Caylee Marie Anthony, 2, FL Missing since June 16-just reported by mother #78

[txlisa]

IMHO the statement of fully skeletonized remains was big news.

It is BIG news.  I am afraid that LE has released info that was designed to inflame people against Casey to further their their case and to strenghten it before they go to trial.


This frightens me because it may wind up that Casey is not convicted.

If their case is as strong as they want you and I to believe, they should not have to release misleading info through "sources close to the investigation".

Here is what I am afraid of.

1.  The air decomposition case regarding the testing at Oak Ridge is NOT able to tell the difference between human and amimal decompostion at this time!  (I live near there and found this following report:  http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/dec/14/death-detector/  The person working on the drvrlopment of decomp testing in the air is Dr. Vass.  Here is what he said about the decomp testing:

"Vass said he's working on a new technology that will detect HUMAN BONES and may be a breakthrough in the search for off-the-track, decades-old gravesites. He's reluctant to discuss details of the new technique at this point.

"What we're hoping for is that bone will produce a signature that is unique to bone," he said. "For the Death Valley thing (he investigated the Charles Manson farm for the FBI with inconclusive results), we need to develop this technology and then go back out there."

Research results also were SUGGESTIVE, but NOT DEFINITIVE, in the other high-profile case the ORNL scientist consulted on recently.

Collaborating with authorities in Central Florida, Vass' team analyzed air samples taken from the trunk of a car owned by the mother of missing 3-year-old Caylee Anthony.

Vass said something dead had definitely been in that trunk.

"We could NOT PROVE 100 percent from our end that it was HUMAN remains. But I don't think there was any question that it was (the odors of) decomposition," he said.""

The LE in Florida said the results PROVED that there was human remains decomposition in the air test.  The doctor's testing is for BONE DECOMPOSITION (most specifically, buried bones).  That is a long way from flesh decomp of 2 1/2 days!

2.  Mitrocondial DNA testing.  The FL LE said they had a match for this DNA testing.  What they did not say was how many matches they had from their sample.  Did you know that full matches go from 1 in approx. 300 million to half the number of  matches down to 1 in 3,000?

3.  I am suspect that they cleared this meter reader within 15 minutes of finding out he had reported that bag 3 times in August.  How do they know that he had no contact/knowledge of other people besides Casey.  The Lake Vag people?  The 2 LE guys that were fired?  Etc., etc.  How can they possibly clear him that fast?

They are developing a "reasonable doubt" case by doing what they are doing.  I believe they have blinders on, are misleading the public and worry that they are hurting their prosecustion of this case!

IIRC~it was nuclear DNA, and no one except identical twins have the same nuclear DAN........all the rest is just defense spinning.

What I wrote about has nothing about defense spinning.  It came from my own research.

I am very interested in seeing where LE said it was nuclear DNA!  Could you please provide a link?  I really want to read about it.  I will feel alot better about LE's case if this is the case.  Please believe me, I am not trying to support the defense - rather I want to make sure LE has all of their t's crossed because I have seen too many cases lost because they did not.  Nuclear DNA is much better than mitrocondrial DNA!

What  about the report of the person who did the air comp testing?  Any further support to help?

Thanks!

We've heard alot from LE, but I have no doubt there is still much being held under the vest for trial.  They've just given enough out for people to see HOW guilty she is, and even pursuade people how important it is to find the body, to help search.  Just wait until the jury here's it ALL!  We also need to blame the media, for giving out different invalid information, so some needs to be taken with a grain of salt.  Just hard to know what.

I agree with you here!  I pray that they do have alot more than has been released!

I sit here, wondering how any other human being can in there own conscience mind defend somebody in there own heart knows is guilty.

That is what I am wrestling with, the "evidence" that has been released at this time.  I want to know in my heart that she is guilty of all of what she is accused of!


I believe everybody has a right to a fair trial.  But to spinning the prosecution info(grasping at straws to create one juror guilt), is considered fair? 

If the defense brings out some of the information I have found by researching online, it won't be spinning!  That is what I am worried about.

 
Like the defense will do?  How do they feel when a real killer is let loose by there spin?  At least Nejame saw the truth and did the right thing.  I wonder how many defense attorneys, with integrity, there really are?  1 in each state maybe, if that? How does Baez sleep at night?  No amount of money could make me defend somebody who deserves what she gets. ESPECIALLY A BABY KILLER AND HER MOTHER AT THAT.  Lord I hope they put her in general public when she is convicted!  
[/quote]


Like it or not, a defense lawyer has a bound duty to defend his client and insist that the prosecution present a factual prosecution.


If the prosecution's case is built on weak facts, she may beat this thing!  Believe me, I do not want to see that.  I worry about what I have found online by the person they went to for the evidence!

[/quote]

I don't think there is a chance in h#ll she'll walk, there would have to be a jury full of non-parents, there has to be common sense and logic applied to the basic facts. It happens all the time, John Racz's wife disappeared, he was former LE in Los Angeles County, he stated his wife left to go on vacation with $25,000..........well, the body was never and the jurors deliberated about 9 hours, there statement was "it's just common sense". How refreshing ` not to mention that almost 300 no-body cases have been tried and won on purely circumstantial evidence because jurors bring in there own ideas, gut instincts, experiences etc., and not ONE would fall for the fact that a mother would not report a missing child for 31 days.
[/quote]

Honey, I hope you are right.   Unfortunately, jurors are not supposed to decided a case on "gut instincts", etc.  The prosecution must present a case that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that a person is guilty.   
[/quote]



But they do, they are only human and they apply common sense and locial explanation-theories(well, most of the time), also we need to remember that it's proof beyond a REASONABLE doubt, not NO DOUBT.
[/quote]

Amen!

Lisa

[Dihannah1]

Island, please read bottom, since this is such a long post, I didn't want you to miss I'm addressing you.    Thanks for your input.

IMHO the statement of fully skeletonized remains was big news.

It is BIG news.  I am afraid that LE has released info that was designed to inflame people against Casey to further their their case and to strenghten it before they go to trial.


This frightens me because it may wind up that Casey is not convicted.

If their case is as strong as they want you and I to believe, they should not have to release misleading info through "sources close to the investigation".

Here is what I am afraid of.

1.  The air decomposition case regarding the testing at Oak Ridge is NOT able to tell the difference between human and amimal decompostion at this time!  (I live near there and found this following report:  http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/dec/14/death-detector/  The person working on the drvrlopment of decomp testing in the air is Dr. Vass.  Here is what he said about the decomp testing:

"Vass said he's working on a new technology that will detect HUMAN BONES and may be a breakthrough in the search for off-the-track, decades-old gravesites. He's reluctant to discuss details of the new technique at this point.

"What we're hoping for is that bone will produce a signature that is unique to bone," he said. "For the Death Valley thing (he investigated the Charles Manson farm for the FBI with inconclusive results), we need to develop this technology and then go back out there."

Research results also were SUGGESTIVE, but NOT DEFINITIVE, in the other high-profile case the ORNL scientist consulted on recently.

Collaborating with authorities in Central Florida, Vass' team analyzed air samples taken from the trunk of a car owned by the mother of missing 3-year-old Caylee Anthony.

Vass said something dead had definitely been in that trunk.

"We could NOT PROVE 100 percent from our end that it was HUMAN remains. But I don't think there was any question that it was (the odors of) decomposition," he said.""

The LE in Florida said the results PROVED that there was human remains decomposition in the air test.  The doctor's testing is for BONE DECOMPOSITION (most specifically, buried bones).  That is a long way from flesh decomp of 2 1/2 days!

2.  Mitrocondial DNA testing.  The FL LE said they had a match for this DNA testing.  What they did not say was how many matches they had from their sample.  Did you know that full matches go from 1 in approx. 300 million to half the number of  matches down to 1 in 3,000?

3.  I am suspect that they cleared this meter reader within 15 minutes of finding out he had reported that bag 3 times in August.  How do they know that he had no contact/knowledge of other people besides Casey.  The Lake Vag people?  The 2 LE guys that were fired?  Etc., etc.  How can they possibly clear him that fast?

They are developing a "reasonable doubt" case by doing what they are doing.  I believe they have blinders on, are misleading the public and worry that they are hurting their prosecustion of this case!

IIRC~it was nuclear DNA, and no one except identical twins have the same nuclear DAN........all the rest is just defense spinning.
[/quote]

What I wrote about has nothing about defense spinning.  It came from my own research.

I am very interested in seeing where LE said it was nuclear DNA!  Could you please provide a link?  I really want to read about it.  I will feel alot better about LE's case if this is the case.  Please believe me, I am not trying to support the defense - rather I want to make sure LE has all of their t's crossed because I have seen too many cases lost because they did not.  Nuclear DNA is much better than mitrocondrial DNA!

What  about the report of the person who did the air comp testing?  Any further support to help?

Thanks!
[/quote]

We've heard alot from LE, but I have no doubt there is still much being held under the vest for trial.  They've just given enough out for people to see HOW guilty she is, and even pursuade people how important it is to find the body, to help search.  Just wait until the jury here's it ALL!  We also need to blame the media, for giving out different invalid information, so some needs to be taken with a grain of salt.  Just hard to know what.

I agree with you here!  I pray that they do have alot more than has been released!

I sit here, wondering how any other human being can in there own conscience mind defend somebody in there own heart knows is guilty.

That is what I am wrestling with, the "evidence" that has been released at this time.  I want to know in my heart that she is guilty of all of what she is accused of!


I believe everybody has a right to a fair trial.  But to spinning the prosecution info(grasping at straws to create one juror guilt), is considered fair? 

If the defense brings out some of the information I have found by researching online, it won't be spinning!  That is what I am worried about.

 
Like the defense will do?  How do they feel when a real killer is let loose by there spin?  At least Nejame saw the truth and did the right thing.  I wonder how many defense attorneys, with integrity, there really are?  1 in each state maybe, if that? How does Baez sleep at night?  No amount of money could make me defend somebody who deserves what she gets. ESPECIALLY A BABY KILLER AND HER MOTHER AT THAT.  Lord I hope they put her in general public when she is convicted!  
[/quote]


Like it or not, a defense lawyer has a bound duty to defend his client and insist that the prosecution present a factual prosecution.


If the prosecution's case is built on weak facts, she may beat this thing!  Believe me, I do not want to see that.  I worry about what I have found online by the person they went to for the evidence!

[/quote]

I don't think there is a chance in h#ll she'll walk, there would have to be a jury full of non-parents, there has to be common sense and logic applied to the basic facts. It happens all the time, John Racz's wife disappeared, he was former LE in Los Angeles County, he stated his wife left to go on vacation with $25,000..........well, the body was never and the jurors deliberated about 9 hours, there statement was "it's just common sense". How refreshing ` not to mention that almost 300 no-body cases have been tried and won on purely circumstantial evidence because jurors bring in there own ideas, gut instincts, experiences etc., and not ONE would fall for the fact that a mother would not report a missing child for 31 days.
[/quote]

I'm curious what you have found in your research that could help in the defense.   Yes, we have the best justice system in the world, though flawed at times,  if I ever need a defense attorney, then great.  Caylee deserves the same, though it's hard to think aboutl

If you don't want to post your research on defense side, please feel free to get my email from Klaas, if you feel comfortable talking offline to me. 
I am NOT asking for special favors, I would just love to discuss.  Or of course, if you feel comfortable talking here, we'd all be glad to here more of your thoughts and what you've found, your call

[flamom]

Who's truck is this?

[Red]

There will not be a single stone left unturned in Mr. Kronk's past. The defense team will see to that. Mark my words. They don't have much to work with. They cannot produce Zanny or anyone who can verify her existance, so they have to create doubt for one juror somewhere. Mr. Kronk is a gimmie if there is anything at all in his past. I'm not saying the jury will buy it, but I'm saying he's in for a lot of scrutiny.
 

I believe the defense "whine" team is going to bite off more than they can chew. Baez has delusions of grandeur that he is johnny Cochran and this is the OJ trial.

#1. Baez can't come up with a good rhyme, but we can... "because if your client does lie, then she must fry."

#2. The OJ trial was not about planted evidence, it was about jury nullification. Even though not one pundit wants to admit the truth, the OJ verdict was about black LA getting even with LAPD for all the wrongs that had been done to them. Were there wrongs done, yes ... was letting a killer off ... no!

Casey Anthony will never be given the presumption of jury nullification as most all of the free world hates her guts. She killed a baby, a defenseless baby. She never reported her child missing. People hate baby killers.

Its the stupidity of lame TV pundits who have no idea what people in the real world think. They hate her and a jury picked from Mars would feel the same. This ain't LA and Casey has never won a Heisman.

[islandmonkey]

If you don't want to post your research on defense side, please feel free to get my email from Klaas, if you feel comfortable talking offline to me. 
I am NOT asking for special favors, I would just love to discuss.  Or of course, if you feel comfortable talking here, we'd all be glad to here more of your thoughts and what you've found, your call 
 

Are you talking about my research?? If so I'm happy to talk about anything here or via e-mail. i have a myspace link you can go to and we can message back and forth.
 

[Kat_Gram]

Mr. Kronk will have to testify.
Casey won't have to.

[Grandma2Maddie]

Who's truck is this?

  Not sure!  Do you have the LINK for the camera?

[flamom]

Who's truck is this?

  Not sure!  Do you have the LINK for the camera?

Here ya go
http://media.myfoxorlando.com/live/mobilecam2.html

[txlisa]

There will not be a single stone left unturned in Mr. Kronk's past. The defense team will see to that. Mark my words. They don't have much to work with. They cannot produce Zanny or anyone who can verify her existance, so they have to create doubt for one juror somewhere. Mr. Kronk is a gimmie if there is anything at all in his past. I'm not saying the jury will buy it, but I'm saying he's in for a lot of scrutiny.
 

I believe the defense "whine" team is going to bite off more than they can chew. Baez has delusions of grandeur that he is johnny Cochran and this is the OJ trial.

#1. Baez can't come up with a good rhyme, but we can... "because if your client does lie, then she must fry."

#2. The OJ trial was not about planted evidence, it was about jury nullification. Even though not one pundit wants to admit the truth, the OJ verdict was about black LA getting even with LAPD for all the wrongs that had been done to them. Were there wrongs done, yes ... was letting a killer off ... no!

Casey Anthony will never be given the presumption of jury nullification as most all of the free world hates her guts.

Its the stupidity of lame TV pundits who have no idea what people in the real world think. They hate her and a jury picked from Mars would feel the same. This ain't LA and Casey has never won a Heisman.

Now we have a poster that came on here and says she found information on Mr. Kronk that may hurt the prosecution.  Why are people jumping to these conclusions?  Say I find a body and something in my past can be used against me, though I am 100% innocent?  What the hell has happened to common sense?

Lisa

[Babybear]

While the death of Caylee is so tragic and so unnecessary, something else has really come home to me while listening to the TV shows about her death.  It seems that the criminal defense lawyers are only concerned with coming up with a story that can result in "Reasonable doubt" with complete disregard of the truth.  They are scrambling to dream up something that a jury might believe while they all know, as do we, that Casey is guilty of murdering her little girl. Maybe they can blame this person or that person or say another person abducted and killed her.  Maybe they can pin it on the hapless meter reader.  I am absolutely disgusted with the whole bunch of them and the law is that if a lawyer knows a client is guilty, yet he puts that person or someone else on the stand to give testimony which he knows to be untrue, he is suborning perjury and can be prosecuted for it.  Yet, they just go on their blase' way suggesting this lie or that lie which could possibly work.  I don't believe that our system is intended to be used in this way and I think it has gone 'way too far, and it seems to me that it began with the first OJ Simpson trial. This is completely disgusting.   

OJ as an anomaly in the area of Justice, but Justice came home now.

The dingbats and dingdongs on TV spouting talking points for the defense benefit, people like Geraldo and others, are trying to pass along things to create reasonable doubt. 

Reasonable doubt is two words.  That qualifying word, the most important word, is "reasonable".  They seem to forget that when they spew.  One would have to discount ALL the other evidence, believe in fictitious nannys with no proof whatsoever, and somehow believe that this meter reader was involved in a conspiracy to frame Casey with items linked to the Anthony home.  Reasonable is far from being in play.  The defense is NOT going to play that game in the court of law.  Nothing the defense lawyers and Baez say now will be used against them.  I think they are going to mitigate her time in jail and her conviction charge.  Maybe a plea.  Maybe a defense of negligence and coverup. 

I have no belief that Baez and the cadre of defense medical examiners are going to waltz into the trial with fantastic tales of ferry Godnannys and loathesome creatures hell bent on framing Casey for money no less.  Casey will never see the light of day at the witness stand.   It would mean a jury convicts her in 5 minutes with a life sentence if they go that route.  Nope, he isn't going that route in the trial.  Maybe in the media to build doubt beforehand, but not in the trial.

Don't forget that what the defense attorney says is not evidence.  In order to get in the silly nanny story, or any other silly story, Casey would have to testify and of course that isn't going to happen.  No one can testify to what Casey told them because it is hearsay. The only hope they have is to have their experts testify to flaws in the prosecution's experts conclusions.  But I was actually commenting on what I've heard criminal defense attorneys discussing on TV today and their absolute disregard of their duty as officers of the court.

[Red]

Why would Jose be meeting with the A's?

Lisa

To be sure that they take the appropriate stance to the public when it comes to his client.

Maybe its to get their "conflicting statements" straight. 

[txlisa]

Mr. Kronk will have to testify.
Casey won't have to.

And that right there is completely f'd up! 

Lisa

[Tamikosmom]

What exactly did the meter reader report on August 11, 12 and 13.

If Roy Kronk spotted the bag ... why didn't he just investigate it himself?  Why would LE not investigate the contents of the bag.  Let me see.  Have I got this right.  Krong and LE are staring at this bag and ... nobody investigates it.

What am I missing?

 

Janet

++++++

Video:
TIPSTER METER READER MAKES FIRST PUBLIC STATEMENT
http://www.wftv.com/video/18319631/index.html

[RaggedyAnn]

Who's truck is this?

  Not sure!  Do you have the LINK for the camera?

I don't have the link but I believe it is one of the security guys.

[Grandma2Maddie]

Who's truck is this?

  Not sure!  Do you have the LINK for the camera?

Here ya go
http://media.myfoxorlando.com/live/mobilecam2.html

Thank you!  I remember when they had someone put in a security system on the house the guy that did that drove a truck like that I think.

[BTgirl]

When I look at the Anthonys' house on the mobile cam, I wonder how they're feeling tonight? Can you imagine finally knowing for a fact that your precious granddaughter was lying in a swamp, decomposing for the past six months, just down the street from your house? 

[Jerseygirl345]

When a parent kills a child

Or it could be that a close relationship existed between the killer and the victim. Let's say a parent kills a child and then buries the body. You may find that the child was carefully wrapped or the face covered to keep dirt from getting in the mouth. In essence, someone is caring for the child after death.

There's a word we use: "undoing." That's when someone tries to somehow lessen the damage after committing the crime, maybe by cleansing and bandaging the wounds. The killer may try softening the appearance of the crime by making the body's position restful and clasping the hands, almost like the victim is laid out. It's a way of symbolically erasing or reversing the crime, and it suggests remorse. Doing this gives the subject away. It's a personal crime -- strangers wouldn't likely do this.

 

[islandmonkey]

Dihannah!~I know the post are incredibly long did you see my reply??

RED~ I missed that, which post stated they had something on Kronk, WTF?? Did Kronk drive Casey's car with baby Caylee in the back seat...pls, common sense make it clear that Casey and only casey killed Caylee

[wreck]

Riddle me this:
How does the Defense bring up a "kidnapping" or "Zanny the Nanny" without actually putting Casey on the stand??? 

[VagrantGuru]

While the death of Caylee is so tragic and so unnecessary, something else has really come home to me while listening to the TV shows about her death.  It seems that the criminal defense lawyers are only concerned with coming up with a story that can result in "Reasonable doubt" with complete disregard of the truth.  They are scrambling to dream up something that a jury might believe while they all know, as do we, that Casey is guilty of murdering her little girl. Maybe they can blame this person or that person or say another person abducted and killed her.  Maybe they can pin it on the hapless meter reader.  I am absolutely disgusted with the whole bunch of them and the law is that if a lawyer knows a client is guilty, yet he puts that person or someone else on the stand to give testimony which he knows to be untrue, he is suborning perjury and can be prosecuted for it.  Yet, they just go on their blase' way suggesting this lie or that lie which could possibly work.  I don't believe that our system is intended to be used in this way and I think it has gone 'way too far, and it seems to me that it began with the first OJ Simpson trial. This is completely disgusting.   

OJ as an anomaly in the area of Justice, but Justice came home now.

The dingbats and dingdongs on TV spouting talking points for the defense benefit, people like Geraldo and others, are trying to pass along things to create reasonable doubt. 

Reasonable doubt is two words.  That qualifying word, the most important word, is "reasonable".  They seem to forget that when they spew.  One would have to discount ALL the other evidence, believe in fictitious nannys with no proof whatsoever, and somehow believe that this meter reader was involved in a conspiracy to frame Casey with items linked to the Anthony home.  Reasonable is far from being in play.  The defense is NOT going to play that game in the court of law.  Nothing the defense lawyers and Baez say now will be used against them.  I think they are going to mitigate her time in jail and her conviction charge.  Maybe a plea.  Maybe a defense of negligence and coverup. 

I have no belief that Baez and the cadre of defense medical examiners are going to waltz into the trial with fantastic tales of ferry Godnannys and loathesome creatures hell bent on framing Casey for money no less.  Casey will never see the light of day at the witness stand.   It would mean a jury convicts her in 5 minutes with a life sentence if they go that route.  Nope, he isn't going that route in the trial.  Maybe in the media to build doubt beforehand, but not in the trial.

Don't forget that what the defense attorney says is not evidence.  In order to get in the silly nanny story, or any other silly story, Casey would have to testify and of course that isn't going to happen.  No one can testify to what Casey told them because it is hearsay. The only hope they have is to have their experts testify to flaws in the prosecution's experts conclusions.  But I was actually commenting on what I've heard criminal defense attorneys discussing on TV today and their absolute disregard of their duty as officers of the court.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting you, but people can testify as to what Casey told them.  What they can't do is to testify what Casey told them about what someone else told her.