Protected: Looking for …”SAM” I am? or who ever you are..!

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Does Kathi Belich have a “work” crush on Jose’ Baez?…

I think is is

Death penalty: What other’s are Thinking

Posted by: Gxxxx | May 31, 2009 at 07:02 AM

 

    I must say that I agree with the defense on the matter of the death penalty. There is something seriously wrong with the prosecution in the fact that they had waived the death penalty and then reinstated it. I know that this was done after the Caylee’s body was found, but Casey was already charged with 1st degree murder.

I have not yet seen one piece of evidence that ties her to the site where Caylee was found besides garbage bags, duct tape and a laundry bag. These are all very common household items that you will find in almost all houses. One thing that really makes me wonder is the laundry bag. This type of a household item you would think would be so easily linked to that home.

I say this due to the fact that it’s a cloth laundry bag that would hold an enormous amount of fibers, possible hair from other family members, etc. I find it hard to believe that if this basket did come from the Anthony house they have not found any evidence of fibers that could be linked to clothes from inside that house. I am also very much confused as to it taking them as long as they did to find Caylee’s body. This if anything will be the reason Casey walks.

We all have to be realistic here on this matter. Although we have this mountain of evidence that Casey did something to little Caylee the fact that the area was searched multiple times (Once with cadaver dogs) and several tips came in of possible evidence in a missing child case that were not followed up on correctly is a massive argument for the defense to claim the body was not there at that time. I myself am having a real hard time with this one.

This is especially troubling to me due to the fact that this area was only ¼ of a mile from the Anthony’s home and we all know that if tips were coming in that there was a possible dead child in the woods the authorities would have ripped that woods down tree by tree. Something is seriously wrong with this aspect of the case.

This could definitely put doubt in a jury’s mind as to whether Casey was the one to put the body there. All the evidence points to Casey having a part in whatever happened, but it does not point to pre meditated murder. There is no cause of death, no crime scene, no motive (Unless you want to say she did it to spite her mother or so she can be child free) and once again we have this long period of time before they found the body when it was almost in the Anthony’s back yard.

I really need to see what else the prosecution has because there is many holes in this case that need to be filled before I myself could say this was pre-meditated murder. Casey is definitely guilty of something (But what and to what extent) I wish Casey would just come out with what really happened.

Posted by: Gxxxx | May 31, 2009 at 07:02 AM

to protect constitutional privacy rights of third parties

the video, to protect constitutional privacy rights of third parties.

documents consisting of the sheriff’s completed internal investigation of the incident constituted “active criminal investigative information” and were, therefore, exempt from disclosure.

In all other cases, material which has been made available to the defendant cannot be deemed criminal investigative or intelligence information and must be open to inspection unless some other exemption applies:

(e.g., s. 119.071(2)(e), F.S., exempting all information “revealing the substance of a confession” by a person arrested until there is a final disposition in the case);

or the court orders closure of the material in accordance with its constitutional authority to take such measures as are necessary to obtain orderly proceedings and a fair trial or to protect constitutional privacy rights of third parties. See Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Lewis, 426 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1982); Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. McCrary, 520 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1988); Post-Newsweek Stations, Florida Inc. v. Doe, 612 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 1992). And see Morris Communications Company LLC v. State, 844 So. 2d 671, 673n.3 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)

(although documents turned over to the defendant during discovery are generally public records subject to disclosure under Ch. 119, the courts have authority to manage pretrial publicity to protect the defendant’s constitutional rights as described in Miami Herald Publishing Company v. Lewis, supra). Cf. Times Publishing Co. v. State, 903 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (while the criminal discovery rules authorize a nonparty to file a motion to restrict disclosure of discovery materials based on privacy considerations, where no such motion has been filed, the judge is not authorized to prevent public access on his or her own initiative).

Do you know who your neighbors are?

let me introduce you folks to Ms. Zenaida Almodovar, and Mr. Peter Gonzalez Jr.

I am not offering an opinion on this, as this site has been under some form of legal issue before about there postings, but if this documents are un-retouch/edited, they are interesing at best.

This should keep all of you folks busy for a while.  Very intersting, I might even change my mind…Key word is  “might”. this link is worth the look.

 

I am not promoting the opinions of the site, I am just being fair, offering other points of view.

by Clarence Darrow,

this quote by a well known lawyer came to mind, after reading some other websites on how many time this type of crime has happen, someone even blamed Susan Smith for the rash of cases, because they thought hers was the first that had been covered by tv and internet media.(did not verify but it’s seems that the timing of the new form or media and cable new, did raise this type of reporting to new levels/coverage not seen too much prior to the late 80’s.)
<p><The first half of our lives is ruined by our parents, and the second half by our children.”<p>by Clarence Darrow, US defense lawyer (1857 – 1938)

 

classification of “NON-PROFIT” is for taxation purposes.  The words NON-PROFIT or not for profit can be used by anyone, the classification indicates whether the company/foundation is taxable or non-taxable status when filing their annual income reports, etc.
<p>

Not a Tax person. But having done print ads for various companies and fund raisers, the tag line is important on their mail outs and posters.
<p>

 

you will get more with honey than with lemons.

I read the letters to the CA email, and I am not siding with her, But the reaction is based on a letter that was borderline harassment .

had you offer a little ” I know how you are feeling what can I do to help, might have gotten different reaction, maybe something you could use later as a “smoking gun”…jmo/finn

posting from people who dislike those who have their own opinion

To anyone who’s comment was re-posted to my blog, in which I placed a parody and added comments that were Addressed to ME, weren’t they?
<p>

D4CMA, I am sorry that you’ve lost respect for anything I have posted in the past.
<p>

I never in any of my posted stated that any of you work for the state, just because your opinions are align with eh states case.
<p>

To dawnisis-<p>
1]. your a little late for the party.  2].  I do not recall re-posting anything from you (your ID). 3].  I re-posted them, the one addressed to me, to show how foolish the statements were.

Instead of feeling offended, maybe a little  hug on the conscience is bothering all who made these assertions, and now knowing how off topic these statements were. D4CMA is the only one who made an honest statement, agreeing to disagree on the Casey Case and that nothing was posted/done to personally attack me, and nor did I her.

<p>

%d bloggers like this: