02-23-2011, 09:03 PM #781
02-23-2011, 09:05 PM #782
02-25-2011, 04:05 PM #783
I am trying to think like the defense here (LOL), so hang in there. Lately, the accidental death theory has been spouted as a possible defense. The way I see it, they don't have much choice (if this goes to trial). The defense has to work with what it has and, IMO, this has to be it.
Here's how I think it'll go, per the defense. Caylee died accidentally on Casey's watch and because of Casey's long suffering childhood with Cindy, and the fear she endured, she felt she had no other option but to cover up the death. Casey knew Cindy would never accept Caylee's death. Now, I now what you are thinking..."what fear" ? But, I am trying to think about how the defense will present this, not what we have learned through thousands of pages of discovery, released in this case.
As for Zanny...Casey had used Zanny with "Mom" for years. When she was faced with LE questioning, she used the excuse she had used for years with her Mom ie; Zanny's watching Caylee. The defense has to distance from any real Zanny theory.
Now, as for the 31 days and the partying...Casey was so fearful of her mother that she couldn't tell them (or LE) about the death, hence the 31 days. As for the partying, Casey did feel sorrow for Caylee's death, but was so relieved to be out of her mothers control (for the first time ever) that she blocked out her daughter's demise.
As for the duct tape, I haven't figured that one out yet, but I believe the defense's plan is to provide as much reasonable doubt, as they can. They know that they can't successfully argue and win every point. I believe the duct tape is going to be one of those points.
02-25-2011, 04:43 PM #784
So here we go....after all this time good ole CM is going to try to float – sorry – the theory of an accidental drowning. IMHO too bad JB didn’t use that to plea waaaay back when. It would have been much more plausible before these two years along with all the information that has come to pass.
But waaaay back then there was no body...so KC and JB thought they could certainly get her off. The imaginanny was still out there with Caylee, somewhere. Case closed. Or so they thought.
But then a body was found...with duct tape around the skull....hmmm. Had to be SODDI - somebody like Kronk, or JG, or RM or ANYBODY BUT KC... But then those theories didn’t pan out either.
So then they had a little “creative” defense going on, with a wackadoodle searcher and a psychic on the phone with their top PI. But that did go as planned either...
So here we are today....it was an accident. KC did some ugly grinding ...uh, coping I mean. And a jury can’t possibly convict their poor, crazy client.
02-25-2011, 05:14 PM #785Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
I'm wondering where Kronk fits in if they go with a drowning story (lie). She drowned and then Kronk found the body somehow after it was in the trunk and decided to dump it in the woods? I mean they tried like crazy to impugn Kronk - LKB was on tv disgustingly lying through her teeth that there was as much evidence that Kronk killed Caylee as there was Casey having killed her. I just don't get it. And what about Zanny? Is Casey the new John Nash from "A Beautiful Mind", only it's "A Beautiful Life"?Justice for GEORGE!
02-25-2011, 05:39 PM #786
The defense strategy seems to be "it was an accident" or if it wasn't, "Mr. Kronk had something to do with it", if not that then "she's insane", the problem is the defense must find a believable defense and stick with it otherwise they look like the charlatans they really are.
It might be one of these, or one of those, or even this! won't cut it with any jury.
They have to go in with a strong adherence to one believable explanation or they are toast..
02-25-2011, 07:45 PM #787
At the most, they will try to discredit Kronk (and others) on the stand, which is what, I believe, all of their past smear campaigns were leading up to.
02-26-2011, 01:20 PM #788
Attack object sarcasm histronics theatrical posturing Begging pleading lying Fantasy smoke n mirrors blabbing blabbing blabbing
but the cornerstone of the defense will be the search for that ONE juror (like the foreman in the first Spector trial) that Baez and the jury picking consultant can rely on to pay close attention to and give great weight to all of the above.IF I PUT IT HERE ITS MY OPINION. apparently i have no idea when i need to say that in a post, so this should cover it....IN MY OPINION anyways,
welcome to the gates of hell JVDS.
Jose Baez: “I sincerely believe that when we have finally spoken, everyone, and I mean everyone, will sit back and say, ‘Now, I understand. That explains it.’”
Jose Baez to da judge :
".....that type of testing is unique. we requested that they be allowed to test items and that of course was objected to by the state and and uh the state uh granted or sustained their objection, denied our opportunity to have him test these items due to a very specialized field, subfield, of dna that he is one of the pioneers of uh in the alternative of we were granted the ability to test certain items by an outside lab...."
02-26-2011, 03:06 PM #789
If this "accidental drowning" is the "Aha" moment JB promised us... the moment when we would all say to ourselves "Aha... now I understand." I'm sorry, but I don't understand... at all?
02-28-2011, 11:50 AM #790
ICA had a better chance with Judge Strickland for a LWOP sentence compared to Judge Perry who has no problems handing down a death sentence. I think the defense truly sabatoged themselves by getting Judge Strickland to recuse himself...I found this little gem....on a two time felon, who raped and killed a mother of three...jurors recommended death but his honor thought his mitigations for his abuse suffered warranted LWOP and spared him his life...JMHO
Justice for Caylee
02-28-2011, 12:04 PM #791Former Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
02-28-2011, 12:16 PM #792
A jury of 12 not knowing KC, GA or CA, and who will speak? GA and CA!
Will the jury hear KC's voice at all?
IMO the defense strategy will be reasonable doubt.
AND they will point at the grandparents. Neither specifically but, both had opportunity and means, but motive? hmmmm... Well they may not do well there, but once the jury gets a taste of how nasty both can be when forced to answer questions... I dunno...
I could easily see JB (or whomever) saying, she left Caylee with her parents, They admitted Caylee never spent one night away from their home, so KC could not have had Caylee with her. CA was trying to take Caylee away so KC let her have the child... went and partied her rear off, it was CA of GA trying to teach KC "the lesson" and there was an accident blah blah blah,
The computer searches... (has it be proven it was not another Anthony family member?)
We have them bringing home the Pontaic AND cleaning it. NOT calling 911 for how many days? do we know exactly?... per CA "There was no ODOR!" GA didn't agree did he?
911 had been called to the home before...(do we know who made those calls??)
CA went to the police office with KC but. they were closed... would she have told them then about Caylee? Why did CA wait till the thrid call to mention a dead body?
All the evidence leads back to the home...(where all 3 live)
CA kicked TES out... not KC
CA wouldn't give items of Caylee's to the searchers for a scent...
CA talked of suicide GA even wrote out a suicide note. (will the jury even hear this? or has it been tabeled?)
CA and GA let the "killer" of their grandchild live with them when she was out on bail? proves they were not scared of KC!
In a backwards way, is it possible for that poor jury to become so confused by the testimony of Ca and GA they could be pushed into believing CA/GA have never tried to cover anything up for KC but only tried to protect themselves?
Any normal person would never understand why CA waited so long to call
or most of what we know she has done... question is... how much will the jury be told, and is there enough proof it could not have been one or both or all 3 of them in on the cover up?
Inded CA and KC are "crafty" and I pray JB is long gone before that trial starts or KC may get off completely because of inadequate representation... STILL not convinced that isn't JB's plan.
... but this has been going through my mind OVER and OVER!
SOMEONE please set me straight!
I am skeered she will get a not guilty!
I have followed this since July 08, but dang it is confusing![/QUOTE]
I know, as do most who follow this case, that CA is a control freak and wants to be in control of everything and everyone. BUT, I do not see that she was in control where KC was concerned. Between these two, KC was more in control, imo. If CA had been in control of KC, KC would have graduated high school with her class. If CA had been in control of KC, KC would not have stolen huge sums of money from her and others. If CA had been in control of KC, there would never have been that scene at Uncle Rick's wedding with CA standing there claiming KC was a virgin and therefore not pregnant. If CA had been in control of KC, we might not be here on this forum discussing the loss of Caylee Marie. I whole-heartedly agree that CA tries to control everything. But, I disagree that she was anywhere near in control of KC. She tried to be, and failed miserably. Perhaps if she had simply tried to parent rather than control, things may have turned out different. JMO.
ETA: The quotes are broken for some reason. My reply is the BBM and down at the bottom.
It Was Ancient Aliens!
02-28-2011, 12:27 PM #793
02-28-2011, 12:51 PM #794
Step 1. Steal Underpants
Step 2. ???
Step 3. Profit!
02-28-2011, 12:58 PM #795