Interview with Casey - Is it finally happening this time?

[mommakk51]

Should have said I guess, that I am one of the few who believe Casey didn't do it. I have my own idears about who did.

 

[heidisams]

Should have said I guess, that I am one of the few who believe Casey didn't do it. I have my own idears about who did.

Just curious, if she's innocent, who put Caylee in fca's trunk? And then took her out of it and put her in the swamp? I'm not being snarky - no one ever answers that, even jbaez dodges it... But, if you have a theory, can you explain how it happened when there's proof fca, and only fca, had possession of her car throughout all the days in question? That's undisputed. She's the one who dumped the car when the smell became too much. Just a few days prior, she even confessed to the smell and tried to blame it on a squirrel. The smell was also detected by a cadaver dog and handler, the fbi, all police/investigators who were in the vicinity of the trunk, the crime scene investigator, a tow yard operator, and several others... So, the facts put Caylee, deceased, in the trunk, with fca behind the wheel. Why? If she's innocent, why did she do that? And, since we know fca had possession of the body, how did Caylee get put in the swamp?

The answer to these questions is really just about getting down to the basics of the crime, yet, seem to be seldom answered, or just skipped entirely in theories of her innocence...

All jmo.

 

[Dana]

I haven't posted in the 'Anthony' threads since the trial. Just couldn't bring myself to because of Caylee. It breaks my heart even now.

A few weeks ago, I happened to be scrolling through all the listed threads at WS and noticed, "interview with CA" and said, whaaaat?

I've been reading through a few of the threads, especially this particular one, and vowed not to put my .2 in but I need to. I laughed my azz off reading what some posted about CA telling all, CA should spill the beans and we'll hear the truth ect ect. Then I realized - some of you are serious! LOL People really believe that once CA gets in front of a camera she'll blurt out what happened years ago?

Good luck with that. What you will hear is, all about her hair, her clothes, her facebook acct, her boyfriends, her life for the past few years and all those unimportant who gives an ats rass details. The most ya'll MIGHT get is a question or two about her mom and dad. You can bet that it will all be arranged ahead of time what is and isn't allowed to talk about. If the interviewer ever crosses that line, CA will rudely walk out.

Not sure about all of you but I don't care about CA's life. We will never know any of the details of what actually happened. If or when the interview is aired, I'll be busy washing my hair.

______

My take? Why would CA lie so much if someone else killed her daughter and you better believe there is no way she'd take the fall if anyone else did it. AND, who, with an IQ above 60, would want to spend years in jail and go through a huge trial because of an 'accidental drowning'? Ex-cop George would know CA would never spend a day in jail for it and would have told her that from the beginning. There was no drowning, no nanny, no jobs, no molestation, no fantasy friends .....there was just CA and her vision of a beautiful life.

And I still believe she tried out how much zanax to give Caylee by giving it to the family dog first. Ya know, the one that died and the family buried in the back yard.

Do I hate CA? Nope, I do hate what she did and think she's a .

 

[LadyTudorRose]

I think Casey could be paid for an interview sometime this year. I think the major media outlets have been chomping at the bit to interview her for years but have avoided it because even though they think the ratings will be decent they also think negative backlash might scare advertisers away. But now they think people might have a more nuanced view on the case and more interest in what Casey has to say, especially if she doesn't do some stupid "If I Did It" angle like OJ did. Even if she's lying and everyone knows she's lying people will be interested. Robert Durst admitted in The Jinx that "no one tells the whole truth" and people still ate that up.

Obviously, they aren't stupid enough to write Casey a check for one million or however much she wants. What will happen if this goes forward is that a large "finders fee" or payment for "media rights" will go to a third party who will then pass the money along to Casey, taking a cut for themselves in the process. My guess would be Cindy, if Casey is still in touch with her, because she comes off a more sympathetic figure, or Cheney Mason who I'm sure will expect a cut either way. See, they aren't technically paying for the interview, they're paying for the rights to photos/video and/or paying someone to help organize the interview on Casey's end and help represent her best interests during the negotiation stage.

That way they can ask Casey during the interview if she's being paid and she'll say no, and the interviewer will back her up and they can cross their fingers and hope people believe them. People are saying it'll be Matt Lauer but I suspect Geraldo Rivera because he gave a blurb for Baez's book; if I were Casey I would ask my attorneys (who have done a lot of interviews during and after the trial) who they interviewed with that seemed most sympathetic to the defense and go with that person.

 

[iluvmua]

I think Casey could be paid for an interview sometime this year. I think the major media outlets have been chomping at the bit to interview her for years but have avoided it because even though they think the ratings will be decent they also think negative backlash might scare advertisers away. But now they think people might have a more nuanced view on the case and more interest in what Casey has to say, especially if she doesn't do some stupid "If I Did It" angle like OJ did. Even if she's lying and everyone knows she's lying people will be interested. Robert Durst admitted in The Jinx that "no one tells the whole truth" and people still ate that up.

Obviously, they aren't stupid enough to write Casey a check for one million or however much she wants. What will happen if this goes forward is that a large "finders fee" or payment for "media rights" will go to a third party who will then pass the money along to Casey, taking a cut for themselves in the process. My guess would be Cindy, if Casey is still in touch with her, because she comes off a more sympathetic figure, or Cheney Mason who I'm sure will expect a cut either way. See, they aren't technically paying for the interview, they're paying for the rights to photos/video and/or paying someone to help organize the interview on Casey's end and help represent her best interests during the negotiation stage.

That way they can ask Casey during the interview if she's being paid and she'll say no, and the interviewer will back her up and they can cross their fingers and hope people believe them. People are saying it'll be Matt Lauer but I suspect Geraldo Rivera because he gave a blurb for Baez's book; if I were Casey I would ask my attorneys (who have done a lot of interviews during and after the trial) who they interviewed with that seemed most sympathetic to the defense and go with that person.

She is going to be interviewed on the TODAY show and Matt Lauer is going to be the one interviewing her. (I'm 99 percent positive on this one from what I've heard).

I bet this will happen around the 4th (the 4th anniversary of being found not guilty). plus, July is sweeps week.

 

[heidisams]

I think Casey could be paid for an interview sometime this year. I think the major media outlets have been chomping at the bit to interview her for years but have avoided it because even though they think the ratings will be decent they also think negative backlash might scare advertisers away. But now they think people might have a more nuanced view on the case and more interest in what Casey has to say, especially if she doesn't do some stupid "If I Did It" angle like OJ did. Even if she's lying and everyone knows she's lying people will be interested. Robert Durst admitted in The Jinx that "no one tells the whole truth" and people still ate that up.

Obviously, they aren't stupid enough to write Casey a check for one million or however much she wants. What will happen if this goes forward is that a large "finders fee" or payment for "media rights" will go to a third party who will then pass the money along to Casey, taking a cut for themselves in the process. My guess would be Cindy, if Casey is still in touch with her, because she comes off a more sympathetic figure, or Cheney Mason who I'm sure will expect a cut either way. See, they aren't technically paying for the interview, they're paying for the rights to photos/video and/or paying someone to help organize the interview on Casey's end and help represent her best interests during the negotiation stage.

That way they can ask Casey during the interview if she's being paid and she'll say no, and the interviewer will back her up and they can cross their fingers and hope people believe them. People are saying it'll be Matt Lauer but I suspect Geraldo Rivera because he gave a blurb for Baez's book; if I were Casey I would ask my attorneys (who have done a lot of interviews during and after the trial) who they interviewed with that seemed most sympathetic to the defense and go with that person.

I fully expect ChMason will see to it that the money will never reach that conniving little thief's hands until it goes through his first... She's his investment. And he's no fool, he knows exactly who and what she is... And he certainly knows fca doesn't honor debts, once money reaches her hands, no one else will ever see a dime. They're a match made in heaven when it comes to scamming people out of what is rightfully theirs... And he hasn't put in all this time, housing and caring for a killer, without setting some sort of plan in place that guarantees him control of the money... And if it happens, I agree, the money will be hidden...he's got to make sure the innocent victims of fca don't get their fair share of that money...

I just hope this all implodes on both of these snakes, and they never see a dime. I can't believe how furious I am that some network might pay that parasite for murdering her precious, innocent baby!!!!!!!!

All jmo.

 

[krkrjx]

I think Casey could be paid for an interview sometime this year. I think the major media outlets have been chomping at the bit to interview her for years but have avoided it because even though they think the ratings will be decent they also think negative backlash might scare advertisers away. But now they think people might have a more nuanced view on the case and more interest in what Casey has to say, especially if she doesn't do some stupid "If I Did It" angle like OJ did. Even if she's lying and everyone knows she's lying people will be interested. Robert Durst admitted in The Jinx that "no one tells the whole truth" and people still ate that up.

Obviously, they aren't stupid enough to write Casey a check for one million or however much she wants. What will happen if this goes forward is that a large "finders fee" or payment for "media rights" will go to a third party who will then pass the money along to Casey, taking a cut for themselves in the process. My guess would be Cindy, if Casey is still in touch with her, because she comes off a more sympathetic figure, or Cheney Mason who I'm sure will expect a cut either way. See, they aren't technically paying for the interview, they're paying for the rights to photos/video and/or paying someone to help organize the interview on Casey's end and help represent her best interests during the negotiation stage.

That way they can ask Casey during the interview if she's being paid and she'll say no, and the interviewer will back her up and they can cross their fingers and hope people believe them. People are saying it'll be Matt Lauer but I suspect Geraldo Rivera because he gave a blurb for Baez's book; if I were Casey I would ask my attorneys (who have done a lot of interviews during and after the trial) who they interviewed with that seemed most sympathetic to the defense and go with that person.

Casey can get paid for interviews, who cares. No matter how much cash she accumulates, she will never be rich.

A rich life has little to do with money and material things. Those are extras, bonuses, luxuries. I will not say they aren't wonderful and great and highly enjoyable, but until someone invents means by which one might purchase a soul, Casey Anthony and other soulless creatures of her ilk will remain pitiful and poor.

 

[coco puff]

Can't wait to watch!! We will finally hear the truth and not just the version of her mother, eh.. and those other family parrots.

what makes you think she will tell the truth now? She had the opportunity to tell the truth at her trial, at the police station, with her parents.... she didn't. in fact she never has. Her interview would be worthless. Duct tape, Google searches, not reporting her daughter missing EVER. She has no other choice but to lie because there is no other way to explain her behavior. It is consistent with the actions of a murderer. Pretty simple when you think about it.

 

[Justiceseeker35]

Just curious, if she's innocent, who put Caylee in fca's trunk? And then took her out of it and put her in the swamp? I'm not being snarky - no one ever answers that, even jbaez dodges it... But, if you have a theory, can you explain how it happened when there's proof fca, and only fca, had possession of her car throughout all the days in question? That's undisputed. She's the one who dumped the car when the smell became too much. Just a few days prior, she even confessed to the smell and tried to blame it on a squirrel. The smell was also detected by a cadaver dog and handler, the fbi, all police/investigators who were in the vicinity of the trunk, the crime scene investigator, a tow yard operator, and several others... So, the facts put Caylee, deceased, in the trunk, with fca behind the wheel. Why? If she's innocent, why did she do that? And, since we know fca had possession of the body, how did Caylee get put in the swamp?

The answer to these questions is really just about getting down to the basics of the crime, yet, seem to be seldom answered, or just skipped entirely in theories of her innocence...

All jmo.

I kinda think that the whole squirrel thing was about damage control. She probably knew she'd run out of gas soon and that Amy would be her first call for gas cans or a ride. She was heading off curiousities about the odor by saying dead squirrels. It's kinda like minimizing why your house is a mess when your mother in law comes over unexpectedly.

 

[ZsaZsa]

what makes you think she will tell the truth now? She had the opportunity to tell the truth at her trial, at the police station, with her parents.... she didn't. in fact she never has. Her interview would be worthless. Duct tape, Google searches, not reporting her daughter missing EVER. She has no other choice but to lie because there is no other way to explain her behavior. It is consistent with the actions of a murderer. Pretty simple when you think about it.

I agree.
Whoever thinks this pathological liar is going to tell the 'truth' will be sorely disappointed.
What she will say would be more like soap opera - melodramatic and intended to appeal
to the gullible.

 

[coco puff]

Just curious, if she's innocent, who put Caylee in fca's trunk? And then took her out of it and put her in the swamp? I'm not being snarky - no one ever answers that, even jbaez dodges it... But, if you have a theory, can you explain how it happened when there's proof fca, and only fca, had possession of her car throughout all the days in question? That's undisputed. She's the one who dumped the car when the smell became too much. Just a few days prior, she even confessed to the smell and tried to blame it on a squirrel. The smell was also detected by a cadaver dog and handler, the fbi, all police/investigators who were in the vicinity of the trunk, the crime scene investigator, a tow yard operator, and several others... So, the facts put Caylee, deceased, in the trunk, with fca behind the wheel. Why? If she's innocent, why did she do that? And, since we know fca had possession of the body, how did Caylee get put in the swamp?

The answer to these questions is really just about getting down to the basics of the crime, yet, seem to be seldom answered, or just skipped entirely in theories of her innocence...

All jmo.

I believe Baez's comment after the trial was... "We will NEVER know how Caylee got into the woods". hmmm how would he know that we would NEVER know unless FCA convinced him that she would never spill her guts. Maybe it is just wishful thinking on Jose's part. If it was someone else besides FCA, how could he know they would never come forward and confess.

 

[Justiceseeker35]

I agree.
Whoever thinks this pathological liar is going to tell the 'truth' will be sorely disappointed.
What she will say would be more like soap opera - melodramatic and intended to appeal
to the gullible.

This case reminds me of the kid that got off of vehicular manslaughter because of affluenza. She has never had to take responsibility for her actions. It's apparent from her high school days all the way until today. Her parents enabled her, covered for her, committed perjury for her and her defense team is still doing it. Isn't a paid interview going to be more of the same?

 

[ZsaZsa]

I believe Baez's comment after the trial was... "We will NEVER know how Caylee got into the woods". hmmm how would he know that we would NEVER know unless FCA convinced him that she would never spill her guts. Maybe it is just wishful thinking on Jose's part. If it was someone else besides FCA, how could he know they would never come forward and confess.

Baez should keep better track of his statements on the subject so he doesn't keep contradicting his own lies. During the trial didn't he tell us that a Roy Kronk somehow found Caylee, put her remains in the woods, in order to claim the reward?

 

[RR0004]

I'll gladly stop watching NBC. ABC took a lot of heat after paying for pics...I imagine the same will happen to NBC. What a world we've come to. Making money off a dead child...it sickens me.

ETA: And I just let NBC know my thoughts on the matter. 11 hours- that's the amount of time the jury took to deliberate. Fuming!

 

[heidisams]

I believe Baez's comment after the trial was... "We will NEVER know how Caylee got into the woods". hmmm how would he know that we would NEVER know unless FCA convinced him that she would never spill her guts. Maybe it is just wishful thinking on Jose's part. If it was someone else besides FCA, how could he know they would never come forward and confess.

Agreed... Jbaez knows this because he knows fca put her there and she'll never admit to it. He also knows because he's one of the ones who had to sit around and figure out a story to tell the jury that would explain away all the evidence, and get her off with a full acquittal. She demanded nothing less... But, they also knew nothing she said matched the evidence that kept coming in... That's why they waited until it was all in, and then basically laid it all out in front of them and said, this has to explain this piece of evidence, which still has to explain that, but still explain this, etc... It was a mess. It was a twisting, far reaching, manufactured bunch of lies.... And because it was all based on a lies, they couldn't explain it all away, and had to dance around the trunk/swamp evidence with the Kronk stuff... It was ridiculous.

But, they know the truth, they have to. They created the lie, with her directing, of course... She had her heels dug in, and judging by her tantrum over a possible plea offer, was never willing to accept any accountability for her actions, but still demanded her attorneys represent her as completely innocent. That's how she's always lived her life, although, usually it was her parents bailing her out and getting her off... But, there was no theory that could explain how Caylee ended up in the trunk, with fca behind the wheel, and then thrown into the swamp, without admitting fca's guilt or involvement. But, the jury didn't care, and never demanded an explanation. They had their crime scene with a big, shiny bow wrapped around it, and they ignored it. Fca just got lucky... The evidence doesn't lie...Everybody knows she put her in the trunk and threw her in the swamp...

All jmo.

 

[Tulessa]

This topic still breaks my heart! :crying:

 

[NikkiArmstrong]

Me too, poor Caylee abandoned by everyone who was supposed to love her and nurture her. All left her to rot, for what? Casey? Huge waste!

Sent from my KFJWI using Tapatalk

 

[heidisams]

I agree.
Whoever thinks this pathological liar is going to tell the 'truth' will be sorely disappointed.
What she will say would be more like soap opera - melodramatic and intended to appeal
to the gullible.

Yep... And all these people who tune in because they think they will finally hear the truth (haha!) will be disappointed when they get nada... My guess is if there's any questions about the actual crime, it will be short and sweet (and scripted) and fca will give a kind of, sort of, answer and then the rest will be about her life now, and how she's been dealing with all the really mean people who listened to the media and prejudged her... :sick::sick::sick:

And maybe a few jabs at the folks..... And jbaez.

All jmo.

 

[iluvmua]

I bet she will refuse to talk about Caylee jMO

 

[tandt]

NO way I'll watch an interview with this murderer.
In our home we use the same type of laundry bag that Caylee's body was tossed into. Every time I pick it up my heart breaks for this baby. Like others have said, every single person abandoned Caylee. It's so sad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk