2011.07.17 Casey Released From Jail

Status
Not open for further replies.

grammieto5

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
4,354
Reaction score
3,551
What he was saying was that there was a glitch in the program when they initially ran it. When he "re-tooled" it, he fixed the problem with the program so that it did get the correct results. He then goes on to claim that he contacted the state after retooling it he ran new reports to disclose the proper number of searches and gave them to the state.

Weren't these mistakes brought out at trial. I remember thinking, ok so she really didn't do 84 searches, the number 84 was for something? So I'm having trouble understanding how the state was not being honest?
 

technicalconfusion

Curses! Foiled Again!
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
2,056
Reaction score
0
Weren't these mistakes brought out at trial. I remember thinking, ok so she really didn't do 84 searches, the number 84 was for something? So I'm having trouble understanding how the state was not being honest?

There was discussion about the 84 number was for 84 myspace searches instead of the chloroform.
 

legalmania

Verified Paralegal
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
3,642
Reaction score
9
Website
www.websleuths.com
She could claim damages because her Constitutional rights were violated. In addition, every news outlet in America and around the world claimed that she made 84 searches, when this is, according to the expert, untrue and is damaging to her character. While I could care less about her character, I truly am not a CFCA sympathizer, if her rights were violated, a case against the state alone, whether she wins or loses is still going to cost the stare more money. And most importantly, if people are not held accountable for their actions, if this is true, then it could happen again in other cases and puts a negative light on the state in future cases. Keep in mind that any time a violation of the Constitutional rights of one individual are infringed upon and that is deemed okay, by omission or otherwise, it could set precedent in future cases that the violation of these rights is okay in other cases. We have to keep in mind that everything in court happens not only at the direction of the Constitution, but also previous case law and decisions in other cases.

This is why HHJP was so careful to make sure that her rights were not violated. He was trying to avoid what may end up happening here anyway because of this.

What about her father and her bothers constitutional rights? She called them child molesters with absolutely no proof. The judge ruled that they couldn't use that as a defense after JB already said it in opening statements. The prosecution said the murder weapon was the duct tape not chloroform. The chloroform was only proof that there was a dead body in the trunk. Casey is a convicted felon and was convicted of lying to police and didn't report her daughter missing, she received a fair trial, she was protected by the Orange County police, I can't think of any way her constitutional rights were violated.
 

21merc7

New Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
10,490
Reaction score
50
Here is the thread for the chloroform searches, faulty software, etc..

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144987"]Software designer says Casey Anthony prosecution data was wrong - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
 

HRCODEPINK

Verified Insider
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
2,166
Reaction score
8
Website
www.patriotstoolbox.org
you (or mods) should post your posts on this subject in the designated thread that was just created so more people will see them :)

I really wish that it would be made into it's own thread also. I am only a Paralegal Studies and Criminal Justice student with a migraine. While I am sure that I am right in my belief of how wrong this is and why, I don't know that I am explaining it well and think AZlawyer or Richard H could probably explain it better if they saw it.
 

Shelby1

Cancer Sucks
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
4,863
Reaction score
5,433
Thank you! Really, honestly, I am on Caylee's side. I just want people to understand that this is not only bad for the state, but also for Caylee and for each and every one of us. When the state does something that violates your rights and it is deemed to be okay by the general public, you are also putting yourself at risk for it happening to you! Precedent is everything, as I am learning very quickly in my Criminal Law and Procedure class right now and as I had learned over 12 long years of volunteer work with the IP. This will not be the last that we will hear of this. It will be all over MSM before it is over with and looks really bad.


Ditto to all you said.


I, too, want to be clear.

In no way am I saying that KC is not guilty.

Like HRCODEPINK said, this is actually really bad for the pros and for Caylee if the defense decides to press this issue. I would be shocked if they didn't.
 

Quiche

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
9,116
Reaction score
328
I really wish that it would be made into it's own thread also. I am only a Paralegal Studies and Criminal Justice student with a migraine. While I am sure that I am right in my belief of how wrong this is and why, I don't know that I am explaining it well and think AZlawyer or Richard H could probably explain it better if they saw it.

Open one.
 

scarlett_hues

New Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
85
Reaction score
1
unsubstantiated RUMOR alert FYI

I have a friend who works for CAA in Century City, Ca. She is currently in Los Angeles seeking representation and selling her story the the highest bidding studio.

This is the truth and it is where she is currently located. She could blend into this city no problem, taking black town cars too and from secret meetings.

You don't have to believe me, but my friend said that she has already met with CAA, and the place was on lock down when she arrived.

they needed to get her out of the south to a city where everyone is so self absorbed they would really have no idea who the *advertiser censored** casey anthoney was anyway. I also heard from my friend that she recently went Blond.

She is under lock and key. You don't think every pop photographer would be looking for her. She is in some private hotel. I think it's the private hotel the masons run for members, anyways that is what my friend told me. She is loaded up in the garage so no one can see her.

I still think she is a sensitive subject and the studio that takes her does not want backlash during the summer season.


I'll be emailing CAA shortly to protest any potential deals with Casey
 

HRCODEPINK

Verified Insider
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
2,166
Reaction score
8
Website
www.patriotstoolbox.org
Weren't these mistakes brought out at trial. I remember thinking, ok so she really didn't do 84 searches, the number 84 was for something? So I'm having trouble understanding how the state was not being honest?

I did not get to see every minute of the final days because my daughter was hurt in an accident, so I am not 100% certain. I know that the mistake was brought out by the defense, but from my understanding it was never addressed and cleared up by the state and that when they questioned Cindy on rebuttal they asked her if she went there 84 times and that this was on July 1st, I believe. After it had been established that there were no 84 visits. If this is true, that is BAD.
 

Quiche

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
9,116
Reaction score
328
unsubstantiated RUMOR alert FYI




I'll be emailing CAA shortly to protest any potential deals with Casey

That sounds like a pretty good deal with CAA, all that hubbbubbb for her-- shoot, they're going to put Steven Spielberg on hold to deal with KC? Confirmation is needed for this, for certain.


[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Artists_Agency"]Creative Artists Agency - Wikipedia, the free [email protected]@[email protected]@/wiki/File:Creative_Artists_Agency_logo.svg" class="image" title="Icelogo"><img alt="Icelogo" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/Creative_Artists_Agency_logo.svg/200px-Creative_Artists_Agency_logo.svg.png"@@[email protected]@commons/thumb/3/3e/Creative_Artists_Agency_logo.svg/200px-Creative_Artists_Agency_logo.svg.png[/ame]
 

SMK

New Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
7,952
Reaction score
28
I did not get to see every minute of the final days because my daughter was hurt in an accident, so I am not 100% certain. I know that the mistake was brought out by the defense, but from my understanding it was never addressed and cleared up by the state and that when they questioned Cindy on rebuttal they asked her if she went there 84 times and that this was on July 1st, I believe. After it had been established that there were no 84 visits. If this is true, that is BAD.
Thanks for the clarification. I myself was surprised to know the State knew there had been no 84 searches, and pressed the point anyway. Really hope your daughter is OK!
 

scarlett_hues

New Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
85
Reaction score
1
That sounds like a pretty good deal with CAA, all that hubbbubbb for her-- shoot, they're going to put Steven Spielberg on hold to deal with KC? Confirmation is needed for this, for certain.

Yep, but a quick email to CAA wouldn't hurt, IMO
 

HRCODEPINK

Verified Insider
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
2,166
Reaction score
8
Website
www.patriotstoolbox.org
What about her father and her bothers constitutional rights? She called them child molesters with absolutely no proof. The judge ruled that they couldn't use that as a defense after JB already said it in opening statements. The prosecution said the murder weapon was the duct tape not chloroform. The chloroform was only proof that there was a dead body in the trunk. Casey is a convicted felon and was convicted of lying to police and didn't report her daughter missing, she received a fair trial, she was protected by the Orange County police, I can't think of any way her constitutional rights were violated.

I completely agree! And that is why HHJP told them they couldn't bring it up again unless there was some sort of proof. Unfortunately, this is a question for AZlawyer, who has answered it several times on the thread on questions for the lawyers. But the state is also held at a higher standard than the defense. Especially in a death penalty case. The defense is under no obligation to prove anything. They are there to protect the rights of the defendant and cast doubt. What is said in opening statements is supposed to not be considered by the jury as evidence. But once evidence is being presented, neither the state, nor the defense are allowed to present anything that they know to be untrue. If this man's statements are true, then the state presented evidence, not during opening statements, but during the phase where evidence is presented, that they knew to be factually incorrect. IF that is true then she her rights were violated and she was not given a necessarily fair trial. It doesn't matter how insignificant the evidence. If the stat presented it, knowing that it was not the truth, then her rights were violated.

Please understand I am on the side of Caylee and all of you. But facts are facts and if what this man is claiming is true, it is not good news.
 

askfornina

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2011
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
29
I really wish that it would be made into it's own thread also. I am only a Paralegal Studies and Criminal Justice student with a migraine. While I am sure that I am right in my belief of how wrong this is and why, I don't know that I am explaining it well and think AZlawyer or Richard H could probably explain it better if they saw it.

[ame="http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144987"]Software designer says Casey Anthony prosecution data was wrong - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame] there is a thread here :) i thought you explained it very well!
 

scarlett_hues

New Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
85
Reaction score
1
CAA rep's the following celebs

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Creative_Artists_Agency_clients"]List of Creative Artists Agency clients - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top