Caylee Anthony General Discussion Thread #129

Status
Not open for further replies.
Correct Pizmex!

AND, LE can not charge Casey with theft UNLESS there is a complainant.
Actually, LE doesn't charge at all. Only the prosecutor can file charges. There doesn't have to be a "complainant." As long as the prosecution has evidence to support the charges they can charge it even if the victim is reluctant. They can do so with or without a willing complainant, but generally do not unless the complainant is willing. Having to subpoena and question a hostile witness for a case in chief to prove up the charges is rarely a good idea.
 
So...can I assume you are saying that if you had a room mate with a 2 year old daughter, and you hadn't seen the child for a month, you would not be suspicious??

Maybe I'm just a suspicious person, but if my roommate's child wasn't around for a week or 2, I'd be concerned that something wasn't right...it just doesn't seem natural to me for a mother to be away from her young child for so long.
Then you aren't a normal 22 year old. Those girls/boys, didn't give a rat's azz where Caylee was.
 
68416045.wGDPMlLK.popcorn.gif
 
One point to make about this alleged smearing and potential incrimination of Casey's last circle of friends -- only LE can charge them with any crimes. So no matter what kind of absurd theories Padilla and Team Casey are spinning, those old friends won't get charged with anything unless LE is so convinced.

True...the release may stop the attempted tainting of the jury pool, imo.
 
What is it? I must have missed your comments yesterday.
Tony is the motive. She was finally getting out from under her parents thumb. Had a job as a hooker (or whatever), but Tony could be a new beginning. Minus Caylee.

Susan Smith again!
 
Since you got no answers cheko, and I haven't got an answer either but

I would doubt very much that Casey got welfare, particularlly since she was staying most of the time at her mom's house. It takes a long time to get it and she would have had to prove that the father was not there, not helping her or dead etc. At least.....that's the way it is in California.

xxxxxxxxxooo
mama
:blowkiss:

I thought since she has such a skill in lieing it would be easy for her to get it!!!! :blowkiss:

I know she never got SS for Caylee......since she agreed not to bother the Dad.I live in Wis & we haven't got welfare.
 
Hey guys, first post here. I've been lurking forever, and when I saw that new myspace yesterday I had to had it. It seems like it is CA to me. There are pictures of Caylee that I have never seen. I made a photobucket account for you guys to check out the screen shots of her pictures and the blogs. There was a diffrent blog there yesterday from the ones I have pictures of, but it got deleted.

http://s491.photobucket.com/albums/rr279/WheresCaylee/

Great find! There are more of the bunny ear (I'm assuming Easter) shots, a picture of George, Cindy, and Caylee together (for those of you in the "Where's George" camp), and even a small one at the bottom of the flyer of her in her sandbox.
 
***** NEWSFLASH NEWSFLASH NEWSFLASH *****

--------- BREAKING NEWS --------

the whole family has been spotted at local superstore shopping mall

they are all looking to purchase NEW PANTS


it seems that all of their pants have been on fire due to all the LIES they have been telling


liar liar pants on fire


more news will be reported as soon as it hits the desk



<---RobotDog the HIPPO KILLER reporter :crazy:

pants%20on%20fire.jpg
 
I thought since she has such a skill in lieing it would be easy for her to get it!!!! :blowkiss:

I know she never got SS for Caylee......since she agreed not to bother the Dad.I live in Wis & we haven't got welfare.

What did I miss, who got SS for Caylee??
 
Tony is the motive. She was finally getting out from under her parents thumb. Had a job as a hooker (or whatever), but Tony could be a new beginning. Minus Caylee.

Susan Smith again!

Okay, thank you!
 
If this turns into a murder case, Baez probably won't push for a speedy trial. Read this article on why defense attorneys seldom do:

LARGO - Christopher Lunz has a potential date with death and doesn't want to wait.

Lunz is charged with first-degree murder in connection with the slaying of his father. Prosecutors intend to seek the death penalty.

Lunz's attorneys want time to interview witnesses and build a defense strategy, a process that usually takes at least a year in capital cases.

But Lunz won't give them that time. At great risk to himself, he is demanding a speedy trial over the advice of his attorneys.

In custody about four months, Lunz is set for trial on June 5.

Though every defendant is constitutionally entitled to a speedy trial, it is a right rarely demanded in a high-stakes situation such as a death penalty case.

"As a defense attorney, you want to be prepared for trial," said defense lawyer Dyril Flanagan, whom a judge appointed two weeks ago to help Lunz's initial attorney mount a case. "This makes it a little more difficult."

Lunz's defense attorneys said they will not have time to interview witnesses. As of Monday afternoon they hadn't gotten through the entire case file.

"Twenty-seven days and counting," said Lunz's other attorney, Keith Hammond, sounding exasperated as he noted the days before trial. "The quickest I've ever done a murder, I think, was in nine months. We haven't completed reading the file. It's so big."

Defense attorneys will, on very rare occasions, demand a speedy trial, hoping to catch prosecutors flat-footed. A judge must schedule a trial within 45 days of the request.

Much more at http://www.sptimes.com/2006/05/08/Tampabay/Murder_suspect_takes_.shtml
 
So...can I assume you are saying that if you had a room mate with a 2 year old daughter, and you hadn't seen the child for a month, you would not be suspicious??

Depends, what kind of story is she giving me? Is she stammering for an answer or is she telling me confidently where the child is? If she says, "Yeah..my mom told me she'd help out by taking care of (insert kid's name here), until I can get on my feet."

I'd probably believe it. JMHO
 
Yep no funeral to pay for.....we all know Casey couldn't afford to pay for one.

I've asked many many times.............Does anyone know if Casey got welfare for Caylee?

If she did then she might have been eligible for daycare (nanny) benefits or at least you are where I live.
 
I saw it mentioned, but why would they? They don't have to release such this early so I am confused as to why they would. Any ideas?

Hopefully it's part of the investigation process...

If I was LE in this, I'd be shaking them all up as much as I could....I'd like to think they are doing it in the hope that it will cause the Anthony's to respond in some way. Every time any of them talk, more inconsistencies/lies come out....and of course, those lies can be used as circumstantial evidence in any subsequent trial.
 
On the front page of The Globe today I heard screaming at Caylee's house on the day tot vanished! (i know,... its the globe lol)

"A former classmate and neighbor Bailey Dickens, 21, heard that Casey wanted to give Caylee away. "A mutual friend told me that when Casey first had her baby, she didn't want it. She was going to put it up for adoption. Cindy made her keep it and took the baby for herself."

The Globe also learned that 1. The tots mom wanted to give up the child for adoption because Caylee was cramping her party lifestyle.
2. Casey was KICKED OUT of her parents home right before Caylee went missing.

The neighbor also reveals that Casey "had one hell of a temper." He said "there was frequent shouting matches at the Anthony's when Casey's mom begged her to take better care of Caylee and to get a job"
 
So...can I assume you are saying that if you had a room mate with a 2 year old daughter, and you hadn't seen the child for a month, you would not be suspicious??

Maybe I'm just a suspicious person, but if my roommate's child wasn't around for a week or 2, I'd be concerned that something wasn't right...it just doesn't seem natural to me for a mother to be away from her young child for so long.


Wasn't Casey staying with Tony some nights and at Amy's other nights? A "oh mom and dad are keeping Caylee for a couple of days" or "Nanny has planned a trip to the beach for a couple of days" would not raise any concerns. imo
 
I don't think they are liars, they are in denial.

Which one of us on this board could believe our child killed our grand child? If you think so, stand up and be counted. JMO.

That's a strawman argument.

Which one of us would COVER for our child if our child killed our grandchild? That's a more appropriate question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
210
Guests online
3,262
Total visitors
3,472

Forum statistics

Threads
593,870
Messages
17,994,492
Members
229,264
Latest member
sofamusic
Back
Top