2008.12.25 Is it a Book in the Woods?

New Posts

It's a sign, not a book? Have I got that right?

Sheesh....think of all the time we spent debating this one! This is what we get for believing everything the media reports. Remind me which news source is responsible for reporting that Caylee's book was found at the remains site, so I can take what they report in the future with a box of salt!
 
But this thread is an excellent case in point. At the beginning of the thread we are picking apart the words that the article chose when reporting on this item and debating whether this was actually being reported by LE as a book.The article was written in such a way that it seemed not only was it a book, but it was THE book. Through our efforts it was revealed that there was no confirmation anywhere that this was a book at all.

So when we push for links this is why. Otherwise this would have been carried as fact that a book was found when in fact, it wasn't.
 
If there was a book then they didn't release photos of it. Cause that thing we saw and identified as a book in December is not this yellow sign in the pictures.
We had already established that the yellow unidentified booklike object was not the book Caylee was reading in the video from NG.
Or am I missing a picture of a book that was just released?
 
iamkimba said:
If there was a book then they didn't release photos of it. Cause that thing we saw and identified as a book in December is not this yellow sign in the pictures.
We had already established that the yellow unidentified booklike object was not the book Caylee was reading in the video from NG.
Or am I missing a picture of a book that was just released?
Click to expand...

This is what everyone thought was a book. Turns out there was no book, there never was a book, it was a sign, we only thought it was a book, we now know we were wrong, it was never a book, it was always a sign, so the final word is .....there was no book.

It was a sign.

There was no book.
 

Attachments

  • 45123910.jpg
    45123910.jpg
    63.8 KB · Views: 241
I'm relieved to know there was no book! Thanks for posting the pic of the sign.

I have to wonder with all the hype going on about this detail why LE didn't just come out and tell the newspeople there was no book.
 
ecs5298 said:
This is what everyone thought was a book. Turns out there was no book, there never was a book, it was a sign, we only thought it was a book, we now know we were wrong, it was never a book, it was always a sign, so the final word is .....there was no book.

It was a sign.

There was no book.
Click to expand...

Yep. this is one for the Myth Busters thread, for sure.

There was no book.
 
ThoughtFox said:
I'm relieved to know there was no book! Thanks for posting the pic of the sign.

I have to wonder with all the hype going on about this detail why LE didn't just come out and tell the newspeople there was no book.
Click to expand...

Because that would have bypassed the normal discovery channels for the defense.
 
Ripley007 said:
An "Advertising sign..." are you kidding me? :waitasec: Somebody better offer me up a high five! I made 2 or more posts about this item possibley being a "yard sale" sign. Close enough, right?!!:crazy:
Click to expand...


hi five to you!!! definitely close enough! :toastred:

it's funny how our minds work. of all the original crime scene photo analysis, the 'book' was the only thing I thought for sure I could see!
 
april_showers said:
hi five to you!!! definitely close enough! :toastred:

it's funny how our minds work. of all the original crime scene photo analysis, the 'book' was the only thing I thought for sure I could see!
Click to expand...


Thanks April!:toast:

I presumed it to be a flat, yellow sign, blown back into the woods and irrelevent to the case. Seems I may have been right.
I also argued that there was no evience to support the presumption that Caylee Owned the Frieda Book. That remains to be seen.
 
april_showers said:
hi five to you!!! definitely close enough! :toastred:

it's funny how our minds work. of all the original crime scene photo analysis, the 'book' was the only thing I thought for sure I could see!
Click to expand...

LOL! I remember the massive headache trying to see all the stuff in those pictures. I was proud I could actually SEE what appeared to be the book.
Lanie
 
ecs5298 said:
This is what everyone thought was a book. Turns out there was no book, there never was a book, it was a sign, we only thought it was a book, we now know we were wrong, it was never a book, it was always a sign, so the final word is .....there was no book.

It was a sign.

There was no book.
Click to expand...

Thanks so much Ecs.
 
In the first crime scene photos that were released, it sure did look like the book Caylee was reading though, didn't it?:yes:
 
ThoughtFox said:
I'm relieved to know there was no book! Thanks for posting the pic of the sign.

I have to wonder with all the hype going on about this detail why LE didn't just come out and tell the newspeople there was no book.
Click to expand...

lol! that would've saved us a lot of grief, wouldn't it? I suppose if LE had to squelch each and every rumor surrounding this case, they wouldn't have enough time to do what they really need to be doing.
 
Well, say what you like, but that thing we thought was a book in the pictures was not the sign.
So- I still maintain it was something else there- they have not released pictures of everything they found.
But- all you have to do is look at the sign.
No way it matches that original photo!
 
iamkimba said:
Well, say what you like, but that thing we thought was a book in the pictures was not the sign.
So- I still maintain it was something else there- they have not released pictures of everything they found.
But- all you have to do is look at the sign.
No way it matches that original photo!
Click to expand...
But lamkimba, you can clearly see the black top of the school house and the log/branch that runs along the top of the sign in both photos.
 
iamkimba said:
If there was a book then they didn't release photos of it. Cause that thing we saw and identified as a book in December is not this yellow sign in the pictures.
We had already established that the yellow unidentified booklike object was not the book Caylee was reading in the video from NG.
Or am I missing a picture of a book that was just released?
Click to expand...

I am not sure why I can't add photos but if anyone can put the picture of the sign next to the picture of what some felt was a book. These are new pictures that were released, so I assume it is not the same item in the picture that was released from DEC? Either way, we will find out I hope at trial if there was a book, but when I put the pictures side by side they are not the same picture or area in my eyes. But my eyes could be playing tricks on me. Would they released the same pictures from Dec in Feb's doc dump?:waitasec::confused:
 
try this
 

Attachments

  • 45123910.jpg
    45123910.jpg
    63.8 KB · Views: 74
  • sign.JPG
    sign.JPG
    78.2 KB · Views: 71
Ok.....we're still on the book debate?? I thought it was a done deal. There was no book....it was a sign......I feel like deja vu all over again.
 
But...but...what happened to the picture of the man in a vintage suit in the upper corner of the book..er.. sign. This crime scene has been tampered!! LOL!!:rolleyes:
 
capps said:
But...but...what happened to the picture of the man in a vintage suit in the upper corner of the book..er.. sign. This crime scene has been tampered!! LOL!!:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I think it is like looking at the clouds and seeing different things. I saw a big old elephant float over my house this afternoon!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 212 more.
Total: 4,636 (members: 213, guests: 4,423)

Online statistics

Members online
213
Guests online
4,423
Total visitors
4,636
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,336
Messages
17,967,709
Members
228,750
Latest member
AlternativeLuck
Back
Top