2011.02.10 Defense Accuses Detectives of Destroying Evidence

Reality Orlando

Verified Aquaculturalist
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,322
Reaction score
26
I'll have to find more about this...on tonight's news. Something about a bag of trash taken from her trunk...
 
The trunk that's been under lock and key in an FBI bay for 2 years and 6 months now?

Maybe it's one of those "we'll recap it for ya, so ya don't forget it!" kind of reports. Which I love. Every night brings a new audience. Taint that jury pool, Jose! Nice work.
 
Ah, so that is the spoliation. The defense probably wants the trash bag out since it was thrown in the dumpster. I wonder what it has to do with the smell... are they saying the source of the odor was left in the dumpster? :waitasec:

Keep us posted!
 
Well really! what is left for them to do but whine some more, maybe they shouldn't be complaining, with so much evidence against her already they hardly need to be looking for more.....:floorlaugh:
 
A snippet taken from this article says:

Baez said a bag of trash, containing lunch meat, cheese, frozen dinners and laundry detergent, was removed from Anthony's trunk and not properly stored. ...The motion claims that detectives intentionally destroyed the smell of the garbage by allowing the trash to air out in a dry room and then storing it in an unsealed cardboard box.


Lunch meat, cheese and frozen dinner CONTANERS! (but no actual meat, cheese or dinners themselves, oh... a technicality I guess...) This is truly henious. How do you spell that? Haneious. Hanus. Henus. Friggin' sicking. That Casey would authorize her lawyers to say that her dear murdered child's decomposing body in her trunk wasn't really a bad smell after all, because the State's Attorney didn't store the cardboard box in a nice enough area ?!?!?!?

GIVE ME A FREAKING BREAK ALREADY? Oh my GOD I"m so sick of being nice about this....
 
from the article and bbm:

"Baez said a bag of trash, containing lunch meat, cheese, frozen dinners and laundry detergent, was removed from Anthony's trunk and not properly stored."

Wow. Just wow.
 
I'll have to find more about this...on tonight's news. Something about a bag of trash taken from her trunk...

LOL ~ So, what's the deal.....Casey thinks that LE STOLE her garbage???

Nothing pizzes off a thief more than having their stuff ripped off....:floorlaugh:

Sorry..........carry on...sometimes I just can't help myself, and sometimes the influances around here.......oh my......I think they sometimes "thwart me" and set me up !!!:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
 
hey Gnatcatcher! Great minds think alike and all that.
or is it "fools seldom differ"?
Nah. Great minds! LOL
 
The defense feels that since they cannot let the jurors smell the trash, the air sample is out.

In essence they say that they are prejudiced that they cannot present the jury their own sniffer stuff. If only the jurors could compare the trash odor to the carpet odor, surely they would know it was (an empty package of) Velveeta that stunk so bad :floorlaugh:
 
Uhmm, he didn't think to ask the trash be preserved way back when it (supposedly) stank so badly in his own tin can?? Too late & too bad, I don't think he's gonna get this one granted either...
 
If the motion was filed just before 5pm - and presumably a copy of same cannot be obtained until the next day - does one assume Mr Baez must have given the information to clickorlando - How else would they get same?
 
I don't know TimesPast, but the docket shows someone bought something today:

02/10/2011 Transaction Assessment 63.00
02/10/2011 Counter Payment Receipt # CR-2011-09217 ANTHONY, CASEY MARIE (63.00)
 
But....isn't this untrue? There were no groceries of any sort in the car, yet they have stated in the motion that there were cheese and meat products accounting for the smell. Isn't this a deliberate attempt to mislead the court? after all they KNOW such items were never found in the trunk, just empty packaging. I don't see how they can assert this when they have evidence exists to the contrary.
 
Oh for heaven's sake, THIS is the mystery motion?? :banghead:

I just can't understand the motive :banghead: is right!

I'm sure the state will file a response right? Or can HHJP deny it based on the late filing?
 
I don't know TimesPast, but the docket shows someone bought something today:

02/10/2011 Transaction Assessment 63.00
02/10/2011 Counter Payment Receipt # CR-2011-09217 ANTHONY, CASEY MARIE (63.00)

I think that was the copies of all the rulings by the Judge which were released earlier in the day and are available online - but I could be wrong. This one could have been saved for later?
 
I just can't understand the motive :banghead: is right!

I'm sure the state will file a response right? Or can HHJP deny it based on the late filing?

He could deny it just based on lateness, but is more likely to wait and see what the SA says. I still think the defense must have made SOME excuse for lateness...right?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
205
Guests online
3,302
Total visitors
3,507

Forum statistics

Threads
592,215
Messages
17,965,264
Members
228,722
Latest member
brew23p
Back
Top