2010.05.10 - Casey Anthony Motions Hearing

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
In order to remain "impartial"......we have to be able to step aside of our belief and passion and see that just because a mom likes to have her party time it does not equate to her being a bad mom.

An example.........For a long time....we used a nanny.........one that would handle school pick up and HW before we got home. We also enjoyed a great many vacations where the nanny kept the kids at home or came with us. Extra hands doesn't mean parents are hands off.

I consider myself an outstanding mom ,and the fact that my child was left in the care of another while I enjoyed my free time does not in any way negate that.

I think too many people are assuming that the photos "should" demonstrate a disregard for parental duties. But "going out" does not a bad parent make. Especially when "adequate care" (read CA and GA) is being provided.

The relevance that these photos will have, is in discrediting KC's statements to LE and offering a glimpse into KC's frame of mind BEFORE that 911 call, and establishing a pattern of behavior during the time that Caylee was "missing". IMO...the SA is too sharp to anticipate using photos just to prove KC a "sl*t, or a bad mom". Those would be opinions and not facts.

Are the photos irrelevant????? NO....not at all. Are they inflammatory?? Sure. in some sense...but only if one is trying to portray KC as a mother "searching for any clues about her missing child's whereabouts". It's all about perspective.
 
I was over on the Lawyers thread talking about JBP and AZLawyer thinks it's confusing because Jay Blanshard Park is also JBP, and JP can also be one of ICA's friends - and I think Judge Perry deserves more than two letters - it even got confusing when we were talking about JS.

So I'm going with HHJP, as a "gentle" nod to Baez to mind his manners, and because I think it has presence like Judge Perry.

Just in case you care to read my posts you will know who I'm talking about.
 
Just viewed the part of Baez's 2 minutes video..OLD NEWS...coverage that is not even current, but from 1 1/2 to almost 2 years ago.
 
Imbackon said:
I agree, the b4 photos are relevant.
There is a big difference when comparing working night shift Mom's from ones that are playing beer pong. Hangovers for one thing!

I believe George made references to making breakfast for Caylee "as usual" and "to be frank" I think the partying pics prior to Caylee being murdered will be an important building block to show what ICA's priorities were.

This was brought up long ago, but show me the pics of Caylee with ICA at Disney or a park or a childs play area at Mcdonalds even or anything outside of the weird silent movies we have seen from inside the home.

How's this for fair play. For every picture Jose can show Caylee in pictures enjoying life outside of the confines of the Anthony home, one party pic must be removed from being shown to the jury.
Sounds fair to me!
Click to expand...

I am very, very concerned that JP won't let the blue dress Fusian pics in. Those pics are critical to the State's case. I worry about the Cynthia Sommer case and the effect it will have on this trial. Is there any hope that JP will let those pictures in or does anyone think it's practically a done deal that he won't?
 
logicalgirl said:
I was over on the Lawyers thread talking about JBP and AZLawyer thinks it's confusing because Jay Blanshard Park is also JBP, and JP can also be one of ICA's friends - and I think Judge Perry deserves more than two letters - it even got confusing when we were talking about JS.

So I'm going with HHJP, as a "gentle" nod to Baez to mind his manners, and because I think it has presence like Judge Perry.

Just in case you care to read my posts you will know who I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

Sounds great LG
 
gamom said:
I always felt the A's would not truly grieve until the media of this case died down. With all the drama going on it gave them a place to vent and someone to be angry at. Once this dies down the only one they will be able to be angry at is KC. Mothers day must have been extremely hard for them yesterday.
Click to expand...

Agree with your post gamom, that the media attention may have postponed their ability to grieve... but would have to suggest re: the part of your post which I bolded that, once this dies down, they will still have the following to be angry at:

1. themselves;
2. one another.
 
sleutherontheside said:
In order to remain "impartial"......we have to be able to step aside of our belief and passion and see that just because a mom likes to have her party time it does not equate to her being a bad mom.

An example.........For a long time....we used a nanny.........one that would handle school pick up and HW before we got home. We also enjoyed a great many vacations where the nanny kept the kids at home or came with us. Extra hands doesn't mean parents are hands off.

I consider myself an outstanding mom ,and the fact that my child was left in the care of another while I enjoyed my free time does not in any way negate that.

I think too many people are assuming that the photos "should" demonstrate a disregard for parental duties. But "going out" does not a bad parent make. Especially when "adequate care" (read CA and GA) is being provided.

The relevance that these photos will have, is in discrediting KC's statements to LE and offering a glimpse into KC's frame of mind BEFORE that 911 call, and establishing a pattern of behavior during the time that Caylee was "missing". IMO...the SA is too sharp to anticipate using photos just to prove KC a "sl*t, or a bad mom". Those would be opinions and not facts.

Are the photos irrelevant????? NO....not at all. Are they inflammatory?? Sure. in some sense...but only if one is trying to portray KC as a mother "searching for any clues about her missing child's whereabouts". It's all about perspective.
Click to expand...
Yep, I think someone within the last 42 years could probably come up with a photo of me not looking like I was the 24-hour perfect MoM. But, as you indicate, there's no one who can find a photo of me that looks like I was having anything at all to do with fun while one of my children was "missing." Let alone being found dead and wrapped in duct tape shortly after so many party pictures. Huge distinction!
 
sleutherontheside said:
BBM
ITA... Is it the case here? Hard to say. BUT..........I find it curious that JB jumped on the whine wagon about the SA using the photos to claim KC was not a good mom. He not only stuck his foot in his mouth BUT...he did so with gusto. JB likely wants to introduce lay opinion that KC was a good mom.

He "assumed" that the SA would say she wasn't. He argued that the photos have no relevance as they were taken after the date that the SA would claim Caylee died. Or actually...that the events on the 16th had nothing to do with the 20th.

LDB stated that they would use photos to rebut KC's own statements to LE about visiting bars to look for "Zanny". Well........JB doesn't want them in there becasue then it will open the door to the Zanny theory that they have been so obviously distancing themselves from.

JB will argue the photos are inflammatory...and IMO...many of them are. BUT...the photos at Fusian are totally relevant. Just as much as the target video, Blockbuster video, etc....that show her without Caylee in tow.

I would caution the SA to move far away from any reference to the "style" of attire. BUT....Judge P was the one to say "mini dress" and "up on stage". LDB even said that there were photos of KC in booths, and sitting at tables.

Perhaps if KC had been photographed "peaking under tables" or "peaking behind the bar"..........one could say...."She was looking for clues". But in the absence of any evidence her participating in a "scavenger hunt" for Intel....those photos do in fact demonstrate her "state of mind" her "behavior" and her whereabouts.

The defense team referred to them as Ugly Coping. Well....what was she "coping with" may I ask?????? JB.....it is best to recall all your past statements, arguments, and "soundbites". They'll bite ya back if you're not careful!!!!!
Click to expand...

I think this is the double edge sword for both sides. I interpret the party pics as someone who does not know their child is missing. When did the defense refer to them as ugly coping? I do remember Jb stating that Kc had a compelling reason for her actions, but do not know that he said it was ugly coping. I doubt the defense will go down this road. IMO
 
chefmom said:
Lol! They sure have! Thanks for the logo pic! Pretty sure that's what he is wearing.
GeorgesShirt.jpg
Click to expand...

CA's in a tank top and GA's in a sports polo...gee, I didn't realize today was "casual Monday". :crazy:
 
notthatsmart said:
I think this is the double edge sword for both sides. I interpret the party pics as someone who does not know their child is missing. When did the defense refer to them as ugly coping? I do remember Jb stating that Kc had a compelling reason for her actions, but do not know that he said it was ugly coping. I doubt the defense will go down this road. IMO
Click to expand...

BBM, that is EXACTLY what the defense strategy will be in my opinion. The problem is, she was the last person to see Caylee and has to explain WHERE and with WHO she left her. The person needs to be a real person in order for it to be believable. She also would need to explain why she lied to law enforcement who was helping her find her daughter once she found out she was missing. IF it were to be believed (yeah right) but just for kicks, say it was believed, then I feel that the state could other charges since if KC told the truth they may have been able to find an alive Caylee. Instead she sat out on bond and provided zero help to the 5000+ people looking for her daughter.

I think she needs to just admit to killing her and try to save her life. :truce:
 
notthatsmart said:
I think this is the double edge sword for both sides. I interpret the party pics as someone who does not know their child is missing. When did the defense refer to them as ugly coping? I do remember Jb stating that Kc had a compelling reason for her actions, but do not know that he said it was ugly coping. I doubt the defense will go down this road. IMO
Click to expand...

How could a mother, pray tell, not know her child was missing? Even Casey did not claim she wasn't "missing." Her first claim was that she went to pick her up that very day and found nanny and Caylee "missing."
 
Clown said:
Do you think, Baez want's south Miami, because there are a lot of young party type people there that he might feel can relate better to Casey, out partying to help with all the stress she was feeling while trying to find , Zanny and her missing two year old baby?
Click to expand...

Last week at the 'budget' hearing, JP ruled the jury would be obtained elsewhere but the trial would be held in Orlando. Today, we have JB arguing yet again for the trial to be moved, and again, he is arguing for Miami.

MOO, I have thought since he first brought Miami up, and continue to think, he wants Miami because he is from there, and how great for him to have a two-month (paid?) trip to his old home town, where people he knows from way back can see him getting bombarded by the media on a daily basis. Where now the in-crowd will be seeking him out, inviting him to country clubs and out yachting, basically 2 months of schmoozing with the upper echelon of Miami society. Think of all the networking he will be able to do on evenings and weekends for the duration of the trial.

Anyway, that's my opinion!
 
ExpectingUnicorns said:
How could a mother, pray tell, not know her child was missing? Even Casey did not claim she wasn't "missing." Her first claim was that she went to pick her up that very day and found nanny and Caylee "missing."
Click to expand...

Yes, but according to her, Caylee was okay. She even talked to her on the phone. Also speaking of the first claim. That was when everyone was under the premise of June 9th. A false date. Le was asking questions based on a false date and Kc was answering questions on a false date.

I really wish Le would have waited and asked more questions once they knew the correct date, but from what I could tell, they reacted with anger and scared her into getting a lawyer. Now we have to wait. go figure.
 
notthatsmart said:
Yes, but according to her, Caylee was okay. She even talked to her on the phone. Also speaking of the first claim. That was when everyone was under the premise of June 9th. A false date. Le was asking questions based on a false date and Kc was answering questions on a false date.

I really wish Le would have waited and asked more questions once they knew the correct date, but from what I could tell, they reacted with anger and scared her into getting a lawyer. Now we have to wait. go figure.
Click to expand...

BBM Key phrase here: "According to (Casey.)" She *claimed* to have talked to her on the phone. The cell phone records proved that to be a lie, like nearly every other thing Casey has *claimed."
 
notthatsmart said:
I think this is the double edge sword for both sides. I interpret the party pics as someone who does not know their child is missing. When did the defense refer to them as ugly coping? I do remember Jb stating that Kc had a compelling reason for her actions, but do not know that he said it was ugly coping. I doubt the defense will go down this road. IMO
Click to expand...
But, then why did she tell the police that she went to clubs she knew ZFG frequented in hopes of finding her daughter? By her own admission, she was looking for Caylee. Doesn't that mean she realized she was "missing"? If you're out searching, doesn't that imply you're trying to find something?
 
gamom said:
I respectfully beg to differ. In my opinion she could party all night and still be there to read to her child and feed her in the morning. Toddlers are in bed by 8 or 9 at the latest. The party does not start until 10-11. The Club closes at 2 so she could be home by 3 or so in the morning. She could still be a good mom.

IF she was working the night shift with the same hours we would not say she was a bad mom. If SA goes down this line, I think it will hurt them. I think they should use the party pics only to show state of mind while Caylee was missing and nothing more. If they start harping on her life style as a single mom and calling her a bad mom because of it...it might not click with a juror.

Just the opinion of a child raised by a single mother who although did go out and have a good time some nights, made sure my need was ALWAYS met and I was well cared for. She was always the last face I saw at night and the first I saw in the morning...usually telling me about her night.
Click to expand...

But remember, when Casey was out partying, she was lying about being at work. I hope they take this all the way back to shortly after Caylee was born and ICA had Lauren babysitting PRO BONO while she was 'at work', all the way up through the Gs and beyond. We're not talking about a single mother going out a few nights a week after baby goes to bed, this went way beyond that. And I can't remember, wasn't Caylee at the 'no clothes' party?
 
notthatsmart said:
Yes, but according to her, Caylee was okay. She even talked to her on the phone. Also speaking of the first claim. That was when everyone was under the premise of June 9th. A false date. Le was asking questions based on a false date and Kc was answering questions on a false date.

I really wish Le would have waited and asked more questions once they knew the correct date, but from what I could tell, they reacted with anger and scared her into getting a lawyer. Now we have to wait. go figure.
Click to expand...

But, nts, we know now Caylee was not okay. And all indications are that so much that the Anthony family relayed as being truth was not true (even as you describe).

She knew she was missing. You said she didn't.
 
notthatsmart said:
I think this is the double edge sword for both sides. I interpret the party pics as someone who does not know their child is missing. When did the defense refer to them as ugly coping? I do remember Jb stating that Kc had a compelling reason for her actions, but do not know that he said it was ugly coping. I doubt the defense will go down this road. IMO
Click to expand...

Except she said her daughter has been missing for 31 days, she admitted that she went to the clubs to find people who knew 'zanaida', she was frantic when Zani wasn't there, she said she went through 'other means' to find her daughter. Logic says if she claims to have been looking for her daughter and was weighing options of whether or not she should contact police or go to the bars and perform her own investigation, that she necessarily must have known that her daughter was missing.

Or, if you're more a fan of the Blanchard Park beat-down story, in which she claimed Zani and her sister held her down and stole Caylee from her, then again, logically, she knew Caylee was missing.

I mean do you remember that stuff? I'm not understanding the thought process here. Any enlightenment will be appreciated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 210 more.
Total: 4,186 (members: 211, guests: 3,975)

Online statistics

Members online
211
Guests online
3,975
Total visitors
4,186
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,462
Messages
17,969,269
Members
228,774
Latest member
truecrime-hazeleyes
Back
Top