Caylee Marie Anthony #149 10/11/09 - 10/18/09

[Cappuccino]

The basis for the NE article was the emails from Cindy to D. Casey. They were never meant for publication. I saw them in one of the doc dumps. I was horrified that she would even suggest such a thing as a human sacrifice by anyone. I just thought she was a crazy b. when I read them.
..
The church my GD's were baptised in is an old old faith and they believe in
the devil. As part of the baptism, they cast out the devil from the presence of the candidates for baptism. The faith is Ukrainian Orthodox. My Grandparents were Ukrainian Catholic. They also believe in the devil taking on human forms. These beliefs are part of a faith that has been going on for centuries.
The Anglican Church here does some " healing ceremonies " where the spirit
is worked on. So, I cannot fault Rev. Grund for his religion or his beliefs. I also think the main Catholic Church in Rome goes in for exorcisms.
..
If all the NE did was publish those emails, I don't think Grund has a basis for a lawsuit.
..
It just gives everyone a glimpse into Cindy's brain and in my mind, she needs to have something cast out of her. She has fallen off the edge of the world into a dark abyss. If the prosecution brings that in, the human sacrifice
that Cindy proposed, the jury will have the same reaction to Cindy and the rest of her thoughts as the rest of the real world. They should bring that in first, then see if anything else Cindy has to say has any validity with a jury.

Cindy just got 're-baptized' - you can see how well that is working out..... 

You cant wash the evil out when you're satan's sister 

[Ono]

The basis for the NE article was the emails from Cindy to D. Casey. They were never meant for publication. I saw them in one of the doc dumps. I was horrified that she would even suggest such a thing as a human sacrifice by anyone. I just thought she was a crazy b. when I read them.
..
The church my GD's were baptised in is an old old faith and they believe in
the devil. As part of the baptism, they cast out the devil from the presence of the candidates for baptism. The faith is Ukrainian Orthodox. My Grandparents were Ukrainian Catholic. They also believe in the devil taking on human forms. These beliefs are part of a faith that has been going on for centuries.
The Anglican Church here does some " healing ceremonies " where the spirit
is worked on. So, I cannot fault Rev. Grund for his religion or his beliefs. I also think the main Catholic Church in Rome goes in for exorcisms.
..
If all the NE did was publish those emails, I don't think Grund has a basis for a lawsuit.
..
It just gives everyone a glimpse into Cindy's brain and in my mind, she needs to have something cast out of her. She has fallen off the edge of the world into a dark abyss. If the prosecution brings that in, the human sacrifice
that Cindy proposed, the jury will have the same reaction to Cindy and the rest of her thoughts as the rest of the real world. They should bring that in first, then see if anything else Cindy has to say has any validity with a jury.

Cindy just got 're-baptized' - you can see how well that is working out..... 

Lol   I guess she's due for a re-dunking.

[tupelohoney]

I agree, if it comes up during the trial that JT saw Casey at Walmart 6/16, the defense will chew him up. But if the State uses his testimony about other things, can the defense even bring up the Walmart Story? Sorry, I just am not educated in that area.

Speaking of chewing up and spitting out....I can't wait for George and Cindy to testify!! 

The defense can only cross examine on what was brought up in direct.

Thank you Babybear....that's what I thought, just wasn't sure.

[tupelohoney]

I agree, if it comes up during the trial that JT saw Casey at Walmart 6/16, the defense will chew him up. But if the State uses his testimony about other things, can the defense even bring up the Walmart Story? Sorry, I just am not educated in that area.

Speaking of chewing up and spitting out....I can't wait for George and Cindy to testify!! 

The defense can only cross examine on what was brought up in direct.

Better yet, after the defense tries to pick them up after a few prosecutorial blows of reality over their lies & rehabiliate their scum characters, the prosecution gets to REDIRECT on what is stated during cross & that will be when the knockouts occur & the jury will remember its lasting final impression.

Oooohhh.....so looking forward to that!!  Thanks Capp!

[tupelohoney]

Sunny thanks so much for all your work putting the deposits together for us.  You ROCK!!   

As we said when it happened, the re-baptism was to show good faith ( ) so as to keep the money coming in. Well, it's all out in the open now, only a fool would donate to them from this point on, IMO. Of course the world is full of fools, but hopefully they will go elsewhere.

[janetruth]

I get the distinct impression that Linda Drane Burdick and her team are very thorough, dedicated, and determined to obtain justice for little Caylee.  I do not see her placing Mr. Thompson on their witness list unless his testimony was completely valid.

Hello, everyone...I've been AWOL for a while, due to the interference of that thing we call LIFE!  Just popping in to say "Hi," and point out that sometimes the prosecution will put a witness on their list that they have no intention of calling, just to keep the defense from calling that person. 

I have not been able to keep up with any of the document dumps in the last month or so.

[tupelohoney]

I get the distinct impression that Linda Drane Burdick and her team are very thorough, dedicated, and determined to obtain justice for little Caylee.  I do not see her placing Mr. Thompson on their witness list unless his testimony was completely valid.

Hello, everyone...I've been AWOL for a while, due to the interference of that thing we call LIFE!  Just popping in to say "Hi," and point out that sometimes the prosecution will put a witness on their list that they have no intention of calling, just to keep the defense from calling that person. 

I have not been able to keep up with any of the document dumps in the last month or so.

Thank you janetruth, now that makes sense where Jim Thompson is concerned.

[Babybear]

I agree, if it comes up during the trial that JT saw Casey at Walmart 6/16, the defense will chew him up. But if the State uses his testimony about other things, can the defense even bring up the Walmart Story? Sorry, I just am not educated in that area.

Speaking of chewing up and spitting out....I can't wait for George and Cindy to testify!! 

The defense can only cross examine on what was brought up in direct.

Better yet, after the defense tries to pick them up after a few prosecutorial blows of reality over their lies & rehabiliate their scum characters, the prosecution gets to REDIRECT on what is stated during cross & that will be when the knockouts occur & the jury will remember its lasting final impression.

Oooohhh.....so looking forward to that!!  Thanks Capp!

I doubt there would be need for redirect.  In fact, I doubt that Mr. Thompson will be called unless there is much more than we know.

[Babybear]

I get the distinct impression that Linda Drane Burdick and her team are very thorough, dedicated, and determined to obtain justice for little Caylee.  I do not see her placing Mr. Thompson on their witness list unless his testimony was completely valid.

Hello, everyone...I've been AWOL for a while, due to the interference of that thing we call LIFE!  Just popping in to say "Hi," and point out that sometimes the prosecution will put a witness on their list that they have no intention of calling, just to keep the defense from calling that person. 

I have not been able to keep up with any of the document dumps in the last month or so.

Thank you janetruth, now that makes sense where Jim Thompson is concerned.

Janetruth, I agree that they probably have no intention of calling JT.  As you say, just keep him as their witness on a list.

[Scatty]

I outlined and filled what I see as a heart shape on the duct tape that was on Caylee's skull covering her mouth and nose......sorry for the graphic



Evidence items #Q63-Q64

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/21252257/detail.html
page 607

Is this inside of the tape or the outer portion? I hate to be graphic also but that appears to be where Caylees ear was, you can see the curved portion where her nose was? There was mention in the docs the heart was about the size of a dime. Have to go make lunch right now or Id stay and look it up.

Not sure if this is inner or outer....I will have another look at all the pix of this in the docs. A dime=2cm and eyeballing this "heart" shape impression looks to be 2-2.5cm

Maybe it's just me, but I see a heart shape, a lot like the sticker they found nearby, just above and to the left of the 1 CENTIMETER mark. If you look just above the number "1", you (or I should say "I") could see the bottom point of the heart and then the rest of it. It's at the left end of the tape. It looks about dime-sized to me.

[Sassycat]

Thanks Sunny.   
Anyone know who Michael Kelly is?   What's wrong with these people sending her money.   

Guy from California
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0904/16/ng.01.html

Thanks Trimm.   I knew you were good, but I didn't know you were THAT good!        

[Sassycat]

I get the distinct impression that Linda Drane Burdick and her team are very thorough, dedicated, and determined to obtain justice for little Caylee.  I do not see her placing Mr. Thompson on their witness list unless his testimony was completely valid.

Hello, everyone...I've been AWOL for a while, due to the interference of that thing we call LIFE!  Just popping in to say "Hi," and point out that sometimes the prosecution will put a witness on their list that they have no intention of calling, just to keep the defense from calling that person. 

I have not been able to keep up with any of the document dumps in the last month or so.

Thank you janetruth, now that makes sense where Jim Thompson is concerned.

Janetruth, I agree that they probably have no intention of calling JT.  As you say, just keep him as their witness on a list.

I agree too.   They may also want to keep the defense wondering what this guy might know or might say...   A long list of witnesses can be intimidating to a defense.

[Cappuccino]

I agree, if it comes up during the trial that JT saw Casey at Walmart 6/16, the defense will chew him up. But if the State uses his testimony about other things, can the defense even bring up the Walmart Story? Sorry, I just am not educated in that area.

Speaking of chewing up and spitting out....I can't wait for George and Cindy to testify!! 

The defense can only cross examine on what was brought up in direct.

Better yet, after the defense tries to pick them up after a few prosecutorial blows of reality over their lies & rehabiliate their scum characters, the prosecution gets to REDIRECT on what is stated during cross & that will be when the knockouts occur & the jury will remember its lasting final impression.

Oooohhh.....so looking forward to that!!  Thanks Capp!

I doubt there would be need for redirect.  In fact, I doubt that Mr. Thompson will be called unless there is much more than we know.

What is in bold is what I was referring to.   I do not think the prosecution will call Mr. Thompson as a witness UNLESS they have direct evidence of his story being factual, meaning surveillance video of Casey & Caylee entering Walmat together-date/timestamped OR a receipt/beanie baby was in Casey's car or where Casey dumped Caylee (ugh I hate referring to that but it is what it is).   The prosecution does not need him to show Casey's behavioral pattern, temperament or illicit habits nor her disregard for the safety and well-being of Caylee, there is way plenty of that without his testimony.

[Scatty]

MTNMOM I'm reading your post, very informative, I now must have read it three times, what does J T say Caylee was wearing? I know I read it but can't remember. Yes, what George said Casey was wearing and what J T says Casey is wearing is very close. And yes, I noticed that also, that the clothes Casey was wearing at Blockbuster with Tony, didn't appear to be her clothes, I thought that maybe the top was Tonys 

From Marinadedavesdotcom

 Caley in my store was wearing some type of jean skirt/shorts and a purplish shirt, and at Walmart Caley was wearing some type of jean skirt/shorts and either a pink shirt or a white shirt with pink flowers on it. I also seem to remember there were some stripes somewhere but honestly cant remember at this time from what … mayber her socks? She did seem to have on some type of white sneakers which seemed normal.

No matter what he says, I still think this JT’s a total red herring! No one—not George or JT—is going to remember what some child or woman wore a month ago. There was no reason to pay that kind of attention to clothing unless one’s a member of the fashion police. Even if the child reminded him of his own. And his comments about how KC’s so called treatment of Caylee made such an unfavorable impression on him, seem rather way over the top, like he’ trying too hard to convince us of his antipathy towards KC. Which leads me to conclude (let me reiterate that this is all JMO) that there is something up with the 16th. Why was George, and now this guy, trying so hard to convince everyone that Caylee was still alive by a particular time on the 16th of June? I may be totally wrong about all this, but he’s got my hinky meter going haywire!

[Scatty]

I agree, if it comes up during the trial that JT saw Casey at Walmart 6/16, the defense will chew him up. But if the State uses his testimony about other things, can the defense even bring up the Walmart Story? Sorry, I just am not educated in that area.

Speaking of chewing up and spitting out....I can't wait for George and Cindy to testify!! 

The defense can only cross examine on what was brought up in direct.

Better yet, after the defense tries to pick them up after a few prosecutorial blows of reality over their lies & rehabiliate their scum characters, the prosecution gets to REDIRECT on what is stated during cross & that will be when the knockouts occur & the jury will remember its lasting final impression.

Oooohhh.....so looking forward to that!!  Thanks Capp!

I doubt there would be need for redirect.  In fact, I doubt that Mr. Thompson will be called unless there is much more than we know.

What is in bold is what I was referring to.   I do not think the prosecution will call Mr. Thompson as a witness UNLESS they have direct evidence of his story being factual, meaning surveillance video of Casey & Caylee entering Walmat together-date/timestamped OR a receipt/beanie baby was in Casey's car or where Casey dumped Caylee (ugh I hate referring to that but it is what it is).   The prosecution does not need him to show Casey's behavioral pattern, temperament or illicit habits nor her disregard for the safety and well-being of Caylee, there is way plenty of that without his testimony.

Your comment about prosecution getting to leave the final impression in redirect was very heartening. But that leads me to another question: can the defense, which I believe puts on it case after the prosecution, call any of the same witnesses that the prosecution had on its list? Like George and Cindy for example? Sorry if that sounds dumb.

[Babybear]

MTNMOM I'm reading your post, very informative, I now must have read it three times, what does J T say Caylee was wearing? I know I read it but can't remember. Yes, what George said Casey was wearing and what J T says Casey is wearing is very close. And yes, I noticed that also, that the clothes Casey was wearing at Blockbuster with Tony, didn't appear to be her clothes, I thought that maybe the top was Tonys 

From Marinadedavesdotcom

 Caley in my store was wearing some type of jean skirt/shorts and a purplish shirt, and at Walmart Caley was wearing some type of jean skirt/shorts and either a pink shirt or a white shirt with pink flowers on it. I also seem to remember there were some stripes somewhere but honestly cant remember at this time from what … mayber her socks? She did seem to have on some type of white sneakers which seemed normal.

No matter what he says, I still think this JT’s a total red herring! No one—not George or JT—is going to remember what some child or woman wore a month ago. There was no reason to pay that kind of attention to clothing unless one’s a member of the fashion police. Even if the child reminded him of his own. And his comments about how KC’s so called treatment of Caylee made such an unfavorable impression on him, seem rather way over the top, like he’ trying too hard to convince us of his antipathy towards KC. Which leads me to conclude (let me reiterate that this is all JMO) that there is something up with the 16th. Why was George, and now this guy, trying so hard to convince everyone that Caylee was still alive by a particular time on the 16th of June? I may be totally wrong about all this, but he’s got my hinky meter going haywire!

I agree with the above. Unless there is more than we know, IMO he's after his 15 minutes.  You're right.  How does he remember the clothing in such detail? My answer is that he doesn't.   I believe LE can ascertain with no trouble when those doors were installed at that particular store.  If I were a betting person, which actually I am, poor odds indeed that he is for real.

[Cappuccino]

I agree, if it comes up during the trial that JT saw Casey at Walmart 6/16, the defense will chew him up. But if the State uses his testimony about other things, can the defense even bring up the Walmart Story? Sorry, I just am not educated in that area.

Speaking of chewing up and spitting out....I can't wait for George and Cindy to testify!! 

The defense can only cross examine on what was brought up in direct.

Better yet, after the defense tries to pick them up after a few prosecutorial blows of reality over their lies & rehabiliate their scum characters, the prosecution gets to REDIRECT on what is stated during cross & that will be when the knockouts occur & the jury will remember its lasting final impression.

Oooohhh.....so looking forward to that!!  Thanks Capp!

I doubt there would be need for redirect.  In fact, I doubt that Mr. Thompson will be called unless there is much more than we know.

What is in bold is what I was referring to.   I do not think the prosecution will call Mr. Thompson as a witness UNLESS they have direct evidence of his story being factual, meaning surveillance video of Casey & Caylee entering Walmat together-date/timestamped OR a receipt/beanie baby was in Casey's car or where Casey dumped Caylee (ugh I hate referring to that but it is what it is).   The prosecution does not need him to show Casey's behavioral pattern, temperament or illicit habits nor her disregard for the safety and well-being of Caylee, there is way plenty of that without his testimony.

Your comment about prosecution getting to leave the final impression in redirect was very heartening. But that leads me to another question: can the defense, which I believe puts on it case after the prosecution, call any of the same witnesses that the prosecution had on its list? Like George and Cindy for example? Sorry if that sounds dumb.

Yes, actually they can if there is evidence that the witness may have that could not be brought out during cross examination of their testimony as called for the prosecution.   The prosecution, of course, would then ask questions based on that testimony on cross.

Im listening to that Levi Page blog radio show (never listened to him before), just started & one of the first thins that caught my ear was according to this Levi Page there has been subpoenas issued for footage of the local station (we know that is WFTV) of the tape the Anthonys used with "unique markings" around town AFTER the murder.   Hmmm...thats exactly why I passed along directly the picture find Twocents had when we were all looking for more duct tape sightings by the Anthonys after Kathi's story broke        This is the first I heard that WFTV's coverage was subpoenaed.   Dropping a note to ask if verfiication can be provided that it was.     Im going to continue listening

http://www.levipageshow.blogspot.com/   On righthand side column you'll find a playback.

[Scatty]

Harping back on the heart impression on the duct tape (I'm like a dog with a bone  ) here's where i thought it was, circled in red:

[tupelohoney]

On the deposit log that Sunny posted for us, on 03/24/09 Tracy Conroy deposited $25.00 by mail into Casey's account.  Tracy Conroy is Tracy McLaughlin according to a poster on another forum. She has a myspace page under the name of TracyDawn.   http://www.myspace.com/tracenda    

[tupelohoney]

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2009/10/casey-anthony-wesh-says-state-subpoenas-footage-of-duct-tape.html

Casey Anthony: WESH says state subpoenas footage of duct tape
posted by halboedeker on Oct 10, 2009 12:48:28 PM
Discuss This: Comments (66) | TrackBack (0) | Linking Blogs | Add to del.icio.us | Digg it

WESH-Channel 2's Bob Kealing announced last night that the state has subpoenaed the station's footage from August 2008 on a Caylee Anthony story.

The reason? The footage apparently shows rare industrial duct tape holding up a poster about the missing toddler, Kealing said.

The same style of Henkel duct tape was found on a gas can in the Anthony home and on Caylee's face when the child's remains were found in December.

"Clearly investigators want to show that this rare tape was used again and again by the Anthony family," Kealing said. "And in their view the connection between this tape and the crime scene and the Anthonys is no coincidence."

Casey Anthony is charged with the first-degree murder of her daughter, Caylee.

On WKMG-Channel 6, Tony Pipitone said there wasn't a lot new in the 1,400 pages of case documents released Friday. He noted that duct tape found on Caylee's mouth was the same rare duct tape found on a gas can in the home. "It's clear it [the tape] will be a key piece of evidence in her mother's murder trial," he said.

The total page count in the case is more than 11,000 and more documents will be released within a week, Pipitone said.

On WFTV-Channel 9, Kathi Belich focused on the placement of the duct tape over Caylee's mouth. WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer said, "The person who placed this duct tape and put it in multiple layers, did it for one reason and for one reason only, to make sure that child could not breathe either through the mouth or the nose."

Sheaffer predicted the tape evidence is "going to be dramatic and it's going to be damning for the defense when the jurors look at this."