ZFG Civil Case: Casey's Deposition #2

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree that she may be "hiding". I think it is either:

She is in emotional hiding. She knows the world knows she is a liar, even her beloved JB said so, right?

It is all about the money. No one wants her face shown so she can remain mysterious (in her mind) until someone forks up the magic dollar amount for her to remove her glasses.

I really think it is the money.

Agreed. It's probably a combination of immaturity and the money. The report of 'flaring nostrils and puffed lips' can be chalked up to working herself up to a panic attack. I've had them so bad that my eyes swelled shut and I got red welts the size of lemons on the bottom of my feet. Not exactly proud of it, but then I had just gotten the news that my husband had stage 3 (almost 4) lung cancer. Whose to say she could feel her hands that day? :floorlaugh:
 
You know - I've been up to my (dangerous) thinking again - and I usually try to strip things down to the simplest explanation...cause that's often the answer.

We know OCA is not a sophisticated person or a deep thinker. And this "disguise" could simply have been a kneejerk reaction from a "bratchild" emotional level.

Something really "heavy" like - well you people out there have made my life so difficult I have to hide instead of going out and enjoying my life again (insert wah-wahing). So okay - so I have to hide - so here I am hiding! How do you like them apples?

Like I said - someone from an immature "bratchild" level of development. Nine year old stuff.
Possibly nothing more than yet another childish attempt to draw attention to herself.
Remember, the whole story is about Casey Anthony, the centrepiece.
She thinks just like her mother really .. Caylee, ZG et al - they may have a role to play in the 'Casey against the world' show but they're irrelevant.
Attention seeking at its finest.
The question is, why is she allowed to continue to get away with it? Anybody else who turned up looking like that would've been told in no uncertain terms to take it off. Not doing so has probably only fuelled her thinking that she's special, and she would consider those who allow her to flaunt it as fools and unequal.
IMO
 
Possibly nothing more than yet another childish attempt to draw attention to herself.
Remember, the whole story is about Casey Anthony, the centrepiece.
She thinks just like her mother really .. Caylee, ZG et al - they may have a role to play in the 'Casey against the world' show but they're irrelevant.
Attention seeking at its finest.
The question is, why is she allowed to continue to get away with it? Anybody else who turned up looking like that would've been told in no uncertain terms to take it off. Not doing so has probably only fuelled her thinking that she's special, and she would consider those who allow her to flaunt it as fools and unequal.
IMO

It's just so silly because people who are disguised are that way because people don't know what they look like...that's the whole point! Children underage often have their identity protected, and sometimes people's actual faces are protected when they testify, but that is because we don't know what they look like in the first place.
For OCA to put on a disguise in front of a closed depo is just too silly for words...and I have no idea why it is allowed. Anyone who wants to know what she looks like can find her in almost any getup with any hair colour and length by doing a very simple google search. A closed depo isn't going to show her location which is what the court so called "protection" is all about so who knows what this special treatment is about - and I hope this judge has the sense to finally put to an end the circus atmosphere that has been created. Surely we are supposed to respect the law and it's courts more than this!
 
One question I have is who swore her in for her testimony and did she take off the disguise for that person in order to prove she was oca? Could she later claim she never gave this deposition?

The way this person operates it would not surprise me at all.
 
One question I have is who swore her in for her testimony and did she take off the disguise for that person in order to prove she was oca? Could she later claim she never gave this deposition?

The way this person operates it would not surprise me at all.

Good point - for all we know that was Cindy under that black wig, Philly's cap and Dolce G sunglasses - they look so much alike....

Oh Hi OCA! :seeya:
 
One question I have is who swore her in for her testimony and did she take off the disguise for that person in order to prove she was oca? Could she later claim she never gave this deposition?

The way this person operates it would not surprise me at all.

I used to work in a law office and then a corporate law department and at the time, the court reporter acted as the agent for the court and was able to swear in the witnesses. Not sure if that is different for different states. The depo would consist of the court reporter, the attorneys and the witness being deposed. They would take place in the conference rooms of the different law offices at the time. or the corporation. I guess the plaintiff themselves could be there. But judges were not there.

I remember in the FCA case, during the depo of one of the psychological witnesses, one of the DT drs. who examined FCA, the judge was called during the depo when problems arose, so the judge was able to intervene via phone, judges are not at depos.

Seems like Morgan would have been the one to object to the disguise, but, for his "own" reasons, lol, probably let the disguise slide. Morgan was probably more amused than anything. Glad he did let it slide and did not object, hopefully it will become public and we will be able to see it, IMO, MOO.

IMO, MOO, etc.
 
I used to work in a law office and then a corporate law department and at the time, the court reporter acted as the agent for the court and was able to swear in the witnesses. Not sure if that is different for different states. The depo would consist of the court reporter, the attorneys and the witness being deposed. They would take place in the conference rooms of the different law offices at the time. or the corporation. I guess the plaintiff themselves could be there. But judges were not there.

I remember in the FCA case, during the depo of one of the psychological witnesses, one of the DT drs. who examined FCA, the judge was called during the depo when problems arose, so the judge was able to intervene via phone, judges are not at depos.

Seems like Morgan would have been the one to object to the disguise, but, for his "own" reasons, lol, probably let the disguise slide. Morgan was probably more amused than anything. Glad he did let it slide and did not object, hopefully it will become public and we will be able to see it, IMO, MOO.

IMO, MOO, etc.

After CA, KC could only be considered "comic relief". jmo lol
 
Good point - for all we know that was Cindy under that black wig, Philly's cap and Dolce G sunglasses - they look so much alike....

Oh Hi OCA! :seeya:

Oh no, oh no. It could not have possibly been CA. She would never let her attorney speak, E_V_E_R. And she would have never plead the 5th....it would have been "What's the relevance of that question....it's not relevant...how can it be relevant?" ....wink, wink. lol
 
After CA, KC could only be considered "comic relief". jmo lol

You got that right! Whew, the Anthony Ladies' ZFG depositions could become classics, CA's for her eye-popping-rabid-ness, and FCA for her comedic disguise. :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:
 
Oh no, oh no. It could not have possibly been CA. She would never let her attorney speak, E_V_E_R. And she would have never plead the 5th....it would have been "What's the relevance of that question....it's not relevant...how can it be relevant?" ....wink, wink. lol
Although she'd never normally expect him speak on her behalf - because, after all, how could he possibly be smarter than her - it's hard to forget that longing look of CA's to her attorney as if to say 'are you going to let them get away with treating ME like this?'.
Not to mention the smug condascention she displayed at the end when she thought she'd won the game.
Actually, I might save a copy of that video just for those times I need to get fired up about something.
 
Although she'd never normally expect him speak on her behalf - because, after all, how could he possibly be smarter than her - it's hard to forget that longing look of CA's to her attorney as if to say 'are you going to let them get away with treating ME like this?'.
Not to mention the smug condascention she displayed at the end when she thought she'd won the game.
Actually, I might save a copy of that video just for those times I need to get fired up about something.

No NO NOOOOOO - where is my Cross to hold up in front of you - I'm begging you - NO!!!
 
Navy said-

Seems like Morgan would have been the one to object to the disguise, but, for his "own" reasons, lol, probably let the disguise slide. Morgan was probably more amused than anything.

Now, if the positions were reversed, OCA's attys would be screaming "emergency order, petition, treatment!!!" instead of laughing.

OCA's DT would be easier to take if any one of them were ever to stumble over the notion of humility.
 
I used to work in a law office and then a corporate law department and at the time, the court reporter acted as the agent for the court and was able to swear in the witnesses. Not sure if that is different for different states. The depo would consist of the court reporter, the attorneys and the witness being deposed. They would take place in the conference rooms of the different law offices at the time. or the corporation. I guess the plaintiff themselves could be there. But judges were not there.

I remember in the FCA case, during the depo of one of the psychological witnesses, one of the DT drs. who examined FCA, the judge was called during the depo when problems arose, so the judge was able to intervene via phone, judges are not at depos.

Seems like Morgan would have been the one to object to the disguise, but, for his "own" reasons, lol, probably let the disguise slide. Morgan was probably more amused than anything. Glad he did let it slide and did not object, hopefully it will become public and we will be able to see it, IMO, MOO.

IMO, MOO, etc.

Thank you for the information. Would the witness be required to provide positive identification? I am comparing this to having something notarized. ID is required before the notary will sign off. My dh and I had to have some forms notarized. I worked through band boosters with a woman that was a notary. She agreed to do this for us, but because she did not know dh, she had to see his id, even though she and I were on the board together and spent many hours weekly working for the high school band.
 
Oh no, oh no. It could not have possibly been CA. She would never let her attorney speak, E_V_E_R. And she would have never plead the 5th....it would have been "What's the relevance of that question....it's not relevant...how can it be relevant?" ....wink, wink. lol


........ :whoosh: ....er...think the purpose of my post was completely....whoosh.....:floorlaugh:
 
One question I have is who swore her in for her testimony and did she take off the disguise for that person in order to prove she was oca? Could she later claim she never gave this deposition?

The way this person operates it would not surprise me at all.

In California the Court Reporter is also a Notary Public who is responsible for positively identifying the deponent, putting them under oath, and then attaching an affidavit to the deposition to that affect. The Notary keeps in her journal the manner used to positively identify the deponent (e.g., valid ID).........I imagine Florida has a similar method???
 
In California the Court Reporter is also a Notary Public who is responsible for positively identifying the deponent, putting them under oath, and then attaching an affidavit to the deposition to that affect. The Notary keeps in her journal the manner used to positively identify the deponent (e.g., valid ID).........I imagine Florida has a similar method???

At this time Florida does not REQUIRE the use of a journal BUT.....it is highly advised AND may be required before long.
 
I fail to understand why anyone would think that Casey would have someone else pretend to be her for the deposition or would think that Morgan is too stupid to recognize her. What benefit would there be to Casey having another person plead the fifth in her place and possibly be brought up on charges of fraud? Some of the theories in this case get really outrageous, IMO.
 
I fail to understand why anyone would think that Casey would have someone else pretend to be her for the deposition or would think that Morgan is too stupid to recognize her. What benefit would there be to Casey having another person plead the fifth in her place and possibly be brought up on charges of fraud? Some of the theories in this case get really outrageous, IMO.

Drama, attention, drama, attention keep going into infinity. It was her. Even Attorney Greene is smart enough to know she could go back to jail for not showing up for a subpoena. jmo
 
Shouldn't we be hearing something from the judge tomorrow or does she work over the weekend to take it up to the ten days?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
101
Guests online
1,445
Total visitors
1,546

Forum statistics

Threads
589,178
Messages
17,915,157
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top