06-24-2011, 12:22 AM #1
Mods, I wasn't sure where to put this, if you have a better thread, please merge!
After going back many, many times watching and listening very intently to the testimony of Cindy, I am asking myself 2 questions.
1. Did Cindy Anthony lie?
2. Did LDB Brilliantly establish that Casey was the only one who did the "bad" searches?
I have come to the conclusion with the help of jschaudt, and mendz, that Cindy Anthony did not lie on the stand today.
In order to see this as I am seeing this, you would have to rewatch the testimony today, and pay close attention to the questions being asked by LDB. We all were very worked up today as was LDB, but I believe she was worked up to catch everyone off guard including the entire defense team and possibly Cindy Anthony.
Work records prove that on March 17, 2008 Cindy Anthony was working. Records indicate that George Anthony was NOT working.
The searches that were done on the 17th could be considered those that are comparable to Cindy's testimony today.
Where we were caught off guard is the FACT that LDB never asked Cindy if she did the incriminating searches on the 21st of March. She did ask her if she had ever completed those searches, in which Cindy did say NO to. Cindy and George were both recorded as working on the 21st which established that Casey was the only one who could have done the searches on the 21st.
Did LDB brilliantly throw us all off today?
Allow me to refer you to the following posts:
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6747579&postcount=697"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - CA's Testimony 6/23/11[/ame]
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6747957#post6747957"]CA's Testimony 6/23/11 - Page 32 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6748111&postcount=811"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - CA's Testimony 6/23/11[/ame]Justice For Caylee Marie
06-24-2011, 12:34 AM #2
I don't think I am following your reasoning. Wouldn't it be better for the SA to bring this up rather than let it go?
06-24-2011, 12:46 AM #3
I think if anyone will go back and read her original depo it is very clear State knew what was coming this is nothing new ...it was spelled out in black and white every bit of it.. even Bamboo and vet questions.."This isn't who they are. It is only what happened to them."
06-24-2011, 12:48 AM #4
In rebuttal, the state will prove that Cindy and George was working on the 21st, and that Cindy Anthony admitted to the searches she was responsible for. They will establish that Casey was the only one who could have done these searches on the 21st and it was done with the intent of committing premeditated murder. I do believe that somehow the user accounts on this computer will fit into the rebuttal and prove that Casey was the only one who used her own profile that was password protected.Justice For Caylee Marie
06-24-2011, 01:07 AM #5
CA was a witness for the defense today. I think that the State was caught off guard and LDB was flying by the seat of her pants. There is no way imo that the state knew what CA was going to say.
LDB is a force to be rekoned with. She solicited just enough from CA today to make her look like a liar. Forget the deposition, LDB asked her questions that will still be fresh in the minds of the jury when the State gets a chance at her again.
The thing that I am confused about is this; I thought they had a 2 party disclosure? I can't count how many times the judge has been upset about testimony that wasn't included in the disclosure... Why isn't something like this included?
06-24-2011, 01:07 AM #6Registered User
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
06-24-2011, 01:56 AM #7
Thank you thank you thank you for this awesome line of thinking!!!
Also, thank you to JWG for the amazing post on the hinky meter! Should be required reading!
I think LDB might have been caught a little off guard since things were going so smoothly with CA in the past and LDB definitely seemed mad while doing cross, but I was wondering what was up b/c it was reported that she went over and talked to CA during one of the breaks- could CA be playing both sides? Wouldn't surprise me! But as this post from JWG was written in March of 2010, you can see that the SA probably saw this coming a mile away.
I think the no "chlorophil" (SIC) searches will do her in for being impeached and that will not be good for CA.
My theory for their strategy on rebuttal will be to ask CA direct questions from her depo like what browser and search engine did you and GA use? (and refer her to her depo on the stand) ask her about work on several days, not just March 17 and 21st, perhaps even pull a JB and call her memory into question on some other random searches from the computer on different days to show it is impossible to remember what you searched for on a day 3 years ago (ala the GA and Caylee's clothing line of testimony).
Next witness: Bradley to show what was on the actual search history and possibly Cawn to show the internet search history from the yahoo/Internet explorer account. She will not have her rehash her answers from the Defense direct/cross b/c that is not how the SA rolls- they will not give her an opportunity to correct herself.
Next witness: Gentiva employees to testify at the very least to their timecard policies and best case scenario CA's actual work computer activity
Next witness: Cell phone pings (hopefully without an actual IT guy from the cell phone company since it might have been stipulated to ahead of time
done and done.
CA will regret trying to mess with the SA. If she thinks she has everyone fooled, then perhaps she should look at how well that has worked out for her dear daughter.
I do think she lied and was not aware of the 21st vs. 17th search information, which we have ICA to thank for delineating her more incriminating searches from her less incriminating searches by 4 days LOL. I cannot see CA as that cunning and I am not surprised that JB didn't pick up on this- nuff said there.
I think the SA is the best and Caylee deserves this for once .
06-24-2011, 02:56 AM #8
Page 11 is CA's timecard for Feb 08 thru March 08!
CA shows plenty of O/T! She worked late that Monday the 17th, just as she stated when she was a witness for the state. Paraphrasing "I couldn't watch Caylee that Monday because Mondays are a very busy day and I usually work late"
06-24-2011, 03:10 AM #9
I have no doubt that the State will be on fire for their REBUTTAL. They will show Cindy for who she really is, the teacher for Casey's lying capabilities. When Cindy was discussing her computer password issues she sounded exactly like Casey discussing her sim card and her lost cell phones. Pathetic.“Every day that they don’t find something is good for me.“ Billie Dunn
06-24-2011, 03:43 AM #10Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
I've watched CA lying but I can't find footage of LDB doing the cross. Does anyone have a link?
06-24-2011, 03:45 AM #11
Its how much OT is tallied for the week, or pay period. If Cindy was saying she worked more on a particular day because she needed to put it in to that pay period because it would in the preceeding one it put her over 40 hrs.
IIRC I would accurately report the week and then fudge it if necessary when I saw how many hours I fudged. It was also because our pay periods did not necessarily end at the end of everyother week.
Can't remember what caused that and how much it happened. But it made it tricked because we would be scheduled for two weeks, we needed to do report 80 hours for that period. It was weird to look at how many hours I had for a week when it wasn't looking at a week as monday to sunday.
Also you had to careful because you wanted to work only 40 hours per week so you could get payed for the hours, just not payed overtime. I'd look over my final time sheet and check it, make adjustments, and check those.
I don't think that there was a particular way that all of us reported that we did not have overtime, we just had to make sure there was no overtime.
Who knows what was going on at Cindy's job. At first I thought that her employer would not be able to confirm this stuff because doing it violates something. But Dr D stated he has done it on national tv and how hard would it be to get his employment history?
No matter what, it proves that it would be difficult for Cindy to prove how long she worked, so like alot of people are wondering how would she know that for certain?
06-24-2011, 05:03 AM #12
Pfft ... so how can Cindy be certain of her ACTUAL work hours on June 17, 2008?
“Do you not know that there comes a midnight hour when every one has to throw off his mask? Do you believe that life will always let itself be mocked? Do you think you can slip away a little before midnight in order to avoid this? Or are you not terrified by it?" - Soren Kierkegaard
06-24-2011, 06:01 AM #13
Cindy swore on the stand that she remembered the date of the chlorophyll search because she also researched alcohol (and other household products) due to an email scare going around about the possible dangers of hand sanitizers in children, on the same day.
ETA: video link re: above (see 1:45 into video)
Through searches, I was able to find that WESH had run an article (or possibly a segment), about this topic around May 30th, 2007.
Quote below is from this link:
Alcohol In Hand Sanitizer Can Mean Danger
News Relaese, WESH.com, May 30, 2007
E-Mails Warn Of Poisoning In Children.
[ame="http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=9507"]Alcohol in Hand Sanitizer Can Mean Danger - snopes.com[/ame]
Orrrrr .... is it that she is using (what I'll refer to as) "The ICA Creative Lying Methodology" --- taking a tidbit of truth (there was indeed an email scare with that topic circulated, albeit a year earlier) and adding it to a lie (about looking up chlorophyll), to make it sound more believable?
Unlucky for Cindy that most of us (and those ever-so-skilled and crafty prosecutors) are so on to the "The ICA CLM".
And that body language, Cindy .... puhleeze ... it's so, so obvious. IF your daughter was half as bad at lying as you, then you should've been on to her (like flies on decomp) long, long before your granddaughter's heinous murder.
ETA: The article at the WESH links above are no longer available
Last edited by Liz; 06-24-2011 at 07:10 AM.
06-24-2011, 06:15 AM #14
06-24-2011, 06:21 AM #15Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
Isn't there a record of all the Anthony's cell phone pings to identify where they each were during the critical times?
By beach in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years oldReplies: 764Last Post: 06-15-2011, 06:11 PM
By tweety933 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years oldReplies: 71Last Post: 05-30-2011, 11:04 AM
By butterfly1978 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years oldReplies: 2336Last Post: 04-25-2011, 11:10 PM