1065 users online (213 members and 852 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    769

    2011.06.08 Today show

    Wow....bad information this morning on the today show. They talked about the dog getting an alert on the first day but not the second day. They said nothing about the surface of the dirt being skimmed away.
    Wendy Murphy claimed the prosecution has nothing and predicts ICA will walk.
    She also went on to say ICA didn't have the car or .Caylee for three days so who was driving the car.
    Where did that come from? Very disturbing to hear the way this was reported.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Thornton, CO
    Posts
    542
    Quote Originally Posted by tsitra01 View Post
    Wow....bad information this morning on the today show. They talked about the dog getting an alert on the first day but not the second day. They said nothing about the surface of the dirt being skimmed away.
    Wendy Murphy claimed the prosecution has nothing and predicts ICA will walk.
    She also went on to say ICA didn't have the car or .Caylee for three days so who was driving the car.
    Where did that come from? Very disturbing to hear the way this was reported.
    Sounds like lkb interviewed with them lol lol lol

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    4,721
    Quote Originally Posted by tsitra01 View Post
    Wow....bad information this morning on the today show. They talked about the dog getting an alert on the first day but not the second day. They said nothing about the surface of the dirt being skimmed away.
    Wendy Murphy claimed the prosecution has nothing and predicts ICA will walk.
    She also went on to say ICA didn't have the car or .Caylee for three days so who was driving the car.
    Where did that come from? Very disturbing to hear the way this was reported.
    Wasn't Wendy Murphy most vocal against ICA? She is now changing her stance?

    This is all fodder for ratings...I don't believe ICA will walk, I do believe the jury might be angry for implicating her father and sexual abuse if that can't be seen/proven in the defenses CIC...how will they prove this? It's one persons word against the other...ICA already has convictions for dishonesty (fraud/check charges) and should not be believed...at least I hope those jurors use common sense for evidence doesn't lie, people do....JMHO

    Justice for Caylee

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bytown
    Posts
    10,180
    Quote Originally Posted by tsitra01 View Post
    Wow....bad information this morning on the today show. They talked about the dog getting an alert on the first day but not the second day. They said nothing about the surface of the dirt being skimmed away.
    Wendy Murphy claimed the prosecution has nothing and predicts ICA will walk.
    She also went on to say ICA didn't have the car or .Caylee for three days so who was driving the car.
    Where did that come from? Very disturbing to hear the way this was reported.
    I saw that segment this morning...

    I have no idea where Wendy Murphy got her information when she claimed ICA did not have the car (iirc she said for 3 days) when Caylee died????
    Is she mistaking that claim with dumping the car on June 27

    The cell pings show Casey went to TL on June 16th...and then drove back to the A home the afternoon on June 17th and repeated that the following day
    ----------------------------------------------------



    --------------------------------------------------
    "There are three kinds of intelligence: one kind understands things for itself, the other appreciates what others can understand, the third understands neither for itself nor through others. This first is excellent, the second good, and the third useless.

    --Niccolo Machiavelli"

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    407
    Quote Originally Posted by LiveLaughLuv View Post
    Wasn't Wendy Murphy most vocal against ICA? She is now changing her stance?

    This is all fodder for ratings...I don't believe ICA will walk, I do believe the jury might be angry for implicating her father and sexual abuse if that can't be seen/proven in the defenses CIC...how will they prove this? It's one persons word against the other...ICA already has convictions for dishonesty (fraud/check charges) and should not be believed...at least I hope those jurors use common sense for evidence doesn't lie, people do....JMHO

    Justice for Caylee
    Sure seems like Murphy & LKB are trying to drum up business

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,555
    Thanks for posting this, I didn't see it. I do worry on occasion that Casey will walk. I will be disgusted if that happens, but not completely shocked. I am praying for justice for Caylee.
    "I learned that it is the weak who are cruel, and that gentleness is to be expected only from the strong."~Leo Rosten

    “If you judge people, you have no time to love them.” ~Mother Teresa of Calcutta


    "Waste no more time arguing about what a good man should be. Be one." ~ Marcus Aurelius

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Southern New Jersey
    Posts
    23
    I saw that segment, too, and I thought "What trial are THEY watching??!"

    But Wendy Murphy did say one thing on another show (JVM maybe?) that I totally agree with: trials are like a mosaic. It is only after they are completed and you step back from them that you see the whole picture. I am confident (most of the time!) that this jury will do that and see the truth and find ICA guilty.
    “If you want peace, work for justice.”
    Henry Louis Mencken

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    480
    Quote Originally Posted by tsitra01 View Post
    Wow....bad information this morning on the today show. They talked about the dog getting an alert on the first day but not the second day. They said nothing about the surface of the dirt being skimmed away.
    Wendy Murphy claimed the prosecution has nothing and predicts ICA will walk.
    She also went on to say ICA didn't have the car or .Caylee for three days so who was driving the car.
    Where did that come from? Very disturbing to hear the way this was reported.
    Is that all the today show has? It doesn`t make any sense, what are they trying to say? It`s not just the dog that indicates decomp in trunk. Why should anyone be driving Caseys abandoned out of gas car? It`s not just three days she didn`t have Caylee, it was since june 16th.

    Edit. Nevertheless, I am a bit worried if she will be found quilty, it seems the defense has been able to create confusion.
    Edit 2. If not quilty then I hope guilty.
    Last edited by Mysteeri; 06-08-2011 at 08:48 AM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Who Dat Nation!!!
    Posts
    1,577
    Doubt, doubt, doubt and that's scary

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    22,961
    I don't get it. I just don't GET IT!!!!!!!! Even if people haven't followed from day one, read the doc dumps like we have...by now they've seen enough evidence just at the TRIAL itself.....

    I just don't get it.
    Anything I post (other than a quote) is simply my own opinion.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Englandah
    Posts
    1,495
    I saw that this AM too, and was sooo frustrated to hear it. They said the prosc put conflicting experts on the stand... and showed Vass saying its the highest levels of chloroform, and he was shocked... then it went into the Chemist from FBI saying it wasn't.
    Then I heard someone say she will walk, and I shut it off.

    So much misinformation... Makes me see how the media really works sometimes. I really don't know what trial some of these people are watching.


    Dont burn the day away

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    480
    Quote Originally Posted by Ms.Heather View Post
    I saw that this AM too, and was sooo frustrated to hear it. They said the prosc put conflicting experts on the stand... and showed Vass saying its the highest levels of chloroform, and he was shocked... then it went into the Chemist from FBI saying it wasn't.
    Then I heard someone say she will walk, and I shut it off.

    So much misinformation... Makes me see how the media really works sometimes. I really don't know what trial some of these people are watching.
    Did I get this wrong. Chloroform is very volatile which means "a measure of the tendency of a substance to vaporize= a phase transition from the liquid or solid phase to gas phase". From wikipedia.

    The FBI guy spoke of fabric, Vass about air, both gave facts, facts don`t conflict.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Englandah
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Mysteeri View Post
    Did I get this wrong. Chloroform is very volatile which means "a measure of the tendency of a substance to vaporize= a phase transition from the liquid or solid phase to gas phase". From wikipedia.

    The FBI guy spoke of fabric, Vass about air, both gave facts, facts don`t conflict.
    Mysteeri: Exactly!

    But they didn't mention that! Thats why I had to turn it off.
    Get it straight!!!


    Dont burn the day away

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    586
    I've been upset about the media reporting misinformation and giving opinions that are not based on the facts of this case.

    One would think that they would do their research prior to reporting, especially about a death penalty case in progress. One would also think that they would have the integrity and decency to portray Caylee Marie Anthony as a precious and cherished little girl. The media continues to miss the most important part of this whole sad mess, (see bolded portion please).

    I've sometimes wished and hoped that someone in the media would come here to Websleuth's for their information.

    I've stopped watching media reports.

    I come here for information and I view the trial live via my computer or depend on the lovely member's here kind enough to post links so that I am able to watch if I am running errands etc...Thanks much.

    I don't get it either. What is the media gaining by reporting clearly incorrect information?
    Ratings? What? I don't know. If I wasn't so busy (lazy) I'd write a letter.
    ~all of my posts are imo~

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    300
    The case isn't being tried in the media. TV shows are concerned with ratings. A verdict in doubt is good for ratings; it keeps viewers checking in.
    There's no need to be concerned what talking heads are saying.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 894
    Last Post: 10-17-2011, 08:22 PM
  2. Replies: 1240
    Last Post: 10-17-2011, 11:18 AM