Defense document - KC swears she didn't report.......

[cecybeans]

Wait for it...wait for it.... CA. This is why she wanted to see GA alone-she wanted to convince him that she was protecting "mom" the whole time......just throwin that out there.

I know a few people have thought that, but I just don't think CA has the acting chops (much less the impulse control) to fake that frantic 911 call about the dead body in the trunk, the martyr drama of her MySpace page and the spouting off to all and sundry about her evil daughter (before the fact) . Unless we are talking "Dueling Sociopaths" here. And if CA was that diabolical, GA would already be six feet under.

I also don't think KC would lose a New York nanosecond of her life protecting her mom (even if she did get a commissary account and all the cheese puffs she could eat for a year).

Those two can duke it out forever as to who is the most narcissistic, but the fact that CA went to work everyday (not Fusian or stealing from checking accounts), supported and babysat her granddaughter, and clearly desperately wanted to spend time with her to the point that she was calling KC wanting answers and sending out LA to find her, makes me think there is no way on earth CA had a thing to do with that baby's demise.

I just think that the best shot KC has is to use her dysfunctional family as mitigating circumstances to her state of mind when she murdered her daughter. No other suspect even comes close to motive, opportunity or intent.

 

[lin]

The more I read the Motion to Strike and consider this ridiculous sworn statement the more I am concerned that Jose is not competent to even represent this perp. This has got to be THE most ignorant response to date from this group who has been loosely named a "dream team"...No dream team would be so stupid, and so sorry to say that but stupid is as stupid does and this is plain stupid!

The sworn statement does not allude to her innocence or the possibility that she committed a lesser crime...

My head is going to explode on this one for certain!!!

I'm pretty sure exploding heads are a TOS violation and we wouldn't want to lose you.

Think of it this way: YOU are in charge of the defense. What on earth can you do to make this set of facts and this perp look better? Not enough, for sure and pretty close to nothing at all. It's that there is so much evidence, her guilt is so overwhelming shown that makes a credible defense impossible. Even our darling Bill Shaeffer has opined the best lawyers in the country would have a real problem with this case.

 

[Intermezzo]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...sey-anthony-grand-jury-100609,0,7743670.story
snipped
" But Casey Anthony did sign a document, swearing to two statements:

"I did not report my daughter missing until my mother called on July 15, 2008."

"I did tell law enforcement that I had dropped off my child with a person named Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez when questioned by law enforcement.""

I am wondering if or how Casey's sworn statement confirming she dropped off her child with a person named ZFG affect the Civil Suit? Anyone?


IMO, These sworn statements do not add anything new, they only support the SA's motion that the Defense's motion to dismiss lacked sworn statements

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

OK...FIRST...our little KC is soooo verrrry smart...IF my opinion is true.

By swearing to the fact of her mom calling 911 on the 15th....KC said "just one more day" when her mom confronted her.....hmmmm....seems like it justifies her not telling anyone...she needed to stick to the "script"...30 days...if I counted correctly, from the 17th of June -she probably started with that day...IMO. July 15th she gets found out by her mom..."just one more day" the 16th...would have her "30 day script" make sense. Therefore, the defenses new motion - AND, IMO, the defenses new strategy.

So...basically, she had her alibi all planned out probably right from the beginning...she KNEW she had 30 days of "freedom"....IMO

ETA : also helps support the fact that CA and DC still searching for Zanny, as the emails clearly show....

 

[Intermezzo]

Casey swore she worked at Universal, was going to get her parents home and George had a mini stroke too. So what. Caseys sworn word means nothing. I don't understand.

BBM
So True...not only her sworn word but any words that come from her.

 

[lin]

EXACTLY! You hit the nail on the head. His DEFENSE of her STUPID behavior while Cayle was missing will be that CASEY did not think Caylee was in trouble or in danger and therefore her behavior is irrelevant. Remember KC told everyone under the sun that Caylee was with her nanny. What absolutely SHOCKS me is that he will go to trial with the NAnny story! IMO

She told her family and LE that the baby was kidnapped and that she had been doing her own investigation. They may try that to explain her behavior but it's easily disproven.

 

[lin]

YES but in the same converstation she told them that she spoke to Caylee that very day and she was fine and in NO danger. She even told the 911 operator. The dangerous kidnapping story was born from the mouths of the A's.

But we now know and the evidence proves that Caylee was not alive to make that call. In addition, KC reiterated how fearful she was that Caylee may be harmed. She did not at any time, iirc, indicate that Caylee was in "NO danger."

 

[Bakersmom]

I am thinking that JB was on Geraldos boat when his receptionist emailed him that they forgot to submit sworn testimony from Casey for the dismissal motion.
Jose probably emailed her back to just pick out a couple of sworn statements and submit it to the court. Maybe???

 

[lin]

BBM
So True...not only her sworn word but any words that come from her.

 

[Intermezzo]

Failing to report ones own child missing/endangered for 31 days is NO indication of innocence. They cannot argue her innocence based on this statment so I think the state will throw them another curve ball on this one...

BBM

raying:

 

[lin]

OK...FIRST...our little KC is soooo verrrry smart...IF my opinion is true.

By swearing to the fact of her mom calling 911 on the 15th....KC said "just one more day" when her mom confronted her.....hmmmm....seems like it justifies her not telling anyone...she needed to stick to the "script"...30 days...if I counted correctly, from the 17th of June -she probably started with that day...IMO. July 15th she gets found out by her mom..."just one more day" the 16th...would put her "30 day script" make sense.

So...basically, she had her alibi all planned out probably right from the beginning...she KNEW she had 30 days of "freedom"....IMO

ETA : also helps support the fact that CA and DC still searching for Zanny, as the emails clearly show....

BBM

Cluster B personality disorders could also account for that.

 

[ZsaZsa]

They are playing with words. Actions speak louder than words.

 

[Mendara]

She told her family and LE that the baby was kidnapped and that she had been doing her own investigation. They may try that to explain her behavior but it's easily disproven.

IIRC - she told them the "nanny took her in order to teach her a lesson" but that she would speak to Caylee and that Caylee was fine - which is what she told LE during their interview - she said Caylee was happy and wasn't crying and was being well taken care of by ZG. She said she was trying to find her herself and should have called LE, but again she didn't feel Caylee was in danger.

It was only AFTER her arrest that the A's began their kidnapped stories about dangerous people and KC trying to protect everyone and Caylee being in harms way if the media didn't stop reporting on the case etc.

I don't think KC ever was recorded as saying ZG was dangerous and would kill Caylee - we got that from the A's.

Am I wrong?

KC could totally go to trial and say ZG was a real person, but gave her a fake name and purposely kidnapped Caylee to keep for herself, but then when the media reported on the case and everyone was searching for Caylee - ZG got scared and decided to kill Caylee and frame KC.

JUST because there is no proof of a ZG - doesn't mean the defense can't say there was an ACTUAL person that KC believed was named ZG - that the name was the name given to KC but may not have been her true identity. IMO

I am just trying to understand JB's thinking on staying true to the nanny story and how he will explain this mess at trial.

KC can totally say that ZG never wanted to be photographed or meet her friends or family for the purpose of her plan to steal Caylee from the begining.

 

[Mendara]

But we now know and the evidence proves that Caylee was not alive to make that call. In addition, KC reiterated how fearful she was that Caylee may be harmed. She did not at any time, iirc, indicate that Caylee was in "NO danger."

IIRC - She told LE during her interview that Caylee seemed fine on the phone and that she KC did not think she was in danger. Didn't she say Caylee was WELL taken care of by the nanny??

PS:I am going to go look it up.

 

[Intermezzo]

Thank You Lin :blowkiss:

I've been lurking, I've missed much and I'm trying to catch up.

 

[ZsaZsa]

IIRC - she told them the "nanny took her in order to teach her a lesson" but that she would speak to Caylee and that Caylee was fine - which is what she told LE during their interview - she said Caylee was happy and wasn't crying and was being well taken care of by ZG. She said she was trying to find her herself and should have called LE, but again she didn't feel Caylee was in danger.

It was only AFTER her arrest that the A's began their kidnapped stories about dangerous people and KC trying to protect everyone and Caylee being in harms way if the media didn't stop reporting on the case etc.

I don't think KC ever was recorded as saying ZG was dangerous and would kill Caylee - we got that from the A's.

Am I wrong?

KC could totally go to trial and say ZG was a real person, but gave her a fake name and purposely kidnapped Caylee to keep for herself, but then when the media reported on the case and everyone was searching for Caylee - ZG got scared and decided to kill Caylee and frame KC.

JUST because there is no proof of a ZG - doesn't mean the defense can't say there was an ACTUAL person that KC believed was named ZG - that the name was the name given to KC but may not have been her true identity. IMO

I am just trying to understand JB's thinking on staying true to the nanny story and how he will explain this mess at trial.

KC can totally say that ZG never wanted to be photographed or meet her friends or family for the purpose of her plan to steal Caylee from the begining.

What about the phone number for ZFG that CA had "at home"?

 

[lin]

I know a few people have thought that, but I just don't think CA has the acting chops (much less the impulse control) to fake that frantic 911 call about the dead body in the trunk, the martyr drama of her MySpace page and the spouting off to all and sundry about her evil daughter (before the fact) . Unless we are talking "Dueling Sociopaths" here. And if CA was that diabolical, GA would already be six feet under.

I also don't think KC would lose a New York nanosecond of her life protecting her mom (even if she did get a commissary account and all the cheese puffs she could eat for a year).

Those two can duke it out forever as to who is the most narcissistic, but the fact that CA went to work everyday (not Fusian or stealing from checking accounts), supported and babysat her granddaughter, and clearly desperately wanted to spend time with her to the point that she was calling KC wanting answers and sending out LA to find her, makes me think there is no way on earth CA had a thing to do with that baby's demise.

I just think that the best shot KC has is to use her dysfunctional family as mitigating circumstances to her state of mind when she murdered her daughter. No other suspect even comes close to motive, opportunity or intent.

To add to you excellent analysis... How would that allegation even come to be made? KC on the stand accusing her mother?? I would pay extra to see that! And what evidence would support the testimony of the proven liar trying to profit by gaining her freedom through this particular testimony? So KC testifies (oooh, that is such an image!!) that CA did it. Then CA rebuts that testimony by denying. At best it would be a sociopathic narcissist said/narcissist said. And the rest of the evidence puts the perp right where she belongs -- lwop or dp.

 

[lin]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...sey-anthony-grand-jury-100609,0,7743670.story
snipped
" But Casey Anthony did sign a document, swearing to two statements:

"I did not report my daughter missing until my mother called on July 15, 2008."

"I did tell law enforcement that I had dropped off my child with a person named Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez when questioned by law enforcement.""

I am wondering if or how Casey's sworn statement confirming she dropped off her child with a person named ZFG affect the Civil Suit? Anyone?


IMO, These sworn statements do not add anything new, they only support the SA's motion that the Defense's motion to dismiss lacked sworn statements

It's already shown that she told LE that but this would be an additional instance, I suppose. However, if I understand correctly and if the media got it right, it may not actually say that she really did drop the baby, just that she told LE that she did. So in answer to your question, I don't think it would have much of an effect on the civil case even if it's admissible due to it being in a pleading. (There are certain immunities for what one says in legal pleadings; open court; or to LE during interviews.)

 

[ZsaZsa]

If she had no reason to report her child missing because she thought she was safe with Zenaida- what about the trip to Tampa when Zenaida was injured? A lot of people have coinicdentally disappeared haven't they, or used false names- Jeffrey, Juliette, Zenaida, all the hospital staff who treated Zenaida, the reporting Police officer at the scene of the accident- did they ALL vanish at the same time as ZFG?

 

[Mensch]

Just an opinion here but I think I can see where the signed document by KC will be effective in planting 'reasonable' doubt if not total confusion in the court proceedings. It shows KC did not report Caylee missing because she (KC) did not consider her missing and truly believed she would get Caylee back until the time CA phoned the police. I think jurors will believe KC was a bad mother and made bad decisions but will not equate this with murder. I can also see that other evidence can be explained away to the point there is reasonable doubt created. I wonder why JB hasn't publically stated that Zanny (imaginary) had a key to KC's car? That would not be as crazy as most of his ramblings. I think KC will walk away from a murder charge. I have been researching other trials and the strategies used to confuse the evidence and this case will likely be the model case for defense tactics to muddy the waters. Just thinking that makes me very angry.