Could Lee Anthony face charges for obstruction of justice?

[Katana]

That's another thing that does not come in without the Anthony's testimony - how they never met or spoke with the nanny.

Neither did any of the other witnesses. KC doesn't have a shred of proof of the nanny, like pictures, receipts of payments, phone call records, or even a job in which she needed a nanny. KC doesn't even have an actual name, phone number, and address that corresponds to the so-called nanny. The nanny kidnapping story is KC's defense so I would think it is on them to have the evidence to prove it. They have nothing to back it up...they won't even have KC's testimony of the nanny. I can't imagine it will be hard to disprove that theory. That's why I think an insanity plea is coming. KC probably left all kinds of forensic evidence at the scene where she left Caylee. Couple that with everything else, it just makes the case against KC stronger.

 

[MissJames]

I am a lawyer, but do not do criminal law. In my family law cases, I could not use police reports as witness statements except to impeach. That means, I would have to question the witness about what they reported to LE and if they varied from that, I move in the report. But, their sworn statements are still out of court statements, so they are hearsay. I'm tellin' ya', I see what they are setting up for and it will make the SA's job ALOT harder.

Ugh,my stomach just flip/flopped. I assumed since they were sworn statements they would come in.
What about KC's statements and lies? If she doesn't testify will they come in?

 

[maur33]

I've said this before and I will say it again: This family is setting up to plead the 5th so they do not have to testify at casey's trial. Nowhere have I seen any LE or state attorney even HINT at possible charges against any of the family members, but firts, the Anthony's attorney hints at possible charges and then, LA gets an attorney and hints at possible charges. I don't buy it! They are wagon circling as best as they can. They know that their testimony will sink her - the things they saw and heard, etc., it already has led to the charges against her - and they do not want to have to testify. If they can claim they are at risk of incriminating themselves - BAM: They don't have to say a word. This would make the case against her a bit harder.

Hmmm, sounds very likely. Now the smell of the car can still come in through the tow yard guy and LE, so that would be a confirmation that the smell existed when george picked up the car and when LE arrived on the scene.

I think the fact that all the evidence from the car will be coming in is more important than having someone confirm that the car smelled of death.

I am not so sure that her family pleading the 5th will work any better for inmate casey, because the jury will be like what the heck is going on here. If her family refuses to testify the jury will be mighty suspicious.

 

[Chilly Willy]

I have no doubts that the Anthonys will testify. They won't be happy about it, but they'll do it. They have no grounds for pleading the fifth, they haven't been accused of anything except by bloggers.

 

[Nosey Parker]

I've said this before and I will say it again: This family is setting up to plead the 5th so they do not have to testify at casey's trial. Nowhere have I seen any LE or state attorney even HINT at possible charges against any of the family members, but firts, the Anthony's attorney hints at possible charges and then, LA gets an attorney and hints at possible charges. I don't buy it! They are wagon circling as best as they can. They know that their testimony will sink her - the things they saw and heard, etc., it already has led to the charges against her - and they do not want to have to testify. If they can claim they are at risk of incriminating themselves - BAM: They don't have to say a word. This would make the case against her a bit harder.

Yikes!! On the other hand, 3 major family members pleading the 5th to every very carefully selected question asked, and leaving KC with no character witnesses at all, could have a very negative effect on the jury. I know they are not supposed to read anything into 5th pleas, but they do, especially in an emotional trial such as this will be. If the SA is prepared for it, and uses other witnesses to fill in the gaps, it could backfire on the A's. (Please!!)

 

[marla]

wonder why she didn't have a better story ready?

Seems she thought the one she cooked up, would fly ..

 

[RR0004]

I have no doubts that the Anthonys will testify. They won't be happy about it, but they'll do it. They have no grounds for pleading the fifth, they haven't been accused of anything except by bloggers.

Did you see TL's (LA's attorney) remark...if you're not a witness you're a suspect. I don't think his impressions are based on blogging. Weird statement considering they ARE State witnesses, no?

 

[Valrico Analyzer]

I've said this before and I will say it again: This family is setting up to plead the 5th so they do not have to testify at casey's trial. Nowhere have I seen any LE or state attorney even HINT at possible charges against any of the family members, but firts, the Anthony's attorney hints at possible charges and then, LA gets an attorney and hints at possible charges. I don't buy it! They are wagon circling as best as they can. They know that their testimony will sink her - the things they saw and heard, etc., it already has led to the charges against her - and they do not want to have to testify. If they can claim they are at risk of incriminating themselves - BAM: They don't have to say a word. This would make the case against her a bit harder.

That is true they COULD plead the fifth. They def could if they are charged before hand. The LE is tying up their evidence now, I think if its strong enough, they will hold off on obstruction...if they need a possible family member to testify with immunity, they'll do that...

That being said, even if the A's plead the 5th on every question, the statements and video on them (ESPECIALLY GA GRAND JURY TESTIMONY) will be read into the record...discrepancy by discrepancy..and the 5th will prevent them from defending the statement.

NOTE: in all statements, LE is careful to say " The door is open..." that is based on custodial interrogation...their rights weren't violated, they were free to leave, no miranda necessary.

the jury will form an opinion of that rather quickly...either they're involved with her in the murder/coverup...or they know for a fact she murdered and covered up...either way, murder/coverup is a given...jurys wont accept a plea of the 5th as fear of persecution (NOTE: PERSECUTION..not prosecution as they will try to spin a 5th by saying its a police witch hunt)...


On a lighter note: can you imagine CA with dtape around her mouth on the stand, dying to talk, raising her hand, by having to say "5th amendment"??? That would be a torture worse than death for her.

 

[Valrico Analyzer]

I have no doubts that the Anthonys will testify. They won't be happy about it, but they'll do it. They have no grounds for pleading the fifth, they haven't been accused of anything except by bloggers.

Absolutely. 5th is usually reserved for those already charged..or advised filing charges are pending...and I think they want to tell their story. But it will be a rude awakening especially for CA when there's pointed questions and she's cut off as opposed to the flowing answers she's used to giving.

 

[whiteangora]

I am a lawyer, but do not do criminal law. In my family law cases, I could not use police reports as witness statements except to impeach. That means, I would have to question the witness about what they reported to LE and if they varied from that, I move in the report. But, their sworn statements are still out of court statements, so they are hearsay. I'm tellin' ya', I see what they are setting up for and it will make the SA's job ALOT harder.

That's not good news then.
I never knew a sworn statement was considered hearsay.
Guess we'll have to wait 'n see what those Anthonys are up to.

 

[RR0004]

I would think that all of their sworn statements could be used.
I'm no lawyer so I really don't know.

I'm sure the 911 calls will be admissable...a wealth of info there.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Absolutely. 5th is usually reserved for those already charged..or advised filing charges are pending...and I think they want to tell their story. But it will be a rude awakening especially for CA when there's pointed questions and she's cut off as opposed to the flowing answers she's used to giving.

LOL. Cindy does like to ramble on, and on, and on, and on........

 

[believe09]

How was it that these fake photos were going around...anyone get caught for that?

FWIW, I don't believe there was anything that sinister going on, like photo manipulation. IIRC they were photos of a dark haired young woman in a cheerleader uniform performing sex acts. The deal is that after hearing GA say there were 1200 photos of Casey doing something "bad", people naturally started looking around the internet to see if she was earning her money in this fashion-the photos then surfaced of someone who looked a little like her and there you go. IMO, the nose of the model was completely different.

 

[CarolineJ]

I would have thought checking in the local bushes would have been one of the first things they should have done. Such a short walk and it seems they never even bothered looking there. If it was one of my cats missing, I'd be looking in every nook and cranny in that area. I believe they all knew, and assisted with the cover up from a very early point in time.

This is a good point. I'm like you - if it was one of our kitties we would have been in those woods every day until we found them. I have been following this case since it was made public in July and I've wavered back and forth about the family's complicity, but when you mentioned your cats I saw the light. Yes, they have assisted with the cover up. I know it now.

 

[believe09]

Do we just have Lee's word that there was a BSD on the laptop? What if he is making that statement up, let's say for one of two reasons; he was setting LE up for the pitch that a virus killed Casey's relevant emails and pictures or he killed Caylee and was trying to frame his sister....'cause what reason would he have to make that story up? (Assuming he made it up.)

I mean after reading a few pages of your comments regarding his computer literacy, perhaps his story to LE about the screen does not hold as much "water" with me as it did...

 

[paisleyprak]

It's way down in LE's interview with Lee.You can tell by the detectives questions they are not buying his story.So the laptop crashed from a virus and erased all of Casey's e-mails prior to July 15th? No,they aren't buying it.He was gone for two hours retrieving that laptop.
Also ,his statement about the cars smell..."The horrible smell that I smelled for the first time"....hinky.Who says that? I could understand something like" I've never smelled such a horrible smell before",but to state "for the first time".....just hinky
I think he was just covering for Casey,but who knows?

Does anyone believe that Casey pushed that car to the Amscot parking lot by herself? I never have. That might have been the first time he smelled that smell.

Maybe the Come to Jesus moment Lee described to LE in his interview was him reminding her that she was basically caught now, and she better figure something out, not that she better just take her Mom to Caylee, because he knew at that time that Caylee was gone.

 

[Valrico Analyzer]

Do we just have Lee's word that there was a BSD on the laptop? What if he is making that statement up, let's say for one of two reasons; he was setting LE up for the pitch that a virus killed Casey's relevant emails and pictures or he killed Caylee and was trying to frame his sister....'cause what reason would he have to make that story up? (Assuming he made it up.)

I mean after reading a few pages of your comments regarding his computer literacy, perhaps his story to LE about the screen does not hold as much "water" with me as it did...

Computer forensics guys at FBI will know that answer. they'll have the exact time the BSOD appeared...and then they'll know who did it..

It's a given that the laptop held something critical. Whether KC did it ( sorry, I dont see it that way, even after the texts from CA...she would have bolted if she knew she was gonna pop in..and the texts would have been recovered between the 2 of them if CA was telling her to do it)
So that leaves LA or AL.
LA is my guess....based on time delay with laptop...

 

[LeLe1953]

Well this is interesting. It reads as if Lee did do it, according to his attorney, but without meaning to do it. ??? What does that mean?

I agree. As far as some of the money being used to help fund Lee's own investigation, wouldn't he need to produce any & all reciepts? Could funding mean paying his bills while he took all this time off work so he could investigate?

Did it ever occur to Lee, being he has no LE experience, he could hurt LE's investigation? What if Caylee had been kidnapped, he could have been putting her life in danger. What was his plan if he found the "kidnappers" & Caylee?

I also didn't understand his attorney saying he had "even given DNA." I thought he refused & it didn't happen until the court's forced him to.

 

[LeLe1953]

Both attorneys now have stated their clients may be charged. They are getting out in front of something they know is coming.

Damage control before the damage is pubic knowledge?

 

[Valrico Analyzer]

Miss James: good catch on the statement by LA "...for the first time"
youre right, that does sound weird..I didn't think about that til you said it.