Sources: Casey Anthony Intentionally Killed Caylee Pt. 2

[QuietStorm]

Shown below.

 

[QuietStorm]

What was Casey doing between 7 and 10 the night of the 15th?

She's pinging during this timeframe. Time of calls are below, but most are text messages showing zero minutes.

All calls are PM. Red=Originated the call or message; Black=Received the call or message; Blue=Both during that minute

7:06 (208 seconds), 7:07, 7:08, 7:10 (37 seconds), 7:13, 7:36, 7:37, 7:38, 7:41, 7:42, 7:43, 7:44, 7:46, 7:47, 7:48, 7:49, 7:50, 7:56, 7:58, 7:59

8:00, 8:04, 8:07, 8:08, 8:14, 8:15, 8:19, 8:21, 8:23, 8:26, 8:28, 8:33, 8:40, 8:41, 8:48 (19 seconds), 8:50, 8:51, 8:53, 8:54, 8:56

9:07, 9:08, 9:09, 9:10, 9:15, 9:16, 9:25, 9:26

10:05, 10:06 (619 seconds to TL), 10:25, 10:35, 10:36, 10:38 (257 seconds to TL), 10:43, 10:45 (178 seconds), 10:48, 10:49

11:02, 11:03, 11:04, 11:44 (talked to TL 4614 seconds)

 

[Chilly Willy]

Hi, Wudge. I find your posts interesting. I don't always agree with you...

O/T I had a dream about you last night. I was in the underground parking garage for judges and da's office employees. The courthouse is in Dallas. Your name was on one of the spaces very near the elevator. WUDGE Are you a retired Judge? Are you ex Prosecutors office?

Judge Wudge?

 

[nursebeeme]

Based on the comment by the SA in the hearing last week about when a trial might occur in this case, it could end up being next year at this time or later before that occurs. It won't be much longer until this case slips to the back pages. It's going to be difficult to keep running stories about who bought what at the jail commissary, most of the general public could care less.

yet just when this thing should slip to the back pages (or at least off of the front page) a kronk or a padilla or a hoover~casey combo comes ripping thru.

This case is like a three ring circus on sterroids and I bet we haven't seen it all yet.

 

[stagehand]

yet just when this thing should slip to the back pages (or at least off of the front page) a kronk or a padilla or a hoover~casey combo comes ripping thru.

This case is like a three ring circus on sterroids and I bet we haven't seen it all yet.

True that. I also think because of all the frenzy surrounding this case, even little details that normally are just regular coincidences in ever day life as well likely in this case, get picked apart to the most minute detail.

 

[dtown]

Why does everyone seem to think the "leak" came from SA, LE or prosecution? If the duct tape or other evidence found ON the body was sent with the body for the 2nd autopsy wouldn't Dr. Lee have seen it and others on the defense? Wouldn't it be just like them to try to make it look like LE or SA leaked it?

I guess that is kind of far fetched - it would hurt their defense to leak that it was intentional. - sorry back to lurking

I think that the leak opens up more doors for the defense and gives them more opportunity to drag this on with more hearings pertaining to Casey's ability to obtain a fair trial. The media needs to let the justice system operate in it's prescribed time and manner. Report the news, don't try to make it or "be" the news. They only serve to complicate things with these anonymous leaks....all for their own selfish reasons of profit from higher ratings. It's as disgusting as the Anthony's (or anyone else for that matter) profiting from Caylee's death.

 

[octobermoon]

(sorry that makes me giggle!)

 

[Wudge]

I think that the leak opens up more doors for the defense and gives them more opportunity to drag this on with more hearings pertaining to Casey's ability to obtain a fair trial. The media needs to let the justice system operate in it's prescribed time and manner. Report the news, don't try to make it or "be" the news. They only serve to complicate things with these anonymous leaks....all for their own selfish reasons of profit from higher ratings. It's as disgusting as the Anthony's (or anyone else for that matter) profiting from Caylee's death.

It's a planted story. No evidence was leaked.

 

[QuietStorm]

I think that the leak opens up more doors for the defense and gives them more opportunity to drag this on with more hearings pertaining to Casey's ability to obtain a fair trial. The media needs to let the justice system operate in it's prescribed time and manner. Report the news, don't try to make it or "be" the news. They only serve to complicate things with these anonymous leaks....all for their own selfish reasons of profit from higher ratings. It's as disgusting as the Anthony's (or anyone else for that matter) profiting from Caylee's death.

Well, here's food for thought. No one in this world can honestly expect that ANYTHING they do will not be reported on some level. And if that deed piques enough interest, the news will become global. From Little League treasurers who embezzle funds to Joe the Plumber, to a celeb getting a parking ticket, to the hit and run of an animal, to the murder of a child. If someone wants to read about or hear about it, it will be in the news in some form.

I have a feeling that the rules for fair hearings based on publicity will change in the future. With the burgeoning Internet, magazines, radio shows, and the like, there is almost no news that does not have the potential to taint or titillate a jury anywhere in the world.

JMHO

 

[impatientredhead]

With the ME finding the cause of death to be indeterminable I find it rather remarkable that definitive evidence exists that it was intentional.

Evidence to suggest the length of time the body was in its found location makes sense as well as evidence to suggest Casey was involved. But indisputable evidence that it was intentional, that's interesting.

Just as an example, if the duct tape shows signs of Caylee trying to remove it and has Casey's fingerprints in it that would be pretty definitive proof of intent to harm since there is no viable reason in the world to duct tape a 2 year old .... the cause of death would still be undetermined though as you can't determine suffocation from skeletal remains, or chloroform poisoning, or strangulation. Those all need tissue to determine.

 

[impatientredhead]

It would be argued by a lawyer that Paddie as a human being with a reasonable knowledge that a fall off the cliff would cause some sort of bodily harm to Joe, and that acting against that reason to leave Joe to fend for himself was further exacerbating any injuries Joe suffered in the fall. Paddie could be charged with negligent homicide. If they find him not guilty in a criminal court for Joe's death, that still leaves Joe's family to seek damages for Paddie's negligence in Joe's death and they would more than likely be awarded tons.

Completely agree, especially if Joe's autopsy shows that he lived for some time after that fall and that medical help may have changed the course of events.

 

[impatientredhead]

Interesting. Why am I not guilty? (I should be!)

You would be, you are not a passerby in that situation, you indicated that the two of you went into the woods for this hike together. If you were hiking by yourself and saw Joe at the bottom of a ravine you would not be required by law to report it, but as a hiking partner that knows he is not going to receive aid any other way you have a responsibility to respond in a reasonable manner.

 

[PoppyH]

Judge Wudge?

Was a Judge=Wudge??? LOL

 

[HRCODEPINK]

With the ME finding the cause of death to be indeterminable I find it rather remarkable that definitive evidence exists that it was intentional.

Evidence to suggest the length of time the body was in its found location makes sense as well as evidence to suggest Casey was involved. But indisputable evidence that it was intentional, that's interesting.

Perhaps, and this is 1000% speculation here, no source and I did not hear anyone report it, but perhaps Casey AND Caylees fingerprints were on the duct tape. ( I've had a thousand ugly thoughts since I saw Dr. G.

 

[HRCODEPINK]

You would be, you are not a passerby in that situation, you indicated that the two of you went into the woods for this hike together. If you were hiking by yourself and saw Joe at the bottom of a ravine you would not be required by law to report it, but as a hiking partner that knows he is not going to receive aid any other way you have a responsibility to respond in a reasonable manner.

Depends on where you are. Some places now have Good Samaritan laws and you can be charged for not helping.

 

[JWG]

Depends on where you are. Some places now have Good Samaritan laws and you can be charged for not helping.

My instruction on Good Samaritan laws - having received yearly training in first aid and CPR - is that they protect the good Samaritan from lawsuits when they act as first responders. They do not force such a person as me to provide assistance. That said, I have not read the law(s).

 

[Wudge]

My instruction on Good Samaritan laws - having received yearly training in first aid and CPR - is that they protect the good Samaritan from lawsuits when they act as first responders. They do not force such a person as me to provide assistance. That said, I have not read the law(s).

Correct. Good Samaritan laws protect the person lending assistance, not the person assisted.

 

[HRCODEPINK]

My instruction on Good Samaritan laws - having received yearly training in first aid and CPR - is that they protect the good Samaritan from lawsuits when they act as first responders. They do not force such a person as me to provide assistance. That said, I have not read the law(s).

Good Samaratin Laws in every state do protect the person helping from being sued, however, in some cities you must help if you see someone hurt and you are the only person that is within view of the incident and can help them. Those cities/states also have it written into the law that you do NOT have to help directly if it puts you in danger of physical harm but you do have to report it once you are in a safe place.

 

[PaddieAB]

You would be, you are not a passerby in that situation, you indicated that the two of you went into the woods for this hike together. If you were hiking by yourself and saw Joe at the bottom of a ravine you would not be required by law to report it, but as a hiking partner that knows he is not going to receive aid any other way you have a responsibility to respond in a reasonable manner.

Thank you for that! I was beginning to think I'd never fell safe going hiking with anyone again! Not reporting the accident of my hiking partner can cause death, which in turn is intentional murder IMO.

Seriously, in that it's been almost seven months since Caylee's death, it's too late to confess and she will be prosecuted on the assumption the death was intentional.IMO

 

[Wudge]

Good Samaratin Laws in every state do protect the person helping from being sued, however, in some cities you must help if you see someone hurt and you are the only person that is within view of the incident and can help them. Those cities/states also have it written into the law that you do NOT have to help directly if it puts you in danger of physical harm but you do have to report it once you are in a safe place.

Citation?