Maybe the thread should have read. What do you think GA was asked by the GJ. The reason, GA was asked only direct questions. No room for opinions, or rambling on. Just direct questions and answers asked and answered.
There were questions over prior statements GA also made, which have not been been released to the public. Not sure how many of you here have had the opportunity, to either serve or be a witness at a GJ but its pretty cut and dried. GA was summoned as a witness and he was required to tell the truth under oath. To lie or change any prior statements of his testimony would be and is perjury. Which comes with a prison sentence.
KC's car circumstantially ran out of gas.
Haven't seen much discussion on this motion filed the other day, and I thought the wording was pretty interesting. Also attached is Baez's response - he has no objection.
SA Ashton says his recollection of what George testified to at the Grand Jury is different than what he testified to at his deposition.
Could this be the first step towards a perjury charge?
And also, since both the SA and Baez will get their copies simultaneously, will we see this?
3doglady, ACandyRose, Ada, affinity, Angel Who Cares, AnotherGladysKravitz, autumnlover, beach, Bobbisangel, Bree0372, Brini, Bttrcookie3, CarolinaMoon, cecybeans, celticthyme, chefmom, christee, cleo612, ClockWatcher, cloud9, coco puff, Coldpizza, Dear Prudence, DolphinsByTheSea, erma285, ExpectingUnicorns, Friday, Galina, GarAndTeed, Glassgirl, HOPE4CAYLEE, HOTNTX, Insomnia Momma, Jackson44, JDzWife, Jenny60123, karenmamo, kaRN, Kat, LaLaw2000, LC446, Leila, LinasK, LiveLaughLuv, lonestar, MADJGNLAW, magic-cat, Mamabear1963, Melanie, metalcrystal, mimimama5, MissJames, mitzi, Moggie, mom2chloe, momtective, mountaintime, MrsT, my2sense, Mystic, MysticOne, MyTinkieGirl, NocturnalLady, nssherlock, nyquilqueen, nyvictoria, Oakley, OneLostGrl, Paintr, Paladine, PassTheMotrin, precious, QB., RedSox Mom, RR0004, sarah7855, Shalya, Shear22, SleuthyMama, Snaz, Sooner Fan#1, Spangle, Star12, starpatch, static, SuziQ, TakeNote, tasylshari, tekilla, The Eunice Burns, The World According, Theonly1, ThinkTank, TinPan, trafficsUP66, Trapshooter, trusttheping, Tulessa, whisperOFwings, Woe.be.gone, wonders, yeknomaras, YellowSubmarine, Zoe Bogart, zoey
Very interesting! Seems as though the SA may be setting up to show GA's inconsistencies to the court, and I would hope it is for perjury or other charges. As far as JB asking for a copy, well, I think GA better hold on! "The wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round!"
It Was Ancient Aliens!
Ada, BlOnDe_GuRrL, Brini, cecybeans, DolphinsByTheSea, Glassgirl, Insomnia Momma, JDzWife, Kat, LaLaw2000, LC446, Leila, LiveLaughLuv, MADJGNLAW, MissJames, mitzi, momtective, mountaintime, Muzikman, MyTinkieGirl, nssherlock, Paladine, precious, SleuthyMama, Sooner Fan#1, starpatch, TakeNote, The Eunice Burns, The World According, Theonly1, TinPan, waiting4change, whisperOFwings, wonders, YellowSubmarine
Definitely very interesting. I think the SA wants to know what they're up against when they put GA (and CA) on the stand. No question in my mind that they'll be hostile witnesses. A perjury charge would be ideal.
Ada, Angel Who Cares, azwriter, Brini, cecybeans, chefmom, Glassgirl, HOTNTX, Insomnia Momma, JWG, Kat, LaLaw2000, LC446, Leila, LinasK, LiveLaughLuv, Macushla, magnolia, MissJames, mitzi, momtective, mountaintime, Muzikman, MyTinkieGirl, nssherlock, Paladine, precious, SleuthyMama, starpatch, tasylshari, The Eunice Burns, Theonly1, ThinkTank, TinPan, trafficsUP66, whisperOFwings, wonders
So if it's proven to be inconsistent then they'll use it at trial? I find #3 confusing. What's he getting at?
Hope we do get to read this transcript. Sounds like in #3 that SA is saying IF the transcript of what GA said to GJ is conflicting with his deposition then SA will use this info in court and will notify JB that this info is considered discovery to be used in the trial.
Me thinks that this is gonna be challenging for GA, KC, CA, LA, JB, AL, LKB...ok challenging to the whole dream scheme.
Ada, CarolinaMoon, CentralFLMama, Glassgirl, Insomnia Momma, JSR, LC446, Leila, LinasK, LiveLaughLuv, MADJGNLAW, mitzi, momtective, mountaintime, Muzikman, MysticOne, MyTinkieGirl, Patty G, pferrin, precious, Sdavidson11, SleuthyMama, Snaz, The Eunice Burns, Theonly1, ThinkTank, trafficsUP66, whisperOFwings, Woe.be.gone, wonders
So if the state can show that GA, CA and LA have lied and they chose (or not) to charge them with perjury, will the state then just put them on the stand to show that they are all liars, trying to cover for KC? Otherwise, what good is their testimony(for the state) unless it can be confirmed in other ways?
Will the state cross and get them to admit the truth? And then confirm it with other evidence? MOO
Last edited by doogiesgirl; 09-21-2009 at 12:36 AM. Reason: Added last sentence
Rest in Peace Sweet Caylee
As goofy as it may seem but does anyone agree with me that GA is the weakest link in the Anthony chain? IIRC GA and CA were going to split up before the mud hit the fan, (now their all lovey dovey in public) soooo does anyone think that if CA didn't have her thumb on him do you think he would have at some point broke their code of silence? I do think he would have and I hate being mean but he just seems to have a yellow streak down his back when it comes to CA and KC. I so wish he would stand up for Little Caylee. I know its a pipe dream but I really wish someone in that family would CARE for Little Caylee and want justice for her.
A grandchild fills a space in your heart that you never knew was empty....
Ada, azwriter, beach, Brini, CarolinaMoon, celticthyme, chefmom, chelle70, Glassgirl, Insomnia Momma, JSR, LC446, Leila, LiveLaughLuv, MissJames, mitzi, momtective, mountaintime, MyTinkieGirl, nyquilqueen, nyvictoria, Paladine, pferrin, precious, Sdavidson11, ShadowGal, The Eunice Burns, trafficsUP66, Turnadot, whisperOFwings, Woe.be.gone, YellowSubmarine
I wonder what in particular they thought he had changed his testimony about?
Of course we don't know what was said to the grand jury, but we got to watch those depos, and apart from thinking GA was an even sillier fool than I had hitherto thought of him as being, I can't recall that he said anything too interesting.. must go watch that depo thing again..
Seems to me the defence might want to use the inconsistant testimony to their own advantage. I dont know, say for instance when they THROW GEORGE DIRECTLY UNDER THE BUS???
I wonder how supportive the A's will be if one of them gets targeted like JG and RM did.
Doesnt it bother them in the slightest that if she is prepared to murder her own daughter it is a really short stretch and just NO PROBLEM AT ALL for her to let one of them go down for it?
Maybe another reason why AL is so keen to get them all together. Maybe she can get LE,CA or GA to say something that would incriminate THEM rather than the perp. IDK, just a thought.
I just have to give you props.
Every time you hunt down documents for us, a song is going off in the back ground of my mind... here it is , for you!
Own it.....love it, you have earned it!!!
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl6yXBnLYYM"]YouTube - David Cassidy (Partridge Family) - I think I love you 1970[/ame]
Last edited by whisperOFwings; 09-21-2009 at 02:57 AM. Reason: Anyone from the 60-70's will know what an honor this is!!! HELLOOOOO< SE**Y!!!
Ada, cecybeans, chefmom, christee, coco puff, countzero, DolphinsByTheSea, Friday, HOPE4CAYLEE, Imbackon, Insomnia Momma, JDzWife, Kat, lisalei321, MissJames, mitzi, momtective, mountaintime, Muzikman, MysticOne, MyTinkieGirl, nyvictoria, Oakley, RedSox Mom, Sdavidson11, TakeNote, tasylshari, The Eunice Burns, The World According, Theonly1, ThinkTank, trafficsUP66, Truthwillsetufree, Tulessa, zoomom
I started reading over the transcript, and carefully noting the answers GA gave that were at variance with what he had said in that interview that he gave LE early on, (just after the police got involved)....then I was going to go watch the interview again, to check and make sure my recollection was correct. I never even got through the depo, let alone checked my recollection of what he said in the police interview.
Despite my good intentions, it is just too big a job .. almost every word is a direct contradiction of his testimony to LE..(as to whether or not KC was working, or whether she stole money, or when he had first hear of ZFG.).but I still don't know what in particular caught the attention of SA.. it is all just the usual A's spin on stuff, as far as I can see. Seems a little late in the day to hold the A's to a normal standard of truthfulness. Or if one is going to go after GA for being less than meticulous with the truth, then why not CA as well?
Best Friends Animal Society
A better world through kindness to animals
[I]Please help BestFriends help us.
I noticed that paragraph 2 of SA's motion only says "GA testified at deposition in a manner that . . ." The first depo that came to my mind was M&M's depo because I saw and read it. But I bet they're referring to State's own depo done in August. (I hope I'm remembering this right.) SA would probably feel more sure-footed using their own deposition as a basis for such an important analysis. If this is right, we won't have anything to compare it to but will still be able to glean a lot of info. moo
The heart of the pure can see, but my eyes have never seen the unicorn . . .
Ok, so which depo are they talking about? We only have access to the civil trial depo, right? Or am I missing something?
They are saying GA's testimony to the GJ does not line up with his testimony in the criminal trial depo, right?
We do not have access to either. Correct? If I am wrong, please point me in the right direction.
What I mean is that we can only compare GA's questioning by LE to his civil depo. So, we can't even see what they are talking about...Darn.
Poor GA. I really like the guy. (don't hit me, lol)
Last edited by WolfmarsGirl; 09-21-2009 at 09:43 AM. Reason: I figured out I was wrong about a thought - I think...
The above is my opinion only based on published accounts of the case.
The thing that the A's and BC are going to use ad nauseam, will be, we had just lost our grand daughter. We couldn't be expected to remember these things when we were going through all of this. I seem to recall, CA even saying this to LE in many of her interviews. This will definitely be their defense to ANY and ALL inconsistencies, mark my words. Or at least it is what they will TRY to use as a defense.
I am also almost certain, there will NEVER be ANY charges against ANY of the A's. I think the state is too compassionate to their position. now this may change if they out and out lie AT TRIAL and they can prove THAT!
Kathi Belich Is My Hero!
OK...I had, IMO, a good post about my thoughts on this subject...but it went the way of wayward posts...LOL
I think perhaps it truely wasn't GA's testimony at the Grand Jury hearing that sealed KC's doom. IMO, we might be a little disappointed with these documents....just IMO, again..."don't shoot me...I'm only the piano player"...LOL
Remember, he walked into that hearing with a binder that had Caylee's "Have You Seen Me" type of flier on the front.
Although, there was also this one....
I'm sure he testified about KC's behavior...past and present....but, at that time he believed (or wanted to) that Caylee was still alive (or maybe he really didn't in his heart).
What I DO know, is that it obviously was the "sum of the whole" that brought the indictment. Regardless of what GA said...IF, in fact, it was more towards a live Caylee and covering KC's buttocks.
Never the less...the indictment, IMO, is a GREAT indication that a jury CAN, in fact, differentiate between the A's bull caca and the more logical conclusion...the probability that KC was involved in Caylee's death...AND, that Caylee was in fact deceased.
They came to that conclusion perhaps IN SPITE of what GA might have said that was contrary to other testimony of Yuri, etc.
Maybe GA is throwing GA under the bus. Like the proverbial martyr, giving his life for his daughter...to save her...even if it means his own freedom....almost the greatest show of love for her, because of his guilt for past problems between them. A little dramatic, but you know what I'm saying.
By creating doubt....even if it means being charged with perjury...he's going to do it for "gorgeous".
BTW...What is the sentence if found guilty of perjury??
ETA : But...then, again...his testimony could be a real "BOMBSHELL"....
Last edited by MyTinkieGirl; 09-21-2009 at 11:19 AM.