View Poll Results: Which charges do you think the state proved BARD?

Voters
84. You may not vote on this poll
  • Do you think the state proved BARD counts 1 thru 7?

    52 61.90%
  • Do you think the state proved BARD counts 2 thru 7?

    18 21.43%
  • Do you think the state proved BARD counts 3 thru 7?

    3 3.57%
  • Do you think the state proved BARD counts 4 thru 7?

    11 13.10%
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 219

Thread: Rehashing, debating and discussing the evidence

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,503
    Quote Originally Posted by RANCH View Post
    I'm trying to understand here. So you believe that it was second degree murder because the staged kidnapping story fits for you?
    No, absolutely not second degree. 1st degree felony murder.

    FELONY MURDER – FIRST DEGREE

    § 782.04(1)(a), Fla. Stat.

    To prove the crime of First Degree Felony Murder, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

    1. Caylee Marie Anthony is dead.

    2. The death occurred as a consequence of and while Casey Marie Anthony was engaged in the commission of Aggravated Child Abuse.

    Or

    The death occurred as a consequence of and while Casey Marie Anthony was attempting to commit Aggravated Child Abuse. 3. Casey Marie Anthony was the person who actually killed Caylee Marie Anthony.

    In order to convict of First Degree Felony Murder, it is not necessary for the State to prove that the defendant had a premeditated design or intent to kill.

  2. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to bayouland For This Useful Post:


  3. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Aedrys View Post
    That's what convinces me. In order for her to have done the staging to make it look like a kidnapping means she would have had to care about what she did. I just don't think she cared. She killed Caylee and left her body in the trunk, only removing it when it smelled too bad. If she was really wanting to stage the kidnapping, why keep Caylee in the car? Why not immediately go dump her somewhere? It just doesn't add up. Casey didn't care enough to go that far to cover herself. It's just not in her to give enough of a crap to be that creative and try to cover up a murder. I think she did really come up with the kidnapping story when her mother pressed her, realizing the ONLY explanation for that duct tape that would work would be that she staged it on purpose. It would be the only explanation her mother would be willing to accept.

    And if she was trying to cover it up with a kidnapping, she would have played the grieving mother role a lot better, begging for her baby back, trying to convince people she was a victim. That would have worked better for her story. Instead, she just lied and lied and lied, and then let her lawyers do the talking for her. How was that supposed to work with a kidnapping story? How was anyone supposed to believe her when she never presented herself as a sympathetic victim of a kidnapping? So she staged the kidnapping and only went halfway with it? It doesn't make sense.

    The only thing that makes sense is that she's cold blooded and lazy, and only came up with the story when her mother was right in her face about it. I think had she fled instead of being too lazy to try to get away, we never EVER would have heard the Zanny story. Instead, Cindy backed Casey against the wall, and thus the kidnapping story was born to cover the cold blooded murder of Caylee.
    Actually it was Lee telling her the LE were going to insist she take them immediately to pick up Caylee but same diff - that's when she came up with the kidnapping story. And we know how she can turn on a dime with a lie..
    When there is Justice - there is Peace.

  4. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:


  5. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    5,961
    Quote Originally Posted by bayouland View Post
    I always felt that she overdosed her by mistake (after doping her up numerous times), taped her and dumped her. Still heinous and 1st degree but no premeditation.

    Do you really think she meets the profile of a premeditated murderer? I just don't know.
    And in this case we had aggravated child abuse, a felony,along with felony murder and you have first degree murder.

    http://criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/a...st_degree.html

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to RANCH For This Useful Post:


  7. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by bayouland View Post
    Well, I could do a flip and ask what of the evidence didn't you believe but that would be kind of snarky and wouldn't be very productive.

    But, to answer your questions.
    1. I believe the evidence that was presented by Dr. Vass.
    2. I do not know where FCA obtained chloroform.
    3. I believe FCA gave Caylee chloroform prior to Caylee's death and that wasn't the first time she gave it to her.
    I believe Dr. Vass proved there was an abnormally high amount of chloroform in the trunk. I didn't hear any scientific explanations, or any explanations for that matter, as to how or why there was a high level of chloroform in the trunk. None of the experts, nor the prosecutors gave any explanation about what the high level of chloroform in the trunk proved. Some say you have to connect the dots at this point. I think there are way too many dots to connect, and nothing but speculation to connect them.

    So, like you, I believe the chloroform evidence presented by Dr. Vass, I just do not know how to connect it to the single search for how to make chloroform on the A's computer.

    I did not see any evidence presented that even suggested that KC was dosing Caylee with chloroform at any time, with the single exception that JA said in closing, "we can only hope that chloroform was used, before the tape, so Caylee didn't suffer."

    Was there some evidence at trial that I missed concerning the chloroform?
    Or, was the single search for how to make chloroform on the A's computer, combined with Dr. Vass's discovery of a shockingly high level of chloroform in the trunk enough to convince you that KC was dosing Caylee with chloroform?

    As always, my entire post is my opinion only.
    The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.-- Gandhi

  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to thedeviledadvocate For This Useful Post:


  9. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    5,961
    Quote Originally Posted by bayouland View Post
    No, absolutely not second degree. 1st degree felony murder.

    FELONY MURDER – FIRST DEGREE

    § 782.04(1)(a), Fla. Stat.

    To prove the crime of First Degree Felony Murder, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

    1. Caylee Marie Anthony is dead.

    2. The death occurred as a consequence of and while Casey Marie Anthony was engaged in the commission of Aggravated Child Abuse.

    Or

    The death occurred as a consequence of and while Casey Marie Anthony was attempting to commit Aggravated Child Abuse. 3. Casey Marie Anthony was the person who actually killed Caylee Marie Anthony.

    In order to convict of First Degree Felony Murder, it is not necessary for the State to prove that the defendant had a premeditated design or intent to kill.
    I guess I was a little slow with my post . Thanks.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RANCH For This Useful Post:


  11. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,503
    Quote Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
    Yes, I do because of the chain of her behaviour. What mother's carries her dead child in the trunk of her car until the smell is overwhelming and then dumps her in a trash swamp.

    She had the opportunity to call 911 even if she had given Caylee too much chloroform - since she lies so well she could have said she had no idea what Caylee had eaten...but no - by your theory her response was duct tape, some garbage bags and into the trunk you go! In my mind there is no room for doubt, not after reviewing the evidence again and again looking for any other possible scenario I could imagine - nothing else worked.
    No mother carries her dead child in the trunk and then dumps her in the trash. I agree 100% unless she is scared chitless because she knows that she can't call 911 and report an accident when it was chloroform.

    If I were to believe premediatation it would be because she was at that video store soon afterwards. I'm just not there yet.

    I absolutely see your points.

  12. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to bayouland For This Useful Post:


  13. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    5,961
    Quote Originally Posted by thedeviledadvocate View Post
    I believe Dr. Vass proved there was an abnormally high amount of chloroform in the trunk. I didn't hear any scientific explanations, or any explanations for that matter, as to how or why there was a high level of chloroform in the trunk. None of the experts, nor the prosecutors gave any explanation about what the high level of chloroform in the trunk proved. Some say you have to connect the dots at this point. I think there are way too many dots to connect, and nothing but speculation to connect them.

    So, like you, I believe the chloroform evidence presented by Dr. Vass, I just do not know how to connect it to the single search for how to make chloroform on the A's computer.

    I did not see any evidence presented that even suggested that KC was dosing Caylee with chloroform at any time, with the single exception that JA said in closing, "we can only hope that chloroform was used, before the tape, so Caylee didn't suffer."

    Was there some evidence at trial that I missed concerning the chloroform?
    Or, was the single search for how to make chloroform on the A's computer, combined with Dr. Vass's discovery of a shockingly high level of chloroform in the trunk enough to convince you that KC was dosing Caylee with chloroform?

    As always, my entire post is my opinion only.
    The how is easy. KC did it. The why is to sedate Caylee. No need for any science. To prove she did it is harder I agree. But why was the chloroform in that trunk at all?

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RANCH For This Useful Post:


  15. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
    TheDevilsAdvocate- up thread where you speak of the chloroform not being proven so not premeditated, premeditation can be in the blink of an eye, or the time it takes to peel a piece of duct tape, cut it and place it on the child's face.

    Certainly premeditation comes with the same process for the second and third piece.

    Premeditation does not have to mean she balanced and weighed her decision and then decided - yes, this is something I am going to do.

    We have all heard it said that premeditation is the time between pointing a gun and squeezing the trigger - in the blink of an eye...
    I understand what you are saying, and agree with you that premeditation can be in the blink of an eye, legally speaking. I personally do not agree with it from my own point of view, but I don't make the laws, so yes, legally premeditation can occur in the blink of an eye.

    I do not think there was premeditation, because, I do not think the chloroform was proven BARD, nor do I think the use of duct tape was proven BARD.

    As always, my entire post is my opinion only.
    The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.-- Gandhi

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to thedeviledadvocate For This Useful Post:


  17. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,503
    Quote Originally Posted by thedeviledadvocate View Post
    I believe Dr. Vass proved there was an abnormally high amount of chloroform in the trunk. I didn't hear any scientific explanations, or any explanations for that matter, as to how or why there was a high level of chloroform in the trunk. None of the experts, nor the prosecutors gave any explanation about what the high level of chloroform in the trunk proved. Some say you have to connect the dots at this point. I think there are way too many dots to connect, and nothing but speculation to connect them.

    So, like you, I believe the chloroform evidence presented by Dr. Vass, I just do not know how to connect it to the single search for how to make chloroform on the A's computer.

    I did not see any evidence presented that even suggested that KC was dosing Caylee with chloroform at any time, with the single exception that JA said in closing, "we can only hope that chloroform was used, before the tape, so Caylee didn't suffer."

    Was there some evidence at trial that I missed concerning the chloroform?
    Or, was the single search for how to make chloroform on the A's computer, combined with Dr. Vass's discovery of a shockingly high level of chloroform in the trunk enough to convince you that KC was dosing Caylee with chloroform?

    As always, my entire post is my opinion only.
    Thank you.

    Unlike you, I don't feel I need to connect the dots. I don't need searches for how to make chloroform on the Ants computer to tie FCA to the chloroform. That would just be lagniappe (extra) as we say in Louisiana.

    The evidence proved there was a ridiculous level of chloroform in FCA's trunk and that Caylee Marie was in that trunk. That is all I need.

    I believe Caylee was sedated more than once by chloroform and more than likely other things as well but that doesn't matter either. Why? Because it only takes once and it is felony child abuse. There are times that Caylee was not around FCA and she wasn't with Grama. Where was she? This is written somewhere in all the pages and pages of documents and I really don't want to dig through them but I remember reading it.

  18. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to bayouland For This Useful Post:


  19. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by RANCH View Post
    I watched the trial but not the Dr D show so I'm not sure what the quote means. The photos that I have seen have left me with a desire to see more, in order to help me understand the jury's decision. What I do know about the tape evidence leads me to believe in a premeditated murder.IMO.
    In a nutshell, JA was saying he presented the evidence he had, as best he could, and since the jury acquitted, they didn't see things the way he had.
    The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.-- Gandhi

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to thedeviledadvocate For This Useful Post:


  21. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    5,961
    Quote Originally Posted by thedeviledadvocate View Post
    In a nutshell, JA was saying he presented the evidence he had, as best he could, and since the jury acquitted, they didn't see things the way he had.
    That's all? What else would anyone expect him to say? How dose that explain the jury's decision?

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to RANCH For This Useful Post:


  23. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by RANCH View Post
    That's all? What else would anyone expect him to say? How dose that explain the jury's decision?
    That doesn't explain the jury's decision, sorry, I guess I misunderstood. That just shows JA accepted the jury's decision, even though he disagrees with it.
    The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.-- Gandhi

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to thedeviledadvocate For This Useful Post:


  25. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    5,961
    Quote Originally Posted by thedeviledadvocate View Post
    That doesn't explain the jury's decision, sorry, I guess I misunderstood. That just shows JA accepted the jury's decision, even though he disagrees with it.
    Ok. It's actually my misunderstanding. I thought there was more to the Dr. D show quote. Thanks.

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RANCH For This Useful Post:


  27. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Volunteer Country
    Posts
    1,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Aedrys View Post
    That's what convinces me. In order for her to have done the staging to make it look like a kidnapping means she would have had to care about what she did. I just don't think she cared. She killed Caylee and left her body in the trunk, only removing it when it smelled too bad. If she was really wanting to stage the kidnapping, why keep Caylee in the car? Why not immediately go dump her somewhere? It just doesn't add up. Casey didn't care enough to go that far to cover herself. It's just not in her to give enough of a crap to be that creative and try to cover up a murder. I think she did really come up with the kidnapping story when her mother pressed her, realizing the ONLY explanation for that duct tape that would work would be that she staged it on purpose. It would be the only explanation her mother would be willing to accept.

    Also, she moved on. She was partying, celebrating her newfound, free life. Forget being a sympathetic victim, she was so over Caylee. It didn't matter anymore. It was moving on and living la Bella Vita for Casey, let her lawyers and parents clean this mess up. How does that fit into staging a kidnapping? She didn't act a thing like a mother whose child was kidnapped, yet the staging a kidnapping story is believable? She didn't beg for her baby back or not once act like a grieving mother even though she staged a kidnapping? I just don't get that. She didn't care enough to really play that story out, and she should have. She should have milked it for all it's worth, and she never did. Why stage a kidnapping and then not sell it? No, instead she shows no remorse and goes partying and lying for thirty one days, then lies some more after that. She didn't even go halfway with a kidnapping after supposedly taping up Caylee's face to stage a kidnapping. It just doesn't add up for me.

    The only thing that makes sense is that she's cold blooded and lazy, and only came up with the story when her mother was right in her face about it. I think had she fled instead of being too lazy to try to get away, we never EVER would have heard the Zanny story. Instead, Cindy backed Casey against the wall, and thus the kidnapping story was born to cover the cold blooded murder of Caylee. Caylee got in the way of Casey's happiness and life, and Casey got rid of her. If that's not coldblooded, I don't know what is.

    This is exactly how I feel. Why would you stage a kidnapping then NOT REPORT IT? Cold blooded lazy murderer. you nailed it my friend.

    ETA: If you were staging a kidnapping KC, why 3 pieces of duct tape over your dead daughters face? One should have done it, but 3? overlapped? You couldn't sell that story to lifetime network.
    Last edited by coco puff; 10-06-2011 at 08:43 AM. Reason: added a thought
    “The fact that Casey Anthony was the last person to have custody of her daughter, failed to report her missing (or dead) for 31 days, consistently lied once confronted, and the child was found dead and hidden, and she failed to tell what actually happened despite repeated opportunities to do so to her family, friends or law enforcement, (even when faced with the death penalty) was sufficient to find her guilty -- not necessarily of premeditated murder, but certainly all lesser charges. The duct tape and other forensic evidence provided additional, but not necessary, evidence. “
    Quote from: Judge H. Lee Sarokin
    Retired in 1996 after 17 years on the federal bench

  28. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to coco puff For This Useful Post:


  29. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    17,865
    Looks like KC may still want to get that house. jmo
    A lie will go round the world before the truth gets its pants on - Charles Spurgeon

  30. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


  31. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,370
    IMO, guilty on all counts.

    I think that in March 2008 FCA entertained the idea of killing her parents, thus the web searches on neck breaking, household weapons, etc, AND at the same time, thought about how to kill Caylee and stage it, which is why she looked up missing children websites and chloroform. Murder on her mind.

    By June FCA's lies and discovered thefts were causing her more problems than she wanted to deal with. CA wasn't providing enough babysitting service to suit her and she had found her new mark in Tony. Caylee as a meal and place-to-stay and job-avoidance ticket was no longer necessary.

    Like JA, I hope, anyway, that FCA chloroformed Caylee before suffocating her with the duct tape. I believe the trunk evidence, so think that FCA likely did.

    After the fact, I think it is somewhat possible that FCA made some half-arsed attempts to stage Caylee's murder as a kidnapping. That might explain why she intentionally left her purse in plain sight in her abandoned car, and why she left Caylee's car seat and favorite doll in the car.

    Could be, though, that she just hoped the car would be stolen so that she could point to a car thief as the person responsible for whatever evidence was found in the car. (I remember a deposition by a FCA friend stating FCA went out of her way to point out Jesse had keys to the car, and so how could FCA know what happened to the car if it had been in someone else's possession, etc.

    Mostly I think that after FCA murdered Caylee she completely moved on to her new lie-life with Tony, and that she only thought about Caylee when she could torture her mother on the subject.

    I have no doubt she thought she could lie her way out of whatever fallout came up about Caylee's murder. And, pretty much, she has done just that.

  32. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hope4More For This Useful Post:


  33. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,496
    I did not vote as I am not certain. I watched the trial, and I must say I was a bit disappointed in the State's complete presentation. I felt they spent too much time on the lies, they did prove that, but there was simple evidence for it. Too little on the murder. Most of the trial was spent at sidebars. Most of the experts canceled each other out (both sides). I felt little was done to focus on the murder and any evidence of it. I felt Caylee was forgotten about, the jury only saw the photos of her remains once, at the beginning of trial iirc. By the end of the trial I was wondering what was off, I recall saying they need to put up some photos of Caylee. The trial was disjointed to me, and not enough time on the relevant factors, too much time on "showboating" and just off to me.

    Of course I think FKC is completely guilty, I also saw more evidence than was presented at trial and could consume that evidence in a logical pattern. Not all over the place, according to which expert could testify when or if at all, and not at sidebars where the jurors could not hear or see. I also felt going for Capital Murder/Death Penalty was going to be a big mistake though, since there was no "smoking gun" so to say, so perhaps they should have just went for Murder, IDK.

    So, as far as the trial, I still feel it was "off" and it took way too long for what should have only been a one week to two week trial, btw.

    Sorry to disappoint, it was just what I observed from my point of view.
    Last edited by 21merc7; 10-06-2011 at 10:45 AM.

    Unless I have included a link, it is my opinion and only my opinion that I am expressing.

  34. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to 21merc7 For This Useful Post:


  35. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    17,865
    I think the only reason JB is not letting KC speak to the media is that it would forever erase the doubt in anyone's mind that KC was responsible for the death of her child. She's not in court now and her silence speaks volumes. jmo
    A lie will go round the world before the truth gets its pants on - Charles Spurgeon

  36. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


  37. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    683
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    I think the only reason JB is not letting KC speak to the media is that it would forever erase the doubt in anyone's mind that KC was responsible for the death of her child. She's not in court now and her silence speaks volumes. jmo
    CA is guilty of many crimes. Unfortuntealy the DA did not charge her for the correct crimes. The state was also unable to prove the child died in the way they thought. The Prosecution failed. The Prosecution got it very wrong.

  38. The Following User Says Thank You to Mrs. Holmes For This Useful Post:


  39. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    683
    Quote Originally Posted by bayouland View Post
    No mother carries her dead child in the trunk and then dumps her in the trash. I agree 100% unless she is scared chitless because she knows that she can't call 911 and report an accident when it was chloroform.

    If I were to believe premediatation it would be because she was at that video store soon afterwards. I'm just not there yet.

    I absolutely see your points.
    The evidence in the trial does not support chloroform, does not support there was ever a body in the trunk.

    The baby's body was wrapped in a very loving way. The same way the family wrapped up their beloved pets. A family member putting the body in the swamp is not a consistent theory. I believe the baby was to be put under the cement pad. Burying in the backyard and keeping that loved one close. That is a consistent theory.

  40. The Following User Says Thank You to Mrs. Holmes For This Useful Post:


  41. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    683
    Quote Originally Posted by wonders View Post
    Could someone please tell me what BARD means?
    Beyond a reasonable doubt.

  42. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    17,865
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrs. Holmes View Post
    Thank goodness their is a need for science in our present judical systems.

    The moment Vass stated their were "astronomical" amounts of chloroform in his tests is when a "good" scientist goes back over his tests and looks for a problem. In any science testing the moment you have a "skew" and a reading that is way off the charts.... you need to look for why. If he had done a series of tests that "skewed" result would have been thrown out as suspect.
    But no chloroform should have been in the trunk, none, zip, nada. Anything over what would be found in soap or decomposition is a huge marker. The fact that there was a search on the A's computer for "How to make chloroform" just makes is suspect that there could have been chloroform in the trunk. Does not mean it was used on Caylee or that it had anything to do with her death. Just that it is possible that there was some in the trunk. jmo
    A lie will go round the world before the truth gets its pants on - Charles Spurgeon

  43. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


  44. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,506
    I have never wavered in believing that KC premeditated Caylee's murder, because of the chloroform searches and the fact that those searches were erased, because of her behavior after Caylee was gone (and her continued lack of remorse), and because she never piped up to say "OK, it was an accident" after getting charged with murder 1.

  45. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to natsound For This Useful Post:


  46. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrs. Holmes View Post
    The evidence in the trial does not support chloroform, does not support there was ever a body in the trunk.

    The baby's body was wrapped in a very loving way. The same way the family wrapped up their beloved pets. A family member putting the body in the swamp is not a consistent theory. I believe the baby was to be put under the cement pad. Burying in the backyard and keeping that loved one close. That is a consistent theory.
    All experts at the trial provided evidence and testified there was a body in the trunk. There was no question about it at all. NONE.

    Lovingly....hmm.....shoved into two black garbage bags and one polyester bag, three pieces of duct tape taped over her nose and mouth, carried in the trunk of the car for 2.6 days (all irrefutable) and then tossed into a swamp by the side of the road ...none of that is a theory. All proven fact. In my world, there is no love in that scenario whatsoever.
    When there is Justice - there is Peace.

  47. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:


  48. #50
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16,010
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    But no chloroform should have been in the trunk, none, zip, nada. Anything over what would be found in soap or decomposition is a huge marker. The fact that there was a search on the A's computer for "How to make chloroform" just makes is suspect that there could have been chloroform in the trunk. Does not mean it was used on Caylee or that it had anything to do with her death. Just that it is possible that there was some in the trunk. jmo
    What is it with the chloroform? Okay - if chloroform is beyond peeps comprehension, take it out of the scenario completely. Set over on the side there as incidental - the trunk had an overwhelmingly large amount of chloroform in it from another isolated incident.

    That leaves OCA taping Caylee's face so that she suffocated, packed in to the bags, left her in the trunk of her car for 2.6 days while she spent most of it in bed with Tony, then she tossed her into a nearby swamp, and lied to her parents about where Caylee for 31 days...

    Much more brutal, but murder nonetheless...
    When there is Justice - there is Peace.

  49. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:


Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Rehashing the weekend - General Discussion
    By Liz in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 08-11-2008, 03:04 PM
  2. Couple arested afer debating theology of Passion of Christ
    By Casshew in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-19-2004, 04:09 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •