Discussion in 'Caylee Anthony 2 years old' started by suepitzl, Jun 22, 2010.
I am not so sure there was a flip flop! I just listened to the raw footage of the interview CM did with Kathi B after the hearing. They were talking about what the co workers at Gentiva did or did not say during their interview with police. CM says something along the lines of they did not say anything in the interview and then goes on to say, much like they say they did and did not search Suburban drive and it turns out they didn't. I may not have the exact wording right, but I think WFTV, once again, has gotten things wrong! I would really appreciate someone else's take on what CM says. I think he was saying the police did not search that area of Suburban - not that the TES searchers didn't.
I think if they are flip flopping, it's a strategy or they are just too lazy to want to do the work to actually fish for someone. I can see them, at one point, saying, "Oh look, we were just trying to clear everyone and here's someone that actually searched that area! My how lucky we are today!"
I can also see them just not wanting to sift through all of those documents, so a change in strategy fixes that. Since everyone agrees that area was underwater, then the conclusion can be drawn that no one searched that area. If no one searched that area, then no one knows how long Caylee's body was there before it was found, or how it got there. It's like if a tree falls in the wilderness but no one was there to hear it, did that actually happen? Or does the tree not exist and couldn't have fallen because no one saw it?
Either way, it's just more defense games. I also think they are finally giving up on the TES documents, but we'll see what happens at the hearing. I'm going to be disappointed if MN doesn't get the mop the floor with the defense.
It will be so ridiculous if the defense don't get access to all the TES documents. But in this case I can see it happening.
That's because it all comes down to relevance...
And there is none.
IMO of course....
If they didn't flip-flop....now that would surprise me.
Don't you mean, it would be ridiculous if they don't get off their tail and go look at those documents. Cause they have had access for many months now. Maybe a year?
Listen to it all the way through--they get back to the TES searcher issue in the last minute or so of the raw interview, and CM is 100% clear that the TES searchers did not search the place where the body was because it was "impassable" at the time so they couldn't search it. He then says that the area was not, however, under water at the time TES was searching and so if they didn't find the body it proves the body was not there at the time. :waitasec: :waitasec: :waitasec:
:waitasec: :waitasec: :waitasec:
Same here. I listened to it 4x yesterday and it made absolutely no sense to me. That was why I didn't respond to Macushla. I had no idea how to explain what he was saying about the TES search. He is talking out of both sides of his mouth. Makes no sense whatsoever, except he is trying to figure out a way someone could have moved Caylee's body.
Nope, nope, nope....
If this statement was attributed to Baez, I would completely agree. Little he speaks makes any sense (to me and some others I know)
But Cheney......Nope! Don't believe he is talking out both sides of his mouth....I think he offered up a glimpse of the changing of direction....
I think this statement is key to what their argument is going to be on the 15th, and we are missing it....
So do we recall exactly when TES states they sent searchers anywhere on Suburban? Wasn't it more than once?
I think we need to break this down farther....
I don't know...have you watched the raw interview? CM seemed so confused--like he had actually forgotten the defense's "talking points" about the TES search.
He was talking down to the reporter, suggesting that the media had made it sound like the TES people were in the exact spot, and the defense had uncovered the fact that the spot in question was "impassable." Then there was a question about why, in that case, the defense thought the body wasn't there in June, and it was like he suddenly remembered his lines: The spot was not under water, therefore the searchers should have found it.
But if the spot was "impassable" to the point of being unsearchable, how could they have found the body even if it wasn't under water? And what made it "impassable" at the time of the search if it wasn't under water???
That's my point exactly. People who LIVE in Florida are going to be on this jury. Either it was impassable by water or plants, most likely water since it was during Hurricane season. The defense is NOT going to win that argument if keeps going there. It's foolish and ignorant to say it was impassable yet no water was there. Everyone said what made it impassable - WATER. Bring in the biology, the weather reports, you name it, and that argument is dead in the water, pun intended.
Does the defense, especially CM since he said it, really think they jury is going to be so dumb as to believe an argument like that? I mean seriously!
The defense did have access to the pertinent records-They just didn't carry their tooshes to NeJame's office to view them.
KC can't violate the rights of others in order to have her rights. People that were not involved in the crime scene cannot be made to defend her. For that matter, they cannot be made to support the state.
Next, they may argue that it was too impassable for KC to have put the body there.
Flip side of the argument, of course, is that Caylee was there the whole time, as RK attests, as botanists attest, as the entomologists will attest.
ETA-Do I remember correctly (or is it rumor) that there is also a child that can put a white car at the remains site as well? At this point, I believe the kid.
She was found not far from the street though, it's not like it was a trek to get back there- what would be difficult about KC tossing her, since she was in bags- ? she was already treating her like garbage at that stage.
Ugh, it's true. But she did manage to get Caylee well enough hidden underneath the ivy (that is not kudzu, maybe ivy? dunno)...and back into the depressed level far enough that the water covered at least a portion of the bagging and Caylee. TES, GSt.J, KW, RK, passers-by could not readily see her from the asphalt.
Time and nature might have moved Caylee a bit, too.
But really, if the defense really tries that, I will be :rolling: cause it is lame...I was just trying to think like them, which is a contradiction in terms.
I watched it a couple of times and he was really acting squirrely. Yukking it up for the cameras and grinning.......he contradicted himself so many times I lost count. Is he going to try to dazzle the jury by confusing them?
This is just so strange and senseless. Do you think he could be ill?
My thoughts as I watched Cheney's post hearing interview with Kathi B?
WHAT does A Lyon think of his interview? She might have turned completely gray after that fiasco! She has GOT to be furious! Not only does she worry about Baez and his capabilities, ( shenanigans ) she now must consider the aging mental capacity of her other partner. And, with Kathi B no less! She really doesn't like her, that was evident. This whole thing makes me laugh!
BBM Could very well be. This reminds me of a class I took my last semester in grad school, something to do with psychology, statistics, and research. At any rate, the professor was a young man and I didn't have a clue what he was talking about. I was 'dazzled' by his 'intelligence' and feeling fairly not too smart myself! UNTIL one day I began to chat with a large group of my fellow classmates, who were likewise confounded by his lectures. Long story short, we reached the conclusion that he was bs'ing us and we called him on it. I got next to nothing out of that class (he did give me a 'B', I think because I let him know I was on to him and expected to keep up my cum average!) but there is a lesson here. Hopefully the jury will not succumb to being bamboozled should that be the defense's strategy. I am confident that the SA will counteract any of that with the facts should it occur.
Separate names with a comma.