I hope I don’t get a warning for calling you delusional. But if I do, it will be worth it.
Frankly, the only one in the Anthony family behaving normally, and believably, is Caylee’s grandmother.
I do not think the grandmother had anything to do with the death, nor with the coverup.
And certainly my dogs were known to dig some shit up from time to time.
What evidence for any of this is there outside of the defense’s theory? If there were any, surely that would have been first on the defenses list of things to present - even if they were not allowed to directly implicate George - even though they did attempt to implicate him. (he is not, after all, on trial here)
One of these things is not like the others. icebeamer, do you really see an emotional Casey Anthony?
Susanann, my question in the “accidential drowning” fantasy is “WHY?” George is an ex-cop. He knows - we all know - accidents happen with small children and swimming pools. Wouldn’t his first reaction to his granddaughter’s drowning to be to call 911 and attempt CPR? If it was an accident, why deny his grandchild the dignity of a proper burial? Wrapping her up in garbage bags and throwing her in the woods? I just don’t buy it. The defense is trying to introduce doubt - reasonable or not - in the hopes there will be someone like you on the jury who will decide “I don’t like the D.A. so I’m going to vote not guilty and let this crazy-ass bitch slide for killing her kid”.
Just a fer instance: If George had recently performed some sort of sex act with Caylee he would not have wanted to call 911.
No.
The legal experts on tv have all said that even if the death was accidental, that Casey would still be guilty of a felony and be going to prison.
Since it was really George’s fault, Georges pool, Georges ladder, on George’s watch, then it would be George who would be on trial and be facing prison time. George had every reason to cover this up. He had no idea that this would be a national news story, he probably assumed that Caylee would be 1 among tens of thousands of missing children each year.
Once George found the dead child and realized that she was gone there was no point to call 911, and everything to lose if he was charged with a felony crime.
Since Casey did not do it, that is why the only thing anyone will ever find is circumstantial and conflicting, there will always be loose ends, because she did not do it. If anyone thinks that Casey did it then there will always be missing pieces since she did not do it.
Once you realize it was George!!!,then all the pieces of this case make sense and everything fits together just like a brand new jigsaw puzzle.
NO, the defense can not use this time to prosecute George, it is not their responsiblity, and the judge, and the prosecution, would not let them go after George. George is not on trial, Casey is on trial. The defense is limited with very narrow parameters in what they can bring up against George, this is not a 1950’s tv show.
Susanann - There are approximately 200 child drownings in the US every year. From reviewing the online articles, most people aren’t charged with negligence, unless, as in the case of this mother, they leave the children unattended and are shopping online. And even she was only charged with 2nd degree manslaughter. The courts realize that accidents happen. Unless she was in a drug-induced coma at the time she was supervising the child, she would’ve been okay. And George, as he wasn’t in charge of the girl at the time, should be free of any charges.
Out of curiosity, why are you so determined that she’s innocent?
StG
I’ve lived here for 20 years and never seen one. I won’t say there are none, particularly in the airport area, but I’ve never seen one here and don’t know anyone who has.
The defense isn’t behaving like they’re “limited”. They’ve accused George of participating in a cover-up and they intend to bring in a witness who says she and George had an affair.
They could just as easily have done what you’re doing – accuse George of being responsible for Caylee’s death – but since there’s no evidence of that and not even Casey has suggested it, the defense is not going there. I can’t figure out why you are.
How much more clear could it possibly be?
What more convincing proof of Casey’s innocence is needed?
I am currently raising money to present to Casey after she is exonerated, once this crucial new evidence is offered in court, which will allow her to freely travel these United States, pretending to work at all of the major theme parks (Assistant Marketing Executive at Disneyland, Human Resource Director at Six Flags, Log Flume Technician at Knott’s Berry Farm) so she can finally get a sense of closure and continue doing what she loves…
I came into this trial, as any other, presuming innocence. Presuming innocence is where we should start.
Nothing I have heard has proven her guilty. The government did not prove her guilty. The state could not come up with anything other than circumstantial, and most of that was conflicting. Furthermore, there are too many loose ends, too many unexplained points, too many unanswered questions, too many inconsistencies in Casey’s behavior, too many inconsistencies in the government case. The reason why the state can only come up with conflicting contradictatory points is because the simple fact is that Casey is not guilty, so of course the state will never ever find anything other than circumstantial and the state will never ever be able to explain the case since they are going after the wrong person. The more and more we hear, the less and less it was Casey. The more and more home movies I see shows Casey to be a loving mother, with no motive.
However, the more I hear, the more that everything points to George, the more that everything fits George.
If it was George who found the body,
if it was George who did the cover up,
if it was George who owned the swimming pool,
if it was George who left the ladder up,
if it was George who was negligent,
if it was George who was responsible for the death,
if it was George who decided to do a coverup,
if it was George who did the coverup,
if it was George and not Casey who had the motive,
if it was** George** who knew that he should and how to tape up a body so it wont leak,
if it was George who might have had other things/crimes in his past,
if it was George who had nothing to lose and everything to gain,
if it was George who did inappropriate things with Casey or Caylee,
then it all makes sense. The more and more we hear of George and his past, if it was George who had a mistress, if it was George who wanted to commit suicide, then the more more and it makes sense that George was responsible.
Pretty simple really.
How many wild bear have you seen in Florida in the past 20 years?
How many weasels have you seen in Florida?
How many bobcat have you seen in Florida?
The fact of the matter is that there ARE coyotes in Florida, and also there ARE dogs in Florida.
Just because “you” dont see them does not mean that they are not there.
My thoughts exactly…
I’ve seen three bears. I’ve never seen a bobcat or a weasel, but I’ve also never seen anyone finger them as suspects in a murder trial. I mean, it’s possible that a coyote buried the bone, but it’s not likely.
Really Not All That Bright - Papa Bear, Mama Bear and Baby Bear?
StG
Well, Casey’s “crack” team will get a second chance to save her guilty ass because this trial is going to a definite mistrial. Just watch. Early on in the investigation, Casey was being interrogated by detectives and she hadn’t been given her Miranda warning. They actually did a very effective job at interrogating her (save the Miranda error) and gleaned very useful info. But, like I said, it’s all for naught.
As an aside, to guage the desperation of the defense, just look at their latest strategy: saying that Casey had suffered a lifetime of sexual abuse at the hands of her father and brother. Upon closer examination of their family life and past quotes from Casey herself, this is utterly preposterous.
I see what you did there.