Could Lee Anthony face charges for obstruction of justice?

[SL_Zero]

"Mr. Anthony, going under the assumption that his daughter, or mean his niece, was kidnapped or was some how held against her will.” He investigated that angle and that avenue first and foremost”.

Interestin statement, by Lee's attorney, Mr. Luka. Slip of the tongue?

i dont support the "unspeakable angle" re: LA, but this is a very weird statement to make. lawyers are trained to think carefully about what they say as they are quite often quoted. why would he say his daughter if he had never uttered that phrase before??? :waitasec:

maybe he has used the "his daughter" phrase before re: caylee... meaning that he has had contact w/ the real bio dad?

probably not but interesting to think....

 

[Angel Who Cares]

This thread is awful long. Are we ready to start a part 2?

It sure is....I'll PM a mod & ask.:blowkiss:

 

[LCoastMom]

I appreciate your thoughts. I don’t want to take this thread OT, but in reply I would say remember this case is nowhere near being solved and it could turn any direction before it goes to trial, or even during trial because Casey’s lips are sealed. She’s not confessed. We know LE has enough evidence to charge Casey with murder, but remember those charges were laid even before Caylee’s body was found.

There has been no information released at all to indicate what basis the prosecution will take this case to trial.......how it happened - how Caylee died, when she died, and how she was able to the coverup what she did.

Who is being investigated is what the media has led us to believe, and believe me all the defense attorneys are leaking tidbits through the media to give the perception their client is innocent. The LE are not required to keep the public up to date with their investigation, how could justice ever be served if they were. All they are required to do is reveal documentation and that's what has been released.

So it’s very unusual for Lee’s attorney to state his client “might” have pending charges. What would his motive be? On the surface it makes no sense why he would want to shed a negative light on his client. So I'm suggesting there's another reason and that's to make someone a little less comfortable in their portrayal of innocence. It's a cat and mouse game and it happens all the time. That’s why I think what I think, and I could be right or wrong.

But this pretrial posturing is what makes following a case intriguing.

umm, throwing your client under the bus to make someone else uncomfortable? Does LE have time to play games like this? Wouldn't it make just as much sense to ask the party they are interested in to come in and make a statement about new evidence, since this person has been up front from the beginning? If this POI suddenly has an anti cooperation stance, just let the evidence speak for itself.

 

[LCoastMom]

i dont support the "unspeakable angle" re: LA, but this is a very weird statement to make. lawyers are trained to think carefully about what they say as they are quite often quoted. why would he say his daughter if he had never uttered that phrase before??? :waitasec:

maybe he has used the "his daughter" phrase before re: caylee... meaning that he has had contact w/ the real bio dad?

probably not but interesting to think....

He also said Casey when he meant Caylee. He had been referring to KC's daughter then switched to Lee's niece. But he stumbled a little. No change of expression, no weird eye movements. He just made a mistake. Watch the tape again, there is no look of deception when he corrects himself.

 

[Tom'sGirl]

It sure is....I'll PM a mod & ask.:blowkiss:

You don't have to send a PM, I'm reading here

New thread here
http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3110058#post3110058