839 users online (200 members and 639 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 35
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    In the Woods In Georgia
    Posts
    5,481

    Prosecution Strategy

    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]

    And:
    [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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    The Lone Star State
    Posts
    783
    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?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The State of Confusion
    Posts
    2,312
    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."
    Jaycee Dugard
    ’.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    In the Woods In Georgia
    Posts
    5,481
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasLori View Post
    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?
    They are allowing Baez to tell this jury that if Cindy did the searches on the 17th then she could have done them on the 21st. They are trying to place reasonable doubt that Casey did not do these searches (premeditated).

    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

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    169
    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?

    TC, Robin

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by mydailyopinions View Post
    They are allowing Baez to tell this jury that if Cindy did the searches on the 17th then she could have done them on the 21st. They are trying to place reasonable doubt that Casey did not do these searches (premeditated).

    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.
    I totally agree. LDB was masterful today! She ws VERY methodical. She knew EXACTLY what she was doing! Rebuttal will be the nail in Casey's coffin. SHHHHH..... Don't let Baez know.... Not that it would matter. He is too stupid to figure it out.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    596
    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!
    http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2010/03...hes-and-cindy/

    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 .

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    294
    http://www.wesh.com/download/2008/1126/18155616.pdf

    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"
    Keep this rose Going for Caylee ♥
    _____/)___/)______./¯"""/')
    ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\)¯¯\)¯¯¯'\_„„„„\)
    We love you babygirl!
    courtesy of ~n/t~




    http://www.rsdhope.org/

    http://www.rsdfoundation.org/crps.html

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    46,814
    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

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    10,698
    I've watched CA lying but I can't find footage of LDB doing the cross. Does anyone have a link?


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,096
    Quote Originally Posted by RSDhoping for a cure View Post
    http://www.wesh.com/download/2008/1126/18155616.pdf

    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"
    Yes, but how much she worked per day isn't the issue employers wanting employees to do that.

    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?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,860
    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

  13. #13
    Liz's Avatar
    Liz is offline I am not a chemist and this is not my 1st rodeo
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    25,446
    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)
    http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-ex...918/video.html

    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:
    http://dottyanddee.blogsome.com/2007...ay-16-31-2007/

    Alcohol In Hand Sanitizer Can Mean Danger
    News Relaese, WESH.com, May 30, 2007
    E-Mails Warn Of Poisoning In Children.
    http://www.wesh.com/irresistible/13412322/detail.html
    Another quote from another (date stamped) site referencing the Hand Sanitizer segment (or article) on WESH from May 30th, 2007:
    [ame="http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=9507"]Alcohol in Hand Sanitizer Can Mean Danger - snopes.com[/ame]

    Alcohol in Hand Sanitizer Can Mean Danger
    http://www.wesh.com/irresistible/13412322/detail.html
    Good to know that Cindy being in the health care profession was so on top of things, that it took her almost a year to research the possible dangers of hand sanitizers on her beloved grandchild. And also clearly recalls the date that she researched it.

    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.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by katydid23 View Post
    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.
    I thought that, too! She sounded just like Casey during the whole sim card thing. They can both just make up things on the fly and be smooth. But I think the jury will see through it and I think they'll cover it all in rebuttal. At least I hope so for Caylee's sake.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    40
    Isn't there a record of all the Anthony's cell phone pings to identify where they each were during the critical times?

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. What Is the Defense Strategy #2
    By beach in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 764
    Last Post: 06-15-2011, 06:11 PM
  2. Role Play- Prosecution Opening-Closing Statements Case Strategy
    By tweety933 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 05-30-2011, 11:04 AM
  3. What Is the Defense Strategy?
    By butterfly1978 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 2336
    Last Post: 04-25-2011, 11:10 PM
  4. Trial Strategy
    By SleuthyGal in forum Nancy Cooper
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 03-24-2010, 01:22 PM