Casey/Caylee Anthony Case: Caylee Pic in The “Big Trouble” T- SOLD TO THE GLOBE BEFORE Remains Found?
Disclaimer– exclusive original content copyright and property of Internet Network News, LLC and Blinkoncrime.com. Reproduction of this article , ANY OF IT’S CONTENTS, in whole or in part without proper attribution and source link is strictly prohibited without prior written permission.
BREAKING NEWS
Orlando, Fl– In the recent depositions by the State Attorneys Office in the case against Casey Anthony one common exhibit was noted in each deposition of George, Lee and Cindy Anthony.
A cropped version of a photo of Caylee wearing the tshirt that is believed recovered with her remains.
All 3 Anthony’s claimed to not have seen this picture before previously, although without being prompted, Lee noted the photo was cropped.
How then, did it get in the hands of The Globe? Could this be the evidence removed from the Anthony home that Jose Baez tells Cindy Anthony to “Zip It” during her testimony and objects to information he considered sealed by the judge?
This edition of the Globe was released October 8, 2008. Six days before Casey Anthony was indicted for murder and remanded to jail without bond.
THE SALE OF THIS PHOTO PRE-DATES THE RECOVERY OF CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY FROM THE WOODS OFF SUBURBAN DRIVE.
One could make the leap that the person selling it would have had knowledge of what she was wearing when 34 month old Caylee Marie met her tragic end.
(EDITORS NOTE: Don’t even try the picture was sold at the yardsale with the clothes and laundry bag– PUHLEASE..)
Blinkoncrime.com poster “Justice 23” contributed to this report.
Related Posts
Related Posts:
1,441 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Re: the duct tape bruises, it seems to me I have seen just as many moms posting “my kid always had bruises like that” as I have seen posts suggesting that the bruises meant abuse, beatings, cigarette burns (that’s an oldie, too), and now duct tape. Except for the child’s mysterious death (and I realize that’s a pretty big exception), there seems to be no evidence of child abuse, so I tend to allow that those were just the kinds of bruises that kids get.
Also, I think to get the duct tape to hit up by her eyes where the bruises are would mean that her nose would be covered, too, which I think would mean she would have suffocated long ago when the earlier bruises occurred. On the other hand, anything is possible. But I still think it’s more than likely a case of imaginations running wild when worrying about the horrors that might have befallen the poor thing, rather than thinking of the common bumps and bruises toddlers often get.
Angelanw @9:24 – That was me speculating about the little round sores possibly being caused by duct tape that had applied more than one time – all before whatever happened on June 16th. I was thinking out loud about whether or not Casey may have applied tape across Casey’s eyes and the bottom edges of the tape caused irritation – or possibly pulling the tape off caused irritation that turned into those weird spots.
In my opinion – Casey had taped (and drugged) Caylee more than once before in order to be able to have personal time with Tony or others. I truly in my heart believe Casey had used this as a substitute babysitter several times. I am also one of the several commenters that think the dark circles under her eyes seem unusual along with the red spots. And I don’t usually read a lot into bruises, circles and other things in those photos that a lot of people do. But the more I look at the last bunch of them that some of the amazing sleuthers here found in the last couple of days – the more I am haunted by those images. I hope I’m wrong and they were just day to day boo boo’s of a 2 year old. ‘Cause with 4 boys I’ve seen them all!
Wendy, I think in Cindy’s latest deposition they ask her who had keys to the car. (Of course Cindy helpfully mentions that Jesse had driven it in the past.)
#1117_TandT/Blink
MYSPACE/IP’s
http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=44
Supposedly, someone reported that the IP came from South FL. Even if that is the case, if utilizing Firefox, one could have downloaded the Foxy Proxy program, which can switch proxies, making it appear that your IP address is different, from anywhere in the world. It seems to me, though, that setting up the configuration is a pain in the ass. However, I have also read that a very skilled computer tech can still trace all the IPs back to the original. I don’t know the circumstances of how that is accomplished. I believe that there is still a footprint, and path, if you will.
# 1110_suz# 1108 Joan
“f it is determined that the Zenaida myspace page was created from the Ant’s IP addy, without knowing time of death, there’s no way of knowing if it was part of premeditation, or part of a coverup after the fact. Actually, there’s no way of proving that the mysterious Zanny didn’t ask Casey to create it for her (you know, except that there’s no Zanny—small detail).”
Suz, It may not definitively prove premeditation, But if it can be proven to have been set up by Casey, it shows consciousness of guilt, and it puts more than a big chink in the reasonable doubt that ‘the nanny did it’ or even existed at all.
CHLOROFORM
I don’t know what importance some of the computer searches will play.
It seemed to me that the body farm scientist, from the released email, was backing away from this hypothesis. No one knows if the state ‘will go there’. However, you know who did make it look more nefarious? ….Cindy. By trying to take credit for the search being a misspelled ‘google search mistake’, she actually places more emphasis on this. Had she not, the defense could have tossed out the slang definition. Now, (once again), Cindy has made Casey’s deeds look more wicked.
Westside-
I do believe OCSO investigated that site early on, prior to the tip, as the url and searches to it were removed from the A’s computer, but I felt it was still an informative piece. I also think the defense could certainly have accessed it via subpoena as well. I do know for a fact that they did and do have access to the A’s IP’s immediately, fwiw.
B
# 124 Wendy. Quote “Sooooooo, Blink, Kleat, anyone…. What do you make of the statement Cindy makes about the car. I believe it’s right about 13:27′ish mark. Might me off by a few seconds… Best to start at around 12:50 or 13:00. When Cindy says to Casey, “I want to ask you something,”…. Casey replies, “go ahead.” Cindy says, “how come SHE never got a chance to get the car, it doesn’t make any sense.”
Wendy there’s a bit of controversy among those who listened to the tape about whether Cindy said “she” or “cha” as in “Why didn’t “cha” (i.e. Casey) go back for the car?” I thought I heard “she” myself. When I listened again, I thought I heard the cha sound.
If Cindy did say “she”, this could have been simply Cindy giving Casey a clue as to what she wanted Casey to answer for the “listening audience” who would hear the tape. In which case Cindy, no doubt, said “she”– for Zanny because she wanted to perhaps get Casey to say that Zanny had the car at sometime during the crucial period. Casey avoided an answer by either saying she couldn’t talk freely or she had already told Lee. Cindy and Casey work like Laurel and Hardy.
Casey tells Cindy, “I told you she had a key.” Not sure if Casey meant Zanny had a key to the car or to the Anthony house.
Just my take.
Todd Black
Former spokesman for Jose Baez
Said on CNN Headline News in October 2008: “This is a very serious case involving — not just involving the loss of the life of this little girl, but the loss of whatever is going to happen with Casey Anthony.”
I still would like to know if LE has interviewed anyone from ‘Todd Black’.
Whoops, Wendy! Casey tells Cindy “I told you she had a key” in another jail convo, not the one of which you speak.
Does anyone know if Todd Black is still operating, whether under that name, or one of the shell corporations that tend to disappear or reappear as a new company over night?
I think the photo came from Riccardo Morales. I doubt it has anything to do with the A’s, though an interesting concept but just a little out of the box imho. Go read Morales’s statement where he clearly says paraphrasing “this is the photo, I was gonna try and make some money out of it.” Coincidence that a photo of the tshirt was published by a seedy tabloid was found with the baby’s remains?? yes, more than likely. No offence Blink but sometimes the simpler explanations just plain make sense.
No offense taken, but we do not agree. How do you account for the cropped version on the caylee is missing site, according to the poster who took it from there?
B
Blink
“No offense taken, but we do not agree. How do you account for the cropped version on the caylee is missing site, according to the poster who took it from there?”
B
More interesting info would be when was the cropped photo REMOVED from “Caylee is missing”, if that was where it was taken from to begin with. Was it before the info was released about THAT shirt being found with the remains?
Sorry Blink I dont get the connection. Its logical is it not that there were many photos available on line to the Anthony’s from a plethera of sources eg Casey’s own social network sites or those of her friends. And Im betting they chose to publish the ones that depicted a loving mother and daughter image over others. The Globe published the full sized uncropped photo and I still say given Morales statement to the police that is a reasonable assumption that he or someone other than the A’sold it. I do not see any cryptic significance in the picture or indeed motivation for the Anthonys or indeed Baez to publish it if they knew it could have been Caylee’s shroud ,on the contrary weve seen the lengths they’ve gone to to deflect guilt from their offspring. And I doubt the Globe paid more than a few hundred bucks for it, so given my conviction that Casey acted totally alone before the fact and has never confessed to a living soul,I guess we just disagree.
#1142_Ragdoll_The “o” is generally considered a sign of impending death. When the body is nearing death, it gradually begins to shut down. The “o” occurs because the body is not getting the same level of oxygen, and the mouth opens in response, in this position to receive more. This doesn’t happen in every death. It is seen in some long term terminally ill patients. I haven’t read where this occurs in a rapid death scenario.
http://www.mywhatever.com/cifwriter/library/70/4993.html
*To my knowledge, mandibular movement as a little-known sign of active dying has been studied only in cancer patients. While many people sleep with their mouths open, commonly called the “O” sign, sleeping patients do not usually exhibit this gentle opening and closing of the mouth. Having watched for this sign for several years, my impression is that it is a relatively specific sign, if present, for active dying, but that it lacks in sensitivity. The few false positives I have observed were in patients with profound neuromuscular weakness and, occasionally, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as described in the text. The cause of this finding is unknown, but based on these observations, I suspect it results from incomplete relaxation of the facial muscles. If fully relaxed, as in REM sleep, the mouth does not move. This suggests to me that while there are similarities between dreaming and active dying, important differences, as yet unstudied, also exist.
WILL BEGIN TO OCCUR AT THIS POINT:
http://www.hospicenet.org/html/preparing_for.html
The person s regular breathing pattern may change with the onset of a different breathing pace. A particular pattern consists of breathing irregularly, i.e., shallow breaths with periods of no breathing of five to thirty seconds and up to a full minute. This is called Cheyne-Stokes breathing. The person may also experience periods of rapid shallow pant-like breathing. These patterns are very common and indicate decrease in circulation in the internal organs. Elevating the head, and/or turning the person onto his or her side may bring comfort. Hold your loved one’s hand. Speak gently.
Sorry Blink I re read your post can you give me a link to the cropped version TIA
Thank you momof3, I was going to post that part about LE saying she was placed IN the shirt, rather than the shirt was left as a message, etc., but didn’t cuz I feel like I am always such a big spoil sport to the more fanciful theories about the shirt, etc.
When it comes down to it, does Casey, who cannot even think so far ahead as to noodle through what to do with the body, go to the trouble of cutting out letters and leaving them with the body? I dunno, but I don’t think so.
On that we agree, but it could have been assumptive she was placed in the shirt, as opposed to it being in the bag.
B
#1154_Blink
Remember the whole “hacking incident”, and then emails to K Belich and Sean Krause? Was this ‘exculpatory’ info. I vaguely recall hearing that it was correspondence between Cindy And D Casey. What was the word on that? Is that maybe one of the things that “Lee knows what he did”? Do you feel this will ever be released? I’m sure that LE knows the IP that this info was sent from, That’s what made me recall this again.
Well, I want to say it had something to do with Shirley Plesea’s computer, but honestly, I am foggy on that- anyone else?
B
From Maura’s Post…….
“……Casey’s cell pings show Cindy sent a text to her at 2:50pm (Casey answered at 2:57pm) and Cindy sent another at 3:00pm, which Casey responded to within a minute. This is when Cindy said she arrived at Universal and called Casey from the parking lot, saying she wanted to see Caylee. This was when Casey told Cindy that she and Caylee had been in Jacksonville since the beginning of the week with Jeff.
When Casey received Cindy’s text at 2:50pm, she was 6.6 miles west of the Anthony house driving Tony’s Jeep. As soon as Casey knew Cindy wasn’t home, Casey made a beeline for the Anthony house. At 3:20pm, Casey was hitting the main Anthony cell tower, then at 3:21pm, she called Cindy’s cell phone for a 17 minute phone call. By the end of the call, she was hitting a tower 1.5 miles from JP’s condo.
When Cindy got home, she noticed Caylee’s Teddy bear was missing as well as some of Casey’s clothing. Casey told Cindy that Juliet had gone to the Anthony house to pick up a few things for Casey.
Did Cindy believe Casey? Of course not. Cindy called Ryan Pasley, Casey’s friend who lived in Jacksonville to ask if he knew Casey and Caylee were in town. Ryan said no they weren’t and that Casey had told him that Caylee was with Cindy at the beach for the week. That’s when Cindy vented to him about Casey’s stealing and lying and advised him to avoid Casey because she was a sociopath.”
********
Now all this above is going on on July 3rd….Cindy is on vacation, goes to Universal to see Casey at “work” and get Caylee. Casey tells Cindy she’s in Jacksonville…Cindy calls Casey’s friend in Jacksonville, Ryan, to see if he’s seen her & Caylee….he says “no, Casey said Caylee was with you at the beach”…….could this be what freaked Cindy out on July 3rd? 2 completely different stories and no Caylee….??
I’m on post 625….back to reading.
Hang on Mix-
is this the teddy that Cindy was holding when she returned from CA? Caylee’s special teddy?
Add to that Lee’s and Mallory’s dragnet of Casey that day into the wee hours. His depo does not even come close to the dialog/texts flying back and forth. I think Cindy or Cindy/George found something and Cindy confronted Casey or left her a vm, Casey lies and TELLS HER to meet her at Universal so she knows where both of them are. Heads to the house and retrieves object X. Remember Lee says “where’s Caylee” assumptively, as if he knows already she is not with Casey.
Lastly, I dont recall Lee saying a word about Ryan telling Cindy that Casey told him that Caylee was at the beach with her. Seems an important ommission, no?
I am trying to believe those that insist the Globe photo was sold by someone who had knowledge of little Caylee’s eventual remains. Whenever I have tried to get a photo published it is I who pay the Magazine for that privilege. They pay me when they want a certain photo and they usual choose for reasons only known to them.
I think the Globe chose that photo from a few submitted… for the wording on the shirt, the reaching out toward the camera almost in a plea by Caylee, and the sinister look on Casey’s face, the smile that doesn’t reach her eyes.
It supports their headline nicely.
Couldn’t it be conceivable that someone sympathetic towards the Anthony’s or the “A” themselves, seeing the magazine copied and cropped it in order to remove the incriminating text by the Globe?
Im sorry tug I did not follow what role you play in the whole image publish/sale scenario. Are you papparazzi or a photojournalist of some kind?
If I could prove Casey Anthony herself sold that photo, would that change your opinion?
B
Blink
I can’t find ANYTHING recent for ‘Todd Black’, no listings, nada. They must be operating under a different name.
The most recent news about selling images goes back to Feb 09, but doesn’t include Todd Black.
http://www.wftv.com/news/18651683/detail.html
Updated: 6:25 pm EST February 5, 2009
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. — Eyewitness News has learned Casey Anthony is willing to part with more photos of her dead daughter to help pay for her defense. A source told WFTV reporter Kathi Belich that Casey’s attorneys have been trying to market the photos to the media again.
Anything more on this?:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?s=e259eb70d61256be58ae50284d4c515e&t=79117&highlight=fbi%2C+todd+black&page=20
“image of the record linking Black/Cabot phone to Ms. Lorena Baez…”?
The piece contained an image of Todd Black phone number, registered to Lorena Baez, Jose’s wife. That would be the piece supporting that there thread that has all the links banned, lol.
B
Renee75
I agree with you that Casey acted alone before the fact.
I don’t recall, though, anyone saying the A’s (meaning G, C, or L) might have sold the original full version to the Globe, or any photos to the Globe for that matter.
If anyone, it would be Casey, especially since the potential contact person or middleman is known to the defense. Ricardo sold photos and gave an interview to the Globe, yes, but we don’t know if he approached them or they him. It is most plausible that the Globe bought photos from both CA (the cover) and Ricardo (inside story). In any case, the defense would probably have been informed in advance of the upcoming Ricardo article by their media contact. Now, who was approached first or who contacted who, we also don’t know.
The message on the t-shirt is what sells the headline on the cover, and gives the publication purchasing power, big time.
Also, that particular cover photo would have paid out substantially more than a few hundred dollars, IMO.
I guess the innocent explanation for the cropped photo being posted on the Caylee is Missing site is that they were showing multiple pictures of Caylee, not of the Ants or others, so folks could find her—so they zoomed in on her and cropped out all unnecessary other faces in the photos, including the one in question.
Westsidehudson, I don’t know who could suggest this in court, but if they are sticking to the nanny did it story, zanny could have asked casey to set up the myspace page for her, possibly as part of zanny’s nefarious plot to punish casey for being an unfit mother.
#1161Renee57
“And I doubt the Globe paid more than a few hundred bucks for it”
I’m not certain or convinced of the idea that the photo was intentionally sold, knowing the shirt would be found with remains.
However, the tabloids pay big bucks for photos, especially incriminating or embarrassing ones.
Some celeb photos bring in 10′s of thousands of dollars, sometimes more. Add to that whatever they are willing to pay for an exclusive interview. They do not follow the same standards as other news organizations do.
Paparazzi make a lot more money than photojournalists. Dirt sells big.
itsMELyn and Blink
If you both agree (for now, given the low-quality of the photo) that residue from both the the B and I is visible, then that would change my theory (post #1134) from Caylee laying on her left side, to laying stomach down. This positioning could support the disbursement of the remains, the missing back of the t-shirt, and the t-shirt remnants that remained in the bag. I will not go further in regards to the little skull.
I am inclined to agree with that, I do think the anthro evidence is consistent with that.
B
# 1167Comment by_ suz,”I don’t know who could suggest this in court, but if they are sticking to the nanny did it story, zanny could have asked casey to set up the myspace page for her, possibly as part of zanny’s nefarious plot to punish casey for being an unfit mother.”
suz, they can say anything that they want, as implausible as it may be. But who will believe that kind of crapolla with no other proof of the existence of nanny? You’re the one who frequently references Occam’s razor. How much suspension of disbelief does one have to exercise to arrive at accepting this explanation? And what purpose did it serve? There was never any further instructions on that site, so. … if it smells like BS, do you want to step in it?
“The piece contained an image of Todd Black phone number, registered to Lorena Baez, Jose’s wife. That would be the piece supporting that there thread that has all the links banned, lol.”
Damn, Blink
So it is lost to the ages?
O no, I own it, it was a copyrighted piece, research contributions intact- Now, where did I put that file?
B
ell, I want to say it had something to do with Shirley Plesea’s computer, but honestly, I am foggy on that- anyone else?
B
Well if it did, then it implicates Cindy Anthony’s involvement. She told everyone that she wasn’t at home, at the time. Hmm, wasn’t she visiting her Mom? Or someone else, at the time it all went down?
Blink
DO you think that the FBI is “keeping an eye” on Todd Black aka Gil Cabot?
Yes, they are. Thus why he went quiet and manufactured the story about going “abroad”. That guy has a passport?
B
#1168-suz “I guess the innocent explanation for the cropped photo being posted on the Caylee is Missing site is that they were showing multiple pictures of Caylee, not of the Ants or others, so folks could find her—so they zoomed in on her and cropped out all unnecessary other faces in the photos, including the one in question.”
That is true, but if innocent, why try to distance knowledge of the shirt and the photo from themselves?
They hang themselves with their own actions of deflection. Similar to the instance of Cindy taking responsibility for mistakenly arriving at chloroform in a google search, they only come out in the end lending more credence to the state’s assumption of sinister behavior.
100% Cotton Degrades
I googled these words, and found text within the published “Handbook of Fiber Chemistry” By Menachem Lewin and Eli M. Pearce, which talks about cotton fibers and degradation and for one, how under certain variables like climate conditions, 100% cotton can be completely degraded in 14 days. Cotton Fibers – Page 667.
Blink, I don’t know if there is a copyright issue with providing a link, so I will leave that up to you.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=rsieide7lUkC&pg=PA667&lpg=PA667&dq=100%25+cotton+degrades&source=bl&ots=ezbFRm7UPx&sig=qdOv23GmaAtuOzAw0fGAgGji4Fw&hl=en&ei=vMflSubuCIbIMc3o4Z8D&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CCIQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=&f=false
# Comment by westsidehudson — October 26, 2009 @ 10:52 am
“#1154_Blink
Remember the whole “hacking incident”, and then emails to K Belich and Sean Krause? Was this ‘exculpatory’ info. I vaguely recall hearing that it was correspondence between Cindy And D Casey. What was the word on that? Is that maybe one of the things that “Lee knows what he did”? Do you feel this will ever be released? I’m sure that LE knows the IP that this info was sent from, That’s what made me recall this again.”
“Well, I want to say it had something to do with Shirley Plesea’s computer, but honestly, I am foggy on that- anyone else?
B”
O no, I own it, it was a copyrighted piece, research contributions intact- Now, where did I put that file?
B
Blink
Hmmm, so if Cabot has gone quietly away, and Mrs. Baez had a number that was tied to Todd Black, and some photos were being marketed as recently as Feb 09 ( Tood Black is gone), then some might take the leap to assume that Ms. Baez might actually have been selling the images all along herself, using Todd Black as a shell? (rather than vice versa)
I think gone is a strong word for Mr. Black. I absolutely believe Baez made a deal with this devil at the onset. I just think his obvious credential vortex made it imperative he find an interim rock.
B
Blink, I thought you were looking for this but I couldn’t find the posting number?!?
On Greta’s show, Sean said that he and Mark Nejame were friends and he and Cindy began emailing. This was after he didn’t post some story. He said that he becane a “Dr. Phil” to Cindy. Cindy admitted to him that Casey was a sociopath and that Cindy believed Casey had something to do with Caylee’s disappearance. Then the next day, Cindy claimed someone hacked into her computer and emailed those statements.
From Sean “The communication ended after she had said that she was hacked. And that was a bunch of crap. And that is what led me to forward all of my emails, all of my texts, and all of my correspondence with Cindy to Uri Malick(ph), and John–”
westhudson and Blink
Sorry, hit the submit button prematurely (talk about foggy).
If I recall through the fog, Fort Myers was cited as the “hacker’s” location. GA’s parents live there, don’t they? Maybe other family and friends as well.
http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/01/29/todd-black-who-blink34-new-spokesperson-for-casey-anthony-defense-baez-law-firm-part-2/
Gosh.
Sorry westsidehudson for my typing errors in your name.
1182_wpgmouse
Thanks, I think you are correct. I’d love to know the IP’s and content of the emails.
Just want to say, that the potential of cotton degrading in 14 days DOES NOT SUPPORT in this case the defense’s theory that the body was placed there after CA was in jail.
How about this? Gil Cabot permits that name”Todd Black” on the phone number. Ms Baez answers the phone as if an agent of that org. She then sells photos, but it provides a degree of separation from Baez’s office. Todd Black gets some kind of cut, or is permitted to speak for the office, thereby getting free promotion for himself? Maybe Gil put them in contact directly with buyers at American Media, but let them broker their won amounts? Maybe he was paid for the initial connection?
He had to have had a contact at one of the American Media rags if he was threatening that entertainment personality with compromising photos (that didn’t exist)going to a tabloid.
Any of this sound plausible?
Except that the phone belonged to Lorena, so it was she who allowed that, and nobody looked it up until we did. He is a rights broker by trade, well advertised for it. There is no doubt in my mind he has those contacts.
B
http://www.myspace.com/389838213
zenaida website- if you go under pics, you can leave messages still.
Aaaack! Westsidehudson has Occam’s razor pressed firmly against my throat! Ulp. Easy, now, easy….
All I am wondering is whether the defense could say (in closing arguments?), “Sure she created the myspace page for zanny—not to cover up a crime she was about to or had already committed, but because zanny asked or instructed her to.”
Sure it’s a reach, but she’s already wayyyyy out on a nanny limb anyway, so what’s one more ridiculous claim?
Creating the myspace page on June 16 (if it turns out to have been done from the Ant’s house) is definitely another piece of circumstantial evidence to add to the pile. I was just thinking of ways the defense might dispute it (can’t prove who did it, can’t prove why it was created).
To the question of what Cindy observed being removed from her home by Casey.
First, what will we see from the state so that they can get a ruling about their question to Cindy and whether they can have it answered or not?
What we know from the deposition of Cindy by the state:
1. That the question to Cindy was whether she observed items being removed from the home during the time Casey was home from jail.
2. We know that the lawyers were talking about ‘Photographs.’ (Mr. Ashton pg 504 )
3. We know that Cindy wanted to clarify before answering and she continued to push that there were ‘two questions’ not one, because the image/photograph she was shown had two pieces of paper on it with some handwriting.
Cindy did not want to answer Ms. D-B until she separated the question into two parts, seemingly whether she had observed the photograph being removed, or observed the photograph with pieces of paper attached, being removed.
The state may have put those notes on the photograph image and copied, or someone else may have, after the fact– those notes might cover the image area to disguise it, and may contain notes from lawyers about the nature of the image being sealed by the court.
But Cindy wants to answer separately, the note papers attached issue, and the image question. Naturally the answer would be ‘no’ if those notepapers were attached after the photograph left the Anthony home, no matter how or why they were attached or by whom.
Interesting that Cindy can not answer ‘no’ to ‘both’– was Cindy wanting to be niggley and by doing so, thought she was smart? Because it seems that if she had not observed that image being removed from the home, then she could simply answer ‘no’.
“THE WITNESS: So as far as I’m concerned, that’s two different questions. That’s not something I gave to him. I’m sorry.”
(‘that’ being, the image with notes on it, or ‘that’ being the photograph– Cindy is playing games– if it were ‘no’ to the photograph, she does not say it. And she plays another little game by suggesting that she thinks all this is off the record– did Brad suggest this as he just advised her how to answer that question)
Baez wants Cindy to respond to what she herself removed from the home when he says ‘By you. By you.”
So Cindy answered in context of what she removed. Not to the question, which was about what she observed being removed by someone else.
————
It seems the question of who took what photographs from the home, is very important. Baez does not want this revealed because, like the Globe photo, he can argue that someone else (maybe with prior knowledge of the crime scene) sold it therefore, his own sealed photos should remain sealed. (sealed because that’s how Casey is paying her defense)
(side note– Annie D.’s depo with the civil case,– interesting comments by Annie as she said she and Ricardo were talking during the time just after Caylee was missing came to light, and she said that Ricardo was upset because he said what if that night Casey and Caylee stayed over in June, was the last time anyone saw the baby alive.
Why would Ricardo say that when the storyline was that Caylee is fine, just missing, will be home soon?
Annie is related to Casey’s statement about Zanex, so Casey could think ‘Z’ + ‘Annie’ = Zannie, Annie lived at Sawgrass, and Casey commented about Zannie’s apartment, that it was set up very much like Ricardo’s (therefore the photo was at Zannie’s not Ricardo’s).
And ‘Annie’ had a little dog that Caylee knew.
Casey told Lee ‘NO’ to the question of whether she trusted Annie (jail vid). Lee decided to take that as a ‘YES’. But Lee was ‘investigating’ and he said he would get people close, keep friends close, enemies closer type thing, so was Annie’s invitation to talk to Casey in the house, sneaked in a couple times.
All the while, Caylee was alive and missing, yet Annie did not want Casey to tell her who or what happened, because Annie did not want to be the only one to know. A child’s life was said to be at stake! Did Annie think that the baby was at no risk with kidnappers who cut off contact?
Did the Anthony’s play Annie and told her not to get info from Casey? Annie, if she were involved, or if the Anthony’s want to point that way, then of course, she would not want to learn what Casey knows about the kidnappers and circumstances surrounding– she would want Casey to not talk about it to her.
Why was Annie brought in if not to get Casey to reveal what she knew so Caylee could be found quickly?
Friends close… enemies closer. (Annie Zannie)
westside
You make a valid point about the price of pics but given there was a glut of Caylee pics already out there I dont buy that the Globe would pay more than a few hunddred for this one. Ofcourse if you take Blink’s theory a little further we are to believe that Baez or an agent for Casey Anthony implied to a representative of a tabloid that this picture could potentially be a smoking gun. So this girl who is fightng for her life would what?…… what are we saying here?…….practically confess that her dead daughter would be found in this exact shirt and hope the buyer would take a vow of silence. Sorry I will never believe that. We saw the new images and video recently sold to CBS And I suspect there are many more images of Caylee that given a sustained interest in images of Caylee could potentially be sold by Baez.
I maintain they bought it from Morales because he had the original and they believed it was an ‘exclusive’.
I think everyone agrees this photo would be worth alot more had it been published/sold AFTER Caylee’s remains were discovered and notably after it was made public she was wearing that t shirt. It certainly imo would put the Globe on the map if this connection was made at time of publication. This did not happen. The alledged sensational aspect was lost. If the Globe had some prior information abot the significance of this photo its my assertion that by publishing it when they did they shot themselves in the foot.
The most common reason for cropping a picture intended for uploading to a web site such as myspace is the limitations placed on size/no of pixels. And the CLARITY and size of the image on the Globe’s front page suggests this was a rather large photo, ergo publishing it full size on commercial websites would be difficult.
I plump for Morales as the likely candidate as he showed up for his interview with a photo of Caylee which in his mind was sellable. Why He tells them he was considering selling it. He notably imo tells detectives Caylee injured her face on HIS table and the mark is clearly visible on the Globe picture. That means it was taken around that timeline.
I thank Blink for her good work on this case and my opportunity to offer up an alternative explanation. I value all opinions,but given the present information,I still opt for the less sensational explanation about this photo.
That is a fair argument, I agree. However, how do you address the fact it is the exact photo (cropped version) that prompts Baez “zip it” comments to Cindy as Kleat so astututely pointed out.
Does anyone not believe if Ricardo Morales sold THIS photo to the Globe, that Jose Baez et al would not be calling 50 pressconf’s pointing the finger at him like a portly, smarmy version of Columbo?
B
(sorry)
wpgmouse, excellent pull on the cotton fiber degradation info! I was looking for something like that last night with no luck. Also great, detailed info on the stitching and all that other stuff from posts above. Nice work and most interesting.
No wonder so many people come to Florida to do their murdering. 14 days to completely skeletonize someone and to degrade their cotton clothes. (Actually, the theory I have heard on why people come to FL to murder is because they secretly want the DP. You could argue that Casey’s “why do people kill people who kill people?” myspace graphic suggests that she was on some level looking for the DP herself for that matter.)
Hi, Renee – the cropped version you are referring to is in Blink’s last post. Its in the depositions that were released and Blink has links to all of those in that article. It may also be posted separately by someone in the comments – but I don’t have time to go search for it this morning. – Lily
Blink– do you think that the Globe photo, which we know is the same as shown in a ‘cropped’ version in the state’s depositions, is the same but uncropped photograph under those ‘notes’ that was shown to Cindy in her deposition, the one with the ‘zip it’ controversy?
If so, the state already would have had the Globe’s original and was asking about that?
The state only had the cropped, but yes, it was that photo that was involved in the exchange.
B
I think Jean means THE CAYLEE IS MISSING photobucket or other myspace page posted.which has nothing to do with the Anthony’s at all.
Websleuths found it yesterday or Friday.
Also here where last log in was November 2008
You’ll see Jean and actually a friend of Casey’s right next to her.
http://friends.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewfriends&friendId=401605006&p=3
http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewPicture&friendID=401605006&albumId=387073&page=8
http://s44.photobucket.com/albums/f13/Caylee_Is_Missing/Caylee%20Anthony/
That photobucket account is not The Anthony’s.
Websleuth post #54 on this thread.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90716&page=3
Photobucket from that Dec 2008 posting
http://s413.photobucket.com/albums/pp218/findcayleenow/?action=view¤t=l_91258dfe2fb04c909b3987fad65f1ccc.jpg
lol-
nobody was referring to a photobucket, they were referring to this myspace:
http://www.myspace.com/cayleeismissing
Note the only “official” myspace note on the home page.
B
Hi all… I’m desperately trying to catch up. Boy you guys are fast!! In the meantime, wanted to jump in in response to Caylee calling her babydoll “mama.” Going waaaaayyyy back to the begining… I remember Cindy stating that Caylee called the doll mama because that doll had belong to Casey as a child. The doll was originally Casey’s so that’s why Caylee called it mama.
# Comment by suz — October 25, 2009 @ 8:13 pm
If it is determined that the Zenaida myspace page was created from the Ant’s IP addy, without knowing time of death, there’s no way of knowing if it was part of premeditation, or part of a coverup after the fact. Actually, there’s no way of proving that the mysterious Zanny didn’t ask Casey to create it for her (you know, except that there’s no Zanny—small detail).
Suz-
If it was created BEFORE the time that George says he saw them off that day– 12:50p.m.– it is undeniable evidence of PREMEDITATION. George has maintained that time in all of his interviews and during his compelled deposition testimony. (I’m not vouching for his credibility in the least; just pointing out that the defense is “stuck” with that time).
Even if it was created AFTER he last saw Caylee (or claims to have last seen her), it does not leave the PREMEDITATION box entirely, because Caylee still may have been killed AFTER it was created, but it does also put this piece of evidence into the COVER-UP box as a possibility.
******
I do not see a viable defense for either CA or GA to “fall on the sword”/ in particular for GA to say he left a gate open.
A) the evidence does not support it; (the State could explain WHY in rebuttal if the defense went that way)
B) a jury would never buy it (they’d see through it and not only convict her, but it would likely fuel the fire to punish her to the full extent, i.e. DP)
If that is the route they take… I hear that there are writing positions open on some hokey daytime soap operas.
GA clearly had concerns early on that there was the potential for Casey (plus Cindy and possibly even Lee) to implicate him somehow (not for him to take the entire blame voluntarily though), as evidenced by his “secret” trip to discuss what he knew with OCSO, but that was during his “I can’t live this lie” phase. That was long, long ago.
He is on board with the “Casey would never intentionally hurt Caylee” train now.
Notice that being repeated? She would never “INTENTIONALLY” harm/hurt Caylee.
It helps to REPEAT THEMES. It makes them STICK.
Remember, the State cannot prove precisely HOW Caylee died. They can only put the evidence before the jury and argue to them in closing any scenario reasonably supported by it.
Don’t get me wrong. They have a strong case. But they have to get past “reasonable doubt”.
That burden of proof on the State cracks opens a door.
Notice how Cindy keeps bringing up the pool? Insinuating that there could have been an accident? Says Casey “thanked” her for finally calling LE, because she (Casey) couldn’t do it herself??
All they have to do is create reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors about HOW Caylee died, and then hammer on the “rush to judgment” against Casey by OCSO that she INTENTIONALLY KILLED her child.
Listen- the defense has to deal with the fact that the dogs hit on the backyard as well as the car; the items linking the dump site to the family home (so how does GA saying he left the gate open work?). Again, they can contest that canine hit evidence, but think about it. An accidental death– coupled with paralyzing fear causing her to leave the body there for a period– would also explain the presence of decomp in the yard. Death is death, after all. The body decomposes whether it was an intentional killing or an accident. The bugs show up either way.
IMO, they have screwed it up by, among other things, blaming friends who could easily be investigated/ruled out. (And it is downright CREEPY and DISTURBING that George was borderline STALKING a few of them/wanted to FOLLOW AMY. Sheeeesh. If I was Amy’s mother…and I read that….. I’d contact the SAO to request that there be proper and adequate security at the courthouse for the check fraud case, at the very least.)
Back on point though-
Casey doesn’t have to take the stand to go this reasonable doubt/accidental death route. She can sit there and scribble away on a legal pad.. and get teary-eyed.. wipe away at her tear ducts (as though she has remorse/misses Caylee/etc) at the “right” moments. (When Cindy and George testify about what a great mom she was/how much she loved Caylee/how much Caylee loved and adored her mom, blahblahblahhh, Casey can nod her head, “yes”).
IMO, if Casey, Cindy, George, Lee and Casey’s counsel (mainly Baez and Mac) had kept their mouths shut, she’d have had an even greater shot with this as a defense. She still has a shot (because some people are apparently willing to believe and/or shill just about ANYTHING–and on that note I will hold my tongue).
Yes. Cindy and Lee and George totally overplayed their parts during the jail house visits. Terrible actors. That’s why Baez put an end to it.
Trust-They were all told, in advance, that they were being recorded AND that the press would have access/the public would be viewing it.
And what did they do? They felt compelled to question her/ACT as though they were trying to get “clues” out of her.
RIDICULOUS. (particularly now that they admit they did NOT question her about ANYTHING once she was out/back in the house!!).
Right??
Think about it logically.
Why would she give them “clues” on videotape that the entire world was going to be able to watch, if Caylee’s life would be put in danger by her leading ANYONE to the alleged “kidnapper”, but not give them the best info she had in the privacy of the home.. or ANYWHERE PRIVATE, such as on a simple stroll down the street?
It would be laughable (if it weren’t so sick and sad).
Seriously. Why wouldn’t she have just given the “clues” to the family/LE at the house? She could have written everything down on a piece of paper so that if the house was “bugged” by the alleged “kidnapper” (give me a break), he or she would not have been the wiser that Casey was “spilling the beans”. Could have done that on DAY #1, (June 15th or 16th) within SECONDS, right? All she had to do was call ANYONE/9-1-1 on her cell from Sawgrass or Jay Blanchard.
Not that any Mother of a 2+ yr old would have waited even a full HOUR, sighhhhhhhh… For argument’s sake, say she waited the 31 days for some compelling reason (cough),… She easily–at that point– could have/SHOULD HAVE told OCSO detectives ASAP every TRUTHFUL FACT she knew. The problem for her is? She didn’t. That is a whole mess of GUILTY AS CHARGED, right of the bat.
And think about what she DID tell them at Universal.
Admitted lying. “Not EVERYTHING I told you was a lie.” (Well, yeah. She told them her name was Casey Anthony, for one, so I guess that technically, she was being truthful when she admitted to not lying about EVERYTHING, but, of course, she knew that what they were referring to was that she lied about EVERYTHING having to do with where she last saw Caylee… where Caylee was, etc. Casey enjoys playing those kinds of word games, but that’s an whole other post) (although I like where folks are going with the BIG TROUBLE COMES SMALL. IN PACKAGES.)
Anyway–
UTTER NONSENSE is what they are asking people to BUY, clearly thought up by Casey, and subscribed to by Cindy and Lee on 7/15/08; embellished thereafter by the FAMILY to change location from Sawgrass to Jay B Park (in order to try to assist Casey), and to change teaching Casey a lesson, to the entire family was being “threatened”.
Downright unbelievable that the Anthonys NEVER CHANGED THEIR LOCKS on the house, even though the alleged “kidnapper” –who was also allegedly threatening all of them– had a KEY to the home, isn’t it? Particularly after this “kidnapper” made good on a threat to MURDER AN INNOCENT CHILD. If you believed that your daughter was keeping her trap shut to PROTECT the family, wouldn’t you-=-the family– do what YOU could to protect yourselves?? Changing the locks would be the FIRST thing you would think of, yes?
In fact, their entire BULLS*** STORY insults the intelligence of any kid in high school who can solve the most basic of logic puzzles.
I don’t doubt for a second that Lee was arguing against calling the police that night.
The “major problem”– as Cindy put it in a text to Casey earlier that same day– was the spillage of decomp in the Sunfire.
The car UNDENIABLY smelled like human decomp– and now there were outside witnesses to it (hence, linking Caylee’s DEATH to the Anthonys, as in CA and GA, and not just to Casey). They tried their best to do a “clean up”, but they were doomed. Even a professional decomp cleaning service would have taken longer, and still not been able to entirely remove that odor from an automobile under those circumstances.
Once they got that car from Johnson’s, they had no choice but to call authorities (though put it off, they/SHE did, indeed–which says a MOUNTAIN about her).
If she had EVER TRULY BELIEVED that there was an actual “Zanny”, she would have phoned that number she had on the post-it under “Z” in her phone book on day #2. Remember, Caylee had never been away from her that long, and Cindy is not a woman who would be deprived for that long.
This is why they have been trying to pin it on someone else. All of that “who do you trust” nonsense. Puh-lease. If she didn’t or couldn’t trust certain friends, why were they invited to the house. Why was she interacting with them on a friendly basis during the 31 days.
*****
About the shirt, keep in mind:
OTHER EVIDENCE that was found at that home, to wit: the parenting book that was consulted about dealing with TANTRUMS.
The State can EASILY, REASONABLY argue the obvious inferences from there.
*****
Sorry for the length of this post!
Excellent. Simply adding in agreement as to the tantrum book- Cindy recently stated Caylee went from the pool to the bath via Casey’s arms on the eve of the 15th. The bath being the place of choice for Caylee to “calm down” during a tantrum.
Covers all the bases, huh?
B
wpgmouse, can you say more about why cotton degrading in 14 days does not support the claim that the body was placed there while Casey was in jail? I hadn’t really thought about it until you mentioned it, and now I wonder how it can be shown that the clothing was there longer than say 14 days? The other items had roots in and vegetation growing into them, but it’s not ringing a bell that the clothing did. What am I missing?
Thanks, Blink re: confirming that photo in the ‘zipit’– Columbo, right!!!
I remember the old Columbo on late night re-runs, those plots were all the same and SO consistent, and but for Columbo’s nasty cigar smoking habit, he was a likeable and far more competent version of a Cluseauesque character.
(I hope this is an ok personal comment!! Columbo, as an imaginary character, can’t really take that personally).
I also think there’s a good possibility that this whole ‘sealing’ of the source of Baez’s funding for his Casey case, is really not so much about client privacy about how she pays her extensive legal team but about much more that Baez is going to extreme lengths, with support of Ms. Lyon, to keep quiet. The state seems to have made headway in connecting the dots to the Anthony home with Cindy’s testimony as she gave slippery lawyer answers to a direct and simple question.
Ms. Drane-Burdick was intimating that she out of the loop when she said ‘I don’t understand…’ what they were all talking about– Ashton adds ‘photographs’. I think Ms. D-B was either not paying attention to her question and the photo before her (and that’s hard to buy) or she was hoping Cindy would chime in and ‘educate her’– an opportunity for Cindy to show her up and take the upper hand.
Cindy did feel she was one up, as she then followed the discussion with a clear direction to the state lawyers, to do ” one thing at a time”. Are witnesses allowed to do this? Whoa… It seems that Ms. D-B has a good understanding of who she is dealing with and they expected friction here, and the point was to get all of this ‘legal issues’ discussion ‘ON record’ so a judge could then make an informed decision.
She is walking intention, truly. Good observation.
B