Crime scene photos #2

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
As for the book not being mentioned as "missing", GA so much as said that KC and Caylee both left the house July16th wearing backpacks. Now that would mean that, at the very least, a backpack is missing....and unless they are in the practice of toting around empty backpacks, one could surmise that whatever was packed is also missing...unless everything from the pack was found loose in the car....IDK, I would think that in one of the many media "walk-thrus" that CA would have showed the book since it is one of the very last memories they have of Caylee??
 
Everyone--
I personally called OCSO today to voice my opinion on the matter about this photo being released to the public. I spoke to the PR guy there and he didnt have time for me since "he was in a big meeting" . However when I described this picture to him (told him it was the one with Caylees yellow book and skull in the photo with the garbage bad), all of a sudden he had a bit of time to chat. This picture is what you all are seeing. He didnt say "Yes it is", however it was not denied and would have been yanked off rtheir site really quickly if the damage had not already been done. I really wish that certain aspects of the picture wouldnt be blown up like that, but it is what it is and its public information. I am getting from him that this was a picture that was NOT supposed to be released, and if it was, then I was told that they are supposed to be smaller in size so when blown up, they are too pixilized to see anything. So sadly, yes folks, your assumptions are most likely correct, this is what you see. Personally I wish I could take each picture off anywhere its posted, but it is public and thats it.
 
Clock's Tickin said:
As for the book not being mentioned as "missing", GA so much as said that KC and Caylee both left the house July16th wearing backpacks. Now that would mean that, at the very least, a backpack is missing....and unless they are in the practice of toting around empty backpacks, one could surmise that whatever was packed is also missing...unless everything from the pack was found loose in the car....IDK, I would think that in one of the many media "walk-thrus" that CA would have showed the book since it is one of the very last memories they have of Caylee??
Click to expand...

Agreed. And again, there was a reason that Casey mentioned this book in that interview. Now, IMO, we know what it was.
 
Jagger-Byrne said:
Does anyone know what book it is that Caylee is looking at when she's sitting at the table while visiting Papa (great-grandfather)? It looks to me like the cover of the book Caylee is looking at is white. The picture in the wooded area looks like it's a book with a yellow cover. That's not to say that Caylee only had one book.

Also, something I find interesting: Casey said the day that the call came in from Caylee from a Private Number (also the day Casey got busted) , Caylee said "Hi Mommy" and that Caylee was supposedly talking about her book(s) and shoes. -- So now I wonder if shoes have been found in poor Caylee's coffin bag or in the acre of land that is being searched.?.

This is so sad! And to think Caylee's been there (close to home) all along. :confused:
Click to expand...


Re the bold:

The book Caylee was looking at in the video is about a kitten or kittens. The kitty's picture is on the cover. The back of the book is white. The front has a large picture of the cat. The cover may have been partially yellow with a white border. Some or all of the pages in the book are yellow and it only has pics of the cat in it. I watched the videos carefully a few times.

The book in the woods appears to be open, not closed, so we can't see the cover, but the pages are yellow, and it looks like some sort of birds in the pictures. It could possibly be a book from a set of books and/or from the same publisher of the book Caylee had in the video. She could have several books like these.

I was going to watch it again to see if I could make out the title but I can't find it.


GOT IT!!! Title is Suppertime For Frieda Fuzzypaws by Cyndy Szekeres.

The book in the woods could be "Fluffy Duckling" by the same author. Library description says: When Fluffy Duckling emerges from her egg she meets a bird, a caterpillar, and a turtle before finding her own Mama Duck. On board pages. "A Golden book".
 
BobbieDoll said:
haha thank you, i couldn't have said it better myself.

We are here for a reason and it's because we are inquisitive human beings.

I saw a post that bashed me for putting that skull up in the image. I'm sorry if I offended anyone but I have spent a lot of time working with photos and figured I had the ability to help some people see what others were seeing.


The biggest tell in these photos is going to be the difference in texture. The texture in the pixels does not lie. And there is something there.
Click to expand...

I agree. I believe a clerk of some kind was given those pictures to look through and release. They had not been at the scene and when they saw that picture, they saw a bunch of trees and had no idea the bag was showing in the picture. It would not have been released if they had known it could be seen.

If you look at the order of the pictures in the sheriff's photo, that is one of the first ones and my guess it is the scene before they removed the bag.
 
rngirl513 said:
Everyone--
I personally called OCSO today to voice my opinion on the matter about this photo being released to the public. I spoke to the PR guy there and he didnt have time for me since "he was in a big meeting" . However when I described this picture to him (told him it was the one with Caylees yellow book and skull in the photo with the garbage bad), all of a sudden he had a bit of time to chat. This picture is what you all are seeing. He didnt say "Yes it is", however it was not denied and would have been yanked off rtheir site really quickly if the damage had not already been done. I really wish that certain aspects of the picture wouldnt be blown up like that, but it is what it is and its public information. I am getting from him that this was a picture that was NOT supposed to be released, and if it was, then I was told that they are supposed to be smaller in size so when blown up, they are too pixilized to see anything. So sadly, yes folks, your assumptions are most likely correct, this is what you see. Personally I wish I could take each picture off anywhere its posted, but it is public and thats it.
Click to expand...

I pretty much figured that they did not intend for this to be released. I would say in a few hours that one will be gone from their releases unless there is something in the FOIA which makes it public property once it is released.
 
rngirl513 said:
Everyone--
I personally called OCSO today to voice my opinion on the matter about this photo being released to the public. I spoke to the PR guy there and he didnt have time for me since "he was in a big meeting" . However when I described this picture to him (told him it was the one with Caylees yellow book and skull in the photo with the garbage bad), all of a sudden he had a bit of time to chat. This picture is what you all are seeing. He didnt say "Yes it is", however it was not denied and would have been yanked off rtheir site really quickly if the damage had not already been done. I really wish that certain aspects of the picture wouldnt be blown up like that, but it is what it is and its public information. I am getting from him that this was a picture that was NOT supposed to be released, and if it was, then I was told that they are supposed to be smaller in size so when blown up, they are too pixilized to see anything. So sadly, yes folks, your assumptions are most likely correct, this is what you see. Personally I wish I could take each picture off anywhere its posted, but it is public and thats it.
Click to expand...

So you spoke to the PR guy and not one of the investigators? Did he look at the picture at any time you spoke to him? Based on the image numbering there are a minimum of 7200 crime scene photos. Unless he was looking at the photo in question when you spoke to him, he would not know precisely which picture you were referring to and may believe that they accidentally released one.

It is easy for people - even LE - to be temporarily confused.
 
Clock's Tickin said:
well, that would explain KC's "talking" to Caylee on July 15...and Caylee was "so excited and was telling me about this favorite book that she has"...I mean, obviously if she still had the book, in KC's mind this will support her story. UUAAAARRRGGGGHHH!
Click to expand...

Clock's Tickin.. I just saw that you posted this this morning before I started a thread (which is now merged with this one) about the Book. I guess we were thinkin' alike today. :blowkiss:
 
debs said:
One simple factor seems to be escaping logic here: The meter reader said the skull came out of the bag. In the picture that is being much analyzed, the object being described as a skull (in fact, BOTH objects being described as skulls) are in situ. They are NOT freely on the ground. The objects, if they are not tree roots (which is what I believe they are) cannot be the skull the meter reader found. Whatever is in the tree (ROOTS!!!), it has not yet been disturbed.
Click to expand...

I don't think the pic shows a skull either, but just because I know how media works, I also don't believe that meter reader actually said what he is being quoted as having said.....much like the "no clothes" release.
 
Hi Bobbie! :)

OK, this photo in question... strangely, I got yet a different image when I zoomed, cropped and used contrast. Like you, I did not add or delete anything. Where can I post it? I need help understanding it. Thanks a bunch!

BobbieDoll said:
you know guys the picture of what we are calling a skull really could be nothing, but what a freakish thing if it is nothing, right down to a tight brown piece of something around the mouth area.

I just don't know what to think.
Click to expand...
 
Originally they were gonna transfer me to Dect. John Allen, however he wasnt avail. and his mailbox was full so no message couldnt been left. The PR did ask which photo, but I didnt have a # to give him. When I described him, he seemed to know immediatly.
 
He didnt confirm it WAS, let me clear that up. but he said he was sorry I had to see it and unfortuantly sometimes pictures are public and its out of their control. And it is.
 
debs said:
One simple factor seems to be escaping logic here: The meter reader said the skull came out of the bag. In the picture that is being much analyzed, the object being described as a skull (in fact, BOTH objects being described as skulls) are in situ. They are NOT freely on the ground. The objects, if they are not tree roots (which is what I believe they are) cannot be the skull the meter reader found. Whatever is in the tree (ROOTS!!!), it has not yet been disturbed.
Click to expand...

It was never said it "fell on the ground." It was said it fell out. The bag could have been slit at that place. Many times I pick up a bag out of my kitchen garbage and it splits on the side.

From the picture I lightened up, I believe it is the bag. It is on the ground and in a position trapped under that bush which looks like it washed there.

195831-1.jpg
 
rngirl513 said:
Originally they were gonna transfer me to Dect. John Allen, however he wasnt avail. and his mailbox was full so no message couldnt been left. The PR did ask which photo, but I didnt have a # to give him. When I described him, he seemed to know immediatly.
Click to expand...


I'm sure they know what has been released.

This would not be the first time someone made a mistake.

Like I said before, the time stamp on this photo is definitely before the bad was removed. The focus of the photo is clearly on the bag, the "skull" that we are seeing is not up in the air but laying on the ground at the base of the bag on top of some brush.


If you look at the orig photo you can see the image still looks like a skull.

This was a big boo boo IMO.
 

Attachments

  • skull.jpg
    skull.jpg
    83.9 KB · Views: 261
Just finished reading both threads, absolutely intriguing excellent thought provacations and sleuthing. One of the best "reads" I've had in a long time. Keep up the good work, especially those able to photoshop, write, circle, draw and color in images so we can have a better view, visual and understanding of what is being described per photo. I take a bow.
 
BobbieDoll said:
I'm sure they know what has been released.

This would not be the first time someone made a mistake.

Like I said before, the time stamp on this photo is definitely before the bad was removed. The focus of the photo is clearly on the bag, the "skull" that we are seeing is not up in the air but laying on the ground at the base of the bag on top of some brush.


If you look at the orig photo you can see the image still looks like a skull.

This was a big boo boo IMO.
Click to expand...

I am convinced a clerk who had not been to the scene scanned the photos and saw nothing in that but trees and released it. It takes a good eye and close observation to pick up on things in crime scene photos. That is why they make photos and videos of everything at a crime scenes. Even the human eye misses things on first pass.
 
SeriouslySearching said:
OCSO would not release photos with pertinent evidence in them. Period. There is no skull or bag in any of those photos, imo. Matrixing and the pixellation of leaves, roots, etc. will always create images in our minds. That is all it is.
Click to expand...

Agree. Though that book does have my eye..........
 
Pink Panther said:
This would be a very obvious ommision. That video has been key in this case and her not mentioning that the book was missing would be very difficult to "explain away"!
Click to expand...

I believe because KC has had all this time in jail to think the entire thing through, she realized she left some "loose ends." That is why she would tell those things, because she knew they would all lead right back to her.

That is why the remark about the house key, because she knew she had wrapped something around her from that house. What she didn't take into account was there was an alarm on the house and the sheriff's department put up those cameras everywhere.
 
Crabcake23 said:
Okay, now I was on Topix and someone insisted that they saw a skull near the garbage bag. I blew this up, so sorry for the fuzziness. It's the same photo Turbothink posted, just cropped and enlarged. I'm not sure what to think.

Thoughts?

***Edited*** Scratch that. There is supposed to be tape around the skull. I don't see any tape here.

1145344.JPG
Click to expand...

Do you really think that the prosecution would release a picture of Caylee's skull? Seriously?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 209 more.
Total: 3,928 (members: 210, guests: 3,718)

Online statistics

Members online
210
Guests online
3,718
Total visitors
3,928
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,160
Messages
17,964,355
Members
228,706
Latest member
mhenderson
Back
Top