Who made up the defense's explanation in opening statements? *POLL*

Who came up with the "GA" did it defense?

  • JB e.t. al., made it up

    Votes: 168 40.4%

  • It's what ICA told JB happened

    Votes: 220 52.9%

  • They got it from an old episode of Star Trek

    Votes: 14 3.4%

  • And of course the famous, "None of the above!"

    Votes: 22 5.3%
  • Total voters
    416
  • Poll closed .

New Posts

USARDOG

USARDOG

New Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
926
Reaction score
1
Mods this is only my second thread and if this is the wrong place for it please remove.

Who do you think made up that implossible defense tale that JB put out in opening statements.

1. It was JB e.t. al., who came up with the "GA did it," defense, and he's really proud of it!

2. It is what ICA told JB happened and he just went with it.

3. They got it from an old episode of Star Trek and thought it would do.

4. And of course the famous, "None of the Above!"
 
I think they are all being haunted by the ghost of Walter Mitty.
 
IANAL, but I don't think lawyers are able to make up stories to explain their defendants' actions.

They are, however, allowed to utilize and frame the made up stories told to them by their clients.

But again, I'm not a lawyer.
 
I think the defense is a mashup of stuff that has been talked about on the various ICA forums on the internet. I think there was an idea or two that was suggested to ICA and then the story was tweaked to fit the evidence.
 
I did not vote on this issue. We know pretty much that if Caysey's mouth is moving she is lying. So if it comes from her, it is suspect. We also know that Baez is capable of blatantly breaking the rules . . . so he can not be trusted either . . . it is stepping in quicksand to believe anything they say or do at this juncture. I only hope the jury realizes this as well.
 
This story has ICA all over it. Overly complex (including GA, nonsense about the extent of the house search prior to the discovery of the body, verbatim speech from GA that made no real logical sense), and typically projecting in a way that keeps ICA a hapless victim. Together with the obvious problem presented by the contradictory evidence showing that none of it would likely be true (GA loved Caylee, demonstrated a willingness to assist LE to find her, no logical reason to assume he would not have called 911 immediately to help save his beloved granddaughter) and the fact that the story is, on the other hand, entirely consistent with what we would expect from ICA (no empathy, no ability to recognize the entirely irrational idea of not seeking immediate help for an accidentally drowned toddler, failing to acknowledge the obvious logical problems inherent in assuming that rational people would accept that covering up an accident by making it look like a murder makes sense).

This story is precisely the sort of thing WS'ers would be entirely willing to accept as one of ICA's making from 2008 on. Nothing about it seems innovative or insightful. JB can't make the facts fit this story, so I just don't buy that he thought it up.

Of course, all MOO!
 
Actually, if the option had been offered, I would have picked: "ALL of the above." Combine the fertile imagination of the pathological liar CA; dribs and drabs thrown into the mix by the defense team; old episodes of LA Law, and probably a sampling of recreational drugs and you have Team Casey's Greatest Hits.

All Mason is interested in is creating reasonable doubt, so he figures if they throw enough "sheet" at the wall, SOMETHING will stick! In my humble, unlawyerly opinion, of course.
:twocents:
 
I think the whole thing is totally an ICA fantasy story. I have watched so many legal experts comment that the DT's case would have been so much easier and had so much better chance of creating reasonable doubt if they had just gone with the simple accident theory version that Caylee died accidently and ICA (alone) freaked out and covered it up. None of them can understand why they threw in George and the molestation to make it harder for them. I think ICA didn't want to accept ANY blame whatsoever and demanded they go with the story JB told in his OS.
 
I agree with jane the dood - there really should have been an "all of the above" option in the poll - I have no doubt that KC told JB the part about sexual abuse and I have no doubt that KC had nothing to do with the Kronk part and I'm pretty sure that the part about GA finding Caylee in the pool had to have something to do with a Star Trek alternate reality episode.

I am still shaking my head about that opening statement. I really expected after 3 years that the DT would have come up with something more plausible. The only thing that was said in the opening that was truly believable was that KC lies. Before the opening statement, it might have been possible to convince me to at least consider that Caylee accidentally drowned in the pool - maybe - but instead - it has convinced me that KC is even more of cold and calculating that I thought before. If it really was some kind of accident then the opening would have contained the sad complete truth instead of all that nonsense. It just doesn't make sense to me that this is the best they could come up with in 3 years - they forgot that the first rule of fiction is that it should be at least somewhat believable.
 
Not sure. If this was their line of defense in the beginning, then why did they not promote this theory instead of the Zanny kidnapped Caylee theory? I tend to think that Baez made this up after realizing that they had no other options, but we may never know.
 
If th DT would have said this story in the beginning it would have been much more believable. Now, after ICA cops to all her lies, its seen as just another lie.
 
I think JB made it up from the facts related to him by ICA. It seems to me that it took a while for ICA to abandon "the nanny took her" scenario evidenced by JB's continued insistent that Caylee was kidnapped...no body, stick with the "she's still alive" theory.

However, after Caylee was found, JB and ICA put their heads together and developed this cockamamie story :twocents:

...except for the "RK found and hide and called and moved and called...." I think that was all JB!
 
I think it's probably just another fabrication of ICA's wild imagination.
 
I said none of the above because I think it was actually a combination of what ICA had told them along with everything they had thrown at the wall and felt had somewhat stuck...they just scrapped it all off, threw it in the mix with ICA's lies and presented it as a lovely mess at opening. :doh:
 
:innocent: IF ... IF ... I did NOT know anything and listened to the Defense for the first time, I would honestly think it sounded like something straight from a "Lifetime Movie" ... really -- it's just outright unbelievable ! :floorlaugh:


But seriously ... I think the "defense" is :

1. A "concoction" of lies from ICA to her attorneys.
2. A "concoction" of embellished details from her former DT members - AL and LKB.
3. A "concoction" of additional embellishments from JB.

The "defense theory" is an "absolute joke" and a "total impossibility" starting with the "accidental drowning" ... GA involved with the "cover-up" along with ICA ... the alleged "sexual abuse" from GA and "possibly" LA ... oh, and the neighborhood meter reader just "somehow" got his hands on the body and saved it to LATER bury it in the woods . . .


:abduction::abduction:
 
dog.gone.cute said:
:innocent: IF ... IF ... I did NOT know anything and listened to the Defense for the first time, I would honestly think it sounded like something straight from a "Lifetime Movie" ... really -- it's just outright unbelievable ! :floorlaugh:


But seriously ... I think the "defense" is :

1. A "concoction" of lies from ICA to her attorneys.
2. A "concoction" of embellished details from her former DT members - AL and LKB.
3. A "concoction" of additional embellishments from JB.

The "defense theory" is an "absolute joke" and a "total impossibility" starting with the "accidental drowning" ... GA involved with the "cover-up" along with ICA ... the alleged "sexual abuse" from GA and "possibly" LA ... oh, and the neighborhood meter reader just "somehow" got his hands on the body and saved it to LATER bury it in the woods . . .


:abduction::abduction:
Click to expand...

I totally agree with 1, 2 and 3! I think ICA came up with drowning/George finding caylee and then the others jumped in to cover "the evidence!"
 
I think it was a corroborative effort between KC and the DT. I think JB has been itching to throw RK into the mix since he found out so much dirt on him and really wanted to find a way to blame him for the murder and finding that impossible he didn't want to waste all that investigative work so he had to show up some where.
Personally, after reading various websites over the years, I think that the DT took all the improbable theories thrown out over that time by the creative sleuthers and made it all their own.
 
Well, it's a big fancy story, that's for sure, and we know who likes those-- KC and Jose. I voted the DT, specifically JB, but will specify it contains elements KC provided herself. I think Kronk is all DT.

:giggle:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 194 more.
Total: 4,142 (members: 195, guests: 3,947)

Online statistics

Members online
195
Guests online
3,947
Total visitors
4,142
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,527
Messages
17,953,785
Members
228,521
Latest member
sanayarford
Back
Top