.

And again, none of this would be happening if KC had not seen fit to countersue. The rest of her family could have happily taken the Fifth and refused to answer questions. It's strange to me that they place blame once again on others instead of squarely where it belongs.

Also, my friends in the area who know the legal community very well tell me that Mr. Morgan is highly respected as an attorney. He has an impressive list of lawyers in his practice, including some who have held high office in FL's Attorney General dept.

 

[MAMABEAR]

Wonderful point...So he wanted to identify Casey's character and her characheter is not adding up to much. Because Casey has no character to write home about.
But now that Nanny is off the hook, what is his point of asking more questions? to continue to make Casey a low life lier?
We already know that. And while G&C are not likable people at the end of the day we can pity and have some compassion for them, they can get out of the limelight that would be OK with me, I really do not like them.
The nanny is not in any trouble; WHY IS HE GOING AFTER THEM???
Why not go after Casey?

Bold #1. The nanny isn't "off" the hook. There are still peeps out there that think ZG is the nanny----she is the one taken to the police station.

Bold #2. Yes, "we" do know that---but she has not "legally been exonerated". That is what Mr. Morgan is in the process of doing.

Bold #3. You and I do not know what this woman has been thru or maybe still goin thru. Her kids are in school and may have to deal with other kids calling their mother (ZG) a kidnapper or baby killer.

I applaud this woman's courage to go thru with this law suit and also her lawyer----Mr Morgan. I think she is a great woman for doing this. If that had been me it would have gone in a different direction. I would have been knockin on the Anthony's door and pulling somebody's azz out on the grass. I would have preferred to have the "lady" of the house but a male would have done me just as good. I'm not tryin to sound like a bad azz--that's just the way I would have done it. Back in my day there weren't (in my existence upon the earth) ways and means for a lawyer to step up to the plate and stand up for me. I had to take care of mine but not in a CA kind of way.

ZG is a "lady" she should be treated like one. Hey, I was treated like a "lady" and when I wasn't treated like one then I showed them how to treat a "lady". I fought to be a Lady and Morgan is fighting for ZG to be the Lady she is. Go Morgan--Go Morgan. I was lucky I got away with some of the thangs I had to pull while I was raising 4 kids all by myself.

These questions he is asking could be explained by somebody who has the words to do so. But fersur---if the questions he is asking, were against the law then the Judge wouldn't let him ask them. I was surprised at the questions that Morgan can ask but hey, the law is the law and they better answer the questions.

What I'm tryin to say is---maybe we don't understand how he can ask but he can so lets listen---I'm enjoying it.

 

[NocturnalLady]

They say that the sense of smell is the strongest impression one carries. I can still remember, 40 years later, the perfume my kindergarten teacher wore. I can remember the smell on my husband after a few hours in the garage working on cars, 4 years after his death. I can remember the smell of my oldest daughter's skin immediately I first held her.

I wonder, every time George hears the word "remains" does that sense of smell kick in and he remembers his drive home from the tow yard.

Great observation. I think you are probably right. Didn't George actually throw up after discussing the smell in the car during the interview with detectives?

The connection between smells and the gut is very direct and undeniable. GA's stomach probably turns over to this day when he is forced to think about it.

He knew exactly what that smell was. Why else would he be praying that it wasn't his granddaughter when he first opened the trunk?

Pursuant to the above -

I wish Morgan would ask George if Zanny had access to the car, keys to the car or was ever known to have driven the car. And who did this information come from (because we know it doesn't come first hand & had to come from Casey.)

I wish Morgan would make sure to clarify all the answers he gets by asking the A's if the "facts" they state have come from first hand knowledge or have been told to them by Casey. It would be great way to impeach their credibility since we know that nothing that comes from Casey is above suspicion.

 

[Theonly1]

Ask George about the resume he found of Casey's in which she listed her job title as "Nanny".

 

[songline]

The criminal case and the attendant coverup by the defendant and her entire family is at the center of the civil case. If the criminal case did not exist, the civil case would not exist.

Because, as you are aware, civil case questions have much more latitude, "relevance" has a much broader interpretation.

Proving that the entire nanny story is a fabrication to begin with, and KC's extrapolation of her nanny story into a specific person named ZG, who was at Sawgrass the week Caylee disappeared, had the same car and NY plates undeniably intermingles and connects the two events. The fact that her parents privately doubted the story in their LE and FBI interviews but kept the fabrication alive in the media is definitely relevant.

Showing that the family never believed there was a nanny and that their support of the spurious story that implicated this ZG in the media - for whatever duration - due to the SPECIFIC elements that tie her and her alone to the location KC says her child was abducted - are absolutely relevant.

ANY piece of information about the family's personal condition that impacts whether the nanny story in general and this nanny story in particular is germaine.

And again, none of this would be happening if KC had not seen fit to countersue. The rest of her family could have happily taken the Fifth and refused to answer questions. It's strange to me that they place blame once again on others instead of squarely where it belongs.

Also, my friends in the area who know the legal community very well tell me that Mr. Morgan is highly respected as an attorney. He has an impressive list of lawyers in his practice, including some who have held high office in FL's Attorney General dept.

IF there is any validity at all to the concept that Casey was afraid of someone.
IF there is any validity at all to the concept that Caylees real father is an older rich man tied to drug money.
IF IF IF.....
I can not see them asking many of the questions he was going after out side of the Criminal case.
I think there are many questions that should be asked. NOT BY HIM....not his job MOO
I personally do not agree with many of the questions Mr. Morgan likes to ask. - MOO
I do not think her parents are going to throw her under the bus....
They want to believe there is a nanny "fine" but they never saw one.

NOW IF they want to call the Anthony's in for a Criminal deposition:
one not put on TV and Internet, used stricktly for the court criminal case.
I'd be happy to list many questions because I think they did know before that 911 call
and helped to clean up. They may know something that forced their hand.
I still do not understand why GA's shed does not even have his own finger prints.
BUT, but it does not belong in the civil matter.

I am glad that Ms. Gonzales will be cleared. the rest is just a matter of logistics she is in the CLEAR.
This is not about her getting what she deserves it is about how Mr. Morgan operates.
he is going for stuff that has nothing to do with Ms. Gonzales.
ALSO: the center of the civil case is the Nanny - not the entire cover up by her family.
NO - other wise he should start asking about many of the things involving the cover up.
911 call, washed pants, etc......but he can NOT. THAT This is my position.
I would not have answered many of his questions, and I am not suggesting that the "A"s acted right at all.
I wish I can recall, some of his questions, but my memory does not work as good as it used to.
And I am not interested in hearing it again. NOR am I an attorney.
I know for sure that as I was watching him, I was saying to myself
he is arrogant, he is out of order, these kind of questions belong to the criminal case....JMO

 

[sassy_texasbelle2]

IF there is any validity at all to the concept that Casey was afraid of someone.
IF there is any validity at all to the concept that Caylees real father is an older rich man tied to drug money.
IF IF IF.....
I can not see them asking many of the questions he was going after out side of the Criminal case.
I think there are many questions that should be asked. NOT BY HIM....not his job MOO
I personally do not agree with many of the questions Mr. Morgan likes to ask. - MOO
I do not think her parents are going to throw her under the bus....
They want to believe there is a nanny "fine" but they never saw one.

NOW IF they want to call the Anthony's in for a Criminal deposition:
one not put on TV and Internet, used stricktly for the court criminal case.
I'd be happy to list many questions because I think they did know before that 911 call
and helped to clean up. They may know something that forced their hand.
I still do not understand why GA's shed does not even have his own finger prints.
BUT, but it does not belong in the civil matter.

I am glad that Ms. Gonzales will be cleared. the rest is just a matter of logistics she is in the CLEAR.
This is not about her getting what she deserves it is about how Mr. Morgan operates.
he is going for stuff that has nothing to do with Ms. Gonzales.
ALSO: the center of the civil case is the Nanny - not the entire cover up by her family.
NO - other wise he should start asking about many of the things involving the cover up.
911 call, washed pants, etc......but he can NOT. THAT This is my position.
I would not have answered many of his questions, and I am not suggesting that the "A"s acted right at all.
I wish I can recall, some of his questions, but my memory does not work as good as it used to.
And I am not interested in hearing it again. NOR am I an attorney.
I know for sure that as I was watching him, I was saying to myself
he is arrogant, he is out of order, these kind of questions belong to the criminal case....JMO

We have a couple of lawyers on the board and they have both said that what Mr. M has done is totally legal and not out of bounds at all on the questions he can ask. I guess unless you can find a way to change the laws before the next time they appear it will be the same way regardless if you think it is right or not. They also state that Mr. M was totally professional on the way he conducted his questions as well as his associates. I have not heard of many lawyers that are going to be kind to people they are questioning if they are trying to hide the truth. I think they will get tough if someone is trying to play a mind game with them. They are lawyers, this is what they do. They should have stopped the whole thing the first time they started their crap and called the judge that day and stopped all this. Once again someone bent over backwards for the A's. I personally think Mr. M should have called the judge the first question they refused to answer and had them hauled off to jail.

You might want to go and read some of what these lawyers have had to say and maybe this will clear up this once and all for you. :banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[Chat Noir]

If KC was taking Caylee on a much needed vacation, why then on the 16th did GA say she left to go to work? Why didn't he say they were leaving on their vacation. Wouldn't they have packed suitcases and had long hugs and kisses goodbye if they were going on a vacation? CA & Ga needs to be asked this question and need to go into more detail on this subject IMO.

 

[Chat Noir]

ITA! Also, who's buying the new wardrobe, the new bling (and lots of it)?

That shirt CA was wearing on GMA I swear I bought a few years ago at Kohl's or somewhere so I don't think it's new. I don't know why I noticed that but I'm thinking her clothes judging by their style are a few years old For the longest time we only saw her and GA dressed in shorts and Caylee t-shirts so it's strange to see them dressed.

 

[songline]

We have a couple of lawyers on the board and they have both said that what Mr. M has done is totally legal and not out of bounds at all on the questions he can ask. I guess unless you can find a way to change the laws before the next time they appear it will be the same way regardless if you think it is right or not. They also state that Mr. M was totally professional on the way he conducted his questions as well as his associates. I have not heard of many lawyers that are going to be kind to people they are questioning if they are trying to hide the truth. I think they will get tough if someone is trying to play a mind game with them. They are lawyers, this is what they do. They should have stopped the whole thing the first time they started their crap and called the judge that day and stopped all this. Once again someone bent over backwards for the A's. I personally think Mr. M should have called the judge the first question they refused to answer and had them hauled off to jail.

You might want to go and read some of what these lawyers have had to say and maybe this will clear up this once and all for you. :banghead::banghead::banghead:

Here is a great article where he himself says he is conducting a "Homicide Investigation" :waitasec:
I did not think you can do that in a Civil Court House: To my knowledge there is another court house for that.
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...hes-conducting-a-homicide-investigation-.html

I think it is a prety fine stink that the Anthonys created with thier last performance.
But I think it belongs in the right arena, not civil....
but I think he is going after the TV station that released her name first,
that is where he will get her some real money.
but before he can win there he need to do this He is on the edge.
but staying on the legal side for sure but pushing for something else. More then money....
MOO "A certain kind of Recognition" ??? not just in Clearing ZG NO!!!!!

 

[MAMABEAR]

For George:

Did you ever see your granddaughter's remains in the trunk of the car?

Did you ever touch the remains--black trash bags--laundry bag--the body was in?

Here is a great article where he himself says he is conducting a "Homicide Investigation" :waitasec:
I did not think you can do that in a Civil Court House: To my knowledge there is another court house for that.
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...hes-conducting-a-homicide-investigation-.html

I think it is a prety fine stink that the Anthonys created with thier last performance.
But I think it belongs in the right arena, not civil....
but I think he is going after the TV station that released her name first,
that is where he will get her some real money.
but before he can win there he need to do this He is on the edge.
but staying on the legal side for sure but pushing for something else. More then money....
MOO "A certain kind of Recognition" ??? not just in Clearing ZG NO!!!!!

Actually here is the quote from Morgan from that site you posted:
"Who committed this murder has everything to do with Zeniada Gonzalez, because whoever committed this murder means Zenaida didn't," Morgan told reporters. "When we prove who did it, we prove she didn't. And when we prove she didn't, we prove our case."

He never said this--->he himself says he is conducting a "Homicide Investigation"

 

[MAMABEAR]

I just hope that Morgan can stop these peeps from throwin any and everybody under the bus.

 

[songline]

Actually here is the quote from Morgan from that site you posted:
"Who committed this murder has everything to do with Zeniada Gonzalez, because whoever committed this murder means Zenaida didn't," Morgan told reporters. "When we prove who did it, we prove she didn't. And when we prove she didn't, we prove our case."

He never said this--->he himself says he is conducting a "Homicide Investigation"

Actually it is a good article and it says many things.
<<<SNIP>>>
John Morgan may be conducting depositions in a defamation suit -- his client Zenaida Gonzalez is suing Casey Anthony. But he told reporters today he has another mission.
"If it seems like John Morgan is conducting a homicide investigation, he admits he is," WKMG-Channel 6's Mike DeForest said.
<<<SNIP>>>

 

[mitzi]

Actually it is a good article and it says many things.
<<<SNIP>>>
John Morgan may be conducting depositions in a defamation suit -- his client Zenaida Gonzalez is suing Casey Anthony. But he told reporters today he has another mission.
"If it seems like John Morgan is conducting a homicide investigation, he admits he is," WKMG-Channel 6's Mike DeForest said.
<<<SNIP>>>

That statement that you attributed to John Morgan was said by WKMG-Channel 6's Mike DeForest. It was the reporter's interpretation. JM did not say those exact words, songline.

This is what JM said:
"Who committed this murder has everything to do with Zeniada Gonzalez, because whoever committed this murder means Zenaida didn't," Morgan told reporters. "When we prove who did it, we prove she didn't. And when we prove she didn't, we prove our case."

 

[MAMABEAR]

Yes---sounds like the reporter was misconstruing What Morgan was saying--but it was a good article.

 

[Blaise]

I just hope that Morgan can stop these peeps from throwin any and everybody under the bus.

Whoa! That is such an excellent point!

Right now, CA and GA are not parties to ZFG's suit, and every time Morgan mentioned sanctions including attorney's fees, the A's seemed to dip their toe into the sea of rationality. I think they're very afraid of being held financially liable. $200,000 can only go so far.

I'll betcha attorneys for AH, WhatsHisFace the Boyfriend(s), and RK are watching. Closely. If the A's attempt to link them to the murder, I can so see Morgan filing YET ANOTHER suit, and this time holding GA and CA personally liable, and I betcha BC is telling them the same thing.

With the number of boyfriends involved, I can see this turning into a class action lawsuit!

Blaise

 

[Friday]

I'll tell you what he should ask them...what the he77 is wrong with you people?????????

:floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:

 

[songline]

I just hope that Morgan can stop these peeps from throwin any and everybody under the bus.

Well then I guess indirectly you do agree that Morgans line of questioning is only designed to aggravate and it is not about clearing ZG.