Anthony's Computer Forensics

New Posts

If I have to see JB spinning so hard he must be dizzy again on the news...not getting questioned about this, I will scream. Fox had him on this morning and I was just dying from him saying it would only help the defense. bulls***

one newsguy did say something after the repeat interview aired about him being wrong, but I was too mad to hear it all.

AZLawyer and JWG totally owned FL in research on this case.
 
Does anyone think JB and FCA discussed this particular search, at any time, but it would have obviously been before he put this information in his book, did JB ask FCA "did you do this search", and did she flat out lie to him, "No JB, that is not my account, I don't use that account, it had to be my dad", and he BELIEVED HER??

or did they never discuss it, and he just put it in his book without vetting it? on Dr. Drew he indicated this was one of the "big bombshells" in his book, he stated, kind of laughing, that it took a few months for it to come out, "but he told us" there were going to be bombshells in his book (he kept plugging his book in that interview lol)

but does he even realize how ridiculous this looks, to people who are following this, how much he has changed the "facts" on this particular search?

I can't figure out why JB stated originally in his book that this search HAD to have been done by GA because FCA did NOT have an AIM (I might be mis-stating the type of account), but that is the reason it was definitely done by GA.

Was FCA "punking" JB saying it was not her? some malicious thing she was doing to get back at him??

or did they just think no one would ever even question it?

or was JB really not that familiar with the real computer log evidence, and he just put this info in the book without really knowing what he was talking about?

I can't figure out how he got the wrong info in his book, if FCA lied to him? does he REALLY believe what she tells him?
 
OK, I will bite. The book is full of lies. This is just another one to add to the list.
I think when he found out about the searches, he knew they pointed directly to KC and how she killed Caylee. It would prove JA opening statement. KC would have to lie to JB about this. She also knew this pointed to her. When the prosecution never brought it up it was a bonus for his team. Putting it in the book was just his way of gloating that he had this and not the prosecution, even though his evidence is wrong. Leaves me wondering if he is sorry he put it in the book since the bombshell is blowing up in his face. This is just my own opinion.
 
NavySubMom said:
Does anyone think JB and FCA discussed this particular search, at any time, but it would have obviously been before he put this information in his book, did JB ask FCA "did you do this search", and did she flat out lie to him, "No JB, that is not my account, I don't use that account, it had to be my dad", and he BELIEVED HER??

or did they never discuss it, and he just put it in his book without vetting it? on Dr. Drew he indicated this was one of the "big bombshells" in his book, he stated, kind of laughing, that it took a few months for it to come out, "but he told us" there were going to be bombshells in his book (he kept plugging his book in that interview lol)

but does he even realize how ridiculous this looks, to people who are following this, how much he has changed the "facts" on this particular search?

I can't figure out why JB stated originally in his book that this search HAD to have been done by GA because FCA did NOT have an AIM (I might be mis-stating the type of account), but that is the reason it was definitely done by GA.

Was FCA "punking" JB saying it was not her? some malicious thing she was doing to get back at him??

or did they just think no one would ever even question it?

or was JB really not that familiar with the real computer log evidence, and he just put this info in the book without really knowing what he was talking about?

I can't figure out how he got the wrong info in his book, if FCA lied to him? does he REALLY believe what she tells him?
Click to expand...

I just don't think that he was that familiar with anything...This information would be something that he wouldn't/shouldn't have thrown into his book in any way shape or form if he had any idea about what is available to the "lowly public" to research! AZ and JWR - You know I mean that super-sarcastically and I hope you'll consider that I made a huge effort not to refer to you as "bloggers".
 
I never read JB's book- what exactly did he say pertaining to the searches? I refuse to for a dime over to him or the Anthony clan.
 
IMO, and I know its absolutely never to happen, just wishing it would.
When I said before that JB should have instructed KC to humbly take the not guilty verdict and go away quietly... I mean that.
I wish that instead of JB trying to spin this computer search into a silver dollar and being such a media wh**e, wouldn't it be great if he conceded and said HE KNOWS she's guilty and feels horrible now for helping a liar, party girl, narcissistic monster get off a murder charge?
how many more times can he say this search would have helped the defense?? Who believes him??

I'm newer here, but so proud of the two members here, and I've had enough of seeing JB .
 
We're starting to veer to the far left. Or is is right? All I know is we're quickly veering off topic again. Let's steer it back onto the road folks. :)


Thread topic: Anthony's Computer Forensics
 
pinkflamingo said:
I never read JB's book- what exactly did he say pertaining to the searches? I refuse to for a dime over to him or the Anthony clan.
Click to expand...

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=179945"]This is a Fact-Checking "List Only - No Discussion" thread [/ame]about Baez's book. Lots of great info in there.
 
beach said:
We're starting to veer to the far left. Or is is right? All I know is we're quickly veering off topic again. Let's steer it back onto the road folks. :)


Thread topic: Anthony's Computer Forensics
Click to expand...

I felt the questions I posed were directly related to Anthony's Computer Forensics, since the whole thing is about that verified "fool-proof suffication" search that was first written about and found out about in JB's book, I don't understand how asking what JB exactly knew "technically" or "forensically" who did the search, by misstating that in his book that CA did not have the AIM account, how is that not related? That is how this whole "thing" started. I am just wondering why he had the wrong information published in his book. or where can a person discuss this kind of question then? Thanks!
IMO, MOO, etc.
 
Ricki said:
OK, I will bite. The book is full of lies. This is just another one to add to the list.
I think when he found out about the searches, he knew they pointed directly to KC and how she killed Caylee. It would prove JA opining statement. KC would have to lie to JB about this. She also knew this pointed to her. When the prosecution never brought it up it was a bonus for his team. Putting it in the book was just his way of gloating that he had this and not the prosecution, even though his evidence is wrong. Leaves me wondering if he is sorry he put it in the book since the bombshell is blowing up in his face. This is just my own opinion.
Click to expand...

I sooooo agree with this!!!! I'd just add to another thought and that is I think JB reached a point pretty early on with KC where the less she said to him the better. He knows full well she's guilty.
 
NavySubMom said:
I felt the questions I posed were directly related to Anthony's Computer Forensics, since the whole thing is about that verified "fool-proof suffication" search that was first written about and found out about in JB's book, I don't understand how asking what JB exactly knew "technically" or "forensically" who did the search, by misstating that in his book that CA did not have the AIM account, how is that not related? That is how this whole "thing" started. I am just wondering why he had the wrong information published in his book. or where can a person discuss this kind of question then? Thanks!
IMO, MOO, etc.
Click to expand...

Your questions were topical.

My post landed at random. ;)
 
pinkflamingo said:
I never read JB's book- what exactly did he say pertaining to the searches? I refuse to for a dime over to him or the Anthony clan.
Click to expand...

This is from pages 181-83, my comments in bolded brackets. Remember his timestamps are an hour early.

The records show that from 9:00 a.m. continuously until 10:59 p.m. she was on Facebook and Myspace. She was researching out-fits worn by shot girls in clubs, going to Victorias Secret, Fredericks of Hollywood, and other sites featuring sexy outfits, shot girl outfits, and Tila Tequila. Tony was a promoter for Fusion nightclub, and Casey was helping him out by managing his shot girls. The shot girls are pretty girls who walk around the club selling shots. What she appears to be doing here is legwork for Tony in trying to find the cutest outfits for the girls to wear on the nights he was a promoter.

These were not the searches of someone out to kill her daughter.

[Nor were they the searches of someone who just found out there daughter died earlier that morning. and that her father was telling her to cover up AS HE JUST ALLEGED A FEW PAGES EARLIER. This book is a painfully bad defense.]

If Casey was on the computer, who was negligent when Caylee wandered toward and into the pool?

[In those few pages earlier, he also alleges that Casey was woken up that morning by George looking for Caylee whom they found drowned. She wouldn't have been on the computer searching for sexy attire when the alleged drowning occurred, that would have been after!]

George himself gives us the answer.

According to the computer records, at 1:50 p.m. someone got on the computer and signed into AOL Instant Messenger. George had an AOL Instant Messenger account. Casey didn’t. Georges user name was george4937. Right after someone logged in to instant messenger, the first search was to Google. Then someone typed in “foolproof suffocation.” It was misspelled, and George was a poor speller. Google automatically corrected the spelling, and the first link that was clicked was “venturing into the pro-suicide pit.” It appeared that someone was thinking about killing himself.

[LOL. No,.the search wasn't on suicide,it was on suffocation. The suicide page was just one of the hits she clicked. She also clicked on "Ten Ways to Kill a Rhododendron" which by Baez logic means the searcher was looking for gardening tips. Baez sucks.]

“Venturing into the pro-suicide pit" is a blog discussing websites that talk about suicide. Shortly thereafter, the person at the computer went to a page that said “heat can melt disposable breathing circuits.” And then a little later, someone visited a link that appears to be a gardening website (George was an inveterate gardener): ten ways to kill a rhodo-dendron.

1 suppose you could argue these searches were made by Casey, but AOL Instant Messenger had been used on the computer, and this occurred more than an hour after George said she had left the house with Caylee.
[But just one paragraph later, Baez claims she was home till 4:18pm. He is a non-stop contradiction machine.]
It wasn’t Cindy. She had left the house and Lee didn’t live there anymore.

There’s further concrete proof that George was on the computer, not Casey. We checked Caseys phone records, and at the time these suicide-related searches were being made, Casey was on the phone talking with Amy Huizenga. When we interviewed Amy, she couldn’t recall anything special about the conversation. Would Casey have these morbid thoughts about killing herself at the same time she was talking on her phone with her friend? It didn't make any sense. Casey's cell tower records also support her claims that she was at home. The records show her in the vicinity of the home until 4:18 p.m., when she left for Tony’s house. While it was never conclusive evidence, it does support her statements and contradicts George’s testimony Because they knew it hurt their theory, its no wonder that the prosecutors didn’t admit the cell tower evidence during the trial.

Again, not exactly a search for the truth.

It appears suicide had long been on George’s mind, so much so that he tried it on January 22, 2009.

So who was negligent in Caylee's drowning? By looking at the web-sites being researched, all concerned with suicide and death, it certainly appears that the one who felt the blame was a guilt-ridden George Anthony.

When it came to evidence concerning George and Casey’s computer use on June 16, the police really pulled a fast one. You would think if you were investigating the Anthony computer—very important evidence—that you’d look into and list the computer searches on the day Caylee died. But the police didn't do that, as my computer expert, Larry Daniel, discovered.

[The state did screw up big on this, but by negligence not malice.]

Sandra Cawn, who did the computer investigation for the police, re-ported that she had conducted a search of the computer on June 16 and 17, 2008, and in her report she showed that there was NO COMPUTER ACTIVITY between the hours one and seven a.m., and then she said “for the nine o'clock, noon hour, and between three and eleven on the 17th of June, there was NO COMPUTER ACTIVITY.”

She gave zero evidence as to what the computer activity was. And for a while 1 couldn’t comprehend what she had done. But by telling the public what time Casey wasn’t on the computer that day, she was hiding the truth: she (or someone connected with the police) had deleted the computer evidence that would have shown that George’s story was a lie and that Casey was telling the truth.

[What an <modsnip> to make such an accusation.]

George said Casey left at 12:50. And yet someone was on the computer over an hour after that time. It had to have been George on the computer because he said Casey was gone, and he was the only one out there trying to kill himself. But Cawn’s report says nothing about his computer use.

[Again, contradicts himself that Casey was there till 4:18.]

If you look at the discovery you will find that the Anthony computer was in use practically non-stop on the days prior to June 16. If you search June 16, there is only one entry. Where are the other entries?

There was nothing there. It was gone. It mysteriously disappeared. When I looked at this I was stunned.

If you go to the cookies, there is not one cookie listed for June 16th. Here was the supposed “unfiltered version" of what was on that computer, filtered by the police.

When I came across this information, 1 wanted to find out whether the prosecutors were aware of this. It was possible that the police did this on their own and kept it to themselves.

To find out, I initially put Larry Daniels on my witness list. I planned on him testifying to the omissions and ramming this down the state’s throat at the trial.

1 also hired another confidential computer expert Josh Restivo from St. Louis, and he verified the same thing that Daniels had found.

------------------------

OMG, I almost wish hadn't read this.
 
AZlawyer said:
Whichever member of the defense team recently said that the June 16 AIM/FB/MS activity couldn't have been Casey because there was similar activity on June 17 when Casey "was no longer at the house" might want to double-check some of the evidence. I show (using JWG's times from the more current computer forensic software) Casey-like activity on the home computer 3:14-3:27 pm. Cell phone pings show Casey in the area of the Anthony home from about 2:30 pm until after 4 pm that day. (Note that the cell pings wouldn't match up with the computer activity if we used JB's time stamps (one hour earlier).) Activity on the desktop and Casey's laptop computers were both high at this time, as though files were being transferred from one to the other, and the Caylee nursing home videos in particular were transferred to the laptop at 3:28 pm--just after "whoever" had finished checking Facebook, MySpace, etc.

So, Defense Team Member whose name I forget, I think it's pretty obvious that the June 17 activity was Casey as well.
Click to expand...

Brian Burner also saw her at the house.
 
Thank you for your patience, and especially the screen shot. I had even read the data line by line, searched after uploading it again, still no fool entry whatsoever, or the surrounding items. I don't understand unless it is opening it with open office, but I've used that for every type of file for years with no problem. Anyway...

The epoch time stamp is 1213642264109375 which converts to Mon, 16 Jun 2008 18:51:04 GMT, which is, in fact, 14:51:04 with -4 offset. Anyone can double check here http://www.epochconverter.com/ and here http://www.freeformatter.com/epoch-timestamp-to-date-converter.html There is a formula too but you have to make sure that the base date is 1/1/2007 00:00:00, which is more complicated than using these tools.

Now to figure out why these lines aren't showing up in the copies I uploaded. :waitasec: Thanks again.
 
Ricki said:
OK, I will bite. The book is full of lies. This is just another one to add to the list.
I think when he found out about the searches, he knew they pointed directly to KC and how she killed Caylee. It would prove JA opening statement. KC would have to lie to JB about this. She also knew this pointed to her. When the prosecution never brought it up it was a bonus for his team. Putting it in the book was just his way of gloating that he had this and not the prosecution, even though his evidence is wrong. Leaves me wondering if he is sorry he put it in the book since the bombshell is blowing up in his face. This is just my own opinion.
Click to expand...

I was going to reply, but you tok the words outta my mouth as this is what I think too. He knows it does not matter noe that FCA is now seen more so as guilty now. Casey, you have met your match!
 
Smelly Squirrel said:
Right after someone logged in to instant messenger, the first search was to Google. Then someone typed in “foolproof suffocation.” It was misspelled, and George was a poor speller. Google automatically corrected the spelling, and the first link that was clicked was “venturing into the pro-suicide pit.” It appeared that someone was thinking about killing himself.
Click to expand...

-respectfully snipped for space & BBM

Okay, I can't sit on my hands another minute. I have read this snip from his book before and the gall of Baez accusing anyone of being a poor speller is more than I can take. This is coming from a man who misspelled irony as IORNY on a huge poster board (or was it a powerpoint presentation?) that he presented during a court hearing!!! FGS! Ironic, much? I realize this is petty but it bugs the living stew out of me.


Regarding the rest of your snip from his book - sounds to me like Baez was pretty darn worried about the fool-proof suffocation search coming out at trial and he mistakenly thought he had his bases covered. It sure would've been sweet to watch his butt get thwarted big time on this issue.

It is a crying shame that it took AZ & JWG to publicly expose the truth of all this almost a year and a half after the verdict. And the more I read and understand, the more I believe that if the SA had known about this, it would have changed the whole focus of the way they tried this case. Who knows? It really might have made a difference. If I was LDB or JA, I would be so mad I couldn't see straight. The whole thing makes me sick.
 
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-f...hony-verdict-be-overturned/?playlist_id=86912

Has this Fox&Friends News news link interview been posted here at WS yet? I don't recall seeing it. This lawyer guest on Fox News is telling it EXACTLY like it is about JB, he needs to STOP boasting about his win, this lawyer guest said should not have written the book and a defense attorney just needs to win the case and move on, that JB's reasoning about the search and the Prosecution hiding it is nonsense, etc., I really enjoyed this interview. Worth a view.
 
Okay, look, either LE screwed up and did not see the relevant file OR they did see it, correct? In either case, the file existed on the disc that was turned over to Baez and his computer experts found it. And to Baez's credit, he even had a second expert verify the findings of the first.

Apparently Baez could not conceive that LE was so inept that they had not found these files, so he then concluded they were trying to hide the files because it would "mess up their timeline".

So, which is it? The answer to this question would have to come from Sgt. Stenger - a man who taught computer forensics at the Master's Degree level at a Florida college. Because Sandra Osborne admits in her interview that she did not know how to work with Firefox files and that she turned this part of the work over to Sgt. Stenger.

And remember, it was not just the files on June 16th which contained the "fool-proof suffocation" string of text. There were other files from June 17th on the same computer, same Firefox browser, that indicated "Casey-like" use.

Plus, Sgt. Stenger was working all along with the outside expert who had designed the decryption program for the Firefox files. Remember the whole thing about how many times someone visited the "chloroform" site? The 1 visit vs. 84 visits?

Actually, I can see why Baez may have come to the conclusion that LE was attempting to "ignore" certain information. Especially when his own experts would have told him that not one or two, but about 1,200 files were "missed"!

You can't make this stuff up, folks! It does beg the question as to what really was going on.
 
NavySubMom said:
Does anyone think JB and FCA discussed this particular search, at any time, but it would have obviously been before he put this information in his book, did JB ask FCA "did you do this search", and did she flat out lie to him, "No JB, that is not my account, I don't use that account, it had to be my dad", and he BELIEVED HER??

or did they never discuss it, and he just put it in his book without vetting it? on Dr. Drew he indicated this was one of the "big bombshells" in his book, he stated, kind of laughing, that it took a few months for it to come out, "but he told us" there were going to be bombshells in his book (he kept plugging his book in that interview lol)

but does he even realize how ridiculous this looks, to people who are following this, how much he has changed the "facts" on this particular search?

I can't figure out why JB stated originally in his book that this search HAD to have been done by GA because FCA did NOT have an AIM (I might be mis-stating the type of account), but that is the reason it was definitely done by GA.

Was FCA "punking" JB saying it was not her? some malicious thing she was doing to get back at him??

or did they just think no one would ever even question it?

or was JB really not that familiar with the real computer log evidence, and he just put this info in the book without really knowing what he was talking about?

I can't figure out how he got the wrong info in his book, if FCA lied to him? does he REALLY believe what she tells him?
Click to expand...

Baez has had this evidence since FEBRUARY 2009

The computer expert Baez hired found the searches in January 2009 and he handed the evidence over to Baez in February 2009 at a AAFS conference.

IMO Baez went to OCA with this evidence...she could have lied..but then we have George who told LE/State in interviews that he remembered her leaving at 12:50pm..It opened the door to go after him in the end.

BBM
IMO they thought no one would question it...Baez made the big reveal in his book but he failed to offer proof to support his claim and accusation.

I don't know if he was to naive, to stupid or to egotistical when he failed to consider that some one in the world would question and investigate what he was claiming(without proof) in his book.
 
Intermezzo said:
Baez has had this evidence since FEBRUARY 2009

The computer expert Baez hired found the searches in January 2009 and he handed the evidence over to Baez in February 2009 at a AAFS conference.

IMO Baez went to OCA with this evidence...she could have lied..but then we have George who told LE/State in interviews that he remembered her leaving at 12:50pm..It opened the door to go after him in the end.

BBM
IMO they thought no one would question it...Baez made the big reveal in his book but he failed to offer proof to support his claim and accusation.

I don't know if he was to naive, to stupid or to egotistical when he failed to consider that some one in the world would question and investigate what he was claiming(without proof) in his book.
Click to expand...

Jose needs to remember her "baldy and sneezing milk stories, and how that bit him on the butt, and stay out of the news, but I think he really thinks he can still make money off Casey.

Looking at the time line and phone calls, it shows that Caylee died sometime after Jesse her heard on the phone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 103 more.
Total: 3,368 (members: 104, guests: 3,264)

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
3,264
Total visitors
3,368
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,284
Messages
17,966,589
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top