2009.05.19. Casey Anthony Civil Hearing @ 10:00

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
lin said:
I don't think KC "changed" the spelling; I think at most she "corrected" it. Like many others, she may have glanced at it and saw what she expected to see, which would have been "GonzaleZ." There have been numerous tests done and perhaps you've run across a few, maybe in Reader's Digest or somewhere, showing how our minds will interpret written words and automatically correct them sometimes.

You suggest that KC changed family details, etc. That's not my understanding. It appears that in at least one of KC's versions she stuck pretty close to the details listed on the card. In fact, in one of her filings in the civil case she mentions the imaginanny has only 2 children and the plaintiff has 5, so this can't be the same one. (Yes, in another she claims zero children.) Point of fact is 2 children were listed on the Sawgrass card, not five. Any other debate on this issue that you may have in mind requires, as the court so aptly pointed out today, a finding of fact more suited to a jury. The very fact that you make these arguments shows the suit is justified and requires just such a finding of fact.
Click to expand...

:waitasec: Yes, I've followed the case. I know that this ZG listed two children, M and Y/J on the card, and that KC said that her ZFG has no children (that ZFG's sister S has 2 children, no mention of their names.) IIRC, it wasn't KC who made the comment that ZFG has 2 children and this one has 5. Regarding the rest of your post directed at me here, maybe you've got me confused with someone else? I have not addressed the point of whether this ZG has a case or not, or where it should be tried. I could see how she might want to bring a case, and I would have to agree with the judge that it would have to wait.
 
Manny said:
They can't get blood from a turnip. The prisoner will remain in jail,she has no money...blah blah. What a waste of court time. HUGE WASTE
Click to expand...

They may be able to recover money under the Anthony's homeowners policy as normally the insured has coverage for such claims against anyone living in the household.
 
seagull65 said:
:waitasec: Yes, I've followed the case. I know that this ZG listed two children, M and Y/J on the card, and that KC said that her ZFG has no children (that ZFG's sister S has 2 children, no mention of their names.) IIRC, it wasn't KC who made the comment that ZFG has 2 children and this one has 5. Regarding the rest of your argument here, maybe you've got me confused with someone else? I have not addressed the point of whether this ZG has a case or not, or where it should be tried. I could see how she might want to bring a case, and I would have to agree with the judge that it would have to wait.
Click to expand...

Just to the point (and forgive me if this has already been said) about the discrepency between the number of children that the real ZFG and the ZFG that Casey named--I managed an apartment complex back in the day and people would often fib on their visitor cards and applications because there are limits to the number of people allowed in an apartment. We'd do a furnace filter change or something and find 6 people living in a one bedroom. So, this could be why the person really had 5 kids but only put down two--couldn't afford anything larger to accomodate the number of people that would actually be living there.
 
I wonder what all the fuss over the camera panning was all about? Was it so we couldn't see CA and GA stick their gum to the bottom of the chairs? There seemed to be an absence of gum-snapping today.

I think CA should thank those evil, childless "bloggers" who have, through their thoughtful if acerbic critiques, slowly improved her appearance and behavior at these hearings, as they most certainly have her daughters.

If it weren't for them, KC would still be twirling her hair and playing "hide the pen" with her little JB (bad pun intended) and not trying to demurely imitate a legal intern in lavendar twinset.
 
seagull65 said:
:waitasec: Yes, I've followed the case. I know that this ZG listed two children, M and Y/J on the card, and that KC said that her ZFG has no children (that ZFG's sister S has 2 children, no mention of their names.) IIRC, it wasn't KC who made the comment that ZFG has 2 children and this one has 5. Regarding the rest of your argument here, maybe you've got me confused with someone else? I have not addressed the point of whether this ZG has a case or not, or where it should be tried. I could see how she might want to bring a case, and I would have to agree with the judge that it would have to wait.
Click to expand...

Check the civil case filings. KC alleges 2 children in her counter claim at #6, I believe.

I do not have you confused with anyone. I was responding to your post arguing CA's possible stance on these issues and suggesting that as reasonable minds may differ, this in fact shows that there are material issues to be resolved here that can only be done through the legal process. You and I cannot resolve them here, so there is no point arguing whether or not the absence of a 'z' or 's' at the end of a name scribbled on a guest card by a Sawgrass staffer is or even can be a material fact. I say no. I think it's a ridiculous, nit picking, CA type of argument that will be laughed out of court. You seem to feel otherwise, or at least indicate that CA feels otherwise.
 
TheMeaningOfItAll said:
Just to the point (and forgive me if this has already been said) about the discrepency between the number of children that the real ZFG and the ZFG that Casey named--I managed an apartment complex back in the day and people would often fib on their visitor cards and applications because there are limits to the number of people allowed in an apartment. We'd do a furnace filter change or something and find 6 people living in a one bedroom. So, this could be why the person really had 5 kids but only put down two--couldn't afford anything larger to accomodate the number of people that would actually be living there.
Click to expand...

Yes, IIRC, this ZG said somewhere along the line that she only listed 2 of her children on the form (I don't know if they are the only minor children.)

In KC's statement to LE she said ZFG has no children. But she has mentioned that ZG's sister S has 2 children.
 
doogiesgirl said:
I wondered that too after CA's depo as JM kind of cornered CA about NOT clearing this ZG when given the opportunity. When she left the video visitation with KC she instead said that KC says she has never been shown any photos of any ZG's!! That could cost CA some cold hard cash. And I am hoping it does. jmo
Click to expand...

That is what KC told her... that LE had NOT shown her any pictures. Cindy chose to believe KC even though LE told her they DID show KC pictures and she could not identify anyone. Cindy was even asked who she believed LE or KC - she said she did not know who she believed.

Another fly for Cindy is she was on television saying LE had not 'cleared' a certain ZFG after they told her they had.
 
DAWN TREADER said:
Apparently details such as who is paying for Casey's defense and whether there are any book/movie deals in the works could come out in the civil case.
Click to expand...

IIRC kc countersuit covers atty fees ---- again iirc, they are in the upward amount of $50,000. + range.....I'm just sayin'----

is it common for an atty to complain of coming to court like kasen did at the end????? Was that tacky?????
 
momtective said:
George is not happy!
12-0700212.jpg
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
:frown:
:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
" " " " " " " " "
" " " " " " " " " "


:praying: praying for GA ~ THIS IS REALLY SAD ! ! !

Now the results of KC's web of lies.... is K I L L I N G her
own father also...
C A Y L E E is gone... Never to return.... KC won't be happy
till she has them all buried and gone...
SHE IS :censored::baby: murderer & the EVIDENCE SHOWS IT !

This is so terribly UNFAIR of KC to Drag everyone
DOWN......
O
W
N


JMO

God Bless !
jjgram
 
Manny said:
They can't get blood from a turnip. The prisoner will remain in jail,she has no money...blah blah. What a waste of court time. HUGE WASTE
Click to expand...
How's she paying for her defense? She must have some money, no? I'd prefer her parents' homeowners insurance paying up, but not sure how that would work as the As haven't been named. She was residing with them, but still not versed enough in insurance to say how they'd be able to collect.
 
TexasLil said:
They may be able to recover money under the Anthony's homeowners policy as normally the insured has coverage for such claims against anyone living in the household.
Click to expand...

True TexasLil. However, are they named in the lawsuit? (I have actually forgotten). If Casey is the only named defendant-ZFG cannot recover from anyone other than KC.
 
zoey said:
IIRC kc countersuit covers atty fees ---- again iirc, they are in the upward amount of $50,000. + range.....I'm just sayin'----

is it common for an atty to complain of coming to court like kasen did at the end????? Was that tacky?????
Click to expand...

Beyond belief tacky, especially in front of this judge. Posturing for the cameras; looking for any petty fault to find and failing so grasping at this nonissue. Like others, I suspect the sidebar may have referenced this outburst.
 
lin said:
Beyond belief tacky, especially in front of this judge. Posturing for the cameras; looking for any petty fault to find and failing so grasping at this nonissue. Like others, I suspect the sidebar may have referenced this outburst.
Click to expand...

thanks for answering this...did seem a little over the top especially when he was already warned---also loved it when he was told when addressing the court to stand up...
 
RR0004 said:
How's she paying for her defense? She must have some money, no? I'd prefer her parents' homeowners insurance paying up, but not sure how that would work as the As haven't been named. She was residing with them, but still not versed enough in insurance to say how they'd be able to collect.
Click to expand...

I'll be very surprised if CA isn't added as a co-respondent at some time in the future, when things have progressed a bit closer to trial. They almost have to include one or the other to get to the bottom of the funding and/or to collect; and CA is the most blatant. Remember the depo and Morgan accusing CA then of publishing the defamation repeatedly despite her claims that KC had previously exonerated 'this' ZFG. Also note that on LKL last week that CA refused to name her poi. She's expecting to be added, no doubt.
 
jjgram said:
:rolleyes:
:frown:
:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
" " " " " " " " "
" " " " " " " " " "


:praying: praying for GA ~ THIS IS REALLY SAD ! ! !

Now the results of KC's web of lies.... is K I L L I N G her
own father also...
C A Y L E E is gone... Never to return.... KC won't be happy
till she has them all buried and gone...
SHE IS :censored::baby: murderer & the EVIDENCE SHOWS IT !

This is so terribly UNFAIR of KC to Drag everyone
DOWN......
O
W
N


JMO

God Bless !
jjgram
Click to expand...

I think what's killing GA is not only KC's actions but his own and the web of lies he seems compelled to continue to weave or at least not contradict. I almost always see inappropriate anger, as BeanE suggested but with GA I also often seen conflict.
 
lin said:
I'll be very surprised if CA isn't added as a co-respondent at some time in the future, when things have progressed a bit closer to trial. They almost have to include one or the other to get to the bottom of the funding and/or to collect; and CA is the most blatant. Remember the depo and Morgan accusing CA then of publishing the defamation repeatedly despite her claims that KC had previously exonerated 'this' ZFG. Also note that on LKL last week that CA refused to name her poi. She's expecting to be added, no doubt.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that could also indicate the defense using it at trial for Caylee---she has someone in mind...........she does want to share it as well---you could just tell it was begging to come out....
 
2goaliemom said:
True TexasLil. However, are they named in the lawsuit? (I have actually forgotten). If Casey is the only named defendant-ZFG cannot recover from anyone other than KC.
Click to expand...

As a resident of the Hopesprings address, KC's actions may be covered under the umbrella of the family's homeowner policy without naming the owner's in the suit. However, as outlined above, I do strongly suspect CA will be named in the future and they're going after a lot more than the insurance proceeds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 73 more.
Total: 3,612 (members: 74, guests: 3,538)

Online statistics

Members online
74
Guests online
3,538
Total visitors
3,612
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,112
Messages
17,963,380
Members
228,686
Latest member
Pabo1998
Back
Top