Sources: Casey Anthony Intentionally Killed Caylee Pt. 2

IMO, I cannot get over seasoned LE/FBI could not get kc to crack or get nervous!
KC was so cold, hard..........what made a 22 year old so evil??? Not even a tear for CAYLEE............
 
I'm not too convinced on the computer searches being able to be used as solid proof of premeditation. Maybe the chloroform search, but I do understand how defense can use that to lay ground work for accidental death theory. Both sides of the courtroom are going to be able to link this to evidence, so on that one, I have to see it play out.


Weren't there any other search words used besides the "nasty" ones? Are things like chloroform, acetone, neck-breaking, self defense, shovel, etc. the only things that were ever used as search terms? I doubt it. Did the digital forensics find other words used? I think we may see the defense bring out other search words that the prosecution chose not to highlight. If any of those words are contrary to premeditated murder it could help to show that you cannot connect a computer search to intent or even actions.

Words such as "doll", "toy", "pre-school", etc. could be argued to show no intent to murder. If one word can be used to show intent to murder - then another can be used to show intent to nurture.

Does anyone know if the computer analysis in the doc dump shows all search words used, or only those that the prosecutors felt were relevant to make their case?
 
The media has had plenty of help sensationalizing this case from the Anthony;s and Casey;s defense team.
Im finding kind of a disturbing implication in many of these posts:
If you dont beleive Caylee's death was an 'accident' or that Casey is flat out innocent,being railroaded by LE you are a dupe of 'Media Sensationalism' or the Prosecution or are somehow not respecting Casey's right to a fair trial.
Fair enough.
I dont see how anyone could look at what we do know about Casey's actions before and after and reach any other conclusion then that she murdered Caylee.

If her defense actually has anything that would mitigate that Ill be happy to change my mind but I doubt they do.
Different opinions are what make a horse race I guess.

Just my opinion....I think what we are seeing recently is a defense-driven buildup painting Casey as some kind of cold diabolical master-planner who killed her daughter - to prepare the public in advance, so when the prosecution announces WHAT they believe happened to Caylee people will breathe a huge sigh of relief. Sick as it sounds, it happens. Time will tell.
 
I split that group of posters into two sub-groups:

1. those that really come up with oranges
2. and those that play Devil's Advocate to stretch our brains, and remind us by law, it isn't an apple until it's been proven to tempt Eve & Lady Justice, both

I'd love a glimpse into what those in the second group above really believe about this case in private when the teaching hat comes off.

Hope I don't get a slap down for this, but IMO some of the people in the 'teaching hats' seem to get their course material from fictional crime dramas shown on tv.
Lanie
 
The only thing that will crack her is fear of bodily harm. Sadly she has always had someeone to rescue her. She knows in this place where she is that she is safe. I don't think she would like to be with the other inmates...so, she is safe for now....She has Baez to protect her. :mad:

Funny thing about Narcissists...Only two things get to them.....First is money (don't even threaten to take that away). The second is fear....you have to put the fear in God to them to get them to react.....and in the state they may spurt out truth. :behindbar
 
I agree. Whether paddie is telling the truth or not is an interesting point. If I were sitting on a jury because paddie lied and covered up the accident I would lean towards believing paddie shoved Joe off that cliff, whether true or not. Who really knows - only paddie, and paddie has already lied. Anyway I don't think it matters. Joe is dead regardless - even if paddie took advantage of an accident - by not calling 911 (rendering aid) the cause of Joe's death became intentional.

I think if you were sitting on a jury you would have to acknowledge first and foremost that the accused is cloaked with the presumption of innocence. Hopefully Wudge or any legal professionals here will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it would be your duty to consider the accused innocent, unless/until the prosecution convinces you otherwise, beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that is how it is supposed to work anyway, but unfortunately the reality is somewhat different!
 
Weren't there any other search words used besides the "nasty" ones? Are things like chloroform, acetone, neck-breaking, self defense, shovel, etc. the only things that were ever used as search terms? I doubt it. Did the digital forensics find other words used? I think we may see the defense bring out other search words that the prosecution chose not to highlight. If any of those words are contrary to premeditated murder it could help to show that you cannot connect a computer search to intent or even actions.

Words such as "doll", "toy", "pre-school", etc. could be argued to show no intent to murder. If one word can be used to show intent to murder - then another can be used to show intent to nurture.

Does anyone know if the computer analysis in the doc dump shows all search words used, or only those that the prosecutors felt were relevant to make their case?

Good point. If you took anyone's computer who uses a search engine, by filtering the history of those results, you could likely "prove" anything you wanted to about the individual.

LE knows this and being the honorable people and I feel they were likely looking for clues that might help them solve the case rather than evidence that could be used at a trial.

Since there is no way to prove that chloroform was in anyway related to the COD it becomes a mute point anyway. However it is something very valuable to those who profit by sensationalizing the case.

JMO but when I saw the report on those search results, my first thought was that someone was scared and looking for means to protect themselves rather than plotting a murder.

If someone wants a fact to be true, it becomes very easy for someone else to convince the fact is true whether it is or not. It's one of the techniques frequently used in hypnosis. Come up with something that touches an emotional nerve, and it becomes even more powerful. It is also for that person that wants something to be true to look upon a piece of evidence from the angle that proves their point to be true.

What I think may have happened in this case and what can be proven to actually have happened are two completely different things. I find it much more interesting to piece together proven facts in an attempt to get to the complete true rather than hope that my theories can be proven to be true.
 
I think if you were sitting on a jury you would have to acknowledge first and foremost that the accused is cloaked with the presumption of innocence. Hopefully Wudge or any legal professionals here will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it would be your duty to consider the accused innocent, unless/until the prosecution convinces you otherwise, beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that is how it is supposed to work anyway, but unfortunately the reality is somewhat different!

Maybe this is a good time to ask any legal professionals about falsus in uno jury instruction.

As I understand it, the jury may be instructed that "If you find that any witness knowingly testified falsely as to any material fact and issue, I instruct you that you may disregard all of the evidence given by that witness if that evidence is not corroborated by other evidence."

I wonder if this jury instruction may be given in this case and how that may affect some of the witnesses that we expect to see on the stand.
 
I totally agree with you. You can see her approach to men at Universal when, after Melich and Allen, the bad cops, leave the room, she starts putting on the same act, smart, confident, EMPLOYED AT UNIVERSAL, looking for her cell phone 'at work,' and pretending she's co-operating with the police, the same facade the other cops have just blown apart. She was angling toward getting Wells on her side, even though all her wiles and big eyes hadn't worked on the other two. She feels more comfortable with men. She's always had more control with men, or thinks she does...not enough to actually hook one to get her out of a family situation that had become intollerable for her, but she feels comfortable when it's raining men. And I do think there have been several times when she got to a point that she did want to confess, at least to some extent, and could have cracked. If Leonard hadn't bailed her out, I think she might have broken in jail, which is a big problem I still have with Leonard, but I think by now, after all those all-days at the law firm, that Baez has become her 'daddy' and 'savior' figure and he won't let her crack. I think he's controlling the shots. She may have told-all to him and he doesn't want her to tell it to anyone else.


The only thing that will crack her is fear of bodily harm. Sadly she has always had someeone to rescue her. She knows in this place where she is that she is safe. I don't think she would like to be with the other inmates...so, she is safe for now....She has Baez to protect her. :mad:

Funny thing about Narcissists...Only two things get to them.....First is money (don't even threaten to take that away). The second is fear....you have to put the fear in God to them to get them to react.....and in the state they may spurt out truth. :behindbar

(bold mine) Yes, the pressure had mounted and KC had gotten herself about as far out on that limb as she could get when whatever his intentions, LP rescued her (grrrr...) A total disservice, as from that shaky limb--where she'd still had LE to fear, and only the tenuous, tentative support of family--she managed to leap to the safety and security of JB's (however misguided) protection... The pressure was off. She is once again back in her comfort zone, another cushy world of enablement. Such is the nature I suppose of legal defense--but it would never have gotten that far, that alone would never have been sufficient to see her through those darkest hours, had she simply been left to ponder her grim future from behind those bars. Once again someone provides what appears to be an escape chute--by convincing her at least that consequences can still be avoided. The opportunity for her to crack came, and went. Narcissist, thru and thru. Her photo should appear next to NPD in the Encyclopedia of Psychology & Behavioral Health. JMO
 
(bold mine) Yes, the pressure had mounted and KC had gotten herself about as far out on that limb as she could get when whatever his intentions, LP rescued her (grrrr...) A total disservice, as from that shaky limb--where she'd still had LE to fear, and only the tenuous, tentative support of family--she managed to leap to the safety and security of JB's (however misguided) protection... The pressure was off. She is once again back in her comfort zone, another cushy world of enablement. Such is the nature I suppose of legal defense--but it would never have gotten that far, that alone would never have been sufficient to see her through those darkest hours, had she simply been left to ponder her grim future from behind those bars. Once again someone provides what appears to be an escape chute--by convincing her at least that consequences can still be avoided. The opportunity for her to crack came, and went. Narcissist, thru and thru. Her photo should appear next to NPD in the Encyclopedia of Psychology & Behavioral Health. JMO

Do you think any jurors will follow suit? Even just one? :confused:
 
Weren't there any other search words used besides the "nasty" ones? Are things like chloroform, acetone, neck-breaking, self defense, shovel, etc. the only things that were ever used as search terms? I doubt it. Did the digital forensics find other words used? I think we may see the defense bring out other search words that the prosecution chose not to highlight. If any of those words are contrary to premeditated murder it could help to show that you cannot connect a computer search to intent or even actions.

Words such as "doll", "toy", "pre-school", etc. could be argued to show no intent to murder. If one word can be used to show intent to murder - then another can be used to show intent to nurture.

Does anyone know if the computer analysis in the doc dump shows all search words used, or only those that the prosecutors felt were relevant to make their case?

Oh I'm sure they have all of her searches, not just the "nasty ones". However when you have a child missing and probably dead, not reported by a mother who is obviously lying to you, and you find things on her computer about chloroform, how to make household weopons, and neck breaking, then you are going to obviously highlight those and find out what they are all about as opposed to the searches done on American Idol, Martha Stewart, or lasagna recipe.

But I see what you are saying, the defense could pull out her searches on doll or ToysRUs and say "See, she was looking for a doll for Caylee. She's a loving mother" not a killer. I still think the computer searches are very damning to her case. It's just one more thing in a slew of other things that point to her guilt, IMO.
 
Maybe this is a good time to ask any legal professionals about falsus in uno jury instruction.

As I understand it, the jury may be instructed that "If you find that any witness knowingly testified falsely as to any material fact and issue, I instruct you that you may disregard all of the evidence given by that witness if that evidence is not corroborated by other evidence."

I wonder if this jury instruction may be given in this case and how that may affect some of the witnesses that we expect to see on the stand.

The instruction is: witness willfully false. The instruction does not contain a corroborative evidence clause.
 
IMO, I cannot get over seasoned LE/FBI could not get kc to crack or get nervous!
KC was so cold, hard..........what made a 22 year old so evil??? Not even a tear for CAYLEE............
I think at that point, 31 days later, she was "keeping her head", in other words, she was protecting her own a$$. Caylee held no importance to her by the time she met with LE. It was all about saving herself. JMO
 
Oh Wudge...you are a treat. :blowkiss: and O/T I love your name. Every time I think of it it reminds me of my brother who has always, for 30+ years called me "Woodge". When he was a baby he thought that was my name because my mother would always ask me "Would you get me a diaper", "Would you get me a bottle?" etc.

Anyway, I would hold that the mother could not really be held responsible. No mother in her right mind would not plead like a maniac to get help for her child and there could be no way that anyone could hold that she intentionally dropped him knowing that for the time being, until help arrived, which could be at any second, or any hour (we all have heard of tragic cases where rescue workers were in an accident and were delayed as well) and every second is an eternity when your child is in mortal danger, he was her only shot. (How's that for a run on sentence record! Sorry!)

It was his heroic choice to help.

SNIP


I agree with you (not all law students would see it as you did).

The doctor was a professional who was trained to recognize hysteria and not to be unduly influenced by it. He clearly recognized the grave risk the situation presented, because he previously rejected a plea for a rescue attempt. Moreover, he could not have reasonably expected the Mother's promise to eliminate all risk. He knowingly assumed the risk of trying to aid the girl.

The Court would almost assuredly rule this way after it applauded his noble and heroic attempt to help in a moment of extreme crisis.
 
Wudge, on the last locked thread you commented that prosecutors are not nice people. I beg to differ. I personally know one who is extremely nice. We are fairly good friends, her daughter and mine are good friends, she is a volunteer treasurer for school, leader of the Brownie troop, and invited me to join her church!

Congrats Linask. To every rule, there is an .....
 
sweetmop posted this on another thread a while back, and it's always intrigued me...Seems the person is either BS or someone claiming to be BS....don't know if Exit 13 or another who has posted here could confirm for us...if it is true, (a big if, I'll grant) there's a LOT we still don't know, and maybe it's why the prosecution seems so confident...

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...2&highlight=annie+dogs+chloroform#post2957332
 
The only thing that will crack her is fear of bodily harm. Sadly she has always had someeone to rescue her. She knows in this place where she is that she is safe. I don't think she would like to be with the other inmates...so, she is safe for now....She has Baez to protect her. :mad:

Funny thing about Narcissists...Only two things get to them.....First is money (don't even threaten to take that away). The second is fear....you have to put the fear in God to them to get them to react.....and in the state they may spurt out truth. :behindbar

:wave: Whisperer

Yes - in fact, Casey told Cindy and George when they came to visit her in jail that in some ways she felt "more protected" in jail than outside. This feeling may have changed when she was bonded out but I don't think she ever really feared any one or thing once Baez stepped into the picture enabling her to escape the confines of her house arrest while at the same time supplying her narcissistic needs and wants.

DT
 
Don't feel bad. When the topic is "men" and "KC", the word loose is just a given.......:rolleyes:

Bad edit. Tsk Tsk
What is it exactly --- I didn't say it. Things get crazy sometimes don't they. LOL


Originally Posted by tehcloser

radio
Almost all of the ones I have paid attention to have just been plain mean. The mothers that murder their own children. I did feel sorry for Andrea Yates. Really did.

Don't really know how many men she has encountered. Lots of boys it seems.


Well I was using the term "men" loosely.
 
sweetmop posted this on another thread a while back, and it's always intrigued me...Seems the person is either BS or someone claiming to be BS....don't know if Exit 13 or another who has posted here could confirm for us...if it is true, (a big if, I'll grant) there's a LOT we still don't know, and maybe it's why the prosecution seems so confident...

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...2&highlight=annie+dogs+chloroform#post2957332
:eek: Irish Eyes.....I have searched endlessly for that thread & gave up! I feel that the cast of characters that have been silent in this, have been kept under wraps until the trial. I think Annie's testimony will be integral for the prosecution. She lived with Dante S at Sawgrass apts. if I remember correctly. Also have felt that the torn hat in the garbage was a sign of her betrayal to KC?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
2,726
Total visitors
2,929

Forum statistics

Threads
595,658
Messages
18,029,783
Members
229,723
Latest member
Prayerwarrior7174
Back
Top