274 responses to “Exculpatory Evidence Suppressed by Law Enforcement During Casey Anthony Murder Trial”

1. I get it that the state screwed up the computer searches.. Or their “experts” made software that was defective. We still dont know for sure that there were or werent the search numbers reported. Is there any other evidense that was supressed or is the computer searchs your big Ah-Ha???

2. I noticed the entry by Bradley a few days ago and wondered if it would have caused a reversible error if she was convicted. I guess the answer is yes. But I think it was just stupidity of behalf of OCSO and the prosecutors really didn’t know. Looks like she was destined to get off. Hmm… maybe she really didn’t kill her child after all. She should still bring a lawsuit, though.

3. I really hope Casey Anthony brings the wrath of hell in the form of a law suit upon the tyrannical and quasi-totalitarian Orange County Sheriff’s office for this travesty of justice. Trust me, no one wants a government agency with an open check book that thinks it can do what ever it wants, to whom ever it wants and get away with it.

   I for one and GLAD Casey was acquitted. If nothing else but to say, “In your face!” to all of the witch burners from the inquisition out there that don’t understand how our justice system works.

   • Love your comment.

   • I, too, love your comment!! One other thing…..I find it strikingly odd that, not only did Ashton retire immediately after the trial, but during the course of this case, Yuri Melich moved to internal affairs. Guess if there’s any investigation into wrong-doing by LE, it’ll be YM doing it, eh? Bet they find it was just a mistake and someone either didn’t recall or just “misspoke”.

4. When LDB did the Colombo with the 84 times I knew it was BAD. I just wonder if the jury knew it. I know Casey is guilty, but of what I am not sure. At least manslaughter, for sure. Chloroform should have been left out of the states case IMO of course. Yes I am Superbowl armchair quarterback. However glaring errors like that should be invisible to a layman like me.

   • Vass and his machine should have been kept out too.

5. tisk tisk

   So glad it was a NOT GUILTY..

6. Makes the mind wander. If they knew about this and didn’t come clean, what else? I am shocked.

7. Thank you Mr. Hornsby for taking my cold call and reviewing this with me and for allowing me to share your opinion.

   Also, thank you for being such a stand-up guy and linking to me. I appreciate you very much.

   At this point, not trying to get all esoteric or metaphysical, we can pretty much say the stars were aligned that Casey would walk – whether she was convicted or not.

8. And maybe someone can sue the convicted felon for violating Caylee’s rights? Done reading both you and the hinky meter.

   • Why would that be? Because one piece of evidence did not pan out the way you expected?

     Let me be perfectly clear that despite the obvious and acknowledged error with both CacheBack and NetAnalysis, I am convinced that the computer evidence supports Ms. Anthony’s guilt. As does the cell phone evidence. As do the various pieces of trunk evidence. And on and on and on.

     If you so easily disregard bogus evidence and decide that you will no longer keep an open mind and closely examine ALL the evidence, then you are no better than the 12 lazy jurors who sat in non-judgement of Ms. Anthony.

     • Exactly, JWG!

       And Gillian, it’s okay. You don’t have to come back to THM. We’re pretty much okay with everyone making their own decisions.

       • Apparantly not.

     • After reading all of the doc dumps and watching the trial, I am free to think what ever I like, just as you are quite free to think that I am “no better than the 12 lazy jurors who sat in non-judgement of Ms. Anthony.”

9. I thought that when Stiger (or whatever his name with the moustache) testified about this, it didn’t pass the stink test then. It did make sense that she would be on Facebook 84 times. I saw other questionable testimony and I didn’t watch the whole trial. Cindy sure wasn’t the only one who lied and then there were those who just kind of navigated the thin line between the truth and an outright lie, which if you have spent any time in a courtroom you see cops do alll the time along with outright lying.

   I personally think Casey did it but she was aquitted and that is that. Had they presented a simpler pared down prosecution case they would have had a different jury and maybe a different result or maybe not. There sure was not anything to directly say Casey did it but I have not come up with a real plausible alternative.

   The bigger thing some of you people might want to think of (if you are so sure she got away with murder) is that it is also that easy or actually easier in many cases for an innocent person to be convicted. It has happened, it continues to happen, it’s no secret and people have been released after losing half their lives in those hell holes that are the jails and prisons (they aren’t what Nancy Grace would have you believe). Maybe you should be more concerned about doing something about that, could be you or your loved ones that get caught up like that next. OR hey what about doing something to hep the living children. Lot’s of them being abused or going hungry because the parents just can’t make ends meet right now. Even lots with no place to live.
   You can’t do anything for that poor dead little girl. It doesn’t help anyone but you and the news organizations to trespass and litter on that private property where she was unfortunately found. But actually that is what many of you are doing, those toys, flowers, candy and whatever else are just garbage now that it’s been left out there and someone has to pickup the garbage at some point. The person who owns the property will likely end up stuck with that bill.

   Good job again there Mr. Hornsby and the links that you have to those other lawyer’s postings are very interessting reading. Will there be a DVD of the Hornsby/Deen pontification and comdey stylings? I’d buy a copy, you two were informative and entertaining the times I managed to catch it.

10. Never believed she used chloroform. There should be criminal charges if it can be determined that the evidence was *intentionally* misrepresented. Otherwise, it’s no sweat off the dept.’s back, the taxpayers will be footing the bill. She’s either guilty or not, but no one should be railroaded.

    • I wanted to add, however, that this revelation does not convince me of *innocence*.

11. To add…

    I see no evidence that there was an intent to exclude exculpatory evidence. The state appeared to be unaware of the error, because if you recall, several days after Mr. Bradley testified, Cindy laid claim to the chloroform searches. During cross, Linda Drane-Burdick asked Cindy if she visited the site 84 times. Now, Ms. Drane-Burdick was either clueless about the error even several days later or so void of ethics she was willing to risk her license to practice. I don’t see why it would be the latter.

    Instead, I think the root cause was either an incurious or an over-worked Sgt. who was not motivated by the difference. During his testimony for the defense, he came across as almost “yeah, duh…there was a difference.”

    Perhaps there is a reason why he was not at the OCSO press conference but Ms. Osborne (Cawn) was … ?

    • JWG, not sure that we can so easily discount ignorance of the problem to LDB. There was only one female State Attorney on the prosecution side and Mr. Bradley’s statement is pretty clear he talked to a female:

      “JUN 16-19, 2011 – I advised the State Attorney of the problem(s) and liased with her and the OCSD officer.”

      Mind you, that is nearly two weeks before the end of the trial. This should have been turned over to the defense, and it she should have NEVER asked that question of Cindy if she knew it was based on a false premise.

      Such an action is no better than Baez asking insinuating questions of Lee or George he knew they would deny.

      • By then, Cindy had already been crossed…

        I do not profess to know what the legal procedure is. At that point in time, it would have been known that the two reports were in conflict, but perhaps it was not know how they erred. At work, I would have postponed the meeting until I got the error fixed, but I just don’t know how it works in court. Actually, I may not have been able to postpone the meeting if it had something to do with investor relations and earnings reporting. I would then be forced to later file an amended statement. I guess that is like an appeal?

        • Cindy testified about being the one who conducted the Chloroform searches on June 23, 2011; this is also when LDB made the comment, well you didn’t search for it 84 times did you.

          And based on Mr. Bradley’s time line, this is at least 5 days after he last communicated with the State Attorney regarding the problem.

          If this were true, her failure to not only disclose it to the defense, but to have the audacity to ask Cindy Anthony if she searched 84 times is just as unethical as anything Baez did.

          This is because prosecutors (and especially prosecutors seeking the death penalty) are held to a standard much higher than any defense attorney. Their job is to seek justice, not obtain convictions.

          • I had my dates wrong, so point taken.

            HORNSBY’S NOTE: I also had my original date of July 1 wrong; Cindy testified to above comments on June 23. But still at least five days after notifying LDB.

          • Richard, in reading the NY Times article, it is said that the software developer contacted LDB and the OCSO the weekend of June 25th. If the exchange between Sindy and Linda was indeed the 23rd, obviously, she hadn’t yet been contacted about the discrepancy.

    • Well JWG, oh hero of mine lo these last three years – then I sure am glad Cindy Anthony took the credit for those searches at Baez insistence even if it meant perjuring herself! LOL.

      And to all those Casey Anthony supporters out there – she got a NG verdict – not dipped in the blessed river and walked away as pure as a new born babe!

12. So I guess this is why the state did not pursue perjury charges against Cindy Anthony.

13. According to this online article in today’s NY Times, Mr. Bradley states that the flawed search history was directly reported to Linda Drane Burdick and Sgt. Stenger in late June: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/us/19casey.html

    According to the article: “Mr. Bradley said he immediately alerted a prosecutor, Linda Drane Burdick, and Sgt. Kevin Stenger of the Sheriff’s Office in late June through e-mail and by telephone to tell them of his new findings. Mr. Bradley said he conducted a second analysis after discovering discrepancies that were never brought to his attention by prosecutors or the police.”

    This is a glaring Brady violation, and all the sugar-coating in the world by JWG and others will not make it appear as anything less than a calculated omission in a capital case, and one that I hope will result in a civil suit to hold Drane-Burdick and the SAO, as well as OCSO, responsible.

    It is not a huge leap to wonder what else in the prosecution’s case was omitted, fabricated or exaggerated. This instance may be just the beginning…

14. Very informative post, I never understood the 84 times either when looking at the URLs and the search times/dates in that short time period, but I’m no computer expert.
    If it is proven to have been intentionally withheld, then OSCO and the State Attorney’s office should be held accountable. Just as Baez should be held accountable, if it is proven, that he intentially/repeatedly violated judge’s order concerning expert witnesses/reports.
    Let’s not forget the person with whom this all began, Casey Anthony. If her child died accidently, she did not report it for 3 years until her trial. She had many opportunities to come clean but instead carried out a 3 yr charade with the help of her lawyer. Casey Anthony doned a Missing Caylee T-shirt when out on bond traveling back and forth to Baez’s office. Then in Oct. 08, stood with Baez (wearing a Missing Caylee pin)as he says Caylee’s a missing child, they believed her to be alive, and when everyone hears the story they will be amazed(he got that right!).
    Now, Baez speaking out of both sides of his mouth, telling the public everyone needs to accept the jury’s verdict….but oh by the way we’re going to appeal the lying convictions.
    So apparently we can’t trust anyone. Justice is not the search for the truth. Since it all seems to be a strategic game, why even bother it’s basically hit or miss. Some innocent will be convicted and some guilty will be aquitted. Might as well go back to vigilante justice, then we don’t have to worry about having trials, prosecutors, defense lawyers,jurys, jails, prisons, forensic labs, or police officers. The Anthony’s could have handled Casey themselves as they saw fit, no one would have ever known about Caylee. No legal system would lead to chaos. but this case was like a huge circus anyway, at least vigilante justice will be alot cheaper–heck I think I just found a way for the government to balance the budget.

15. prosecution was telling a STORY ONLY,spinning yarn if you will and they told that story throughout and it’s a damn shame so many believed it and convicted Casey before trial!

    Everyone lies…..Casey,family,prosecution,defense

    The greatest story ever told “THE CASE AGAINST CASEY”….

16. This is a great article as well as the article posted on Hinky’s site and after further consideration I dont know if there will ever be “closure”. It is of my opinion that regardless of the computar forensics and whether there was 1 hit or 84 hits nothing disproved or gave reason too the high levels of chloroform found in the trunk. Nothing will take away the rotting flesh of KC’s daughter staining the trunk liner. Nothing will explain away the 3 strips of duct tape found around the skull of a discarded child…Am i bitter…a little bit.

    The prosecution hit on all the main components of this crime and did not waiver or try to include the proverbial “Big Foot”–wa-wa-i think m-m-my daddy did this…wa-wa-yeah and so did my bra-bra-brother-GGRRR…ow-up!! I dont mourn like others cause of wa-wa-how i was brought up to lie!! Holy Hell is the Pill bitter!!

    Frikin WHA!! my wrist is almost stiging cause justice is just giving me a little tickle from the spanking…I understand the justice system. No, i dont have a degree but the system was set-up so that it could be easily understood. A little common sense is all it takes-

    There is a body. A child. Last seen with her mother. Mother copes by stealing, partying, fornicating (not that this should be viewed as dastardly but hey the shoe fits), drinking TELLING MA-MA & DA-DA that Caylee is having the “time of her life”. Car is found. KC says shes in another city but mom and dad have the GOD DAMN CAR!! Caylee has been missing for 31 days. I work here, i work there and i screw him, i screw her, i SCREW YOU ALL—it was a beat down orchestrated by ZFG!!-am i bitter? yeah, a little bit!!

    There was an injustice done to Caylee. She is not memorialized, she’s been scrutinized perhaps victimized if i could be so bold. There is no justice cause i could give a GOD DAMN about the justice for KC as if that means anything?? hmm am i bitter, yeah, a little bit!!

    For those who stand behind KC you many want to remove the “beer goggles” cause beauty is only skin deep and in this case she’s a monster who got away with MURDERING HER OWN FLESH and BLOOD!!

    • For those that should not ever forget our constitution…

      She’s not guilty and nothing showed she murdered anyone.

      The state spun a STORY and it was up to 12 people to decide weather or not the story held up to the charges and it did not!!

    • With all due respect….did you actually WATCH the trial or read any of the multitudinous pages of reports surrounding the “stain” in the trunk or the “chloroform” or the duct tape??? If you had watched or read, you would understand WHY the case was not proven. There was no DNA evidence in that stain….NOTHING that said it was without a doubt a decomp stain. Did you see the pics of the duct tape on the skull (which was really beside the skull stuck to the hair mat with one end lying over the mandibular area)? Have you ever taken a 7th grade science class? Because if you have, then you KNOW that the chloroform evidence was pure imagination and that there is NO WAY that the chloroform level was as high as Vass claimed it was 30+ days AFTER this alleged body had been removed from the car.

      The problem is….you bought the story of the prosecution HOOK LINE AND SINKER because you wanted to. It was not proven. If you remove the theories and stories of the prosecution….what you’re left with is the 31 days. That sure made Casey look bad, but it did NOT provide evidence of a murder. So what do we know? Caylee is deceased and someone tossed her body into a swamp. Do I like that? No!! It disgusts me. But fortunately for all of us, our legal system and laws don’t say you can find someone guilty because they disgust you.

      The prosecution did not prove their case, despite their best efforts to “enhance” and fabricate the evidence. Casey was found not guilty by a jury of her peers who DID, in fact, understand the directions that the judge gave and who were PERFECTLY aware of what “beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt” means.

      • Regardless of what story, theory or evidence one chooses to believe or disbelieve everyone knows the verdict was not guilty on the felony charges.

        I am still waiting for a logical explanation why a mother would lie for months on the condition and whereabouts of her daughter. And sit in jail for 3 years facing a murder charge when she knew it was an accident.

        • Ah-Ha,
          I love the way you people ask for an explanation, you always use the word “reasonable” to describe the type of explanation you’re willing to accept.
          So I ask you, why would anyone bother to explain anything to you? What’s reasonable to one person may not be reasonable to another.
          I think it’s reasonable that it’s PTSD. That’s post traumatic stress disorder, a form of denial.
          Another question of yours that I wouldn’t waste my time explaining “why would a person sit in jail for 3 years knowing it was an accident?” LOL… I think you should ask Mr Hornsby that one. But I’ll try and maybe he can give us all the right legal explanation.
          It’s my understanding that once a person is charged with a crime, it’s not up to them to go out and prove the prosecutor who put them there is wrong. At that point, it’s up to a jury or a judge to dismiss your case.
          I can’t tell you how many times someone has asked me that very question.
          I’d like to know the answer too but I’m sure it’s not up to the suspect to prove their innocence. It’s up to the prosecution to prove their guilt.
          Remember, “Innocent until proven guilty”

      • Funny you should ask what i based my opinion on. Not only did i read i also watched. As to your time in 7th grade perhaps you should note that DNA degrades over time as it was explained. The duct tape WAS found on the skull and one piece found away from the skull. 3 strips of tape and it held the mandable in place. The entire skull was found in one piece not in two. As an outside person one must realize that murder trials do not play out as nicely as it does on CSI.

        as to the assertion the chloroform levels were exagerated i find it highly unlikely when the defense expert also noted chloroform levels even without the carpet in the trunk!

        I did not “buy” the prosecutions theory i made my own determination based on what i read and what i watched. The fact of the matter is still as i outlined in my opinion above.

        KC was the last person seen with her daughter. KC admits to a “foul smell” in her car and blames her father for possibly hitting a squirrel. For 31 day’s KC is seen doing everything which included partying and stealing. Does that mean she murdered someone, no; but what it does give rise to her “antic” as questionable. But moving that aside you still have the lies that seem to be never-ending. Common sense would lead you to tell the truth if it were an accident and i dont believe KC was “ugly coping”; i believe she was un-burdened by the death of her daughter which is why she behaved the way she did.

        I will concede that the constitutional rights of a fair and impartial trial did play out but to come away with just we the people find her not-guilty of murder in the first degree but we find her guilty of lying to investigators is proposterous. And to further insinuate that the prosecution “enhanced” evidence may i ask what were you watching? Nothing the prosecution laid out was embelished or “enhanced”. The prosecution tried the case based on the statements when mom called to say it smells like theres a dead body in my daughter car…i dropped her off…there was a beat down…timer55…why make up the elaborate lies if it was an accident…?????

        She killed her daughter. There was a lot of evidence that should have been entered but was instead held back, perhaps you should read what was compiled? Granted it has no relevance now as the trial is over and i think the move by prosecutors not to bring it in was a good move as it would add a lot of confusion…maybe, but there is no explanation as to why a 2 1/2 year old would wrap herself in plastic bags-two of them then put herself in a laundry bag then grab her blanket and walk herself to the end of the block and die in a swamp. Every theory, in my opinion, that it was an accident went out the window the 3 years it took to bring this to trial. KC had every opportunity to say this was an accident and every opportunity to gain the sympathy of the public but she came up with lie after lie to cover up the murder of her daughter.

        She is guilty and i hope if anything karma catches up to her.

        • I hope “karma” catches up to a whole lot of people.

          • Omar, I find it very telling that after that thorough analysis of the facts of this case, you only response is “I hope karma catches up with a whole lot of people”.

      • Omar,

        This is what I understood from Dr. Vass “shockingly high” statement. He was referring chloroform results that he had normally seen in environmental samples. Parts per million vs parts per billion vs parts per trillion. If an expected result would be in the parts per billion range and instead showed up as parts per million, then that would be “shockingly high” to someone who is dealing with trace compounds/elements. It would be a ver small about to those of us that live in the liter,gallon measuring world.

        One part per million (ppm) denotes one part per 1,000,000 parts, one part in 106, and a value of 1 × 10?6. This is equivalent to one drop of water diluted into 50 liters (roughly the fuel tank capacity of a compact car).
        One part per billion (ppb) denotes one part per 1,000,000,000 parts, one part in 109, and a value of 1 × 10?9. This is equivalent to one drop of water diluted into 250 chemical drums.
        One part per trillion (ppt) denotes one part per 1,000,000,000,000 parts, one part in 1012, and a value of 1 × 10?12. This is equivalent to one drop of water diluted into 20 Olympic-size swimming pools.

        Current federal regulations allow up to 100 parts per billion of chloroform in drinking water. That standard is currently used for soft drinks.

        Chloroform evaporates(vaporizes) quickly when exposed to air. Chloroform lasts for a long time in both the air and in the ground water. Most chloroform in the air eventually breaks down, but this process is slow.

        Chloroform in items like water, cleaning products, soda are normally in ppb, even if they are combined should still be in ppb range. I don’t know how much it is in decomposing bodies,maybe it’s much higher in children, not that we would know since most people don’t donate their child’s body to science.

        The Epa uses environmental mass spectometry to analyse organic compounds in water and air, they even check for chloroform.

        I’m not saying I know why the levels where high, just saying that I understand the “shockingly high” statement by Dr. Vass.

17. Looks like a correction is in order regarding when the state knew.

    Mr. Bradley has updated the timeline on his website. The triggering event was the direct examination of Sgt. Stenger by the defense, where he was shown the NetAnalysis report. This happened the same day Cindy tried to take the blame for the chloroform searches. So when Linda Drane-Burdick asked Cindy if she searched 84 times, she was not yet aware that there was a problem with that number.

    • Thank you, the reporter I work with often called and verified that.

      • Mr. Hornsby,

        I think that it would be appropriate for you to include this timeline correction, as posted by JWG and verified by your reporter friend, somewhere within your blog, in addition to leaving it buried within the comments section.

        IMO, a good spot for it would be above or below this paragraph:

        “It appears the Orange County Sheriff’s Office intentionally suppressed exculpatory evidence that directly contradicted the State Attorney’s theory of premeditated murder in their attempt to have Casey convicted of First Degree Murder.”

18. I signed up and commented a few times on the blogs mentioned (websleuths, scared monkeys/blinkoncrime). A few times I disagreed with the prevailing “thought-comment-stream”, stated my opinions objectively e.g., lets just take one issue, the mysterious identity of Caylee Anthony’s Dad.

    Blink has stated she has 100% irrefutable evidence as to who Caylee’s Dad is and roundly insulted the MA grandmother seeking a DNA test, and who may pursue a wrongful death suit. I found it odd that Blink (unless she herself impregnated Casey) would have mysterious inside law enforcement evidence as to the real identity of Caylee’s dad.

    Many of my comments were not published, the ideas were used as hers/theirs. I ran into a lot of paranoia, and I began to question who this Blink person was, what they were truly up to. That led me to your site, and it begins to fall into place. There’s more.

    I know there a missing/abused children epidemic in this country. Geck it’s intl and we all know that. IMO Blink does the epidemic more harm than good. Why is that? On each and every case, she whips up a dust cloud of data – muddying the waters – until the picture becomes so “noisy” it hides what people should really be looking into. I think that is exactly what happened in the Anthony case, with all the TV media as well. Had this case been allowed to play out without the media/internet noise stresses – we’d have the perp(s) on Florida death row by now. Curiously, everytime someone mentions the epidemic of child trafficking and how lucrative that illicit business is, on Blink, and how that is controlled by seriously organized criminal elements, she deletes the commentary, the commentator, everything…. given I have some exposure to that, e.g., here in Sacto there is finally something real being done (this year to be exact) and it was only started when folks stopped sticking their heads in the dust over this and acknowledged that “child trafficking” was an epidemic. While Blink may acknowledge the street level SO’s, don’t ever ever claim on her board it goes higher than that. In her world, the dirt is where she says it is.

    Makes a person who is male, without cats, and with a lot of personal knowledge about her own “child trafficking” and “terrorism financing” neck of the woods, wonder out loud about her Jersey connections herself.

    Thanks for reading.

    • I agree with one part of your comment. I don’t read Blink/Scared Monkeys so I can’t offer anything useful on that. I do strongly believe that if ABC had NOT paid $200,000 for the videos/pictures to the Defense Team and if CBS 48 hrs had not done another big money deal with the defense team for the 2 part special, that the majority of the multitude of atty’s who were at one time or another on Casey’s defense team would not have happened and the over blown media circus also would not have developed.

      • Agreed

      • Hi Nancy, What led me back to the Shannon Stoy sites (Blink is listed on business sites such as Manta as Shannon Stoy in Pennington, NJ) were a few of the main stream TV media coverages of the Anthony case, e.g., in August 2008, that specifically and repeatedly mentioned the Internet bloggers and referred specifically in one episode to her site. I took it then and now they are linked, since they appeared during that critical investigative time until the child’s body was found – to be feeding off each other. During one phase of the trial, they were parrotting each other so much I thought Nancy Grace was Blink in Internet disguise!

19. is there going to be enough eggs to cover everyone’s face?

20. PS People murder, and often try to make it look like an accident. No one tries to make an accidental death look like a murder. The father was an ex deputy sherrif and the mother a nurse. Neither need to look up chloroform unless double checking something specific.

21. Lawson Lamar
    State Attorney
    Ninth Judicial Circuit of Florida

    415 North Orange Avenue
    Orlando, Florida 32801
    (407) 836-2400

    P R E S S R E L E A S E

    CONTACT:
    Danielle Tavernier
    (407) 836-2361

    July 19, 2011

    Below is the State’s response to comments made by Mr. John Bradley, designer of the software
    CacheBack, in today’s New York Times article.

    Two software programs were used for conducting computer analysis of searches completed
    during the Anthony trial. The results produced by CacheBack returned results of 84 visits. The
    second program, Net Analysis, returned results of 1 visit.

    After the results were mentioned in court on June 23rd, Mr. Bradley contacted the State the same
    day. He consulted as to a potential rebuttal to the defense regarding the error in his program and
    recommended using Net Analysis findings. All findings had previously been supplied to the
    defense in discovery.

    On June 27th the discrepancy was discussed with Mr. Baez and both he & the prosecution agreed
    to use the Net Analysis return of 1 site visit count as the most accurate information available at
    the time. If additional information became available, the State agreed to disclose. Mr. Baez
    brought the discrepancy forward in court testimony and again at closing with his court exhibit.

    During jury deliberations Mr. Bradley admitted to sending additional report information to the
    wrong email address but was able to deliver information to prosecutors on the evening of July
    4th. On July 5th prosecutors prepared a Notice of Supplemental Discovery for defense but it was
    never provided because the jury had reached their verdict.

    Mr. Bradley never told prosecutors that the searches or the dates and times of the searches were
    inaccurate. The only inaccuracies discussed were the visit counts discrepancy and that each
    software program (CacheBack & Net Analysis) revealed a different number of total records.
    Again, all of this information was disclosed to the defense in a timely manner.

    We are dismayed at the suggestion made by the defense that prosecutors would withhold
    exculpatory material. Court records show that the defense was completely aware of the issues,
    utilizing these facts at trial.

    • …and there you have it.

      Mason’s comments feigning surprise and condemnation are exactly in keeping with his sliminess.

22. I find it very disturbing that the computer forensics group at OCSO “ignored” the discrepancy and failed to follow up to validate the data and resolve the problem “long ago” when they first discovered this. At this point I am left with having the opinion that blatant ineptitude & malfeasance in Stenger’s group is the only culpable entity.

    I know that inevitably mistakes do happen in every trial but this seems to me to be of a more serious nature than a simple mistake. I wonder if this information was shared with the lead detectives “long ago” by Stenger? I would assume not since he also neglected to contact the SA’s or the two software developers or attempt to rectify the discrepancy in the data. Very disappointing.

23. Gee, way to be sore winners by sheer dumb luck. Look, she didn’t die, just her baby did, so rejoice already.

    I read the NetAnalysis blog and the CacheBack explanation by Mr Bradley last week and as a result it did weaken the power of the chloroform searches but it did not knock the existence and deletion of the search entirely off the table as it’s mere existence is still interesting and contributing evidence as a part of the whole.

    It doesn’t change the essential problems of what Casey did and didn’t do with her baby.

    Answer these questions:

    If the defendant had been a man, do you think the jury would have found him not guilty of anything? If the answer is no, then you agree that Casey did k!11 her child in a way that she destroyed the evidence of. The legal standard does not require knowing or determining the cause of death.

    Under what circumstances is it ok for a mother to release the hand of her BABY and not put the hand of her baby into the hand of a real, actual and trustworthy caretaker?

24. *”its mere” *headdesk*

25. Ladies and Gentlemen of future juries, please remember, defense attorneys have a vested interest in suggesting to you that ANY doubt is reasonable. They have NO vested interest in the actual guilt or innocence of their client. Otherwise, they’d be constantly wanting for clients.

26. Richard, perhaps you should quote a newer blog entry at the Hinky Meter, and quit trying to get attention on yourself.

    Caylee Anthony case: SAO responds to allegations

    http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2011/07/19/caylee-anthony-case-sao-responds-to-allegations/#more-7524

    I wasn’t impressed with you in the beginning, but came to appreciate your intelligence and knowledge as time went on. Then came all the media blitz with you and Jeff Dean. Your head has swelled too large for your body. Maybe your mother never told you that you get more bees with honey than vinegar. Shame on you for jumping all over the SAO and specifically Linda Drane-Burdick, who is 100 times the attorney you will ever be. I believe an apology to LDB is warranted.

    BTW: You use JBMission? Oh Lord, save me now.

    • Now wait a cotton picking minute here….

      When Richard says something pro prosecution you people fawn on him.
      Look up the word hypocritical,because you and the other nuts are all there!

      You want a lawyer getting a big head from this case look up Morgan or his son on twitter or That other itty bitty tiny guy with the dark hair.

      Not Guilty…Get over it!!

      • Oh, you must mean the other lawyers who don’t backpedal when the verdict expected changes, like NeJame, and Morgan…I see. Where are you from, JBMission? LOL!

        • No sorry

          I am a independent thinker,not from jbmission and Richard didn’t back peddle…He’s a defense lawyer not a civil lawyer like Morgan.

      • HECKLER STICKING UP FOR RICHARD.HE GOT IT WRONG.ARE YOU FUCKING HIM

        • Yeah that’s it…My word you are “BRILLIANT”!!!
          Well as brilliant as a baby pulling shit out of his diaper that is!

          In the words of wign…………GET BENT!!!

      • How can Morgan get a big head he has 11 offices ? All these cow town attorneys from Orlando barely can afford Paralegals . But since this case everyone has juiced up there websites and now they are super lawyers . You can look up any attorney in Orlando on the clerk and there case load and results and you will not be Impressed plea after plea..

    • The best trial attorney in Florida did a small blog during trial on the outcome and were the state fumbled before the outcome .Roy Black is his name he represents high end clients Did the Kennedy rape case and etc..you want the real info on things that mattered look up his website. It’s a simple blog not to much bla bla in it more to the point. ..Only has one or two blogs the guy has a lot of clients so he doesn’t respond

    • LDB is owed no apology, the fact she relied on such questionable evidence and refused to correct the matter speaks for itself. And your opinion that anyone is 100 times the attorney as me is based on…, well, it is based on nothing.

      • Agree big time I thought both State attorneys were average at best. I would never pay for there service ..And if she was 100 times better than Rich she would own a practice or I guess she likes not making enough money to cover her student loans lol..anyone stuck in the prosecutors office for life sucks and no they are not doing it for public service they plant and corrupt evidence on the Reg.

      • BINGO!

        Even if she didn’t know the question she was asking Cindy Anthony was based upon a false premise, when she did find out she should have withdrawn her assertion, agreed to admit/stipulate to the mistake and dissassociate herself and the state with the erroneous evidence.

        And then when Baez pointed out the issue during the time closing arguments were scheduled, a point in time when Burdick knew, by any account that the “84 times” was false she should at that point offered to admit that the evidence was wrong. She should not have had the audacity to tell Baez, as you put it, pound sand.

        I deplore violence towards women but anyone who disagrees with me, I think we have found the perfect poster trial for your cause…

27. She is innocent… the chloroform mistake proves that! She never lied, she never stole she only ever gushingly loved and worshipped and protected her daughter. I mean ,it’s not as if she was found duct taped and dead in a swamp now is it?!!!

    • She’s innocent of murder.

      What does stealing have to do with Caylee’s death?

      • It goes to character. She stole her friend’s check book and all the money in her account. That’s a fact and now the class act is a convicted felon. She was accused with stealing the life of her daughter and lying.

        Now I have a question for you. What does her brother feeling her up have to do with Caylee’s death?

        • Ah-ha it goes to her mental ability to handle stress or trauma.

          Being a thief doesn’t make you a murderer,whilst having a mind that reacts differently to trauma sure could make you do some amazingly idiotic,strange,things and even make you not believe what really happened.

          Did you know with enough stress your mind can snap and go off to a place not even a doctor can explain?

          I bet you are the type that still buys the chloroform crap…lol lol
          oh my what a disastrous story the state came up with.

          • Heckler,

            Have you ever been sexually abused? Because I take offense to your statement. A brother trying to feel her up, which she states she quickly stopped, would not rise to the level of trama you refer to. I know, because I was sexually molested by my step-father(an alcoholic) who touched me while I slept, multiple times. Even after he spent time at an alcohol treatment facility, I still never trusted him again. I moved out of the house the day I turned 18. I went to another state and re-enrolled into high school and graduated and then went on to college. When I had my children, I never allowed the molester to babysit my children. I attended many support groups and every sexual abuse victim I met, left home the day the became an adult or ran away from home. They did not stay in the “sex abuser” house after they became an adult. A good mother would NEVER leave their child with the sexual abuser, a lazy.deceitful, mooching, stealing mother would.
            As far as the chloroform levels in the trunk ( I could care less about the computer search…a computer search can’t in and of itself hurt anyone), I understood the testimony by Dr. Vass. In an earlier post to Omar, I explained my reasoning based on what I had learned in Chemistry.

28. I find it interesting that so many spend so much time cutting down people at JBmission that have spoke facts and truth, which is now only being substantiated. Back on topic, the statement from the state’s attorney office is more lies and I’m sure this piece of evidence isn’t the only thing they tried to hide. Just before LDB began her part of closing statements Baez attempted to do something about the lie that was presented as factual evidence. LDB’s answer was he had already had his say and his closing argument is over. Perry agreed and told him to file the appropriate motion, even though the trial was nearly over. He should be held accountable too. Anyone with the ability to think logically knew something was wrong with this testimony. It is also a lie that they prepared a discovery notice and didn’t have time to give it to the defense. They claim they never got it until the evening of July 4 from Bradley. The jury didn’t announce they had reached a verdict until some where around 1:30. They had all morning to fax the notice of discovery to the clerk but it isn’t there. They had all morning to fax or email the discovery to the defense, they didn’t do that. Even if Bradley is lying and they are telling the truth, they should be held accountable for withholding evidence and allowing the jury to continue to deliberate. He took his page down, by the way.

29. This whole thing has gotten way out of hand when people are supposedly posting home phone numbers for lawyers online. The result being that mental midgets are apparrently making threatening phone calls, even to lawyers wife who has nothing to do with it.
    The lawyers were just doiing their jobs! Their families had nothing to do with any of it! Get a friggin grip you morons!
    I would think that the cops should go after this nonsense very aggressively. Surely they must be able to track these originating numbers down and put the fear in these lowlifes.
    Unbelievable.

    • They are now bored on websleuthes so now are seeking Casey’s hideout for giggles,who care if you post a view of Chaney’s house right?

      You’re right they are morons.

30. The “84-visits-vs.-1-visit” to the chloroform page at sci-spot.com is meaningless to me in the grand scheme of things.

    So … Casey visited that particular page only one time from the Anthony home computer.

    ADDITIONALLY, Casey Google-searched the word “chloroform” TWICE, she Google-searched the phrase “how to make chloroform” TWICE, and also searched Wikipedia for chloroform.

    If I remember correctly, she also deleted the Firefox browser history on July 16, 2008, prior to her initial arrest. There was some reason that Casey didn’t want these searches to be discovered. Consciousness of guilt?

    Certainly, the OCSO computer forensics team should have been more diligent in their duty to inform the prosecution of both the NetAnalysis and CacheBack discrepancies, but, IMHO, regardless of the number of times sci-spot.com was visited, there is ample computer forensic evidence that chloroform and variants were searched for multiple times by Casey on the Anthony home computer. The 84-vs.-1 does not detract from that.

31. Very interesting and well-researched post, Mr. Hornsby.
    My only concern?? Why oh why mention the jbmission website!?? It’s been known for years that those forked tongue “ladies” delight in slamming and disparaging ANYONE who thinks that Casey had a role in her daughter’s death. As I write this, I’m sure they’re conjuring up yet another crazy, paranoid and delusional conspiracy theory. LOL…..after all, jbmission was “hot on the trail” of the “real” Zanny Nanny……and spent over a year working themselves up to a lather! Lest we not forget……I have read entries that claim that Scott Peterson is innocent (God help us), Kyron’s stepmonster Terri is being wrongly accused (OMG!) and the real Zenaida is STILL a major suspect because of the pictures on her Myspace!! Heaven help us all!! At least jbmission is always good for som comic relief! “)

    • Seriously, Richard, the JB Mission mention detracts from your credibility.

32. Hey Sandra….glad to see you’re reading at the Mission. Probably makes you mad that we saw the “lack of evidence” very early on. Don’t be mad. I believe you got chased out of there because you were rude and insulting rather than intelligent or thought provoking. But don’t worry…we won’t hold a grudge.

    Oh…and btw….I personally haven’t posted there for 3 years….only a few months, but I’ve leaned enough to know that most people could care less about how our judicial system is supposed to work. What most people care about is having the freedom to talk badly about people they don’t like. That’s your constitutional right, and since you seem to hold it so near and dear and exercise it at your leisure, you may just want to start asking yourself what’s gonna happen when your right to run your mouth is chipped away at, bit by bit, by people who would like nothing better than to run free, unchecked, for power and money.

    Or maybe you should leave the deep thinking to those who are capable of doing it.

    • Hey Omar………….((YAWN))………….looks like you still haven’t removed your lips from the extremely large buttocks of Jose! LOL…if you are still somehow unaware (or blind) to the fact that jbmission is THE LAUGHING STOCK of all Caylee-related blogs,…then I’m afraid you’re stuck with the tinfoil-wearing paranoia crowd. Go ahead and prop yourself up and “play intellectual” with your fellow ex-convict friends. Anyone who has perused that ridiculously asinine blog knows that “Omar” has a penchant for the F-word and delights in defaming law enforcement, prosecutors, judges and ANYONE who dare speak ill of darlin’ Casey. The funniest part?? You guys are behaving like Casey is now *magically innocent*. LMAO!! “Not Guilty” does not mean innocent. Now get on back to the mission and tell Zuben to roll you a few fat ones to puff on while she ponders how astrology is so grooovy. I’m sure Zuben’s “charts” (that smell of putrid patchouli oil) are telling you the OBVIOUS: Casey is better off in jail where she can be protected. I know you expect everything to suddenly come up roses for her, but she’s walking around with targets all over her.

      • wow, jealous much? lol Not guilty may not mean innocent, but not guilty means not guilty. lol its nice that you can take out your frustrations about the mission here isn’t it? How bout a lil respect for RH. Lets stay on topic and lets keep our public employees in check. how bout that?

33. Well, I liked LDB. I thought she was respectful and a good prosecutor. When she showed up with Yuri’s hard drive a year late, I just kind of gave it a pass. But now this with the 84 hits. She knew exactly what she was doing. No pass this time. Fool me once, fool me twice. Whats next??? See I thought it was JA that held evidence, didn’t realize there was team work going on there. MOO

34. I do have a procedural question: when the shocker of the pool accidental drowing death was presented by the defense, why didn’t the prosecution put Casey’s boyfriend on the stand? His statement to the press in 2008 b4 Caylee’s body was found, (which video is available for anyone to review), was this: “the last time I saw her she was in the pool. (at his apartment complex).

35. I do have a procedural question: when the shocker of the pool accidental drowning death was presented by the defense, why didn’t the prosecution put Casey’s nightclub promoter boyfriend on the stand? His statement to the press in 2008 b4 Caylee’s body was found, (which video is available for anyone to review), was this: “the last time I saw her she was in the pool. (at his apartment complex).

36. I watched that portion of the trial and it sure seems to me that there was something said that brought into question whether or not 84 searches for chloroform were accurate. It could be that I just deduced that it was more likely to be 84 visits to facebook than Sci-spot (was that the name of the site? something close to that if not). I can’t help but think something that was said brought me to that thinking because I had been buying what the prosecution and experts had been selling but changed my opinion on that particular testimony before the end of the trial. Could be I just thought why the hell would she go back there that many times? Just didn’t make sense.

37. Wouldn’t you know that the pro-Casey people would not only run with the “vial” (of chloroform), but they’d also blow the situation way out of proportion, thanks for the most part to those lying backsides, Baez and Mason who are playing dumb now. Birds of a feather, as they say. Only the unconscionable could represent one such as Casey.

    Inasmuch as it has been determined that this matter of the 84 searches was brought up at sidebar (as I understand it) and all parties involved, to include Baez and Mason, KNEW the results may not have been accurate due to a glitch in the program used to determine how many searches were made, the State , nor OCSO, by no means made an “intentional” faux pax.

    Which part of “we didn’t know there was only one search until AFTER Casey had been acquitted” don’t some of you understand, and what did it matter after the fact? For all we or any one else knows, there could still be glitches and the 1 search could be wrong! Might I also remind some of you (and thank God you’re the minority) but for “junk” science countless millions would never have survived the likes of cancer, polio, typhoid, diptheria, tuberculosis – the list is endless.

    All of this JB (I’ll call it, and with all due respect) mentality reminds me all too well of the Clintonites who were so desperately scrambling to excuse Bill’s horrendous behavior (desecrating the highest office in the land with his adulterous behavior) and in so doing not only threw Monica Lewinsky under the bus, but ran her over with a 20 ton truck! This same “selective reasoning” and overly “liberal mentality” would throw LDB under the bus now, regardless of any crimes committed by their heroine, Casey Marie!

    Talk about a “witch hunt!” Had any of you any sense at all you’d be demanding justice for CAYLEE based upon those 31 days and the long list of events that occurred therein, all of which point to none other than Casey as the perpetrator of this crime!

    I hope to God that the powers that be will reconsider the ability of criminal defense attorneys to present whatever ludicrous theories suit them to present in order to WIN, with NO sound basis in FACT and NO evidence whatsoever to back up their claims! Justice isn’t justice if it doesn’t stand on TRUTH and KNOWN FACT, and the truth of these matters remain:

    BY HER OWN ADMISSION CASEY WAS THE LAST PERSON TO HAVE SEEN CAYLEE ALIVE

    BY HER OWN ADMISSION CASEY WAS THE LAST PERSON TO HAVE HAD POSSESSION OF THAT CAR THAT REEKED OF DEATH

    BY HER OWN LYING ADMISSION CASEY ABANDONED CAYLEE ON THE STEPS OUTSIDE THE APARTMENT OF A FICTITIOUS NANNY

    This list too, is endless.

    • I side w/you Autumn but here’s my interpretation of what i also saw, and i’m not sure if this is “normal” but i thought it funny…Do you remember how many times the defense tried to call for a miss-trial? It seems to me the defense was growing exceedingly worried of the guilt of their client and, to top it off like you said, KC knew she was dead in June 2008. I thought it funny how both Mason and Baez would get up there and say the prosecution is throwing everything against the wall hoping something sticks but i guess it kinda foreshadowed the end result because nothing stuck…at least the way it should of…IMO

      I also cant get over the “rose-colored glasses” these KC supporters have on and their lack of perception of who they are defending. I think everyone will agree that everyone is entitled to a good defense Baez/Mason; hell Mason before he was speaking before us all on how their client will walk hand in hand with them out of the courtroom as the truth will come out said the defendant was doomed-kinda funny how even Mason had a guilty perception of KC way in the beginning dont you think?

      Just because she was found not guilty does not mean she’s innocent…couldnt say it better than that!! This case gets me very flustered and no matter in the end there is no real justice for Caylee 🙁

38. Richard,

    Because i find no other place to actually ask this question i hope that at least you’d tell me/us your perspective. Today on the Front Page of the Orlando Sentinal it says the Defense is Billing the Prosecution for, obviously, their defense however, because Baez and Mason both stated that they knew the child was dead in June could that be problematic for recouping because it could be easily argued by the Prosecution that the Defense wasted their time when they knew full well the Caylee was DEAD?

    Thanks

39. Thank you for the update, Mr. Hornsby, and for giving credit and truth, where it is due, even when it isn’t popular.

    Sandra and others of like mind and mouth, all I care to say is that I chose the ID, ZubenElSchemali because of the meaning. It translates Price that covers or Sufficient price, being the desire of my heart, simply that justice prevail. When the state would go do such lengths to present false evidence, we can be fairly sure there is more and that they didn’t have a case to begin with. Why else would they go to this very dangerous extreme? It is also a fact that this isn’t the first time Ashton has withheld exculpatory evidence. It is a matter of court record. We can be reasonably sure this isn’t only the 2nd time. This calls for a serious investigation of both law enforcement and the state’s attorney office. Since Melich is now in internal affairs, the investigation needs to come from outside OCSD. This last sentence is my opinion, of course. The rest is fact you’ll have to live with. Do you want justice or revenge aganst someone you’ve decided not to like?

    • odd that you would insinuate “false evidence” was used, if you are alleging such facts please provide the support as nothing presented was fabricated. If you are basing your concerns on the computer searches beit 1 time or 84 times is moot in the overall of the case. High levels of chloroform were found in the trunk that smelled like a dead body. Notably the defense expert who tested the trunk indicated he found trace amounts of chloroform in the trunk but what he found most of was gasoline particulates…the Prosecution will intorm this “expert” that when he tested the vehicle the carpet had been removed day’s before and therefore giving an explanation as to why he was finding gasoline…But i digress, at no time did the Prosecution put on false evidence or information. it has been confirmed only that part of the evidence entered may have been flawed but that was not the fault of the prosecution. This maybe also why it wasnt brought up in closing arguments…the 84 searches that is…

      • Phanton heart sticker.

40. Gosh, just wait until Delaney finishes that presentation showing the lies behind the duct tape & how the actual size, when produced by a photshop PROFESSIONAL will show that the width does not match the width needed to do what the prosecution claims it did, hold the mandable in place.

    So let’s see… Chloroform searches=BOGUS
    DNA or proven decomp in trunk = 0
    Duct tape evidence purposefully altered to misrepresent

    As if Yuri’s outright perjury wasn’t enough. What else waits in the wings?
    I can’t wait for it all to be revealed.

41. B-Man…Please, for your own benefit…read up on volitile acids and half-lifes.
    There is absolutely no way a high amount of chloroform would have been present at that date (4 months+ post).

42. B-Man, you may be right in saying the 84 searches wasn’t fabricated but that certainly doesn’t mean it wasn’t false information and exculpatory. One 3 minute look at how choloroform was used in the 1800s when curious because a boyfriend wants to win her over with chloroform, tends to disprove the premeditation using chloroform to murder her daughter. High levels found in the trunk? Who said that besides one researcher that is trying to sell a secret database and sniffer machine? Ddin’t the FBI say it was trace amount?

    Now, one thing I would have to say is fabricated is the duct tape senario, including the dramatic and highly prejudicial video. Even an elementary education would lead to no sale there. Think about this. They claim the duct tape was stuck to the skin. It proceeds to decompose, fluids being highly caustic and acidic, to the point it would dissolve all the glue. Decomposition completes and the tape magically gets sticky again so that it sticks to the bone that had been underlying the gooey skin, fluids and body fats. But the glue is pretty much not present when they test. Now, how can it be glued to the bone? My 10 year old says it is impossible. What say you? Fabricated perhaps?

    Have a nice evening.

    • The tape was not stuck to the skull, the tape was attached to the hair mass, along with plant growth that intertwined with the tape and hair which inturn held the mandible in place. Haven’t you ever seen plant growth, where it held unsimilar items together(like if you laid a piece of rope on top of a roll of wire fence, and over time plant growth interweaves with the fence and rope attaching the rope to the fence.

      • Oh, and I don’t think the tape could have been attached to the plastic bag because there would most likely be reside/discoloration on the bag. Plastic bags do not break down quickly.
        Think about when you see a car that someone has n oput duct tape/plastic say due to a broken window. The car is exposed everyday to the weather, rain/snow and traveling at high speeds. When you start seeing edges of the tape starting to peel up, there is residue/discoloration on the plastic and the car. The duct tape can stay on the plasic and the car for a long period of time.

43. ZubenElSchemali, Just for you I’m going to post this again, and add that the FBI did the sample without the carpet, Dr. Vass had a carpet sample contained in a canister. So if the chloroform binded with the carpet Dr. Vass results would be much higher than the FBI’s results.

    This is what I understood from Dr. Vass “shockingly high” statement. He was referring chloroform results that he had normally seen in environmental samples. Parts per million vs parts per billion vs parts per trillion.

    If an expected result would be in the parts per billion range and instead showed up as parts per million, then that would be “shockingly high” to someone who is dealing with trace compounds/elements. It would be a very small about to those of us that live in the liter,gallon measuring world.

    One part per million (ppm) denotes one part per 1,000,000 parts. This is equivalent to one drop of water diluted into 50 liters (roughly the fuel tank capacity of a compact car).
    One part per billion (ppb) denotes one part per 1,000,000,000 parts. This is equivalent to one drop of water diluted into 250 chemical drums.
    One part per trillion (ppt) denotes one part per 1,000,000,000,000 parts, This is equivalent to one drop of water diluted into 20 Olympic-size swimming pools.

    Current federal regulations allow up to 100 parts per billion of chloroform in drinking water. That standard is currently used for soft drinks.

    Chloroform evaporates(vaporizes) quickly when exposed to air. Chloroform lasts for a long time in both the air and in the ground water. Most chloroform in the air eventually breaks down, but this process is slow.

    Chloroform in items like water, cleaning products, soda are normally in ppb, even if they are combined should still be in ppb range. I don’t know how much it is in decomposing bodies,maybe it’s much higher in children, not that we would know since most people don’t donate their child’s body to science.

    The EPA uses environmental mass spectometry to analyse organic compounds in water and air, they even check for chloroform.

    I’m not saying I know why the levels where high, just saying that I understand the “shockingly high” statement by Dr. Vass.

44. Ugh Who cares about all of this same ol crap…..she is not guilty on first 3 counts period!

45. B-Man, what do you think? Is it time we gave some serious thought to the implementation of professional juries here, in the State of Florida? Kim, I’m recommending that you be among the first to be seated in 1st degree murder cases that involve a whole lot of forensics, should professional jurors ever become a part of our system of justice.

    Heckler, we had ALL better care that such a grave injustice was served!

    Zub, I’m amazed!!!

    “When the state would go do such lengths to present false evidence, we can be fairly sure there is more and that they didn’t have a case to begin with.”

    False evidence? Surely you jest! Your comment is true of none but the defense. Perhaps you need to reconsider the totality of the evidence, as well as how many times the leopard defense changed its spots over the course of the past three years?

    Paraphrasing and summarizing:

    It was the nanny!

    No. It was the nanny and her sister, and Caylee’s alive.

    We’re conducting our own search for the nanny.

    Kronk! It was Kronk, and we have evidence to back up the claim! (They had nothing.)

    It could have been Jesse, or George.

    Yeah! Jesse!

    No. George! He had access to the car! He had the keys! Yeah, it was George!

    And at the final hour, knowing full well that their ship was sunk the defense stooped so low as to lie through through their teeth, because it really wasn’t about justice, it was about WINNING!

    Caylee drowned!

    And now they’re all scrambling to cash in on the cow.

    • Autumn,

      Thanks, but I personally don’t believe in the death penalty so I would never be picked. In this case the victims family(Cindy, George, and Lee) would not want the death penalty imposed and would have begged for her life to be spared if she had been convicted. I think it was a waste of time, even if the State believed the homicide to be First Degree.

46. Kimpossible, I see you trust Vass over everyone else, even FBI. He was even embarrassed when LE leaked it to the media. What ever! Back to the duck tape that you claim, with the state, held her mandible in place, anotomically. How do you suppose that so many teeth fell out when the madible was pushed up agains the upper jaw to hold them in place? Have you even looked at the skull or read the reports of the collection of the remains? My 10 year old agrees that it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that the teeth fell out because the mandible wasn’t taped to the skull and the skull was jostled around, sufficiently to dislodge the teeth. One was even glued to the upper skull. Now, how do you suppose a skull could sit upright all that time, with the mandible in place, but yet a tooth slips out and defies the laws of gravity (these are higher laws than the state of Florida can deny), gluing itself to the top of the skull? I guess I missed that in science class.

47. Mr. Hornsby, now that you are aware that fellow attorneys have violated the law and code of ethics are you going to file a complaint? If no, can a citizen from another state do that? Is there someplace else beside the Florida Bar that can investigate? What about OCSD. What ouside agency can investigate their wrong doing?

48. Zuben, forgive me for intruding on what you deem a conversation between you and Kimpossible but I would like to offer a possible explanation to the question you imposed regarding Caylee’s teeth.

    Again, it would seem, that you are not considering the totality of the evidence nor all of the environmental factors involved during the long period of time Caylee’s remains were in the swamp. Nor are you taking into account that no where in the autopsy report or in any investigative report is it suggested that Caylee’s face was taped so that her jaw was clamped shut. It isn’t even possible that it was following the complete decomposition of her face.

    Had the tape been securely put in place, so as to block off her airways, this tape would have loosened substantially during decomposition.

    As her tongue, cheeks, the roof of her mouth, etc., would also have decomposed, her teeth would have lay loose and scattered in what was once her mouth. In that state, giving due consideration not only to the loosened tape, but to the flood (moving water) and animal activity that her remains were exposed to, it isn’t unreasonable to consider the possibility that her teeth escaped her mouth.

    I wouldn’t know about a tooth being “glued” to the top of her skull. I don’t recall seeing any mention of such a thing in the reports, but I will look again.

    Regardless, you say “glued”, as though this were an intentional placement of that tooth, supporting the defense theory that someone tampered with her remains, which is highly unlikely. The wind, the rain, the flood, the mud, the animal activity, all offer a far more reasonable explanation. She was in swamp like conditions for a very long time, so it is not unreasonable to believe that a single tooth came to attach itself to the top of her skull.

    Again, no one is suggesting that the tape was placed so that Caylee’s jaw was clamped shut. Considering the process of decomposition it would have loosened, substantially; and affixed to her hair would have kept the mandible from falling away from the skull. Her mouth could well have been wide open and screaming, as she was taped, leaving the teeth to an easier escape after the tape fell away from her mouth and her nose.

    I gotta hand it to you, Zub, you’re relentless; and most certainly entitled to your opinions.

    • The tooth was stuck to the interior of the skull with sediment. It’s in the crime scene reports. I think what Zuben is saying is that the majority of people have just trusted what they’ve heard about the tape being “wrapped around the head 3 times”…which is what LDB said during trial or the three pieces of duct tape being placed over the mouth to suffocate Caylee (Ashton’s version) AND the state/media’s further assertion that it was the placement of this tape that kept the mandible in place despite 6 months in the swamp with animal interference, water movement, soil shifting, wind, etc. You can’t have it all ways logically. To further confuse things, Mr. Kronk saw the skull outside of the bag in August. Then, miraculously, it somehow worked its way back into the bag by the next day, but fell out when he kicked the bag. BUT by another miracle (or perhaps at the paws of a very considerate animal), the skull somehow got back into the bag and there remained until sometime before December when Kronk again found the remains. By December 11th, the skull was lying on the ground upright, mandible in place….and he stuck his meter reader stick into the eye socket and lifted the skull and then let it back down gently. So, you see, the versions of the skull’s actual placement differ according to who is talking about it. Furthermore, as you said, if the tape had been placed prior to decomp, deterioration would have caused it to sluff off, thus NOT holding the mandible or teeth in place. So obviously, this skull was moved if we are to believe all the odd happenings with it. It just doesn’t make sense when you start thinking about the crime scene reports and the discovery versions (all of them). But there was definitely a tooth stuck by sediment to the inside of the skull.

      • What Kronk saw in August, know one knows, it could have been the canvas bag over the skull, a skull shape could have been what he had seen. In December, when Kronk said he lifted the bag, he could have assumed the skull fell out when it could have already been laying on the ground. I think if he had initially seen the skull he wouldn’t have needed to picked up the bag at all.
        The point is a child’s remains should not be found in a swampy wooded area, especially if the death was accidental. You question everything else as if the police put there, but not the fact that a child’s remains would be in the woods in the first place. If it was any other’s child’s remains found in the woods(other than a child wondering off and dying there), people would naturally assume homicide, especially if a parent is lying about the child’s whereabouts.
        It no longer matters in this case, the jury found Casey Not Guilty.

49. Zuben,

    Would you be so kind to post the link or tell me where you got your information to support your statements I pasted below. I would like to read all about a tooth being found glued to the skull. Does your information say what kind of glue was used?

    “One was even glued to the upper skull. Now, how do you suppose a skull could sit upright all that time, with the mandible in place, but yet a tooth slips out and defies the laws of gravity (these are higher laws than the state of Florida can deny), gluing itself to the top of the skull? I guess I missed that in science class.”

50. Ah-Ha, I won’t take the time to track down the doc on line because not all are still easily accessible but if you’d like to share you email addy, I’ll gladly mail it to you. It’s all there in the 10,000+ pages of discovery.

    Autumn, Omar is right. The report said stuck to the upper skull with sediment. Of course, they didn’t test it so who knows, it could be decomp residue or dirt. Now, I could buy most of what you are saying except for one very important fact. They claimed that Caylee’s skull was in that exact position so long that roots had time to grow. The force of gravity would keep the skull pressing down on the mandible so the teeth missing does not fit with the big picture of what the ME and others said. Remember how LE pressured Kronk to take back what he said about it rolling out of the bag? Or didn’t you read that. Miller claimed to have seen the indentation in the ground, showing it had sat there for a long time too. You might remember he was a special guest invited into the crime scene on Dec. 11 when the defense was barred for days and days because they didn’t know if it was Caylee. Maybe they thought it was Jennifer Kesse or someone else Miller was looking for. Ya think?

51. No, I never said I trusted Dr. Vass over everyone else. I pointed out the I understood his “shockingly high” statement and why based on ppm vs ppb. The FBI and Dr.Vass tested 2 different sample types, collected differently so their results would be different, the carpet sample being more concentrated in a small container.
    I did not hear anyone testify that the position that the skull was found, was the exact position that the skull maintained to for up to almost 6 months. With the animal activity,decomposition, and water, It’s not unreasonable to assume that the skull could have moved even slighly over that time period, since a child’s skull weighs less than an adult’s.
    The mandible and the upper maxillia being together would not automatically hold all teeth in place. The teeth of the upper maxilla are usually slightly forward than the lower teeth and even if the skull was at one time towards the left as Spitz suggest, the upper teeth, being exposed after decomposition of the skin tissue and gums, could fall out due to a variety of events. The inner surface of the cranium is not smooth, it contains depressions and furrows, so if a tooth dislodged, it could have entered the skull with assistance of rising water and settled in to a depression or furrow and remained there along with other sediment after the water subsided. It did not say where in the calvarium the tooth adhered, the calvarium is a larger area than just the very top of the skull. How much force doesn’t your 10 year old think it would take to dislodge teeth from a toddler’s skull?
    It wasn’t the teeth location that bothered me, it was the location of the duct tape and how it was attached to the hair mass.
    Duct tape and chloroform aside. I don’t know if you are married, but hypothetically if you hadn’t seen your 10 yr old for 31 days and during that time his mother gave various reasons( he’s at camp, then staying with friends, etc) then when you are finally fed up with excuses, she tells you that your son was kidnapped by such n such 31 days earlier. You find out they were all lies (child never at camp, friends named and such n such don’t exist). Then 6 months later your son’s remains were found in a swampy area near your home. The mother then claims that he died by accident, she paniced and didn’t call 911 and her father said he would take care of the body. She then continued on as if nothing ever happened. Even if there was never any signs of abuse, would you believe her story? Would you believe that she wouldn’t call 911 after an accident to make sure nothing could be done to save him? But instead she would allow his body(that hadn’t officially been confirmed to be dead) to be taken away to an unknown area? If a family member told me a similar story about my child, I would not believe the death was accidental. But To me, at the very least, the failure to request medical assistance for a child would be aggrevated child abuse.

52. How much force doesn’t my 10 year old think it would take? It would take a super natural force to take the bottom teeth, lift them up and carry them away. What evidence did you see, read or here that said the bags and skull was submerged in water? The pictures I saw had not mud deposited on top at all. I read nothing and heard no testimony of that either. The underside of the bag looked dirty but the top side looked pretty clean and white. Yes, the autopsy doc does tell where the tooth was stuck. I believe the defense expert mentioned it too, didn’t he? I don’t know how many pictures of skeletons you’ve seen but a whole lot of them still have all their teeth in place. Look at what teeth were missing in the skull, then read the docs as to where they were all found.

    I do know something about volatility and won’t go into all that because you obviously aren’t much interested. But I will say that chloroform is so volatile that there would have to be an active source of chloroform present or to have just been removed in order to get anything more than a trace reading. Lemon or Orange oil would stay in the air much longer than chloroform would. It’s basic chemistry. Don’t forget, there wasn’t even a trace of decomp residue found in the carpet. Even if there was a cloroform spill in that carpet they would find some trace of it. Just one reason showing why there need to be standards and lab protocols in place if you are going to use anything as evidence. I’m sure this case will haunt Vass for a very long time.

    As for the duct tape, there is as much evidence of what you say as there is for the phantom heart sticker and just one more thing that needs to be investigated.

    • Wow, super natural force? The lower mandible had nine teeth intact, the upper maxilla I believe had 4. A child that age has about 20 teeth, so the majority of the teeth fell out from the upper maxilla. I’m sure not all the skulls you have seen have been left out decomposing in the elements with animal activity. Yes, and I’ve read the documents too.

      The chloroform results were trace readings. While I don’t recall the amounts, it can still be in the low ppm range and not knock someone out, but any amount in the ppm range would be considered high according to government guidelines. I’m not pretending to know where it came from, nor do I know if spilled, how or if it would bind/react to the carpet or the backing. Yes, chloroform liquid evaporates quickly when exposed to air( it turns from ‘/liquid to gas/vapor), but the chloroform compound itself lasts for a long time in air and water because chlorofom is slow to break down.

      I do not think there is any specific test for human decomposition, what was testified to was that a number of chemicals found were consistant with human decomposition. On the defense side, it was argued they could be consistent with other things. There was also testimony concerning what they believed to be consistant with adipocere. Even in other cases that use accepted forensic testing, most of the time the best the expert can say is that something is consistent with something else.

      There was testimony that the area was flooded during/after a tropical storm. And if you look at recent photos of the site, there is also standing water present this time of the year. The area where the remains where found slopes down from the road, so being lower, water tends to collect there.
      I’m just saying I understand why the experts testified the way they did, both prosecution and defense, because rarely is anything proven to be 100%.

      It is my own opinion that the tape was intentionally placed there while the child was alive. My only question was if it was placed there to quiet the child or placed there to kill the child. Even if it was placed to quiet the child, and the mother had no intention of the child dying…would still not be an accidental death to me because the act of placing the tape is not an accident.

      Still if I throw everything out, the sad truth is… a 2 1/2 year old child’s remains were found bagged/scattered in a wooded area. No loving mother would do that to their child.

      I am not asking you or anyone else to have the same opinion as me, I only tried to provide examples to what I base my own opinions. I have a 15 yr old, very smart who I love dearly and respect, but I would not base my opinions soley on his opinons since he has not had a large range of life experiences as a basis for his own opinions. He still tends to believe what he hears and not look any further.

53. Zuben, now you have me totally confused. At 3:50 PM today you state: “Yes, the autopsy doc does tell where the tooth was stuck. I believe the defense expert mentioned it too, didn’t he?”

    Eight hours earlier at 8:07 AM you state “one was even glued to the upper skull” and “yet a tooth slips out defies the laws of gravity gluing itself to the top of the skull?”

    Was the tooth you are referring to “glued” or “stuck” to the skull? I certainly don’t remember any testimony stating a tooth was “glued” to the skull yet in your post this morning you boldly state a tooth was “glued” and “gluing” to the top of the skull.

    If there is evidence and testimony that glue was used to attach a tooth to the skull then one could assume some tampering or staging was involved. I wonder what kind of glue was used that could withstand 6+ months in that swamp plus decomposition. Or was glue used after the remains were found?

54. Ah Ha….with all due respect, “glued” is a word that can not always be taken literally. Ever heard the expression, “she was the glue that held the family together”? Glued/stuck….what’s the difference. Taken in context of Zuben’s entire comment, it’s easy to say that Zuben was never trying to imply that someone literally took a chemical compound of high viscosity and bonded a tooth to the inside of the skull. It was a common sense statement.

55. Area A was under water from August 18th through 28th according to the water depth report that the State provided. There is no proof that the body was in Area A during that time period. There is no proof that there was standing water in Area A at any other time. Basically its a weak case because there is no proof of what happened. One can only speculate. Sure, Dr H did an estimate, but its just that. His own speculation. The botanist was going off of pictures. The botanist did not even show up until the 14th. What is up with that? The ME doctors reported their findings from the ME office and the body shroud. They did not report their findings from the field in which they were there. Things have obviously been left out. The jury picked up on it and its a good thing. IMO

    • So where do you think that the body was during that time? What proof is there that the body wasn’t there at that time? So you find the defense’s botany expert more credible(who also looked a pics of leaf litter)?
      Most homicide cases are based on reasonable speculation/inferences of the circumstances/evidence, because most of the time there are no other witnesses.
      Would it be more reasonable that the closest person to the deceased (who by their own written admission was the last person with the victim), who may have fanticized about burying them in the backyard (we know fantasy is easier than actually doing the action) found that option too difficult and needed to find a new option. If almost getting caught with the body, pulls around the corner to nearest wooded area and tosses it out. The degraded condition when found, of bones, clothes, cloth bag,pastic bags, insect activiy, animal activity are consistent with the time frame.
      Or is it more reasonable that child died by accident, the mother nor grandfather calls 911, the grandfather hides the body (where), the meter reader finds it (how), puts it in the woods in August calls to report the body 3 times (chancing that someone else might find it), gets berated/insulted by a police officer who slips, scoops up the remains again, takes them home so he can watch them and allow plants to grow threw them (allows his dog or cat to chew on bones so it shows animal activity). Then in December, takes the remains back to Suburban Dr. scatter them around and staged the scene, calls right away so no one else finds it. Oh and he followed the case so closely to collect the money because he was morally bankrupt that he didn’t know he had to call the Tip Line first to collect the reward.
      I could also speculate that a story that involves a UFO, but would it be reasonable?

56. It was more about the lack of evidence. Lack of evidence is evidence in my opinion. I have always said that majority opinionators were depending on the events that happened after the incident, when the state would need to prove all evidence leading up to the incident. That recipe does not work with jury’s. A juror is going to want to know every detail leading up to the incident and then how the incident happened. The State depended on the jury looking at the emotional side of what happened after the incident. Its really not that much to ask of the details leading up to the incident. We didn’t hear a lot of that. The jurors were left in the dark as we all have been. I would like to see GA, CA, La, RK, Kc, TL, JG’s phone records leading up to the incident. To include tower pings and text messages. I wish LE would have examined CA, GA, and LA vehicles. There are a lot of things that I would have like to have seen, but the Le just did not provide them or they just didn’t investigate, so we were all left in the dark as to what happened leading up to the incident.

    If the body was dumped in the woods like trash, then where did she die? When did she die? how did she die? Why did she die? The 84 hits are key here because it shows the State knew the answers to none of these questions. They were relying on chloroform. Chloroform just isn’t a believable theory. There are way too many easier ways to do it.

    On the other hand, The defense provided a theory that was plausible. Many wanted to believe it was an accidental drowning from the very start back in 08. Even RH said on WS a couple of years ago that he thought it was an accident covered up. That is truly a plausible theory. So, theory against theory with no real proof of either. One must fall down on the side of the defense. IMO and MOO

57. RH,

    Does this now set precedent in Florida. Now that the Judge has allowed in experimental smell science and experimental post mortem banding, will all SAO be able to use this now without the frye test anymore?

58. Omar, since you are defending a word another person used in this blog indicates to me you don’t believe “glued” or “gluing” was ever in the testimony or evidence regarding a tooth. Why else would you jump in and state “glued/stuck…what’s the difference.” You bet I have heard the expression “she was the glue that held the family together.” I have never heard “she was what stuck the family together”. I do not think the words “glued” and “stuck” are interchangeable. I would not tell another “hey I glued a note to your computer screen.” But I would say “hey I stuck a note to your computer screen.”

    If a tooth was found on the skull other than where it should have been then why not use the word “stuck” or “attached”? “Glued” or “gluing” implies to me exactly what you said to bond with viscosity. And insinuates foul play such as tampering or staging.

    Zuben used the words “glued” and “gluing”. I didn’t know there was any evidence or testimony that a tooth was attached with glue so I just asked him where he got his information because I obviously missed it.

59. aha: I have spent so much time on the play on words in the last three years. Like some bones were found within the tangled bags. A play on words. The bones appeared as though they fell out of the bag or bags. Within, definition. Homicide, definition. Many play with words ….. These all become generic words that have general meanings. Like glue…. That is all zub meant. I am not sure of the technical meaning of the word glue, but I am sure of zub’s meaning and that it was stuck to the inside of the skull. I am sure you know it as well. IMO

60. I think its kind of wierd that people assume that teeth float, but hair doesn’t.
    I think its absurd to think that anyone hit any site 84 times.
    3 ingrediants, 84 hits. Whats wrong with that picture?
    Shoving a 3 year old balogne package in a doctors face?? wth?
    Teasing everyone with a can of death? wth? Will those cans of death go up for sale on ebay?
    This whole case amazes me, but really, the evidence isn’t there and they had 3 years to come up with it. IMO

    • I think its kind of weird that a person’s first assumption to a child’s skeleton partially in plastic bags discovered in a wooded area would equate to accident…not homicide, manslaughter, or neglect.
      I think its absurd to think that a good mother lies about her dead child.
      31 days. What’s wrong with that picture?
      Defense shoving 3 yrs of balogne in the public’s face…missing shild, someone else did it, then pool accident without seeking medical assistance. wth?
      Teasing everyone with George’s private part in Casey’s mouth? wth? Will Casey sell her photos on ebay if she can’t get money from the media?
      This whole case amazes me too, but really first degree was not the only consideration…also 2nd degree, manslaughter, and aggravated child abuse.

61. Thanks guys.

    Ah-Ha, Huhhhh? I guess you’re getting to technical for me. I don’t play word games. Mud can act like a glue and objects can be stuck or adhered as if glued, as well as other substances. I really don’t have time to debate something so trivial with you. There are much more serious issues to discuss.

    Kimpossible, it is impossible to know why in the autopsy report, Dr. G would reverse the mandible and maxilla but if you look at the picture that was shown during trial, the mandible only has 4 teeth still in place and the maxilla has 9. Or did they substitute a picture of another skeleton? The tooth was GLUED to the calvarium, “adhered with dirt”. This is the top of the skull or the skull cap. All of the middle teeth of the mandible had fallen out. These two facts tell me the skull spent time during decomposition not in the upright position. The defense expert showed exactly where the tooth was stuck, off to one side of the calvarium. I don’t know why it was so important to LE to say otherwise.

    • Zuben,

      I think the pic that you are referring to is the skeletal remains laid out in approx. anatomical position, the teeth that were found at the scene may have been put back in to the skull to complete reconstruction. I have put in the question to someone who was in the courtroom and saw the pictures, but I have also seen his drawings of the skull, in which he shows the underside of the skull( with the mandible removed) and specifically writes 2 teeth on each side. Nor did Dr. Spitz put anythin in his report addressing such an error.
      I went back to the autopsy report, and it only stated that an incisor was adhered to the calvarium, it doesn’t specify where. TI would have to go back and listen to testimony, because I don’t recall the testamony of the tooth being adhered to the very top of the interior calvarium The calvarium is composed of the frontal bone, the 3 parietal bones and the occipital bone. Dr. Spitz did not address the incisor in his report, so I assumed because of the dark staining he refers to on the left side area that it was probably the location the tooth would be adhered. Skull could have been tilted to the left.

      • Since I posted, I receive a response back from the person who was in the courtroom. I was told the autopsy report was correct. There were 4 teeth(2 on each side) of the maxilla(upper jaw) and 9 teeth in the lower mandible.

62. Wait a sec zub. Do you have the real pictures? without blur?

63. Is there any possiblility that the A’s are going to start with the ccash back guy and then hopefully the judge redirects them to the state? I mean really, ya gotta start somewhere. Couldn’t she then in return go after her former employer?

64. Yeah notthatsmart, I’d like to know that too. Where are the pictures that Zuben is talking about. I guess he/she has information that no one else is privy too, because I haven’t seen any photographs of the skull without the blur. I have however seen ONE photo of the skeleton on ABC’s website, but one can’t make out the teeth or anything glued to the skeleton from that picture.

    On another note, it seems that someone knows where Casey is, and wants to sell her location to the highest bidder. Maybe it won’t be long before the world knows where in the world Casey Anthony is. LOL

    http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/28632128/detail.html

65. OH! RICHARD………..I was such a trusty follower of your blog, JB MISSION, REALLY? They are the biggest bunch of fruit cakes this side of the Blog Community, and you actually give them credit…….guess you’re included now with the Bozo Law Firm, for you to even suggest that LDB or JA are not trustworthy……..well………….I would venture to say, the public would not agree with you. Shame on you, better to try to win an argument I suppose in your eyes, then the lost life of a sweet little girl. Hope you don’t have any children. I’m guessing with this article you have lost a lot of followers….Go write some more emails to Bozo, and tell him how to get another murdering parent off. Unspeakable.

    • Unspeakable? You do realize I linked to the exact video they referred to and their assertion was correct. So essentially, because I read a blog you disagree with, even though I verified everything they said was accurate, you accuse me of being a poor father and an unethical attorney. The only person who should be ashamed of their actions is you.

      • Absolutely uncalled for. To question your fatherhood because you posted an unpopular opinion is not only ridiculous, but hipocritical. These same folks claim outrage over the death of a precious 2 year old little girl, but have the audacity to question your fatherhood because of a simple statement that isn’t what they wanted to hear?? Unreal.

        • AND…I haven’t agreed with everything you said throughout this trial, but I would never question your devotion and love as a father.

          • And they say Casey is the crazy one.”

      • Richard, because of your association with the JBMission, it seems like you have very few non-JBM readers left. Most of the ones still posting with you are from that pro-Baez/Casey website.

        I know this is my last visit here as you have been taken over by the JBM. Too bad, I thought you had thoughts of your own in your head…seems not, anymore. What a shame.

    • Maggie~ Your JB Mission comment is HILARIOUS. It’s like Christmas in July.

      • Really ah-ha? You question statements made by commenters on the JBMission site, but you compliment and encourage someone of Maggie’s caliber? Someone who just called others a fruit cake, and in the next sentence accused Mr. Hornsby of being an unethical atty. and even went as far as to question him as a parent? All because he entertained the FACT that the SA withheld evidence? He didn’t even suggest this made Casey seem innocent, God FORBID he ever do that! LOL!!
        Your credibility is out the window right behind your buddy, Maggie.
        It is obvious that neither of you care about the truth, only being right.
        And as Maggie stated, what most of the public believes.

66. ‘Rut Row Shaggy……methinks the jbmission stooges are a bit “testy” now that their darlin’ Casey’s media shelf-life is rapidly dwindling and the powerful Casey backlash continues to gain momentum! Whatsa matter omar, nts and astrology-lady? Not gonna get your piece o’ the pie? Bummer…..and you’ve done so much “work” for Jose and Jerry and Andrea “no S” Lyon. 🙂
    Karma baby……KARMA.
    Note to Mr. Hornsby: As a non-Floridian watching the trial via WESH-2 I thought your legal analysis and commentary was perfect. Major Kudos to you, Sir! You were a breath of fresh air with just the perfect amount of smart realism.

    • Sandra- Your post speaks for its self. The fact that you would equate the outrage over the SA’s actions to WHATEVER you imply is the actual case. Im not really sure, Is it that we are defending our darling? Is it that we want the media coverage to continue? Is it because our “work” for the def. went unnoticed? And you say the people at the JBMission are stooges? Ha! Ha!
      It couldn’t possibly be that the actions by the SAO and the OCSO were just OUTRAGEOUS?
      For you to suggest that because we are don’t buy into propaganda and media sensationalism, the fact that we would rather look at the whole picture and form an opinion based on FACTS rather than what Nancy Grace or JVM told us we are nuts, but for you to see that all as being in love with KC, wanting worldly recognition, or secreatly working with the defense, maybe you need to see about getting YOUR head checked, just a suggestion…..
      “Karma Baby, Karma”- Looks like “astrology-lady” is not the only one who has far-fetched beliefs. I think she believes in Karma too, LOL!!!

67. Richard,

    The only people that are commenting here are from jb mission. That is where the problem is with your site and your recent opinions. The state offered a statement and you blew it off and went with what jb mission said. ok….

    • Baxter,

      I’m not from jb mission. Whether I have agreed or disagreed with any of Mr. Horsby’s articles, my comments have never been moderated or deleted. As far as I can tell, he allows all opinons.

      • Then kim, you are one of the very few people who are not from that that site and I think you know that.

68. I am disappointed. I heard that an article posted by JBMission was referenced on Mr. Hornsby’s Blog, and I was excited to come over and read the feed back. I assumed that commenters who read Mr. Hornsby’s blog, a respected defense atty., would be interested in facts and law. I feel badly for Mr. Hornsby since this was obviously his assumption as well.

    It is one thing to disagree with some of the theories we enjoy tossing around, but to get mad at the facts is a totally different issue. You see, our theories are just that, theories, and when we induldge in exchangeing these theories we are upfront and very clear about them being opinion based, and have never attempted to convince each other or anyone outside otherwise. With that being said, we also put a great deal of work into researching any claim of BS that we make. If we disagree on an issue or state that something the media or any other source has stated or acted wrongly, YES we DO dig deep to prove our statements. We do not take lightly being lied to, so if we make a statement allegeing wrong-doing, we will make it our business to back those claims up! If you want to challenge what we claim, you will definately need to know exactly what you are talking about, and have your facts ready, because we definately will.
    The question that I see asked over and over again is about the 31 days. I would love to debate that, and I could exchange theories with you for days, but the truth is, I don’t know. You don’t know. I can say what has been said, with no real proof, but I can only argue about something I can prove with facts, and that is all the article posted attempted to do.
    This is a blog based on laws and Trial coverage. I would think that most of you would be aware of court procedure, but there I go with my assumptions again. Apparently this is not a familiar subject to alot of you because the opening arguements continue to be used as leverage in an argument over ethics. The opening statements in a trial are NOT considered evidence, and even though they were presented by the defense team, the defense does NOT bear the burdon of proof. The defense could have alleged that Caylee rode off on the back of a pink elephant if they so desired, it is neither here nor there. Yes they made some pretty steep allegations, but it was in no way their burdon or responsibility to prove any of it. I don’t know if any of the defenses allegations were true, but I do know that the state did not have the evidence to prove guilt, and that was my discourse.
    Now, I do feel, and let me emphasize that this is MHO, but I really think the defense put George “on trial” as a strategy. They needed to show the jury how easy it is to make someone seem guilty based on the same type of circumstancial evidence that the state was presenting. Even if they still consider the Zanny/Nanny story to be true, they dare speak that ZFG name while she has that lawsuit hangimg over their heads. I know Morgen and Morgen were on standby hoping the slightest peep of Zanny would be muttered by Jose. So what are their choices? They needed to save their clients life. I cant say what happened. It could be alot of things, but the only thing I can factually say is that if after 3 years not one solid piece of evidence can be presented showing guilt, I am completely convinced of innocence.

    You all can save the pictures and the videos of Caylee singing for the weak. No one, like the Pros tried to do at trial and bloggers all over blogdom are still trying to pull, is going to tell me that if I don’t look at a video of Caylee singing and become convinced of Casey’s guilt that I don’t care about her death, and that I some how support the killing of children, PLEASE! And then tell me I’m crazy??
    I am very proud to be an informed reader and commenter on the JBmission blog. I am not a “run of the mill” type, and I pride myself on that also. Until the not guilty verdict came in, we were all scoffed at for calling it. Who’s laughing now?
    I will wrap this up by announcing that anyone who suggests a boycott of any network which broadcasts an interview of Casey Anthony is hee haa hilarious! I will suggest that our next post be about why that is and Maybe a few suggestions of some more worthy and effective boycott ideas to those of you looking for a cause, maybe walmart is a good start.
    And last but not least if anyone is interested in the recent articles and reports concerning the cost of Casey’s defense for the tax payers, maybe you should swing back over to the JBMission to get the REAL scoop. JB posted, yet another very enlightening, factual article on that subject!! Have a great day, all! And thank you Mr. Hornsby for keeping an open mind and being interested in the truth, even if it is unpopular.

    • Well apparently the jury did consider alot of Jose Baez opening statement. According to the Foreman, he and others were suspicious of George. Even if the jury believed the death to be a pool accident, which is what Baez presented threw pictures, there was no evidence presented that Casey was not present the day Caylee died, no evidence presented or disputed that she didn’t die on June 16th. Her cell phone pings put her in the area of her home that day. The juror who spoke said they didn’t know who was responsible for Caylee. With that said, Casey Anthony was the uncontested biological residental parent. She is the person who is legally responsible for the child. The grandparents did not have custody and whether they provided food.shelter,etc, was their choice as grandparents. They were not required by law to do so. Casey Anthony, as the parent, is required by law to obtain medical care for her child when it is needed. A parent must provide reasonable care and supervision of their child, especially if they know a child can get outside unattended (picture of Caylee opening sliding door possibly gaining access to pool, implies it was known). When/if the child was found unresponsive (no way to know if she was actually dead when found), it would be the parent’s responsibility to call for medical assitance, it doesn’t matter if grandpa, neighbor, or friend was present.
      What happened after the fact(who took the child’s body to dispose), would have no bearing on the parent’s actions/non actions when the accident was discovered.

      • If you listened to the jury foreman, he specifically stated that the jurors did NOT believe the molestation accusations or anything else for which no proof was offered in opening statement. Juror #11 said specifically that the jurors did not believe George due to the way he answered questions and appeared to be vague or combative when questioned. The opinions that the jurors held of George were the result of GEORGE, not Baez or his opening statement. Of course, all I can base that on is what the Juror himself said. I wouldn’t dare to suppose that he’s lying or that I know the minds or opinions of the jurors better than they know them themselves. And I tend to agree with you that not calling 911 or doing something to try to save the child was irresponsible and reprehensible. But it’s the prosecutor’s fault that they did not charge Casey with something believable. And while we’re on the “we just don’t know what happened” theory….let’s just be real honest….we can all ASSUME Casey was there or George was there or Mickey Mouse was there. The fact of the matter is that we do not know. We have only the testimony of known liars. So when that happens, we have to rely wholly on the LAW, and when it could have as easily been one way or the other, then the law states that the jury must rule in favor of the defense. The wall that people keep hitting is the 31 days. I agree that it’s atrocious….but I don’t know WHY it happened. I can speculate just like you do….but that’s all it is. SPECULATION. The reality is….WE. DON’T. KNOW. Period. What makes me a bit miffed in this entire case is that people spout their opinions as fact, and use their hatred as grounds for punishment. People are missing the big picture. The jury was entitled to form opinions of any witness. They were also told that it was within their discretion to assign the weight to each testimony as they saw fit. The jurors went with what they were given. Now people are mad because the jury used logic rather than emotion to come to a verdict. People are mad because the jurors were suspicious of George….and YET….for 3 years, people all over the blogs…most of which were anti defense/anti casey blogs….HATED George and found him to be a reprehensible liar…along with Cindy. Yet, when the jurors have the same inclination towards George, suddenly it’s an outrage and the jurors were just ignorant and in a rush to go home. The bottom line is this: Casey was found NOT GUILTY. The fact that some of us have felt for 3 years that there was NEVER evidence of a murder does NOT mean we “love Casey” or approve of the way she behaved. Some of us are just able to sort through the facts without assuming that every skank or wh*re who shakes it in a bar is a murderer and every liar on the planet (and there are MANY) tossed their child in a swamp. Trials are meant ONLY to determine whether or not the accused has been proven guilty beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. They are NOT meant to answer all the questions. Most of the time, the whole truth never comes out.

        • The jury did not rely solely on the law when determining who was responsible for Caylee death. The foreman’s statement, they couldn’t determine who was responsible for Caylee shows they questioned the fact that Casey wasn’t responsible for her own child when she was present, they used “caregiver” to try to shift responsibility to George..where is the legal basis for that assumption, when Casey was at home and no one else had legal custody of Caylee. Casey was legally free to leave with Caylee at any time, which is why the 31 days time period was able to occur.
          If I took my child to the babysitter, and while I was still present the child had an accident that needed immediate medical attention, I couldn’t, as the parent, just up and leave saying “oh well it’s your problem now”. Do you think that would absolve me of my parental resonsibilities?
          The State brough charges of First Degree because they believed the death to be premeditated and also believed their evidence supported that, but that was not the only option the jury had to consider. They also had other options to consider from the jury instructions.
          Murder in the First Degree includes the lesser crimes of Murder in the Second Degree,
          Manslaughter and Third Degree Felony Murder, all of which are unlawful.
          A killing that is excusable or was committed by the use of justifiable deadly force is lawful.
          If you find Caylee Marie Anthony was killed by Casey Marie Anthony, you will then
          consider the circumstances surrounding the killing in deciding if the killing was Murder in the First
          Degree or was Murder in the Second Degree or Manslaughter or Third Degree Felony Murder
          whether the killing was excusable or resulted from justifiable use of deadly force.

          AGGRAVATED MANSLAUGHTER OF A CHILD
          § 782.07, Fla. Stat.
          To prove the crime of Aggravated Manslaughter of a Child, the State must prove the following
          two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
          1. Caylee Marie Anthony is dead.
          2. Casey Marie Anthony’s act(s) caused the death of Caylee Marie Anthony.
          or
          The death of Caylee Marie Anthony was caused by the culpable negligence of Casey
          Marie Anthony.
          I will now define “culpable negligence” for you. Each of us has a duty to act reasonably
          toward others. If there is a violation of that duty, without any conscious intention to harm, that
          violation is negligence. But culpable negligence is more than a failure to use ordinary care toward
          others. In order for negligence to be culpable, it must be gross and flagrant. Culpable negligence is
          a course of conduct showing reckless disregard of human life, or of the safety of persons exposed to
          its dangerous effects, or such an entire want of care as to raise a presumption of a conscious
          indifference to consequences, or which shows wantonness or recklessness, or a grossly careless
          disregard of the safety and welfare of the public, or such an indifference to the rights of others as is
          equivalent to an intentional violation of such rights.
          The negligent act or omission must have been committed with an utter disregard for the safety
          of others. Culpable negligence is consciously doing an act or following a course of conduct that the
          defendant must have known, or reasonably should have known, was likely to cause death or great
          bodily injury.
          If you find the defendant guilty of Aggravated Manslaughter of a Child, you must then
          determine whether the State has further proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Caylee Marie Anthony
          was a child whose death was caused by the neglect of Casey Marie Anthony, a caregiver.
          “Child” means any person under the age of 18 years.
          “Caregiver” means a parent, adult household member, or other person responsible for a child’s
          welfare.
          “Neglect of a child” means:
          1. A caregiver’s failure or omission to provide a child with the care, supervision, and services
          necessary to maintain a child’s physical and mental health, including, but not limited to, food,nutrition, clothing, shelter, supervision, medicine, and medical services that a prudent person would
          consider essential for the well-being of the child;
          Repeated conduct or a single incident or omission by a caregiver that results in, or could
          reasonably be expected to result in, a substantial risk of death of a child may be considered in
          determining neglect.

          AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE
          § 827.03(2), Fla. Stat.
          To prove the crime of Aggravated Child Abuse, the State must prove the following two
          elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
          1. Casey Marie Anthony knowingly or willfully committed child abuse upon Caylee
          Marie Anthony and in so doing caused great bodily harm, permanent disability, or
          permanent disfigurement.
          2. Caylee Marie Anthony was under the age of eighteen years.
          “Willfully” means intentionally, knowingly and purposely.
          “Child abuse” means the intentional infliction of physical or mental injury upon a child or
          an intentional act that could reasonably be expected to result in physical or mental injury to a child
          or active encouragement of any person to commit an act that results or could reasonably be expected
          to result in physical or mental injury to a child.

          After the “accident”, not knowing that the child was actually deceased or could be saved. The inaction of Casey to seek medical attention (at the very least) for her own child would be gross negligence. Not to call 911 or seek medical help (is an intentional willful act). An unresponsive child, who may not be dead, would/could indeed suffer great permanent bodily harm(organs shutting down) which could reasonably lead to the ultimately permanent outcome..death.

          • I didn’t see any evidence at trial proving Kc was home when Caylee drowned. I never saw any evidence that proved she was home. Only the testimony of GA, of whom I can not believe. I have read documents that show her cell phone at home. There is a 4 hour gap in cell phone activity. There is no proof she was there at that time. Your comment relies on assumptions that were not proven at trial and have never been proven. IMO

          • Again…you’re making an assumption. The jury said they didn’t know….ergo, NOTHING WAS PROVEN. I know what the available charges were. You’re pointing the finger at everyone else, in particular the jurors, and implying that they somehow shirked their duties. But re-read what you wrote. “The foreman’s statement, they couldn’t determine who was responsible for Caylee shows they questioned the fact that Casey wasn’t responsible for her own child when she was present, they used “caregiver” to try to shift responsibility to George..where is the legal basis for that assumption, when Casey was at home and no one else had legal custody of Caylee.” Based on the evidence presented…..they were NOT convinced beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt that Casey was at home and that Casey was responsible for Caylee on the day of the incident. Where is the proof? Cell phone pings?? Do you have the time of death? Do you have a for sure cause of death? None of that was proven. Without that, we can “assume” a lot of stuff. You want to have it both ways. You want to call the defense liars and complain that the jury bought Baez’s opening hook, line and sinker AND YET you are upset that they did NOT, in fact, buy it hook, line and sinker because it was not PROVEN. The jurors who have been interviewed have stated that they did NOT have a cause of death or a time of death or anything to determine what really happened. There were too many questions unanswered for them. In that case, they were instructed to find verdict in favor of the defense. It’s simple. You’d like to have seen Casey held accountable for not reporting her daughter dead. Fine. I can agree with that. But you can’t argue that the jury shirked its responsibility by believing Baez’s opening statement and then turn around and assume that they just bought the drowning on June 16th story. Do you see what I’m saying? What the jurors have stated is that there was NOTHING….not ONE piece of evidence….that proved conclusively when or why or how Caylee died. All can agree that a child’s body being tossed in a swamp is a reprehensible and disgusting tragedy. But the law says that if we have no proof as to who put her there…..we can’t just find the mother guilty just because we don’t like her. You are trying to cloak your arguments in pseudo facts and assumptions and then criticize anyone WHY you feel the way you do, and I am not criticizing you or calling you crazy for feeling that way. Conversely, you are insinuating that folks who see it a way other than the way you view it are wrong and uncaring. If that’s your theory, then fine. Cling to it. That’s your right. Just quit criticizing others who have a different one than you.

          • Wow…somehow I accidentally deleted part of a sentence toward the bottom of my last comment. What my point was is that I can understand WHY you feel the way you do. I can even understand what you’re basing those feelings on. I am not criticizing your logic nor your feelings. I’m just simply saying that, while my logic is different (as was that of the jury), it doesn’t mean we care less or have flawed reasoning. You’re saying that they should have found Casey guilty of one of the lesser included charges…..but I’m saying (as did the jury)…that those charges were not proven either. That’s my opinion. That’s the opinion of the jurors. You can’t convict someone without at least providing one piece of evidence that hasn’t been blown out of the water by showing how that evidence COULD have just as easily pointed to another person. THAT is reasonable doubt.

      • And are you implying, then, that if you see a child who has been struck by a car or who is floating in a public pool, you as an unrelated adult, have no obligation to call for help or to report that to someone? I agree that Casey should have been responsible to call 911 if she was there and knew her child had drowned. I’m not disputing that at all. But the fact is, we may NEVER know what exactly happened because no one is saying what happened. It was never the job of the defense to prove anything. Their job was to create reasonable doubt. So while I see your point and I tend to agree with it……the simple fact of the matter is that the defense DID present reasons as to why Casey didn’t make that call. Whether we believe them or not is irrelevant because we were not jurors. We can all have our theories…..and isn’t that what everyone is pounding the JBMission for….having theories? So your theory that Casey was home and just didn’t call 911….or that maybe Caylee wasn’t dead at the time she was found…..those are theories. The fact of the matter is, we don’t know and most likely never will. What we DO know is that Murder One was not proven. It’s as simple as that. Your opinion as to Casey’s guilt of murder is simply that….your opinion based on YOUR THEORY.

        • I don’t know if someone who sees an accident or fight that results in death is legally responsible to call or take action, morally I would hope one would take action…but you frequently see and hear where people don’t get involve at all. That might be a question for Mr. Hornsby.
          While I don’t believe the death was accidental(yes my theory), I’m going off the jury’s belief that the death was an accident.

          Reasons given why Casey didn’t make the call for medical assistance does not make her any less culpable. No evidence was presented that Casey was distraught, with-drawn, unable to function. It was shown that there was no change in her demeanor(how she was before compared to after). A grief counselor that did not examine her was speculating too. And the fact that no one knows if Caylee was actually dead at the time being found of a supposed accident, is the factor that demonstrates negligence because she did indeed die. Caylee was not deemed medically dead at that time by a doctor, Casey nor George are medicallly qualified…and that is a fact. Even ignorance of the law is not a defense.

          Fact is that Casey herself by her own handwritten statement, her police interviews and jail house videos place her and her alone as the last person with Caylee. What evidence was there shown that disputes that?

          • There was no evidence shown to dispute that. It was not the job of the defense to dispute that. Like I said….I totally understand why you feel the way you do…..and you’re right, Caylee did, indeed, die. But we don’t know how or when. And you’re right….if it had been my child, I would have freaked out if I thought anything had happened to her….so I am not disagreeing with why you feel that way. It’s just that we don’t know the story, and we can’t convict on less than proof beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt.

          • And again….the jurors interviewed have not said they believe it was an accident. Multiple times, they have stated that when the trial ended, they still had no idea HOW Caylee died, WHEN Caylee died, or WHERE Caylee died. You’re assuming that they believed it was an accident. There is no evidence that the jurors believe it was an accident based on the interviews with jurors that I’ve listened to. What they have stated over and over again is that they do not KNOW what happened to Caylee because there was nothing presented in trial to prove what happened.

69. Baxter-Mr Hornsby’s been around the block and back relative to what makes blawgs roll. I have read everything he’s written on this case and when I saw the reference to jbm I had a really good laugh. Come on, don’t be so disappointed-have a good laugh.

    • I know. I have been following him here and on WS. His attitude and humor seems to have changed since the verdict. I liked his humor better when it was aimed at Casey and Baez.

70. The fact remains…..the jbmission sheep shifted gears/suspects just as soon as Jose said the word “go”. It was quite hilarious to witness the quick turnabout! They went from “there is no doubt that Zanny the Nanny is REAL (!?) and we have tracked her down as the super-sleuths we are”…..to….”bad, bad George! I always suspected him!”. LOL!!! How disingenuous can you get?? The handful of miscreants over there feed off of each others while sharing sob stories of their own family members’ “wrongful imprisonment”. Gee……no wonder…..if you take a tiny group of police haters and paranoid “they’re out to frame us ALL!”-types…..you get such a website as the mission. Here’s a handy translation for anyone attempting to plow through their garbage over there: Being an “out-of-the-box thinker” equals “it’s OK to commit crimes and be a convicted felon because EVERYONE has been set-up and framed”. OK……really??? LOL!!

    • Your reading comprehension level must be pretty low, Sandra. If you had really read all the comments there, you would have known that many posters had a very difficult time swallowing the opening statement. While there is ample evidence to suggest that not all of the “imaginary” friends are truly imaginary….no one at the JBM ever stated that they had tracked anyone down and proven them to exist. Why does it make you so angry that we were right?? What we were right about is that there was NEVER evidence of Murder One. I guess you haven’t read any anti-casey blogs to peruse their “theories” either, eh? Drop it already, Sandra….your comments smack of immaturity.

    • Well I for one have speculated like many, but never really believed the zanny existed. I would speculate to entertain the idea, just as the Police did. They flat out called her a liar in the interrogation, but yet they went on to investigate the idea that the story was true. Trying to leave no stone unturned. Problem is, that they stopped at the zanny. I kept looking for something that made sense. Murder is not it. Have never felt it to be murder. So, I began to suspect GA…….before trial. Go ahead and read the blogs. You will see it. Majority opinionators do not have an open mind to the truth. This family has lied over and over and majority opinionators continue to fall for the lies. They just pick and choose the lies they want to believe. I for one, keep an open mind. I can only speak for myself, but your relentless efforts to degrade the mission is just plain silly. IMO

    • Sandra- I haven’t noticed any posts by you offering any contribution to the topic at hand. What you have posted are a few attempts at insulting the people who frequent the JBmission. It is starting to seem personal, but maybe thats just me being paranoid, lol!!
      If your insults were even close to the mark, I would ignore you, but your accusations and claims are so outlandish that I don’t think even the worst critic could possibly believe any of your rediculous claims could be true. you claim:
      *We base our opinions on what Jose says
      *We all have sob stories about family members “wrongful imprisionment”
      *we’re paranoid
      *We’re police haters
      *We believe others are often out to frame us
      *We write a bunch of garbage
      *we believe it is ok to commit crimes, especially felons
      I won’t even bother to defend any of these claims. Anyone who actually believes these allegations are true, are as big a waste of time and space as the accuser. I will give you credit for the much needed laugh. You are a real life hater! I love it though, my hubby and I laugh together as we lay here cuddled up, he is a 16 year active duty Marine Corps Military police officer, LOL!!

      • God Bless you and your husband, KimMiller! Thank you for the service!

71. Did everyone read the latest from John Bradley backtracking?

    “On June 27, the discrepancy was discussed with Baez. … Mr. Baez brought the discrepancy forward in court testimony and again at closing with his court exhibit,” said Danielle Tavernier, a spokeswoman for the State Attorney’s Office in Orlando.

    “During jury deliberations Mr. Bradley admitted to sending additional report information to the wrong email address but was able to deliver information to prosecutors on the evening of July 4,” Tavernier continued. “On July 5, the prosecutors prepared a Notice of Supplemental Discovery for defense but it was never provided because the jury had reached their verdict. Mr. Bradley never told prosecutors that the searches or the dates and times of the searches were inaccurate.

    “We are dismayed at the suggestion made by the defense that prosecutors would withhold exculpatory material,” he said. “Court records show that the defense was completely aware of the issues, utilizing these facts at trial.”

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/20/anthony-trial-witness-john-bradley-backtracks_n_905119.html

    • Im having trouble figureing out just how this article vindicates the Prosecution? This is not breaking news, it was published the 21st. It doesn’t matter if he sent info to the wrong email or not, he also stated that he called and spoke with them on the phone.

      The only thing this article states is that Mr. Bradly did not make accusations, he simply put the information out there, and that is true. Im quite sure he’s gotten his fair share of death threats for this, LOL!! poor guy.

    • Baxter-I did. Thanks for the link.

72. again
    Everyone is aware Casey has been found NOT GUILTY and there is not a darn thing anyone can do about it!

    The story ended about 2 weeks ago,not the way most wanted it but most stories never do!

    • Agree, the case is over, but the truth keeps on chooglin, so the saga continues. stay tuned 🙂

      • NTS-Teeth float? Hair doesn’t? Say it ain’t so.

        • huh?

73. Omar,

    And where is it that you are not criticizing other people’s theories, to tell me to stop giving my opinions. I’ve read many critical posts written by you.
    When I give my opinions, I do try to provide examples based on my own experiences, common sense, and evidence I felt was presented at trial. When others give their opinions, I might state why I disagree but I do not tell them to stop. Mr. Hornsby has not asked me not to comment. If he does, since this is his blog, I will comply.

    • Kim…I’m not criticizing your opinion. I said more than once that I understand why you hold those opinions. I’m just saying that I have not based my “opinion” on Casey’s guilt on her character over the past 3 years. The evidence did not add up to me. That’s it. I even stated that you are entitled to stick with your opinion. It’s certainly your right. And at the JBM, I definitely did insult a few people. But I didn’t go over to their blogs to do it. They came in with criticism and they got it back.

      Anyway….I do not criticize your opinion. And truth be told….I could care less who likes mine.

74. And Kim….I would very much appreciate you pointing out to me where I asked you to stop posting your opinion. Once you find that, please copy and paste so that I can apologize to you.

75. Omar,

    Omar at 4:36. bottom of paragraph.
    ‘You are trying to cloak your arguments in pseudo facts and assumptions and then criticize anyone WHY you feel the way you do, and I am not criticizing you or calling you crazy for feeling that way. Conversely, you are insinuating that folks who see it a way other than the way you view it are wrong and uncaring. If that’s your theory, then fine. Cling to it. That’s your right. Just quit criticizing others who have a different one than you.’

    You take my difference of opinion as criticizm, so I took your statement as meaning if I can’t conform just quit because my opinion is not going to change. If used psuedo facts please let me know what you are referring to. I try not to just abstractly throw things out there. The majority of the time, I try to lay out my opinons and the basis of how I form my belief. At times, like everyone else I do get sarcastic and for that I apologize. I don’t recall calling anyone crazy but if I did I apologize for that too.
    I don’t mind a good debate, but me being a minority on this site, I have felt that many people have been more derogatory and critical of my opinons.

    • Kim Possible? says snipped:

      I don’t mind a good debate, but me being a minority on this site, I have felt that many people have been more derogatory and critical of my opinons.

      Are you really FINALLY at LAST feeling like a minority? And you say this is why you were getting snippy and maybe?? insinuating other’s who don’t think the same way as you, are crazy… Well, welcome to my world!!!
      BTW, if I counted comments right, I’d guess you’re still in the top 50% of commenters.

      Carry on…I just had to add my two cents and welcome you to the edge of the “minority” and honestly I haven’t read anything deragatory towards you but I agree, there are a few who are critical of your opinions. I guess we can say the same about your comments. I find your comments critical as well. But isn’t that called a debate?

      • JBMission – A debate is a formal method of interactive and representational argument. (Wiki). It is not an opportunity to demean, degrade or discredit posters who have an opposing viewpoint. Your “debating” skills are limited to hitting the DELETE when a factual argument is presented. You garnered a group of people who simply agreed with you and in your absence they burned at the stake anyone who had the misfortune to come into Ms Anthony’s “altered universe”. That is not a debate.

        • @anonymous 10:45; Exactly correct! JBM is a nasty old biddy who cackles in delight as brags about deleting all opposing opinions. That site is a joke. A bad joke.

        • Great observation Anonymous…In the absence of naysayers and allowing only polite and open-minded discussion was the best decision I ever made.
          If you recall, you were one of my first commenters when I opened my sight. You refused to answer my questions. You didn’t like me and I didn’t like you. So considering the fact that I have a personal blog and not one such as Topix, or one of the other news affiliated blogs, I decided the topic of discussion and it wasn’t negative Casey Anthony, it was “What If” she’s innocent. In the process, I attracted other people like myself which made the experience enjoyable unlike relentless arguing when you were allowed to post on my site.
          My happiness is all that mattered. It was my blog.

      • JBM,

        I was quoting the paragraph where Omar was addressing me, Omar wrote to quit critizing others who have a different opinion. I felt I was stating my opinions and basis for them in response to others, just as the others have stated their opinions in response to mine. I did not believe that I was calling anyone crazy or criticizing, but I was trying to make the point that if that was the feelings conveyed it could go both ways…yes debating.

        I could just be a sheep and just go to a like-minded sites where others might blindly praise my posts, some who themselves refer only to what’s reported by others and not read or verify documents that were presented at trial. If I only did that I would not be opening myself up to other possibilities or other opinions. I may discover an opinion that is so profound, it may actually change mine.

        It troubled me to be viewed as cloaking my opinions in pseudo facts(when I truely try to provide documents or circumstances that I base my opinions). If I get something wrong and it’s brought to my attention with their supporting facts, not just a blanket statement, I will go back and check documents that I relied on. But I guess there is nothing derogatory about one bringing reference to their 10 yr old into an opinion, as if my posts are not worthy of a child’s thought process, when their own post concerning the skull/teeth may be relying on incorrect information or photo. On many levels I’m probably not smarter than a 5th grader-LOL

        I am fully aware that the verdict is a done deal and can never be changed, but it was my opinion that I was entitled to an opinion. I’ve accepted the verdict to be Not Guilty, but that doesn’t mean I have to agree with it. Those defending the verdict have the exact same rights to agree with it. But what’s the point of a blog if there are no discussions? Just because I disagree doesn’t mean that I don’t understand the sacrafices of this jury, to me that’s two separate issues.
        The defense team stood forward and publicly preached that every one needs to accept the jury’s verdict, yet they are appealing the lying convictions. Explain to me how that is not hypocrytical?

    • OH. Ok, Kim. If you took my comment saying to “quit criticizing others” to mean that I asked you to quit voicing your opinion, then I apologize. ‘Some people’s only opinions are criticism. Again….it’s your right. But in return, respect my right to do so as well. Thank you.

      • Omar, I understand . I do respect your opinions & your right to voice them as well.

        • Thank you, KimPossible. I respect yours too.

76. This is only my opinion concerning unreported death by any undetermined means. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, if I disagree with someone or someone disagrees with me, that’s each person’s own prerogative.

    1. Caylee is dead.
    2.Death can occur by homicide, accident, suicide, natural causes.
    3.Last known date proven by video to be alive June 15th
    4.June 16th, both the Prosecution and Defense contend Caylee died. Defense also focused on establishing George was there that day, the pool,pool ladder with testimony and photos (not just opening statement).
    5.Casey puts herself as the last person with Caylee, not just once but through multiple statements. So whether one would use the term missing or dead, the defense established through their own evidence/testimony Caylee was never missing(not just through the opening statement). Even if missing, not to report it would still be negligent. A toddler can not adequately feed, cloth, shelter, or care for themself.
    6.Since Casey puts herself as the last person with Caylee, the condition she might find Caylee in (unresponsive, possibly dead-we do not need to know how,when,where or why) does not deem her a medical authority to make that determination. The Possible fear of what her friends or family might think about her, does not absolve her legal responsibilty to the child’s welfare.

    True, defense does not have to prove anything, but they chose to put one on, which included evidence and testimony on behalf of their client. Even though opening statements are not evidence, it would be unethical for a defense attorney to make up or fabricate a story. They laid out their defense,provided their facts and they did not contest or provide evidence to the contrary that Casey was not there at the time of Caylee’s death. They even provided, their evidence concerning Casey’s behavior and why she didn’t report the death, establishing that she was there. No facts presented or implied, testimony or otherwise, that Casey was not present. That is why it is my opinion that some of the jurors(based on statements of the jurors who spoke out)considered an issue that was not even in evidence and not contested. It was my own opinion that would be an unreasonable inference of the facts presented.

    In my opinion, alot of people focused on and was suspicious of Cindy and George because they didn’t take action during the 31 days. But some people forget the fact that Casey was an adult and Caylee was her child, she was free to leave and take Caylee where ever she wanted. It was within her legal right to refuse to allow the grandparents access to her. Legally, at that point and time, there was nothing the grandparents could really do, especially if there was no prior child abuse. Were they to call police and say my daughter is being spiteful and chance being forever alienated? At that time, police would probably dismiss it as a domestic matter.

    My example of why culpable negligence should have been a consideration is due to the possibilty the child (injured by either an accident or medical event) could be saved. When I worked at a heart & lung center, a toddler was brought in by ambulance, unresponsive(they were actively working on him),he was a blue tint color and to me,a lay person, he appeared to be dead. Later I had found out that they had taken him directly to surgery and to my amazement he survived. He had a heart condition called Tetralogy of Fallot.

    • Bravo KimPossible! Perfectly stated. But I do have a problem with your criticism of the jurors. In my opinion, had the prosecutors had one incident of prior child neglect, I believe the jurors would have voted guilty on that indictment. Other than lining up character witnesses, the prosecution had little of anything else to prove murder. The few character witness that did testify all agreed that Casey was a good mother.
      I believe the defense did a good job of painting George as a liar. If you look at George as the liar, then you may question his assertion regarding the last time he saw Caylee. Had George been more forth coming and maybe admitted to having a fling with River Cruz, I think he would have been more believable.
      I believe he was a big problem for the jury.
      Contrary to popular belief, I’m not happy that no one is paying the price for whatever happened to Caylee. But I’m not willing to execute someone without solid evidence. Maybe if LE would have taken their time to gather ALL the information without tunnel vision they would have indicted the responsible party properly with the evidence that would prove their case.
      Justice delayed is not justice denied. Now we have a double jeopardy issue as far as Casey is concerned so chances are this case is closed. I don’t believe anyone is happy with the verdict except to say someone wasn’t put to death for a crime that wasn’t proven. For that I’m happy.

      • JBMission stated on 3/25/2010 “The problem with Casey is that she’s a poor murderess. Her murdering skills are underpar in my opinion. I’ll admit Casey is a good liar, a fairly good thief, she does have some embezzling skills, but murder isn’t her forte. To think that I actually would have hired her to be my kids nanny. Look at her, really. Wholesome girl, beautiful smile, likable personality, polite, well spoken. Really, what’s wrong with Casey? I would have fixed her up with my son and he would have been happy…She seems like a nice girl. Maybe that’s why she doesn’t know how to get away with murder.”

      • JBM

        Since you have a problem with my criticisim of the jury, Do you have a problem with the defense appealing the lying convictions? They tell everyone to accept the jury’s verdict, yet they are appealing what they proved their own client was in court. Not only that, they want the state of Florida to pay for the appeal since Casey is indigent. Only accepting part of the verdict, Is that a problem for you?
        Yes, the jury was suspicious of the George. I think Baez did a good job in his closing argument. He used visual aids and that made it very easy for the jury to understand and remember. Do I think the Prosecution could have done more? Yes, I think when they found out the defense theory, they could have spent more time poking holes in the defense story.

        From the juror# 2 interview with St. Petersburg Times: The jury didn’t believe anything George Anthony said on the stand, according to Juror No. 2.
        But more importantly to the jurors who opposed the manslaughter charge, no one could say who was Caylee’s caretaker — the mother or the grandparents — when the child actually died.
        If it was murder, who did it? If she died accidentally, then who was the child’s caretaker?

        But Juror No. 2 didn’t buy that.
        “The six that voted guilty said it didn’t matter at what point in time she came home and found out her daughter was missing,” he said. “She had to report it in some way, shape or form, and that’s where the negligence came in.”
        But some jurors, he said, had decided not to convict Casey Anthony of any charge in the girl’s death. By lunch Tuesday, the guilty side started to lose votes.

        Juror No. 2 was the last holdout. Deliberations lasted for 11 hours over two days. They filed into court at 2:15 p.m. Tuesday to hand over their verdict.
        “We truly don’t know what happened,” he said. “Somebody knows, but we don’t know.”
        I was hoping Juror #2 would have explained what had changed his mind. At what point was Casey Anthony absolved of her parental duties to her child? Since there was lesser charges considered, was it the fact that she was charged with 1st degree and that absolved her parental obligations? Everyone keeps focusing on the First Degree charges & or Death Penalty, but the lesser charges have absolutely nothing to do with the death penalty. In the lesser charge, where would anyone be exicuted? When a custodial parent finds out/discovers their child is missing, severly injured or possibly dead and chooses not to report it, when is that action not culpable negligence?

77. Mr. Hornsby, since you didn’t answer my question as to the best place this alleged misconduct of LE should be reported (other than internal affairs of OCSD for LE), I’d like to ask another question. Are you obligated, as a member of the Florida Bar, to report the prosecutors for their part in this? I would ask the same of all other attorneys aware of this allegation, including Judge Perry.

78. Notthatsmart-I read your above comment on July 22, 2011@9:39pm “I think it’s kind of wierd that people assume that teeth float but hair doesn’t.” The statement,although odd,cannot compare to the cheekiness of Omar’s statement that “posters had a difficult time swollowing the opening statement.”

    The proof jurors were looking for was metaphorical and theatrical. They had no time for the evidence that was presented to them by prosecutors.Omar would have you believe that jurors are witnesses.

    They found all the answers they ever wanted from Mr Baez’ opening statement which was a magical, mystical journey to FreedomLand. He fought for his client like a freaking bulldog and when it came to the closing statement he did the same. Did he need the facts? Certainly not. Did he need to be well prepared? No. Did he have a moment or just a minute of apprehension when he watched the jailhouse videos? No. The entire defense was predicated on telling one lie after another. The desired result was the hope and prayer that jurors would lie. They did. Most defense lawyers ask jurors to give their client some light at the end of the tunnel. These jurors delivered.

    • I am missing something?? How is it that I would have anyone believe jurors are witnesses??? Isn’t the job of the jury to look at the evidence or lack thereof and make a determination based on what was presented? My statement was that the jurors who have been interviewed stated that they still had no idea what happened to Caylee….when she died, where she died, or how she died. Those questions were not answered for them. You must be confusing my statement about commenters at the JBMission with my comment about the jurors. You assume that you know the minds of the jurors when you make statements like, “They found all the answers they ever wanted from Mr Baez’ opening statement which was a magical, mystical journey to FreedomLand.” That is, perhaps, true in your mind, but is in direct contrast to what the jurors have said.

      • I doubt it.

79. Kimpossible, would you have a reasonable explanation as to why someone would remove some of the bottom teeth, then replace some of the top teeth, to take the full skeletal photograph? That makes absolutely no sense to me, whatsoever. The picture clearly shows opposite of what the autopsy report states. No, I have not seen a picture of just the skull that isn’t pixilated but there is no way they would change the teeth then photograph it as evidence, unless they are trying to claim it was upright the whole time, according to what Melich wanted Kronk to say. If so, someone is in a whole lot of trouble if anyone notices this photo doesn’t match the others.

    • Zuben,

      I can only say that I had personally cooresponded with someone who was present in the courtroom almost everyday (with a media pass for OS) and he saw the photos, unpixilated. The day the photos where shown, he had made his own drawings/sketches of various views of the skull/ tape along with evidence #’s and written discriptions. I view on of his drawings that showed 4 teeth on top jaw and a hand written note that stated 2 teeth on each side. To clarify it, I messaged him with the question and he responded back. He stated that there were 4 teeth on the maxilla and there were 9 teeth on the mandible(lower jaw) as stated in the autopsy report.

      The full skeletal photo is taken from above, so I can’t make out a clear view of the middle bottom teeth or even be able to count the teeth. I can only say that there were photos of the skull taken at the scene and also more photos taken at the medical examiners office. It appears to me, from the full skeletal photo, that they were putting the bones in the approx. anatomical position. This part is only my assumption since I’ve never been a medical examiner. I didn’t see any of the missing teeth they found at the scene laying on the table, so it was my assumption that because they appeared to be reconstructing the bones to the correct position, that they may have put the missing maxilla teeth back in to the socket to complete the reconstruction for the photo. Various photos of the bones and skull had been taken separately prior to reconstruction

      Do you have a report or something other than your view of the photo that says there were teeth missing from the lower jaw? Since photos were taken at the scene, you would be implying that someone glued the missing teeth back in the lower mandible at the scene and neither Dr. G or Dr. Spitz pick up on that? The missing teeth were recovered from the scene and brought back to the medical examiner’s office on 2 separate days. What I thought I saw on the skeletal photo was what appeared to be an incisor in the maxilla, this was part of my basis that their reconstruction procedures may have be replacing the recovered teeth in their correct anatomical position. The incisor was the one found adhered to the calvarium and the other incisor was never recovered.

      I hope my explanation makes sense.

80. The child died before or after being placed in the trunk while the vehicle was parked at the home. The teeth were scattered like the bones and with the exception of one tooth all others were recovered at the final resting place. They were a source of DNA. The autopsy pictures were part of discovery but were not published discovery out of respect for the victim and the wishes of the family. (see Court doc submitted to Judge Strickland).

    Do not assume someone you do not know, who did something you are not quite sure of is “in a whole lot of trouble”. The only person in “Big Trouble” was the precious little victim. You might be distraught about a pixilated photo but most serious and sensitive writers/posters prefer to remember her big brown eyes.

    • Anonymous- everytime you post, you comment on something you cherry-pick, without bothering to read entire contexts or just ignoring previous posts which explain your issues. If you had read previous comments you would know that Zuben is referring to a picture NON pixelated which IS on the web, which shows the remains and the skull in the pic.
      For you to refer to yourself as a serious writer and insinuate that Zuban and NTS are not is a joke. These two have researched in depth the evidence surrounding this case. They did not just base their claims on paranoia and distain for the law as many have suggested they have. None of us who believe that Casey Anthony was rightfully found not guilty have come to that conclusion because we don’t feel that Caylee’s big brown eyes are precious. We all want to see justice for her as much as anyone else, but to get justice, a through investigation would have to take place. I don’t believe that the OCSO had the intentions to just FRAME Casey from the get-go, but I feel like they rushed to judgement, and once the media had the masses in an uproar and OCSO had already promised them blood they felt had no choice but to convict her at all cost, and when the evidence wasn’t there, well they had to pull something outta their A**es.
      I mentioned previously that there are alot of circumstances which make guilt seem the only reasonable explaination, and I could debate on reasons that could explain that as well as reasons she didn’t want to talk to police, but those are only theory based on some research, but not proven or confirmed.
      It is very difficult to know that this little girl was killed and no one is paying for it, but I still hold out hope that the truth will come out, but I can’t justify one murder with another.
      I watched last night and cried as the story of Leiby Kletzky was told again on FOX. Murders such as these unfortunately happen all the time in the US, and it is not often that I question the innocence of the accused. At the beginning of this trial I believed Casey was guilty. It wasn’t anything I felt needed to be questioned, but as time passed, evidence was released, and the trial began, I was completely convinced that something just wasnt right. I dont believe in the accident theory either, that is another story, I posted all of that previously if you care to go back and view it.
      I won’t allow anyone to attemt to make me feel guilty for standing by the facts of this case I don’t condemn the law, I am thankful for our justice system, and I am not by any stretch of the imagination a radicalist. Caylee has not received justice, but I hope by keeping the focus on the SA and the OCSO they may perhaps be forced to do an actual investigation, one which considers all options and evidence.

      • KMiller-I believe Casey Anthony is a psychopath. I have no expectation that she will come forward and admit to her involvement in the death of her child, the disposal of her body or the cover up. I understand fully why she did not call police to report Caylee’s death-most people who plan to eliminate family members are not paragons of virtue or purity nor are they willing to disclose their wrongdoing to new-found friends and acquaintences.

        She lied to everyone she knew and when pressed for answers simply deflected the blame and punishment onto another. When that didn’t work she blamed the next person who unceremoniously walked into Caylee’s final resting place. When it turned out that he was nothing more than morally bankrupt, a wife beater, a kidnapper who used duct tape, and sexual predator, he was thrown into that metaphorical swamp of reasonable doubt. He languished there from December 11, 2008-present.

        She convinced jurors that her father was a sexual molester, an adulterer, a liar and the only person who held the lifeless body of her daughter in his arms. It wasn’t long before he screamed at her and someone prepared Caylee for burial the same way they buried their pets.

        Enter the body snatcher or is it the cherry-picker?

    • anonymous,

      According to the reports. a piece of bone from the right tibia was sent to the FBI for DNA analysis. A fragment of bone from the left femur was used for toxicology testing. I did not see any reports stating that any of the teeth were used for DNA. If you know of any report, please let me know.

      • I refer you to the research conducted by Dunning and Kruger. It is my understanding that you will relate to this sad phenomenon.

81. I respectfully suggest, you are anonymously incorrect. They pictures were all published by the prosecutor in court. The mainstream media didn’t publish most without blurring but the full skeleton picture has been published on 3 news sites that I’ve seen, crystal clear. I have seen the picture and read the autopsy report. There is no assuming there, it’s fact. Kimpossible is the one saying the picture of just the skull matches the description written in the autopsy report. I think it is a safe assumption that if one picture is different than another (just like the duct tape positioning) then the hand of man had a part in that change. Teeth don’t switch places all by themselves. I was ready to assume it was a simple clerical error on the part of Dr. G. Kimpossible raised more questions in my mind, simple as that.

    • I’m glad you saw the autopsy photos and that the photos were “crystal clear’ to you. How “teeth switch places all by themselves” is certainly an interesting question. I can understand how important it is to eliminate “simple clerical errors” when attempting to evaluate this phenomenon.

    • Zuben,

      Don’t worry, I completely understood your comments concerning this matter. I also understood the basis of your opinion. No explanation needed by me on how/why you reached your opinion.

82. Aonoymous- Finally something intellegent you posted, BRAVO!!

    sniped:
    Do not assume someone you do not know, who did something you are not quite sure of is “in a whole lot of trouble”

    Well said, take your own advice. LOL!!

83. Anonoymous: Some folks are suggesting that Caylee’s teeth floated in the water. I googled teeth floating but only came up with horse answers. I am not about to pull one of my teeth to see if it floats. If you know, then spit it out please. On the other hand, I did find out that healthy hair floats. go figure

    The hair lay at the base of the upright skull. Why did it not float away? My theory is that it was not under water. What is yours? respectfully

    • notthatsmart,

      If you go back and read my previous post, I said with the tooth may have entered the calvarium with the assistance of rising water. I was thinking more along the lines of when water moves pebbles. When I refer to water in that area, I also don’t know how highor low it was. I don’t know if the water was moving at any point other than rising and descending(there was a tropical storm). While normally I would not expect a tooth to float, I don’t know about a toddler’s teeth. I do have 2 baby teeth I had kept from my son, yeah people will thing I’m weird but I also have a lock of hair from his first hair cut. I don’t know which teeth they are other than one was very tiny(slightly hollow), the other appears to be a larger maybe a molar. Just out of curiousity, I put them in water. The larger tooth did not float, the smaller one did float but it appears slightly hollow so maybe that’s why it did. The smaller one does not appear to be an incisor. These teeth are probably up to 8 years old.
      With that said, I do not know if Caylee’s incisor could or could not float. I never said that the tooth floated but maybe it’s a possibility. How the tooth entered the skull is unknow to me, but that doesn’t mean anyone purposely put it there. Even if the skull had been laying on the left side or angled left for a long period, as Dr. Spitz suggested. One would still expect the indentation in the leaf litter.
      If Kronk saw the skull first, there would be know reason for him to lift the bag. It’s possible that when if lifted the bag, he thought the skull may have come out of the bag, when it could have possibly been on the ground already. We know that Kronk said he put the meter stick and tilted it up, maybe he didn’t gently lay it in back down in the same position, ti’s possible he let it drop in the up right position. Even if he was expecting to find a skull based on what he thought he previously saw, doesn’t mean it still didn’t surprise him, especially if he saw tape which would be unexpected. (Like watching a scary movie you’ve seen before, and there are parts you know are coming but still make you jump).
      I don’t see any problem with the police interviewing Kronk more than once. I don’t see a problem with them wanting to clarify whether or not Kronk was sure the skull rolled out of the bag or not, or if the bag may have just covered his view of it. If one is upset at the time, they may remember something one way, then later remember it another… I’ve seen alot of you give Cindy that benefit. Even two people looking at the same accident may view different things.

      Instead of looking at reasonable explanations for some events, it seems every piece of evidence is or can be made into a conspiracy towards Casey Anthony.
      The police were conspiring, the investigators, Cindy and George, Prosecutors, Kronk, Jesse,possibly Amy, and then back to George. I’ve read many of the conspiracy stories.

      The police were 31 days behind because of who?

84. I never gave it any thought.

85. Does anyone have a link to the corrected timeline? Mr. Bradley has unfortunately taken his post down.

    • Uklaw,

      I found this CacheBack post from July 11th and it also includes press release from his lawyer dated July 20th. I hope this works for you, please let me know.

      http://www.docstoc.com/docs/86033446/Incorrect-Evidence-At-Casey-Anthony-Trial

86. Kimpossible: Thank you for the post. It was going good until the end. Many majority opinionators resort to the conspircacy theory when they can’t make sense out of anything. I myself have never believed in any conspiracy theory during this case. As a matter of fact, I have documented it well on many sites. I am not sure why majority opinionators think that minority opinionators are conspiracy believers. I really do not know of any.

    Perhaps Mr Hornsby could explain the mission of the LE after indictment. I am not sure if the mission of the investigation changes after indictment. In an initial investigation, they are trying to figure out who is guilty, however after indictment, what is their goal? The indictment was on Oct 14th 2008, what has been their mission since then? Perhaps that is where your getting your conspiracy theory. It seems that once the indictment happens, the mission changes to everyone do everything they can to find that person guilty. I am not sure. I don’t really see that as a conspiracy, I see that as protocol if that is the way it is done. anyone know?

    I guess one could say that GA and KC conspired to cover up an accident, but that does not include anyone else. Does two make it a conspiracy? moo

    • Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply or direct the comment to you specifically when I referred to evidence and conspiracy theories. I tended to ramble without clarifying by the end of my comment. i should have clarified what I was meaning. I’ve read alot of blogs both pro and con, where some have picked apart various pieces and theorized different conspiracies of the family, friends and law enforcement. One example is many attacked Cindy because of her various public statements and rumors of a fight between Casey and Cindy, suspecting Cindy of causing Caylee’s death or hiding the body. They believed the 911 calls were staged. They did not want to consider that as both the mother and grandmother, she was probably distraught, conflicted, angry, emotionally broken and in disbelief. There were theories about Lee dumping the body because of a photo showing the hi-five between him and Casey. I could go on and on.
      I just meant that it was easy in this case to pick apart each piece of evidence because so much information was compiled in this case. During the Some people based their theories on the little snippets they heard/saw on tv and read in an article or blog. They did not want to look at all the circumstances or read the documents themselves. Some people where for Casey, Some people were against Casey.
      In my opinion, two could be a conspiracy. It helps to have someone to conspire with-LOL

87. Excellent article – Finally, an attorney that has a plethora of experience in criminal law practice that is neither too blind to see the facts about this jury’s verdict nor afraid to tell the truth.

    “The Anthony trial was an intricate circumstantial evidence case, but it shouldn’t have flummoxed a jury of even borderline intelligence. Why did these jurors so lack the courage of their convictions (literally) that they were not willing to fight for their convictions for even one full calendar day? It seems to me that the jurors collectively certainly did not carefully evaluate the evidence in the manner that this circumstantial evidence required — when such careful examination could have resulted in a guilty verdict. None of the reported comments of the several jurors who have communicated, in one form or another, has said anything that inspires confidence that they knew what they were talking about, understood the difference between inferences that could be drawn from evidence as opposed to mere speculation or properly understood what the prosecution was required to prove.

    Don’t get me wrong. I respect the jury system and, in some philosophical sense, respect the verdict although I disagree with it. But part of that “respect” is respect for the system that I understand is designed to sometimes yield inexplicable verdicts, and is based on the fact that the verdict is unimpeachable — and speaks, or should speak, for itself. The more the jurors talk — and make tragically incorrect, dare I say uninformed, statements such as that the case lacked “hard” evidence, that the time of death and manner of death was not shown and that the jury largely ignored all of Casey’s lies as having nothing to do with the case because it shed no light on the specific day that Caylee died — the less their verdict and decision-making deserves to be respected. The more they make public comments, whether or not for compensation, the more they set themselves up for constructive criticism in the cacophony of public debate. The prosecution is not blameless here. It has to take responsibility for helping select this jury. It also has to take responsibility for frittering away four hours of closing argument without adequately explaining to the jury how to properly evaluate a circumstantial evidence case. But that is really a separate topic deserving a separate discussion.”

    http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202508318214&Reasonable_doubts_in_the_Casey_Anthony_trial&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1

88. There ya go Richard! You opened the door to JB Mission, now you might as well not continue your blog, have you ever visited there’s? No one will take what you write seriously anymore.

    • Really Just Us,
      Did you read Mr. Hornsby’s article??
      Here’s the first paragraph of his article. Are you aware that it was my blog that predicted a not guilty verdict? I think you should go back and read my blog. Read it and weap Cupcake! We were right!

      After reading the comments at The JB Mission, it appears that Baez brought up the issue of false or misleading evidence with Judge Perry right before Linda Burdick gave her closing. She basically tells him to pound sand.

      Obviously Mr. Hornsby does visit my blog. (wink)

89. NancyB-Thank you for posting this link. It is my hope that those folks who continually meet down in that “rabbit hole” come up for air and read it.

90. Frankly, I had to laugh when I read that article. First of all this ‘teacher’ quotes and bases his article on a fictional character. This is appropriate I think, because the strongest ‘evidence’ the state had was fictional too, super high amount of chloroform, phantom sticker, etc. Each piece of evidence the state produced, that might lead one to vote guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, fell apart. With no cause of death it is just as reasonable to assume she drowned as she might have died due to someone’s willful act. Actually, I think drowning is more reasonable because most often there is some evidence of cause of death then it is murder. What topped it for me is the state didn’t disclose doing the simplest test to rule out drowning, when they became aware of this possibility. If diatoms are present in the marrow of drowning victims, it would have been a simple matter to exclude that possibility. The lack of this test tells me they either didn’t want to know or withheld it because it ruined their case.

    In the pic of the full skeleton it is easy to see if you magnify it. You can either hit ctrl+++ or copy and past into paint of some other program. I use open office and I can set it at what ever magnification I want. The mandible is easier to see clearly than the maxilla teeth. It is clear that there are more than for above though and it is clear that there are 4 in the mandible. So, unless all these news sites posted a picture that isn’t part of the state’s evidence, the autopsy report is incorrect. I’m sure this is Caylee’s skeleton though because I do have a clear picture of the tibia with the piece removed and this tibia matches. No, I have not seen the other pictures that were blurred, without being blurred. I was not in the courtroom and I will not accept a 3rd party hearsay statement as truth. I will accept what I see with my own eyes until there is irrefutable proof to the contrary.

    • I don’t know why the state didn’t request a test for diatoms when the remains where found, maybe it was because Casey scofted at the drowning theory when it was suggested by Cindy. Could they have tried to do the test anyway, I suppose so but I don’t know what the condition of the bone marrow was, since they used pieces of bone for DNA testing. Can they do diatom testing on bone? I a few studies on marrow testing. By the time the state was informed by the defense of their theory, the Anthony family already had Caylee’s remains cremated years ago.

      I understand, nor would I expect you alter your opinion based on a 3rd party. I too have enlarged the photo, I gave my opinion and basis for it, as you gave yours and your basis. I doubt that any other photos will be released due to Earnhardt’s Protection Act.
      Just pointing out that it would not only be Dr. G’s report that would be wrong but also the defense expert Dr. Spitz analysis would be wrong.

    • Zuben says;

      “I was not in the courtroom and I will not accept a 3rd party hearsay statement as truth. I will accept what I see with my own eyes until there is irrefutable proof to the contrary.”

      Perfectly stated Zuben!
      I don’t understand why people would choose to read the media hype instead of reading the documents that are available and come to their own conclusion. And then they have the audacity to dispute the ones who have read the documents with an open mind. Then they want to back up “their” opinion with some news article they read.
      It was the Sunshine Laws of Florida which made this case interesting and is what drew me to the Anthony case. Without the Sunshine Laws, I’d have to rely on the media for information unless I were able to visit city hall or wherever they keep records in Orange county so I totally agree with you..there’s no need to rely on 3rd party hearsay. Exactly.

      • JBM,

        I don’t know if you where referring to me, but I want to make it clear that I have read all the documents and listened to all the interviews and testimony. I don’t rely on media hype, I view the documents that have been released and then form my opinion. Yes, my source is a 3rd party to everyone here, but I explained why I went to him with the question because he was in the courtroom. His response helped me to clarify my opinion, which is why I provided the basis for it. It wasn’t so that anyone else would change their opinion and If asked, I would have revealed his name since it’s public info anyway. But now I see there would be no need for that because he would still be considered a 3rd part in your eyes. Again, I never asked anyone to accept it, it was an example as a basis for my opinion.

        I also try to be of assistance to others when I can, I provided a link to the information Uklaw requested, when no one else did.

        I asked you some questions concerning your statement of having a problem with my criticism of the jury. , Do you have a problem with the defense appealing the lying convictions? They tell everyone to accept the jury’s verdict, yet they are appealing what they proved their own client was in court. Not only that, they want the state of Florida to pay for the appeal since Casey is indigent. Only accepting part of the verdict, Is that a problem for you?

        Maybe you missed it. I was looking forward to your responses.

        • No KimPossible,
          I was speaking in general. I picked up on Zuben’s remark regarding 3rd party information and thought it was awesome.
          Yes, I did miss the questions you posed to me but I have to say, I have no desire to get into debate with you or anyone about what to “debate”. We’re all just opining, offering food for thought. If it’s something I’m interested in, I’ll read it. But often, I’m not.
          How many times do you want to read “31 days”? I’m way pass debating things of that sort.
          You asked, “Do you have a problem with the defense appealing the lying convictions?”
          No, I don’t have a problem with it and this is why. When Casey is brought in to deposition with Morgan, she’ll be able to plead the 5th because she’s in an appeal process. IMO, it’s possibly a legal maneuver, a clever one at that.
          I do have a problem with Mr. Morgan because of the questions he asked the Anthonys in their depositions. 80% of the questions he asked had nothing to do with his clients civil suit. It seemed to me that Morgan was doing the prosecution a favor by asking questions that had more to do with the murder indictment than helping find answers for his client.
          As for your questions regarding the jurors and their vote of not guilty?? I’m sorry but I don’t recall reading those questions.

          • That’s Ok, I understand your explanation. You have no problem with the defense questioning the jury’s verdict through their appeal, only other people. I see how it the system now, when the defense does it, it’s a clever legal maneuver, when Mr. Morgan or someone else does it falls under the category of playing games or questionable. Justice is no longer about seeking the truth. I thought you agreed with the verdict, so even when their right..their wrong?

            In my opinion, Casey’s position is between a rock and a hard place. On one hand it makes it difficult for her to get the big bucks to do an interview or sell her story right now because of all the law suits filed against her. Anything she might possibly say in an interview or book could be used against her in civil court. On the otherhand she would need to plead the 5th in all the civil suits to save her possible marketability. If she gave all her explanations in civil court, no need for anyone to pay for an interview. The civil suits could eventually proceed without her testimony.
            She’ll probably have to resort to selling photos.
            Sometimes it’s Damned if you do, Damned if you don’t.

    • I did go back and enlarge the photo. While I cannot count the teeth in many areas due to the blurring. I can not even count all the teeth in the maxilla. I do see that the center area of the mandible is white in color, not the brownish color of the skull, bones, and mandible. So I assume the white area in the center are teeth. If the center area of the mandible was the same brownish color, I would assume teeth could be missing. This is only my opinon from what I see when I enlarge the photo.

      • kimpossible,
        Good point on Casey being between a rock and a hard place in her civil suits versus her media marketability. Have you seen the 15 questions the TES attorney has sent to her attorney? Don’t know how all this is going to turn out but if Cindy’s deposition with Morgan is any kind of barometer should be interesting.

        I find it odd that JBM had a problem with Morgan’s deposition with the Anthonys. I mean they had an attorney at their side and if their attorney didn’t feel the question was relevant he could have advised them not to answer–which happened quite often. Like you said if it’s Morgan or someone else going after Casey then it’s questionable. Yet Baez can stand up in front of a jury and accuse the Father of his client of sexual abuse with ZERO proof, and that’s a ‘clever legal maneuver’. Go figure.

      • KimPossible,
        Sure it’s okay that you don’t understand.
        And I couldn’t agree with you more, “You’re damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t” Welcome to my World!

        • jbm,

          I absolutely understend.

91. add a little psyllium or isphagula to your diet.

    • add a little personality to your comments…

    • Anonymous,
      I would suggest you take your psyllium with as little water as possible. Read more at Wikipedia.

92. Kimpossible, are you referring to something other than Spitz’s report dated March 10, 2011? He doesn’t mention teeth. The evidence of the dark sediment pooled and caked in a 2″ area on the left inner skull behind the hard pyramid shaped area of the left temporal bone was sufficient to show the skull was not in the upright position during decomposition. His focus on the mandible was to show it could not have been held in place by the mandible. He had already pointed out she should have looked closer at the inside of the skull. Did you want him to pick apart the whole autopsy? Considering he wasn’t paid, I think he covered what was most important to the defense.

    Why are you so determined to defend Dr. G, even when it is obvious there is a mistake here? Being a tv star or someone that wants to believe Casey murdered her child doesn’t make her infallible. In fact both qualities can diminish objectivity. I really do not see how you can not count 4 teeth in the mandible. There are two on the left, at least one being a molar. We can reasonably assume there are about 8 or 9 in the maxilla. I can clearly count 4 in the left maxilla with as many or more in the right.

    I believe they still would have the femur and tibia, used for testing, in the evidence collection. I believe they use the bone marrow to look for diatoms. If they really wanted to know how Caylee died, this would have been a standard test, especially after the conversation Baez had with them on October 14, when they charged her with murder, even if only to rule it out. If she had been killed, then put in the pool, or bags, or on suburban drive, the diatoms wouldn’t be there.

    One might say “surprise, surprise”, to sarcastically say ‘of course’ or ‘what do you know’. I’ve said it in that way before, as have many people. Her tone of voice is important.

    • http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/anthony,%20caylee_report.pdf

      on pg. 27 of 36 pages. Last sentence of 2nd paragraph University of Central Florida Department of Anthropology Report Submitted by Dr. Schultz Pg. 3 of 10.
      “For example, the association of loose maxilla teeth that were recovered in Area A with the skull is consistent with the skull decomposing in the area where it was located.”
      The report states Dr. Schultz assisted in examining the remains and skeletal dispersal report.

      Dr. Schultz specifically indicated loose maxilla teeth were recovered from area A, so his name would also have to be added to the list if Dr. G’s autopsy report is wrong.

    • Zuben says: Kimpossible, are you referring to something other than Spitz’s report dated March 10, 2011? He doesn’t mention teeth. The evidence of the dark sediment pooled and caked in a 2? area on the left inner skull behind the hard pyramid shaped area of the left temporal bone was sufficient to show the skull was not in the upright position during decomposition.

      Zuben, don’t you think that would go with the theory the majority of the decomposition process took place in the trunk of the car? It’s hard to sit straight up in the trunk, and if you look at the outline of the stain that someone outlined at the hinkymeter, (I believe it was JWG), it would coincide with Dr. Spitz’s theory that the body decomposed on it’s left side. The stain outline that was done shows a body, in fetal position, laying on it’s left side. It has been said by many that due to the heat in Florida at that time of the year, the majority of the decomp process would have been complete in only a few days. I don’t know why this wasn’t brought up at trial as well. I guess the prosecution wasn’t as confident with it as most of us are.

      • Justiceforbabycaylee,
        Your theory is not based on one iota of fact. The stain in the trunk is speculative. There was not one human cell of DNA in the trunk to support anything decomposed there.
        And the reason it was NOT brought up at trial was because it could not be proven. JWG’s theory was the same as Ashton’s. How did that work out for him?

93. That should read, ‘was not held in place by the duct tape’. Sorry

94. Zuben,

    Yes that’s the one I read, when referring to Dr. Spitz analysis or the autopsy. He was referrencing what he disagreed with. Him not mentioning the teeth, in my opinion goes to him not finding a problem with Dr. G’s finding on that issue. He was the defense expert, he was there specifically to look for problems with the autopsy report. He examined the skull and reviewed the report. Dr. Spitz was there to do a job, I don’t think him being paid or not would affect him doing the job he aggred to do. It is my opinion that would be a very important discrepancy that he would pick up on. He has never come forward to say the teeth information on the autopsy report was incorrect. I don’t know if Dr. Spitz has an email to ask him or if he would even respond.
    The autopsy states they used small pieces of bones & scrapings for testing. I don’t know if they kept any of the bones since the remains where all suppose to be returned to the Anthony family. i’m sure there’s always more they could have done. It’s easy for all of us to sit back and Monday Night quarterback after the fact.

    • Sorry for all the spelling errors. I need to proofread better before posting.

95. Just read that in Orange county (alone) the prosecuters are working on the murders of 11 children. That is just in Orange county, how many more across the state, across the country, throughout North America? Why not the same outpouring for any of these children? What about all of the children around the world summarilly dispatched by their parents or starved to death? What about all of the children that are dying for want of cheap medication that is unavailable to them? Little girls whose lives are extinguished because culturally boys are preferred? Girls killed by their own families in North America and abroad because they had the audacity to be raped and bring dishonour to their families because of some twisted f’ed up religion?
    You people just continue to beat this dead horse. Casey was aquitted. I don’t personally think she should have been but it’s over so what about all of these other children? Why don’t they deserve the same amount of attention when their parents also are accussed of killing them?
    What a bunch of friggin hypocrites.

    • Billy

      It is so sad, I’ll never understand why someone would ever consider harming a child. They all deserve the same attention, but the media like everyone else picks and chooses. The more sensational the case, the more attention it gets.

96. Billy. We are trying to fix this one, so the others will be done right. get it?

    • This one can never be fixed.

    • Notthatsmart- You state, “We are going to fix this one, so the others will be done right. get it? Is that Latin for “there is still no evidence that the trash bag was thrown in the swamp.”(posted at THM 10/2010). You are one goofy poster.

97. You can’t fix anything it’s over, done, finished, the jury has spoken, GET IT? There is nothing more anyone can do. You have a fabulous name because if you believe that typing all of this nonsnese fixes anything, well then, you just really are notthatsmart.

    This has been an anomally, the same things presented to a different jury would have very likely yielded different results. However they were presented to this group and this is the decision they arrived at. Nothing is going to change because of it, everyone in a position to make the changes you might desire knows that. The masses may persuade some pandering politicians to present and even manage to pass some new law or maybe two that in all likelyhood will never be enforced because they are designed specifically to the Casey Anthony case which has already been decided.

    I have never seen such stupidity in all my life. People writing emails to judges and whoever else they could reach thinking that they could sway justice by it. That somehow their opinion would cause someone in power to disregard the law and substitute the writers opinion instead. A screaming, shrieking shrew on tv proclaiming she knew everything and all the while caring not one whit about any of it save her television ratings which were so strongly bolstered by all of you sheeple.

    Thinking people do not react in this fashion. The fact of the matter is this whole case was no different than hundreds in courts every day in many ways, save all the media attention. Frankly the biggest difference between this and so many others is someone who is almost undoubtedly guilty was aquitted where in many instances it is an innocent person being convicted on less evidence. That is far more troubling.

    Most of you folks should go sit in some courtrooms for a few months and learn how things really work.

    You people buy into this nonsense by the likes of Nancy Grace like that she had a private cell with paid for snacks, you go try sitting in a closet with a cot and a toilet and sink by yourself for three years and then come back and tell me if that moron’s opinions are worth anything about how well off Casey Anthony was. As for the snacks, if you had to eat the food in these institutions you’d be greatfull for snacks if you could get them. Better still I’d love to see Nancy (Dis)Grace sit in a solitary cell like that for a while, I bet she would be stark raving mad (in a different and more clinical way) than she is now.

    The stark reality of this situation is that it had nothing to do with you, me or anyone other than the state of Florida prosecuting Casey Anthony on behalf of Caylee Anthony and actually when it gets right down to it even though the state gave Cindy and George Anthony great latitude and defrence their only roles were truly only as witnesses legally speaking.

    The people who have and continue to spout this crap about they speak for Caylee, they are here for her because her mother killed her and her grandparents did nothing for her are a deluded, self rightous, judgemental (accent on the mental part) fools. I don’t care for the way the Anthony’s have handled themselves and the situation but none of us have ever been in such a position and hopefully never will. It was and is a precarious tightrope that they walk between concern for their daughter and mourning their granddaughter, none of us would know how to deal with that. As far as I’m concerned they can rot in hell too but I’m not interested in assisting them to do so. In my opinion every cast member of this sorry story will provide their own undoing one way or the other.

    In summation I ask you this, Nancy Grace; Cult or dangerous cult? I really hope she gets her’s someday too! Phoney, evil, money grubbing bitch that she is.
    There is more I’d like to get off my chest but it isn’t my blog and I’ve way overused it as it is.

    Thanks for providing the forurm for me to express my disgust for so much of what I read about this case from people driven by pure emotion with disregard for rational thought Richard Hornsby. Sorry for taking up so much space on your turf.

    • Billy, billy, calm down. lol My idea of fixing is fixing the state to stop pursueing cases with a narrow mind.Start focusing on truth. The trial is over and the verdict is forever. I am not talking about fixing that. It just seems to me that the state will win at all cost, including the truth. Something is broken and I suspect politics is involved. The state never had a case that they could prove and I suspect any other jury would render the same verdict. I won’t go long winded, but Nancy Grace makes her own bed and she can sleep in it. I believe in free speech and I support anyone’s right to speak. I do wish journalist would be more responsible. MOO

98. Zuben, I have seen on the site you normally post on that you are into astrology. I myself have never been a firm believer. I went to a link that was left on another site, and I have to say I was quite flabbergasted with what I read. This person did a reading back in November of 2008, and what she posted on November 24th, 2008 blew my mind. I don’t know quite what to make of it, and I thought that since you are into astrology, and I have read many of your predictions on that other site, that you would take a look at this and let me know what you think. I probably already know, because in this link it puts Casey there when Caylee dies, and the death is not by drowning as most of you believe. In this reading, Caylee dies at the hands of her mother and a man, (not George) and dies from what she sees as an overdose of drugs.

    https://forensicastrology.blogspot.com/2008/11/caylee-marie-anthony.htmll

99. http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/28693267/detail.html

    Well there you go. I suppose if he gave the judge the finger in court then it would be a problem, out in public it’s protected by the First Amendment.

    • What a waste of a complaint. Florida Bar Rule 4-8, “Maintaining the Integrity of the Profession.” Didn’t he know Integrity left the building along time ago.

100. Kimpossible, because you have been patient and respectful, I’ll spend some more time on the teeth. Page 32 of the report, hand numbered, 6471 has a list of all bones and where they were found. 4 maxilla teeth were found in area A, 2 were flagged 4A, found on Dec. 12, the other two were flagged 29. This is the same area as the bags, skull and other bones found in the bags. Susan Mears found the ones flagged #29 at 11:05 am Dec. 13. (See doc page 3427-9) Caylee had 20 teeth. 10 were in the maxilla. 10-4=6, not 4 teeth left in the maxilla. There could not have been 4 left in the maxilla unless one incisor was the missing one and the other incisor is the one stuck to the upper skull AND if the picture posted is not Caylee. I’m sure it is though. AND, if the incisor stuck at the top is from the maxilla, how did it get up there? I’m too tired right now but when I get a chance I’ll see if they listed where the other teeth were found. Kim, people make mistakes but pictures don’t lie. Again, it is not Dr. Spitz’s job to point out everything not right, only what is relevant to the death of Caylee. But, I’d love to ask him about this. Their focus was on the sediment in the skull that showed she did not decompose in an upright position.

     Justiceforbabycaylee, there is no sign of decompsotional fluid in the trunk. You are referring to a figment of the imagination of an over zealous prosecutor. If Caylee left a stain in the trunk there would be sediment or residue of what put that stain there, ie, deompositional fluids, in the trunk carpet. There was nothing. Please, don’t allow the desire for evidence to create what isn’t there. There was nothing to show a human had leaked fluids into that carpet.

     Metoo, I ran across that site and didn’t find anything she was right about in any of the cases I read that she covered. She needs to be right at least a percentage of the time before I will give her any credit.

101. Zubendoobee-Casey Anthony loved to tell lies. It was something that gave her a lot of pleasure. As a result of her lies she often witnessed friends and family defeated, anxious and “on the edge”. Of course it was the drama that was associated with it that made her feel powerful; often times lying provided her a certain “status” and the potential for others to regard her as worthy and available. She was articulate, unread and uneducated, but someone who had all day to pretend that she was gainfully employed, going to college while raising a child who was being cared for by a nanny. But we all know the truth about Casey-she was without ambition. Her primary goal in life is to find someone who will provide her the ability to live a parasitic lifestyle and when she tires of him/her she will move on. What will people say was her ticket to success, fame and money? Lying.

     You know what you are doing? You are doing for Casey what she cannot do for herself. In your efforts to discount the death investigation findings you are having a fun time rummaging through the bags of bones collected at the crime scene. You have been known to give a rather “nuanced” analysis of the femer and tibia bones and now you are doing a dental analysis and in the off chance readers come with preconceived ideas-the trunk did not contain “a sign” of decompositional fluids and regardless of what the first responders say, there was never a smell of a dead body in the trunk.

     This is called “duping delight”. Casey loved to dupe anyone willing to believe her. All she had to do was take a fact and twist it and then add something inconsequential to the mix and in no time the listener was dumbfounded, a believer or possible breathless. Withoutt a conscience and the inability to gauge how her listener or reader was “understanding” her she was at a loss when behaving in ways which were morally and ethically correct. She had no way of knowing how to show grief, remorse or shame unless she witnessed others and actually practiced behaviors she observed.

     The truth is always relative to folks who engage in duping delight and if “heads roll” so be it!

     • Anonymous,
       “The truth is always relative to folks who engage in duping delight and if “heads roll” so be it” ?????? Huh???

       What are you smoking? And what kind of psychiatric help have you received in the past? Perhaps, you should up your Lithium and double the Prozac.

       Have you always suffered from mental disorders? How many years have you been in therapy? I suspect you are everything you claim to know about Casey. Remember the old adage, “It takes one to know one?” Yep, yep, yep..You sure claim to know Casey Anthony real well. I think you’re looking in the mirror.
       Duping delights? Is that what people have to do after reading one of your comments? Dig deep into your psyche..assume that you’re some super intelligent species..believe that you are superior in some way?
       Well sorry…I’m duped. You haven’t convinced me yet.
       Enjoy your evening, because I know I am.

102. I don’t know why I put myself through this; indeed I should just probably move-on as there is nothing that can be gained from my disproval of the jury’s verdict. Their decision has to be respected and is by the courts but I can’t keep away… I find it humorous how there are those people who will continue to defend not only Casey’s actions but those of the jurors and the “evidence” provided, or to some naysayers the “lack thereof”. Several people have made mention that the Defense did not have the burden of proof and therefore could simply sat there like a bump on a log offering nothing to defend their client. However, they did. None of what “they” were presenting refuted what the Prosecution was laying before the jurors; in many respects the bolstered the Prosecutions claims.

     What complicated this case was not the “junk science” but television itself. We, may I venture to say collectively, watch our crime dramas with fervor, down to the last morsel. We become complacent, in some sense, to what is fact and what is Hollywood. We’d all like to think that every case has a smoking gun just waiting to be found. That every crime scene has DNA evidence just spurted onto the walls as if the guy in the corner was aiming. However we’d be remised to find that most cases are not this way and many cases are circumstantial.

     As a case largely based on circumstantial evidence (however I’d like to adjust the work “circumstantial” to probable). In opening statements the Defense clearly states their client is an admitted habitual liar.

     The death of Caylee occurred sometime between 8 and 1 on June 16th. (why do I say this?…because when LE asks when was the last time she saw Caylee Casey answered I dropped her off at the front steps of the Sawgrass Apartments between 8 and 1 so I theorize this is probably the time in which Caylee died). I don’t think we need to touch to heavily on the 31 days because whether you believe Casey or not all will agree that she was living it up for those days…not a Caylee…ooops I meant care in the world…sorry.

     Most recent there is debate on the computer searches; was there 1 search or 84 searches? Did the Prosecution know? Did the Defense know? When? Does it matter? To some it does because the Prosecution is trying to show premeditation but because Casey herself never clarified or gave reason for the computer search no one knows. Of course we have Cindy claiming it was her but phone records clearly show she was a work when the search(s) were done? How long was Casey on there? Could she print out the how too? Was it an innocent inquiry because on her boyfriends wall there is/was a posting “win her over with chloroform”? one may never know…circumstantial…hmmmm

     Dr. Vass stated several times there was no hidden agenda when doing the testing of the trunk liner. He wasn’t trying to gain riches for a newly developed “sniffer”. He simply stated that there were unusually high concentrations of Chloroform in the trunk, that’s it, not explanation as to why there would be such levels without outside influence, the garbage bag with empty containers, febreeze, dryer sheets? Nothing could account for the levels but the possibility that the “body” that was in the trunk must have emitted noted levels and the only way these levels could be understood/explained was that in some capacity it was used…circumstantial…hmmm

     Defense experts who were brought to the stand to debunk Dr. Vass only made him look better as no one would discredit how he made his conclusions therefore Dr. Vass’s testimony was viable…circumstantial…hmmm

     A Defense expert does his own experiment in Nebraska stating he just did it to do it (yeah right)…could not get the same results therefore in his lustorous carrier of like a couple years negated Vass’s word…but when the prosecution asked, or suggested, that could temperatures impact the results; since his controlled testing never got above 65degrees? We must remember: the Florida sun…a body…in a trunk… temps reaching (just a guess) 150 degrees…boy that’s a lot of rot…circumstantial…hmmm

     Now the stain in the trunk; was there a stain? Could a body of a child be made-out? Hell if you look hard enough you can find the Virgin Mary in burnt toast or a Corn Flake so who knows? But because of the location, it’s “putridness”, the fact that both parents, as well as those processing the vehicle, indicate the smell of decomp was very high in the area over the spare tire cover. Lee, who was brought on by the defense admitted that there were stains in the trunk…gasp!!; but not in the location near the spare tire cover…circumstantial…hmmm

     The controversial duct tape. This seems to be a point of contention especially where it was located. I’ve seen the same drawings discussed up-thread from a very respectful reporter and they clearly show that the tape was found to be on the face of the skull and were held in place, as the examination of the remains show, by fibers, hairs, and plant growth. Speaking of plant growth, did you get a look at the growth intertwining with the blanket…wow, that must of taken some time you think…? But I digress, what of the duct tape…there is no explanation of why duct tape would be placed on the face of a child…none!! Holding putrid liquid? …circumstantial…hmmm

     How about this scenario: Casey mixed herself up a batch of Chloroform from the ingredients list she printed off in March when she did the Google search. All of her friends were living it up and going to Puerto Rico for vacation while she was stuck at home with Caylee. The grandparents, although very supportive and loved Caylee deeply, were angered by Casey’s actions on a daily basis because they wanted Casey to be more responsible…she is the parent you know…but Casey doesn’t want to hear it again and finally it comes to a head and there’s a big blow-up. Casey cannot ask her parents to watch Caylee as they already believe she is an unfit mother but wants to party with her friends. Casey knocks Caylee out (knocks her out, not kill her cause she cant do that) and knowing what she read probably said that it will render the victim unconscious so the duct tape was placed to asphyxiate it the pool was used this is when it would have been done cause it would wipe any evidence away so Casey just threw her in the pool and when the coast was clear Caylee’s lifeless body was removed and placed on the ground. Now the borrowing of the neighbors shovel is unknown but I know it wasn’t to get rid of bamboo roots, so I will theorize that Casey did not want to touch her daughter so she retrieved some trash bags…anyone remember how many…2 I think?…and a laundry bag; Casey cinches these bags up puts it in her trunk and drives around for a couple days as the smell get to her but meanwhile she’s trying to think of a way to dispose of the body. During this time Cindy’s calling and Casey’s saying Caylee’s fine she’s here, she’s there, she’s well in the swamp just down the street mom…Decomposing, rotting, being submerged under mosquito infested water, trash being dumped continuously. Men, possibly women “relieving” themselves; mind you on the body of a 2 year old that was just in the way…Moving on to the 31 days and the defense expert witness suggesting that this is just a form of ugly coping…wow, is that the best you can come up with, you might as well throw in molestation by the father and the brother…oh wait they did!!

     Let me move on to another piece of “doubtful evidence” the “heart shaped sticker”. One must remember that when the strips of tape were sent to the FBI lab to be processed they were asked to find fingerprints (was it mentioned that 6 months had gone by till they discovered the body and at times that 2 year old was submerged in water and, during drying out periods, animals fed off her?) and during the examination the tech called over her supervisor to state she found an anomaly on part of the duct tape and both the tech and supervisor confirmed it was the outline of a heart. Florida did not ask for this they asked for fingerprints. When the FBI went back after they completed their search for fingerprints to do further testing on the “heart shaped” residue it was no longer in a condition in which adequate testing could be completed. LE will find sheets of heart shaped stickers in a drawer commonly accessed by Casey…circumstantial…hmmm.

     In respects to Mr. Kronk, I think he tried to do the right thing but was trying to gain his 15minutes of fame not realizing the consequences; I excuse him based solely on my interpretation of what I saw and read of Mr. Kronk.

     There were so many “circumstantial” pieces throughout this trial it is just hard to believe that a jury of “her peers” could only find that she lied to police. That’s it? It’s not so much that they found her Not Guilty of 1st Degree Murder is that they found her Not Guilty in respects to the death of her daughter. They could’ve easily convicted her of felony child abuse resulting in death but nope…only that she lied to LE. So the rest of us have to believe that on June 16, 2008 Caylee Marie Anthony, tired of being loved by her mother, grandmother, grandfather, uncle, great grandparent decided to off herself!! Not to mention putting tape on herself throwing herself in her moms trunk in 2 garbage bags and a whitney bag and while her mother was “pulled over” popped the trunk and threw herself in the swamp…UGLY COPING…Caylee is responsible for her death…is that what we’re to believe?

103. B-Man- I will post a similar article (to your post) in the hope that you have not already read it. It is a toss-up which one is better-you and Ms Lush share fine writing skills and narrative insights that should not be forgotten or rejected.

     The HuffPost: Crime
     July 10, 2011 Casey Anthony Trial: Verdict Leaves Public With Many Unanswered Questions by Tamara Lush
     July 2, 2011 Casey Anthony Trial: Jurors Left With Scant Evidence by Kyle Hightower, AP

     The two articles should be considered a “before and after” look at what jurors could have done and what they did. I don’t think there would be so many unanswered questions today had Officer Cane called for “back-up” or at least attempted to look beyond the rattlesnake in August 2008. I believe Mr Kronk took a verbal dressing down and as a result Caylee was left to have others walk away with her shorts and T-shirt. They aren’t to blame for robbing her of her dignity or her right to life.

     Knowing what we know and don’t know is important. Ms Anthony was arrested because LE believed she had knowledge about the whereabouts of her child but was unwilling to reveal what she did and when she did it. Everyone who has looked at this case “from day one” knows one thing for sure: The defendant had guilty knowledge and so smitten with her ability to lie, she made the conscious decision to lie again and again until she was “arrested on a f…… whim.” She wasn’t really upset because she had a boatload of narcissism that kept her alive and well for three years.

     At the end of the day “the jury’s statement was not a statement of her innocence” (Berman, Ohio State Prof) but a glaring look at a most repugnant defendant-someone who now has to field offers to take off her clothes, go into hiding or perhaps move out of the country. She will always “stick to her story” and in order to do that she will have to lie until the day she dies. In the days and months ahead Ms Anthony will come to the realization that by a simple process of elimination most people know intuitively, intellectually and emotionally that she killed her child. She gave as much thought to her death as most of us give to carving our Thanksgiving turkey (R.Hare). It was swift, certain and agonizing. Ms Anthony calculated it to be between the hours of 9-1pm. Sometime before she went to work at Universal.

     • Get a grip! Trials are not meant to solve mysteries…

104. You assume what you have no right to assume, Anon. You have no idea what I delight in or what my motivation is. It saddens me to know that these people hold the lives of other in their hand, have the power of life and death. It also saddens me that you and so many other take their carelessness so lightly. I’m sure you’d change your mind if it were you in her shoes.

     One more comment on the teeth and bone collection and then I must move on. Pg 3607 shows that Dec 13, 1 tooth was collected from lane 4, found by Robin Maynard along with pelvis, lane 6. She isn’t mentioned in Jenny Welsh’s daily report listing all those that found bones that day and what lane they worked, pg 3427-8. She was in charge of sifting and bug collection so I’m not sure how she got the other half of the pelvis. That seems a little large to be unnoticed when scooping up dirt to sift. But, my main concern is, if they scooped up the vegetation under the skull when they collected it, how did they miss 5 teeth or not find them right after collecting the items in Area A. Perhaps they weren’t right with the skull and bags? How do they know for sure the tooth was found in lane 4 or where it was in lane 4, when she is sifting buckets from different lanes? The skull was on the NW edge of are A in lane 4. The ilium or pelvis was found in area F, 10-15′ diagonally SE from the skull.

     Anyway, now we have 5 teeth found, 13 they claim are in the jaws, one stuck in the upper skull, one missing.

     While Jenny Welsh appears to be very diligent and care a lot about critical attention to detail I think many of LE and even the examiners office needs some heavy duty training on the handling of evidence. Bone 46 is a good example, showing why. Pg 3639 shows the evidence sheet filled out by Delgado on Dec. 18, a bone which became bone 46, see pg 3488, collected in lane 5. But it is listed as the right 2nd metatarsal from area D in the anthropological report, which is lane 6. See page 6471, pdf pg 32 in the autopsy, anthropological report. Maynard took the bone to the ME’s office, Shultz identified it as human so she took it back to Suburban, supposedly put it back where it was found then photographed it. This is professional standard procedure for handling evidence? How could they possibly know exactly how and where it originally laid? This is probably how it switched lanes and areas from one piece of paperwork to another. For all I know, seeing this type of mistake, several times now, the mandible could have been in lane 10 before they repositioned it to take pictures. I’m sure someone will jump all over me for that statement but read for yourself. They removed a bone then brought it back to photograph it. Oh, and Hanson, from the ME’s office, thought a bone was human but Schultz, back at the office, said it wasn’t. Hanson was on scene to help.

     Night all.

105. This coming from a person who can’t decide what imaginary friend you want to be at any given moment.

     • Well Dr. Anonymous,
       Whether we pondered any theory really doesn’t matter. At least we knew Ashton and Burdick didn’t have the evidence to prove murder unlike you who thinks because a person is a liar, she’s a murderer.
       At least we didn’t pretend to KNOW Casey Anthony and characterize her psyche as if we were trained behavioral scientist.
       At least we didn’t believe every word coming from the media.
       At least we KNEW there never was a heart sticker on the duct tape.
       Should I go on?

       • Jbm,

         I know I’m not Anon, but several of your commentators at various points did pretend to know Casey Anthony.
         And you KNOW that there was never a heart sticker on the duct tape? You were there? You actually saw/handled the evidence? You were there when Caylee died?
         You call your and your commentators’ varied theories pondering, and all opposing theories assumptions/speculation…What’s the difference?

         So what are you basing your pondering theories on if you are saying the prosecutors have no evidence, the evidence is questionable,investigators questonable, medical examiners questionable. Throw it all out and what are you left with to ponder….Nothing.

         So regardless of evidence or no evidence, if you weren’t there how can you KNOW what was or wasn’t there?

         • Kim Possible,
           No, I wasn’t there when Caylee’s body was found but I do know how to read a FBI report which clearly states that no heart sticker or residue was found on the duct tape.
           Sorry Kimpossible that is not speculation that is fact. Obviously you weren’t paying attention when Lorie Gottesman of the FBI was on the stand in Casey’s trial.
           BTW, not to pat myself on the back, but I’ve been saying this ever since I read the documents a year before the trial began. 😀
           And I must say, I expected a lot more from you Kim Possible. Your argument sounds childish.

           • Oh yes and while I’m in the mood, here’s the real report on Casey Anthony’s psyche not some speculative fodder coming from someone calling herself Anonymous.
             http://www.ocala.com/news/20110716/anthony-trial-rife-with-area-connections/1

             Now had Dr Krop visited my site, I would have gladly posted his findings.

106. Seriously, Anonymous…..is that the best you got? Wow.

107. Take care of yourself.

108. B-Man & Anonymous, BRAVO, my dear comrades! BRAVO! Though you do know, don’t you, that you can’t talk sense to a turnip?

     XXOOXX

109. Zuben,

     Quote from your post. “Anyway, now we have 5 teeth found, 13 they claim are in the jaws, one stuck in the upper skull, one missing.”
     So you have the 20 teeth. Dr. Schultz stated the teeth found at the site were maxilla teeth. I can only reiterate that I believe any issue with the teeth would have been immediately apparent to Dr. Spitz, he would not overlook that type of discrepancy. . He would have been quick to this point out, further substaintiating his “shoddy” autopsy opinion. He also checked the skull for any signs of trama according to his testimony. I can’t help you with the mandible on the photo, because what I believe I view is different than your view.

     While I have previously read the documents you referred to, I have not gone back to scrutinize them and would have to re-read to see what you referred to. It would not surprise me if there where mistakes, there were many people involved and they are all human just like you and me. I’m sure you have made mistakes in both job and your personal life, no matter how careful you intended to be. These people on the scene where dealing with hundreds of pieces of possible evidence. Not only did they have to photograph, grid and mark off the areas, they had to clear the area of plant growth and trash. They had to document all the trash because they didn’t know what was evidence. They searched for small bones on their hands and knees, had to photograph, identify, and log those as well. They worked multiple days and recovered almost all of Caylee’s bones. I think they did very well considering the terrain they had to work with and the number of tiny bones that where scattered. So while is your right to defend the jury, I too will defend this recovery team.
     —————————————————————–

     While there are people who will continue to nit-pick at the evidence or those like me who question the jury verdict, one fact remains, this case began with Casey Anthony and her failure to report whatever it is that happened to her child. It doesn’t matter if you continue to defend her character/behavior or scrutinize it, the investigation started with her in conjunction with the 31 days because she specifically gave the number of days she last saw her daughter and placed herself as the last person with Caylee. She purposely mislead investigators with false trails and false information, which had to be investigated. Her behavior and unwillingness to be honest is part of the circumstances surrounding the search for her child. Looking at the big picture, circumstances can and often is evidence.
     It doesn’t matter what time the death occured, if Casey had help, didn’t have help, it was murder, manslaughter, accident, or something in between. It is a fact that Casey Anthony places herself as the last person with Caylee, in the 911 call, handwritten statement, police interviews, and jail house tapes. Casey Anthony is the biological, uncontested residential parent who is the legally responsible person concerning the condition of her child.

     It does not matter if she was there, wasn’t there, under what unknown scenerio you want to consider, at some point that day she knew her child was “missing”/possibly dead. A person lies to cover something up, most of the time it is one’s own actions or inactons. It doesn’t matter if she had been covering for someone else or her own actions/inactions, Casey’s legal responsibility is to her child.

     The jury does not need to believe the defense nor the prosecution, which is what some have said. They did not need to know how, when, where Caylee died to determine that the mother neglected her legal duty to her child, because infact Cayless was eventually found to be dead. No one knows if Caylee was even alive or dead when placed in the plastic bags.
     I have still never heard or seen one reasonable argument as to what point in time of discovery, that Casey would no longer be legally responsible or culpable for her own child.

     While Casey skirted her responsibility to her child, she allowed her child’s body(dead or alive?) (either by someone else’s hands or her own). to be discarded like trash, desecrated and disarticulated by animals, insects and weather in a swampy wooded grave.

     You can blame the media attention concerning this story, first the publicity was welcomed to look for a missing child. Then the media continued to latch on to this story because of a callous, unemotional mother who continually lied to investigators and a family who wanted to believe that their daughter/sister was involved in any possibility other than the intentional disapearance or death of her own child. Not to mention the Florida Sunshine Laws which were in effect prior to this case, not because of this case.

     The anger directed at Casey is because of Casey. She publicly created and perpetuated a charade of Caylee missing, openly doning her Caylee Missing
     t-shits and/or buttons with her approving lawyer standing by. Then through her lawyer at trial contends Caylee died of an accident, that Caylele was never missing but dead June 16th 2008. Imagine how those people who reported seeing a live Caylee feel, knowing that some of those people were investigated, had to be questioned and the child (Caylee look a like) had to be view or questioned. Imagine the investigators having to go through thousands of tips that were coming in to the tip line, to the Anthonys, to the investigators, and to the sheriffs office.
     Shifting the blame to someone else is not going to absolve Casey of the legal responsibility she, as the mother, had to her child. The manner of her actions establish culpable negligence. This is my opinion.

110. Kimpossible: What law is it that you speak of? How do you neglect a dead child? and what law is it that is broken when you neglect a dead person? Specifically, what law are you talking about when you legal responsiblility? I am serious. How can you be legally responsible for a dead person? I think you are putting the cart before the horse as though a crime had been committed before Caylee died? What crime is that? Sincerley and with respect. I am confused as to what you are talking about?

111. Kim, Amen, girl friend! It doesn’t matter how it was that Caylee got to be where she was! Truer words have never been spoken! Common sense and a barrage of hard evidence – some NOT so circumstantial – all point to but one perpetrator of the crime. Casey. I won’t rehash the facts with any great detail. We all know what they are; but:

     By her own admission Casey was the last person to have seen Caylee alive, as there was no nanny for her to have left Caylee with.

     By her own admission she was the last person in possession of the car. She admitted it stunk of something dead. Squirrels she said, though no evidence of any squirrel material was found on the car that NO ONE else was in possession of during the time she was complaining about the smell, just prior to and by her own admission, abandoning the car at Amscot.

     Little else matters, really. Her own admission that the car stunk of something dead, coupled with the “expert” testimony of those familiar with the smell of human decomp was enough. It’s obvious that the jury couldn’t have cared less about the forensics lest they wouldn’t have been so quick to dismiss such HARD evidence as the napkins covered with adipocere (grave wax).

     Forget about the stain on the carpet that Lee couldn’t account for but to say that it wasn’t there when he owned the car. Common sense dictates that Casey had ample time to try to clean up whatever mess was in the trunk prior to having abandoned it, why else would her slacks have smelled like death which prompted Cindy to conceal that evidence? Of course it can be said that if she was so determined to clean up the trunk why would she have left anything in it? Smoke screens and mirrors.

     Much of Casey’s time is unaccounted for. I’m not willing to give any possible baby killer who admitted to so much, and against whom so much can be established, the benefit of the doubt. I can’t, having been there and done that. Many of those who took part in the search for Caylee are familiar to me. I have worked with them, and will do so again. I know the frustration felt by many for their inability to do a thorough search of the area in which Caylee was found because it was under water! First rule, consider your own safety first. You’re of no help to anyone if you get hurt and are put out of commission.

     Some (JB) don’t know what the hell they’re talking about, and no matter how hard pressed they are to pass themselves off as know-it-alls so that most are convinced. It’s an insult to the knowledge some of us possess born of experience, and experience tells me that it hardly matters which bone was found in which lane and what teeth were located where, considering the circumstances surrounding the disposal of Caylee and the environmental factors involved over the course of many long and even turbulent months.

     Zuben, you’re a dear. Do me a favor. Stop concerning yourself with where the bones were found or which tooth was where. Concern yourself with HOW it was that Caylee came to be so scattered. Familiarize yourself with the activities of the carnivorous. Do you know which parts of a dead and rotting being the carnivorous attack first? Do you know how they go about feeding on the dead, or how they’d gain access to such a tiny being as Caylee encased in three layers of baggage?

     I don’t know how it was that a tooth became lodged in Caylee’s skull. I do know that all things considered a number of things could have happened that caused it to be so, from the jostling of the animals that were feeding on her to what remained of her when the wind and the rain and the flooding occurred. Flood water can easily lift a two ton truck, at the very least. A young child’s tooth, loosened during the process of decomposition, as teeth are loosened and most fall out, could easily have been lifted up into her skull. Understand, Zuben, I can’t read, watch, hear this stuff without envisioning it all. I’ve been on searches. I’ve seen decomposing bodies or what’s left of them after a mere few days and weeks left out in the wild, as well as I’ve witnessed my share of autopsies. Have you? How about you, JB? Have you been there, done that? Doubtful. You go on and on about the docs that offer but half of all involved.

     It seems to me that many assume the packaging remained intact, and well enough to have stuck up out of the flood waters well enough to have been seen. Wrong. Rule of thumb: DO NOT LOOK FOR ANYTHING WHOLE. After six months all anyone was going to find was pieces and parts, torn asunder and scattered from here to kingdom come. Experience tells me that within days, if not hours, of Caylee being dumped in that swamp her packaging was torn to shreds, reducing her to near ground level, and her limbs were ripped from the rest of her body, her buttocks torn and gnawed upon long before the wind started blowing and the rains of TP Faye began to fall.

     I’m sick to death of the scoffers who dare to say that had Caylee’s remains been in that swamp (had someone not placed her there at some later date) someone would have seen something! Such scoffers haven’t a clue. LE went to great lengths to not only sift in order to find every last bit hoping for a clue as to an actual cause of death, in reconstructing Caylee, but also collected even the smallest scrap of black plastic that may have been a part of the packaging. How many of you skipped over all of that in the docs, or thought it meaningless that so much plastic was being tagged, hummm?

     Evidence. Forget about the search for chloroform. So many are using that now like some sort of smoke screen meant to hide the other known facts that support premeditation, such as the computer searches for NECK BREAKING. But then, it could have been Cindy who searched for neck breaking thinking she might break Casey’s for the horrid mother to Caylee and daughter to herself that Casey was. Funny how some just skip over all of the times Cindy is known to have accused Casey of being unfit and so much so that Cindy threatened to take Caylee from her! This we learned from Casey, remember? And how many remember what George had to say about how he and Cindy were the sole care givers of Caylee, and what a burden it was sometimes, for Cindy? Anyone?

     Know though that I do not attribute any such search to anyone other than Casey who was searching for the means to be rid of her daughter, once and for all, in the true form of a typical sociopath who’d deny the object of their hatred a chance at happiness in the care of someone else. “I don’t want you but no one else can have you either!” How many battered women and children have died at the hands of such?

     I can just hear it now! “Oh, but, Autumn, the prosecution presented witness after witness who said that Casey was a good mother!” Fools. What known child abuser beats their children in the presence of those they are trying to impress, and especially this lot of new found friends, most of whom didn’t know Casey but for a handful of months! Oh, but Jesse said … Jesse said what? That Casey didn’t want Caylee? Casey considered giving Caylee to Kio Marie? Casey broke up with Jesse because Jesse cared more about Caylee than he cared about her? According to Casey, and we’ve heard this time and again, George and Cindy cared more about Caylee than they did about her. That’s almost laughable now considering the fact that George and Cindy sent justice for Caylee up the river, truth be told.

     Truth be told there was one witness who didn’t know Casey well enough to have been impressed with her and who saw past the pretense. A lone two year old child left to answer the door to strangers, who was left to entertain the strangers alone while her mommy busied herself in the bedroom with her boyfriend. Neglected Caylee who would have been left out on a balcony alone, and who was expected to tie her shoelaces alone. That witness who got it right because she’d yet to be so beguiled by Casey and her sociopathic ability to beguile the naive. But this witness wasn’t alone. George said it. Cindy said it. Casey herself said it. “Because I’m a vindictive bitch!” “All anyone cares about is Caylee! What about ME?”

     Well, she’s free now, and the Misisionites can all go around boasting the accomplishment of a bumbling, incompetent and even lying defense, regardless of the fact that justice was not served here. Not for Casey, inasmuch as it is that true justice would have seen her behind bars for a good long time, and most certainly not for Caylee.

     Revel in it, Missionites, but consider this, she got away with it, and in so doing she’s going to be further empowered, and that isn’t something to revel in, that’s something to fear.

     • Autumn: I will save you the time, but your post is full of assumptions that were never proven. It appears to be a fabricated story. Especially the part about hard evidence. There was no hard evidence. I will just for now respect RH space here, but if you would like to go over each point, I will be happy to. I see a lot of wishful thinking, a lot of assumptions of things as facts..12 jurors heard the entire prosecution case and found her not guilty. Are you thinking the prosecution did a terrible job of presenting the facts? Or do you think something is wrong with all 12 jurors?

       • I agree NTS,
         Autumn just spewed 3 years of gripe all in one long comment which I certainly wouldn’t waste my time to read. Heard it all before ad nauseum as THEY say. What do they want a cookie for longest comment ever? Anyone could do that? But can they look at this case through the eyes of the law??? No they can not and the bottom line.

         • “Do they want a cookie for the longest comment ever?”

           I don’t know JB……but I’m compelled to ask a similar question of your oddly cult-like mission “followers”:
           “Do they want to give Casey a gold-star for the being the biggest liar in the history of the Florida courts??” or what about:
           “Do they want to give Casey a ‘high-five’ for successfully hiding the corpse of her baby girl long enough for skeletonization to occur??”

           • Jessica,
             My site only seems like a cult to you because you’re in the majority but as proven in a court of law, the majority is not always right.

             I’m not offering Casey any rewards for her behavior but I don’t want to see her die in prison for an alleged crime that wasn’t proven beyond a reasonable doubt either.

     • Excellent and well-spoken post, Autumn!! 🙂

       • It was alright but a little boring since we’ve heard this ad nausem for 3 years now. It’s beginning to sound a little robotic, don’t you think so Jessica?

112. Revel in it, Missionites, but consider this, she got away with it and in so doing she’s going to be further empowered and that isn’t something to revel in, that’s something to fear.

     Well said, Autumn, but unfortunately she and ‘OTHERS’ will be further empowered and get away with it.

     • No Deanna Hancock,
       I’m reveling in the fact that I live in America where you just can’t put someone in prison without evidence. There was NO evidence. Rah, rah, for the Red, White and Blue!
       I’d rather see one guilty person go free than see one innocent person spend ONE DAY in prison. That’s the way I roll.

       • *Sigh.

         Which part of “circumstantial evidence IS STILL EVIDENCE” don’t you get, yet, humm?

113. As many of you have stated, no one knows, how, when or where Caylee died, but we do know she did in fact die. Casey places herself as the last person with Caylee 31 days prior, so she knows that something has happened to Caylee at that point in time. Every parent has legal responsibilities to their child. Failure to so can be deemed neglect There does not have to be a history of abuse, it can be one single instance. While no one can state for certain how Caylee died, the point that Casey discovered/or caused the condition of her daughter, she had a legal obligation to her child to seek medical assistance. Casey is a lay person and cannot legally deem her daughter dead(we are not living in a time of unattainable medical assistance), neither is the grandfather or any of Casey’s friends if any of them had been present. You do not know if Caylee was indeed dead when placed in the plastic bags. Some children who appear unresponsive may infact not be clinically dead. But without any medical assistance the child will die. That is why you see the EMT’s continually working on a person until the doctor calls time of death. Only a doctor/ME issues death certificate.
     Even if you want to believe Casey was not there when it happened, came back and learned of it(which there is absolutely no proof). She is still obligated to report it, she cannot take someone elses word (a lay person)that her child is dead. Even if the body was taken away and she did not see it, she cannot just take someone’s word and do nothing. She must, at the very least call and report what was told to her and that her child may be in danger, if not dead.

     Because the death was covered up, the neglience could also have occured prior to the incident but because of the cover-up I’m not even considering that factor. It is the fact that Casey became aware of the incident(whatever scenerio you want) involving her child and did nothing. Caylee may still have died or deemed dead by a physician, but by seeking help she would have fulfilled her obligation to her child.

     As stated in Florida Statute 827 (criminal law), “Neglect of a child” means:
     1.
     A caregiver’s failure or omission to provide a child with the care, supervision, and services necessary to maintain the child’s physical and mental health, including, but not limited to, food, nutrition, clothing, shelter, supervision, medicine, and medical services that a prudent person would consider essential for the well-being of the child; or

     2.
     A caregiver’s failure to make a reasonable effort to protect a child from abuse, neglect, or exploitation by another person.

     Neglect of a child may be based on repeated conduct or on a single incident or omission that results in, or could reasonably be expected to result in, serious physical injury or mental injury, or a substantial risk of death, to a child.

     Even when our children/teens are not in our presence, Parents can be held responsible for their child’s actions such as vandalism,theft or other accidents, because it may be the result of our inaction to properly supervise the child. For example, if I allowed my teenager to ride his dirtbike down the highway to go to his friends house less than a mile away and while on the highway he causes an accident which resulted in his death and the other driver’s death. I could infact be charged with vehicular homicide/manslaughter in my son’s death and driver’s death. For one, it is against the law to ride a dirtbike on the highway and because I did not require my son to follow the law, I would be held responsible.

     I sorry but I cannot explain any better than that. I’ve attempted to explain it several times with other examples and if you do not comprehend what I am trying to convey, then you will never understand. This is just my opinion.

     • Well Kimpossible, at least you tried to explain it. The explanation does not fit the incident though. She certainly is guilty of not reporting her child dead. What crime is that? and what statute? She did not let her child drive down a hiway on a dirt bike, so if she did something that was neglectful, then what is it? Where is the crime and if one existed, then why didn’t the State charge her with it? No one even knows if Kc was home when Caylee died. The state did not establish that. First the incident happens, second someone reports it. In that order, none other. I think you are trying to use everything that did or did not happen after the incident to prove what happened before the incident. It won’t work.

       So, a persons cell phone is recorded with pings to be in that location. That does not prove that the person was in that location. Only that the cell phone was in that location. That is the only thing jurors had to go by to put Kc near that location that day. Hardly enough evidence to prove manslaughter. In essence, the state did not prove that part of their theory. IMO

       • Both the state and defense established through their evidence she was in the vicinity of Caylee at the time of “the incident”. Casey places herself as last person with the child. This is a fact at trial. That is also undesputed at trial or anywhere else. You are assuming a fact that was not in evidence nor disputed. I could assume that she was in Jackson County or on the moon but there is nothing to support those assumptions. Apparently you are going to continue to assume she was not there even though she tells the 911 operator, writes her own statement, tells law enforcement, and reiterates everything in her jail house videos as her being the last person with Caylee. Because she was the last person with Casey, then she was there.
         You do not know at the time of the incident if Caylee actually died at that moment. Why? Because no medical assistance was called upon. The defense said George held her lifeless body(which I don’t personally believe), lifeless and unresponsive does not automatically make someone dead. The child could have been unresponsive in their scenerio or any scenerio. Casey is not a medical doctor to deem someone dead, neither is her father nor her friends. So how is it that you know Caylee was actually dead, when a doctor did not deem her dead at that point or with in a short period after? How is it that you actually know? Caylee died at what point?
         At the exact time of incident or in the plastic bag? It’s the failure to obtain medical help for the child. You don’t know if the child could have been saved, do you?

         I am not using what happened prior to the incident, I specifically said I was not considering that. What happened after the incident is important. You said first the incident, second someone reports it, in that order. Exactly. Second never came until a month later.

         Even as I’ve said before, under your theory she came home and discovers that ther was an incident with Caylee is missing or dead. Someone would have to tell her because you can’t leave a 2 yr old unattended, that would also be neglect. So even if someone told her child was dead & they took care of it, it would still be negligent for the parent to not report it because she would not know for a fact her child is dead, the other person could have given her child away. If someone is telling her something, she does not know if it is a fact or not. She would not know if her child is in danger or not. But doing nothing would knowingly put the child in danger.

         If I went to my child’s babysitter to pick up my child. I was then told my child died, they couldn’t reach me so they decided not to call 911 but instead get rid of the body. I can’t just take their word as fact and decide for myself not to call 911. I can’t say well you didn’t report anything so I won’t either. Because they didn’t report the incident does not absolve me of my legal parental obligations. I would not know for a fact if my child was dead, wondering the streets alone, sold, or kidnapped by someone. A parent’s legal duty is to their child’s well being. At that point you would not know what condition your child is or is not in.

         I assuming that when Casey thought or believed her daughter was dead (as opposed to a doctor deeming her deceased), that is what relieved her of her legal responsibilities to her child?

         A police officer arriving on the scene of an accident may believe that the occupant is dead, but that does not relieve him of his duty to call for medical assistance. An officer cannot legally deem the person dead because he believes it to be the case and just leave the scene or dump the body. The unresponsive person may not be dead, only appear to be that way. That would be negligent. A parent has that same legal obligation to their child, because the parent is imposed with the duty, responsibility and obligation.

         So keep believing that you KNOW Caylee was legally dead right after the incident and keep believing that you absolutely KNOW Caylee was legally dead when put in the plastic bags. I don’t know, so I just hope and want to believe because it is easier to accept. It’s because of Casey’s inacton towards Caylee, no one knows at what point after “the incident” Caylee actually died. One minute? 10 minutes? half hour? The one thing we do know, is Caylee was not even afforded that possibility by her own mother.

         The one thing we do agree on is, I will cling to my opinion and you will cling to yours. We both share that right.

         • You say both the state and defense establish that she was in the area at the time of the incident. I will have to agree to disagree with you on that one. I do not think that was established at all. Only the search and the discovery was established and not the incident. She could have came home from the gas station and asked where Caylee is as far as I know. It was not established and we do not know any of it as fact.

           As far as what she said and wrote on July 15th and 16th, it doesn’t matter because the defense opening statements trumped all of that.
           I don’t know of the legal responsiblilities when someone believes their child to be dead. Certainly her Father is former investigator and why would she not believe him? I agree that she is guilty of not calling for help, but I do not think a dead person needs help and do not know what crime she would be charged with. Leaving the scene of an accident?

           I do not assume that she was not there, I only acknowledge that it was not established that she was there. I wasn’t there, so I don’t know and apparently the state does not know either because they did not even cover it. I do not know at the time if Caylee actually died at that moment. True. The child could have been alive if we want to speculate that, but it is only speculation, there is no proof. Its all guess work.

           I think your scenario where it would still be neglegent would not work in court because you would need to know weather the child was dead or alive. I don’t think you can charge neglect after someone is dead and that brings me to my point which is that we do not know. The state had 3 years to figure out what happened. They did not investigate thoroughly of the day of the incident. They did not have GA or CA or La cars investigated, they had few phone records. They left the jury hanging with lots of questions, which will always equal reasonable doubt.

           The fact is, we do not know what happened after 3 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars. And if we do not know, then she is not guilty.

           It is my opinion if they would have done a thorough investigation in the first place, then they would not have charged her with murder.

114. There are a lot of unanswered questions in this case. I have always said that the state will have to focus on the evidence leading up to the incident and the evidence of the incident itself. The last 3 years, folks have been focusing on things that happened after the incident. Jurors would want to know what happened to cause the incident and what actually happened at the incident. The State had very little evidence of anything before June 16th. They couldn’t even tell us what day she died. They had 3 years and prolly 200 staff to focus on the 2 weeks leading up to the incident and incident day itself. They did not have everyones phone records, they did not check CA or GA or LA automobiles. They ventured out into disproving her lies rather than investigating what actually happened. They need protocols established. They need to follow their own rules. You start with the next of kin and then you move out from there. How hard is it? They had 3 years and it is what it is…….IMO

115. I am starting a 12 step program for you people who cannot get off the Casey Anthony on your own. We understand at CAA (Casey Anthony Anonymous, we can help you. Casey Anthony can be harder to quit than booze or crack or crack & booze with a little pot once in a while but it can be done with minimum withdrawl syptoms if you just let us help you.

116. When I heard Baez state that Casey Anthony won’t be giving any interviews for three months because she “will be seeking professional treatment for serious mental issues instead” I was LOL. First of all the kind of professional treatment Casey needs cannot be accomplished in a few months. She needs a few years at least, if not a lifetime of therapy.

     Jose Baez, her spokesperson turned manger/pimp, said Casey is seeking treatment because:

     1. “She now realizes that her questionable behavior when Caylee went missing was the result of obvious mental health issues.”

     2. “She still needs help to deal with the trauma of losing Caylee” and

     3. “She spent 3 years in jail in solitary confinement facing murder charges that ‘It messed with her head.’”

     I think the therapy issue is being used for delaying her interviews and buying time so that Casey won’t be as hated as she is now. This is Baez’ way of trying to soften her image. It is blatantly transparent how disingenuous this “therapy claim” is. Anyway, Casey seems to be imprisoned wherever she is hiding out.

     José has taken on the role of Casey’s PR agent which is unseemly as well as unethical, IMO. I see it as nothing more than another strategic move/damage control so that they both can cash in on the “big” money deals. Baez knows that the winds of public opinion can change very quickly.

     This is part of Baez’ plan to try to get her ‘victim’ status into the public’s eye. Baez is trying desperately to rehab his “prized possession’s” marketability, but doesn’t get that the death of a 2 year old, either purposefully or ‘accidentally’, will not ever sit well with the public. Never. He never should have gone there. And Geraldo can invest all he wants in this defense team and client and get the exclusive interview but “if it smells like decomposition, it is decomposition”, and that isn’t going to change.

     Question for Baez: How can Caylee have ‘drowned’ in the pool and at the same time ‘go missing’?? Which is it? Just shows us the defense team and Casey cannot keep up with their lies.

     • In my opinion Casey is receiving the finest acting lessons money can buy in preparing her for her best performance yet.

117. This whole question of Casey being a good mom was not answered in my mind at all !! We all heard that Cindy & George threatened many times to take custody of Caylee – does this show Casey as a good mom ?? These friends who testified should have been questioned on exactly how many times they saw Caylee. Like JA said it is easy to play and have some fun when the child is happy but that is not all there is to being a good mom. She didnt support Caylee in any way when it came to her food, her diapers, her clothes. George & Cindy knew the true ways of how Casey was or wasnt being cared for by her mom. Lee said Casey told him that her mother called her an unfit mom many times but George & Cindy didnt want her to get the death penalty so they werent about to be truthful about why they felt Casey wasnt a good mom . They were the only ones that knew the truth. We had grandma`s comment that Casey hated her mom more than she loved Caylee. I think that says a lot !!

     • Well Fran, it was the State who provided perhaps 10 witnesses, not sure because I lost count, in any case each and everyone of them all agreed, Casey was a good mother. Now if George said differently, I would consider the source.

118. These friends were all single, it is easy enough to play all cutesy with caylee for an hour in front of them. I wish the Prosecutors would have pointed out that all their opinions didnt shed a true answer on whether casey was a good mom

119. I think the jbm posters are passionate casey-supporters because they each feel a “connection” to the Felon in one way or another. There are several “points of connection” at play here. I think the greatest one is most likely extreme Narcissism, followed by extremely liberal or lax (or absent!)parenting styles. Scary combination, imo! Perhaps they feel “wrongly accused” of a crime themselves, or someone in their family has (or is currently) serving prison time and they were perceived “set-up”. Maybe a child has been removed from their care and they’re angry about it. Trying to defend their own neglectful activities or those of their adult children? They are certainly hair-trigger sensitive to certain topics over there!! I think the CMA story hits waaay too close to home for these guys. They feel some strange compulsion to defend every obviously horrible (and provable) action by casey. Baffling, to say the least!

     I think I can best sum up the ardent casey-supporters at jbm as individuals who feel a “connection” to

     • Interesting concept Jessica? Perhaps we can relate to Casey Anthony in some way but if I may, I’d rather base this concept from the actual psychological report done by a licensed forensic psychologist, the renowned Dr. Harry Krop who visited Casey Anthony several times while she was in jail.
       Perhaps you’ll enlighten yourself and others who seem to think they know Casey when in fact, they’ve never met her. Comments are always more interesting when they’re base on facts.

       • This is almost laughable, JB. You haven’t done much research on Dr. Krop have you?