Protesters could be hindering conclusion. - Page 11

SUR · #**251** 09-14-2008, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katie526

Great post. Our children are a product of what we show them and teach them.

I feel sorry for that little boy and I hope he is okay. What brought tears to my eyes was that 2 year old little girl wearing a sign that said "how could you kill someone like me". I think that is what it said. Who would put a sign on their child like that.

IMO a very sick inidvidual would put a sign like that on hr baby. As far as the little boy, they proved how concerned they are for children by not even comforting him when he got hurt. Sickos

Marple · #**252** 09-14-2008, 12:17 PM

I hope the A family and the HOA can get the protesters moved to a protest zone and get them away from the front of the house. The neighborhood does not deserve to live with this disruption of peace day after day.

jbar · #**253** 09-14-2008, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Listen and watch this WHOLE video and you will understand ANYTHING can be said by LE and that does not mean it is truth of proof.

I have seen all the videos on all the news networks. I also understand that 'someone' can explain away anything they want if they talk enough. Logic is basic though. Logic makes sense, without elaborate excuses.

monoxide · #**254** 09-14-2008, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marple

I hope the A family and the HOA can get the protesters moved to a protest zone and get them away from the front of the house. The neighborhood does not deserve to live with this disruption of peace day after day.

Why revoke fifty people's rights? When all you have to do is take Casey back to where she belongs. With her in the slammer there will be no arguments.

softsoul · #**255** 09-14-2008, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GameTheory

SOME of the protesters - to be exact those who take their children outside the Anthony house - are one and the same with Casey. Why?

Because JUST LIKE CASEY they put THEIR needs, THEIR desires, THEIR wants above their children's well being and safety. They should take a good look in the mirror.

I don't agree with how these protesters are acting but come on...to compare them with what Casey has done....WAY out of line IMO.

lowa1 · #**256** 09-14-2008, 12:22 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom..._United_States

So many rules are being broken at these protests at this house beginning with language to inciting a riot like atmosphere. I thought maybe I should review the first amendment. It's been awhile since school days. Good reading if anyone is interested. Hope I linked correctly.

SUR · #**257** 09-14-2008, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbar

I have seen all the videos on all the news networks. I also understand that 'someone' can explain away anything they want if they talk enough. Logic is basic though. Logic makes sense, without elaborate excuses.

You obviously didn't listen to the one I posted because no one is explaining away anything. It is just facts by a judge. You can't have logic if you refuse to listen to others who understand how and why LE does what they do.

SUR · #**258** 09-14-2008, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monoxide

Why revoke fifty people's rights? When all you have to do is take Casey back to where she belongs. With her in the slammer there will be no arguments.

She is lawfully out on bail and has not been charged with being a "baby killer". These protesters will argue, make fools out of themselves and put their children in danger no matter where Casey is IMO. I wonder if any of them would want to be put in the slammer instead of getting bail?

Salome · #**259** 09-14-2008, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monoxide

Why revoke fifty people's rights? When all you have to do is take Casey back to where she belongs. With her in the slammer there will be no arguments.

Casey has a right to be out on bail. It sucks and nobody but the A's like that uncomfortable fact, but it's part of our justice system. I agree that she belongs in jail and that she will end up there for a good long while, but for now, she is not breaking any laws by being at home (as far as we are aware, of course).

The protestors are not breaking laws by protesting peacefully and assembling on public property (some of them aren't respecting either of these). Yet the HOA has rights as well, and may be able to assert them to move the protestors to a different location. If you've ever been involved in a planned march or protest, you'll know that very often you are told where you can be and where you can't be (on sidewalks, not blocking streets, for example) without breaking laws and getting in trouble yourself. I don't see much of a difference here if the HOA succeeds in getting the protestors moved.

jbar · #**260** 09-14-2008, 12:29 PM

Quote:

You obviously didn't listen to the one I posted because no one is explaining away anything.

I meant you, The Anthony's, Katie526 and whomever else supports Casey can explain away what LE is saying, the FBI proof, etc by talk talk talking... but logic transcends all.

SUR · #**261** 09-14-2008, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbar

I meant you, The Anthony's, Katie526 and whomever else supports Casey can explain away what LE is saying, the FBI proof, etc by talk talk talking... but logic transcends all.

Again, it is not logical to ignore a what a judge says but if you choose to, oh well. You know what they say about a closed parachute.

jbar · #**262** 09-14-2008, 12:37 PM

This judge is saying that LE knows more than we do and that they are not able to out and out break the law, but they are able to create impressions to POI, witnesses etc - not the general public!!! I do not believe that they are allowed to say they have FBI evidence when they do not. That would be breaking the law. Again, I think you are explaining away pure logic to create his comments to mirror something that fits your agenda.

ibyoungr · #**263** 09-14-2008, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monoxide

Why revoke fifty people's rights? When all you have to do is take Casey back to where she belongs. With her in the slammer there will be no arguments.

This argument is getting really old. The judge set bond, the bond was met. If you have a problem then take the PROTEST to the judges chambers. Simple.

If you do not like the law, then change the law.

I can believe all day that Casey is guilty. That is not what this is about.

Rights? Let's talk rights...

Which "Right" trumps?

1st amendment - Freedom of speech?
5th amendment - Right to remain silent

Funny thing is... Casey has a right to remain silent.. ACLU's website
http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14528res20040730.html

50 people's right to protest.... careful be very careful.... with this one.
So do you agree with the weirdo Westboro Baptist church that screams and harasses families of dead soliders?
If it is okay to do in one situation.. then it comes legal precedent in another situation.

Is the ACLU going to have to have an argument with themselves?

I have asked 3 times... what right trumps the other and not one person can answer this.

softsoul · #**264** 09-14-2008, 12:45 PM

There is no proof that LE has lied or misled about anything. Casey on the other hand...

SUR · #**265** 09-14-2008, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbar

This judge is saying that LE knows more than we do and that they are not able to out and out break the law, but they are able to create impressions. I do not believe that they are allowed to say they have FBI evidence when they do not. Again, I think you are explaining away pure logic to create his comments to mirror something that fits your agenda.

And create impressions they did and again that does NOT mean it is truth or proof. They CAN say anyone has any evidence they wish to as was explained and again, does not equal proof. Again, it is not logical to only believe what you choose to and not wait to actually see the proof before you assume it is fact.

jbar · #**266** 09-14-2008, 12:49 PM

It's also not logical to debate with someone who does not follow logic, reality and science.... or those not dealing a full deck. I will heed the advice you gave to Katie526 earlier.

unsaid · #**267** 09-14-2008, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbar

This judge is saying that LE knows more than we do and that they are not able to out and out break the law, but they are able to create impressions to POI, witnesses etc - not the general public!!! I do not believe that they are allowed to say they have FBI evidence when they do not. That would be breaking the law. Again, I think you are explaining away pure logic to create his comments to mirror something that fits your agenda.

I enjoy your posts jbar. I'd like to invite you to see this issue from my perspective.

I think that LE has the information that they say they have. It's the information that they aren't saying they have that is important. They are being strategic with the info they release. What I'm unsure of is if they ALSO have information that disproves their evidence. Ok so you have Caylee's dna in the trunk and you release that information. So perception sways one way. What if they have other's dna in the trunk as well? They haven't released that info. That would lessen the impact of the info they released about Caylee's dna, right? So they won't do that, imo.

They are trying to get something from Casey so the information they release isn't really about pleasing the public and being 100% forthcoming, it's about getting Casey to tell the truth by any means and within the constraints of the law. Only releasing evidence that tells one particular story is a way to do that, IMO.

SUR · #**268** 09-14-2008, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by softsoul

There is no proof that LE has lied or misled about anything. Casey on the other hand...

We have seen NO proof of all the leaks LE put out. If they had all this proof they would charge her with murder instead of playing cat and mouse games, letting unproven tid bits leak out, putting others in danger, creationg the hate towards not only Casey but the whole family. Say what you will about ducks, T's and I's but IF they had the evidence she would have been charged. They are going to play their silly little games until one of those protesters does something to hurt themselves, their kids or someone else.

SUR · #**269** 09-14-2008, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbar

It's also not logical to debate with someone who does not follow logic, reality and science.... or those not dealing a full deck. I will heed the advice you gave to Katie526 earlier.

I think accusing me of not dealing with a full deck is against the rules, isn't it?

I thought this was a place to debate the case but your "logic" only wants you to see one side.

PomMom12 · #**270** 09-14-2008, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiredofthis

Yep. Me too.

I agree.

Katie526 · #**271** 09-14-2008, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUR

I think accusing me of not dealing with a full deck is against the rules, isn't it?

I thought this was a place to debate the case but your "logic" only wants you to see one side.

Hang in there, it get's rough. I learned my lesson.

jbar · #**272** 09-14-2008, 01:03 PM

Quote:

It's also not logical to debate with someone who does not follow logic, reality and science.... or those not dealing a full deck.

Quote:

I think accusing me of not dealing with a full deck is against the rules, isn't it?

Please check your paranoia at the door. I did not personally, or directly, implicate you in my post, what so ever.

jbar · #**273** 09-14-2008, 01:06 PM

Quote:

They are being strategic with the info they release.

They are trying to get something from Casey so the information they release isn't really about pleasing the public and being 100% forthcoming, it's about getting Casey to tell the truth by any means and within the constraints of the law.

I agree with both of these statements.

I still 100% believe though, that they would not "make up" false information and state it as proof.

I do believe, and have stated so in several threads, they have enough evidence that can prove decomp in the car, and the death of Caylee. I do not believe they can prove Casey's involvement with either of those issues - and that remains to be the hold up. I think they will use this proof to get Casey to talk, however they can, within the constraints of the law - but I also believe that appealing to her in an emotional way, as they have till this point, will not be fruitfull for them.

SUR · #**274** 09-14-2008, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katie526

Hang in there, it get's rough. I learned my lesson.

Their closed minds don't rattle me. I guess they live sheltered lives to not know that cops can and do lie and it is not unusual in this case. The thing that is unusual in this case is the leaks are causing people to put themselves and their children in danger byt the silly and immature "protesting". If one of them get seriiously hurt or killed and LE's leaks are proven to be BS who is going to be at fault?

unsaid · #**275** 09-14-2008, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbar

I still 100% believe though, that they would not "make up" false information and state it as proof.

I agree with you on that.

About the evidence they have that proves Caylee's death-- what if they also have evidence that discredits that evidence in some way? That's the type of evidence that I wonder about them withholding. I think it could be that type of evidence that hinders them from pursuing a murder charge.

It just occurred to me that maybe it isn't only for lack of evidence that they don't charge Casey with murder but maybe it's because they have some evidence to the contrary. Hmmm....