Skip to comments.Orange County FL PD Live Press Conference (Anthony Trial Fallout)
Posted on 07/12/2011 10:43:14 AM PDT by truthkeeper
This live thread will cover the Orange County (FL) investigators' news conference today on the Caylee Anthony case. It is set to start at 1:30 p.m. EST. It was reported that it is being held due to intense public demand for information on this case. The participants will include: 1. Sgt. Allen 2. Det. Melich 3. CSI Bloise (forensics) 4. Dep. Forgy (K-9 handler) 4. Dep. Osbourne (computer specialist: chloroform)
No details. He’s playing it close to the vest.
If I were investigating, I would look to see how much money was deposited into the jurors’ Cayman Islands bank accounts.
(Yes, I read too much John Grisham.)
So now we all know something that I'll bet will go unreported. You Florida FReepers will have to keep us informed.
Thinks Caylee’s law is good (no surprise there- but I think it is a feel good law.)
We did our job. The best we could. We are moving on.
Yuri’s wife glad it is over.
Sources: asking about sealed images of Caylee. Investigaors say NO
Someone asking about all of the lies in the case. “This case was built on lies” How do you feel about that?
Response: not uncommon for people to lie. BUT these lies took up precious resources. Taxpayer funded. Money could have been used to find other missing kids.
I have to wonder if there was some jury tampering too. Not saying there was, but it was a very peculiar verdict, and they reached it in a very peculiar manner.
Refuses to speculate what they might have found if Kronk would not have been blown off.
Sheriff: They held deputy accountable. He no longer works for this agencey.
One would hope some place better. The woman didn’t even look clean.
Keep us updated.
“Money could have been used to find other missing kids.”
Good point. I hope Equusearch sues and gets reimbursed for the thousands of dollars Casey’s lies took away from other searches.
Do you know what kinds of acts would be considered jury misconduct?
Intellgence section assessing threats to Casey (as they come in). Hopes people step back, regardless of feelings and not comment another crime.
Didn’t the jury factor in the jailhouse video of Casey and her parents laughing at the theory of drowning or did they just take Jose at his word while ignoring the fact the family disputed it?
No, but I think I’ve heard that talking about the case outside of the court room is misconduct, and I believe one or two of the jurors have said they did just that. I was actually thinking of jury tampering (by the defense) when I wrote that post, not misconduct.
Oh, I don’t know—accepting a bundle of cash so you can quit your job at Publix and retire to Costa Rica?
I remember the alternate juror, Russell something, blabbed first. He said "all 17 agreed" (among other comments) and I inferred from his comments that they had all been discussing the case before it had even been given to them. (Disclaimer: Just my take.)
This cop just said the witness tampering investigation is "ongoing" and therefore cannot give any details.
OCSO contacted Casey through Baez’s office regarding sexual abuse charges to investigate. Those offers were declined.
Never determined who father was.
LOL. Me too.
I’m sorry. I knew you were talking about jury tampering and I have a good idea of what that amounts to but your remark made me wonder whether jury misconduct might be an issue too and I don’t know exactly what is considered jury misconduct. Talking outside the deliberation rooms is no doubt one method. I’ll have to do a web search to find out if there are others. It just seems to me this jury might have crossed other lines.
Mostly just softball lib feely type questions. Id rather doubt there is any additional information to cling to from this. jmo
Thanks, yes, I recall the alternate talking as though he’d been sitting in on all of the deliberations which made me believe they’d discussed the case outside of court. I wasn’t sure if that rose to the level of jury misconduct though it makes sense that it would. I’ll have to do a search to see what other things constitute jury misconduct.
Maybe there are some interview transcripts. I’d love to see some fines hit these dufuses. (or would that be dufii?)
I would agree, except for post #45. Now that’s interesting.
I believe it’s conceivable they discussed it before deliberations.
Please send me a FReepmail after you do so. Thx
And didn’t the judge tell the jury each day not to discuss this case?
Not to mention that Jose Baez was acting all cocky the morning of the verdict. Remember him acting like six shooter in the hallway?
Remember it all too well.
Well, have to go to an appointment in town—luckily, the news conference is over, so I won’t be missing anything from that. Interesting news conf, especially about the possible witness tampering...
..and I think y'all missed the police saying George was never...a suspect....and the lead detective saying Casey IS the suspect.
They never put much credence in the 'Daddy molested me' junk...
..as they said...the only one saying this was Casey....a proven liar.
Defense witness tampering==New Trial!!!
October 21, 2010
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. — A private investigator working for the defense is being accused of witness tampering, WFTV was told by two EquuSearch volunteers Wednesday. They said both witnesses gave similar stories.
Defense private investigator Jeremy Lyons is being accused by two EquuSearch volunteers of trying to change their testimony about searching the scene where Caylee”s remains were later found. One has already been deposed by the defense and the other has given a statement to investigators.
Lyons was in court recently examining EquuSearch records. He keeps a low public profile, but behind the scenes, he’s talking to EquuSearch volunteers who are not happy about it.
Brett Churchill and Brett Reilly, both prosecution witnesses in Casey Anthony’s murder case, feel Lyons was trying to get them to change their testimony.
“I felt in my mind, yes, he was trying to tamper with me, in a sense,” Churchill said.
“As far as I’m concerned, it’s almost like tampering with other witnesses to misrepresent the truth that way,” Reilly said.
Both say the exact area on Suburban Drive where Caylee’s remains were found December 11, 2008, was under water and unsearchable until the month before.
Churchill had already been questioned under oath by the defense for two and a half hours, but says that didn’t stop the defense investigator from going to his house and lying to him about Reilly’s story.
“He basically was asking me if what I said in my deposition was the exact story because he had others who fared differently, one of them being Brett Reilly,” Churchill said.
Reilly says he warned Lyons not to twist his words after seeing what the defense has done to others. He says Lyons promised not to, but then found out he did exactly that.
WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer says the defense investigator is traveling through dangerous territory.
“The statute specifically says you cannot engage in misleading conduct,” Sheaffer said.
Reilly said he complained to defense attorney Cheney Mason about the situation and both told the sheriff’s office.
Casey is headed back to court Friday, October 29, for a status hearing. At the hearing her defense team will ask a state agency to reconsider a recent request for thousands of dollars in funding to cover lodging and travel expenses.
The Justice Administrative Commission had previously challenged that request, saying the defense needs to prove the money is really needed for the case.
bobkealing bob kealing
#CaseyAnthony detectives confirm criminal witness tampering investigation re Laura Buchanan ongoing.
4 minutes ago
Laura Buchanan thought she would pull a quick one and claim she had searched Suburban Drive [her paperwork claims different]. She called Joe Jordan and while talking she says:
LB: Hey this is Laura, Im the Kentucky Law Enforcement officer that searched with you
JJ: I dont remember you
LB: Oh yeah, well we searched together on Suburban Drive
She then wanted Joe Jordan to talk to someone at Baezs office. She stated she was working with someone in Baez office, and she felt he should talk to someone there. He pretty much told her not to call him anymore. He does state she was fishing!
“...Juror #11 suggested that the “jury” even thought perhaps George Anthony was the killer.”
I don’t know if George Anthony was the actual killer but I do believe that he and his wife had a hand in covering up the crime.
I couldn’t watch Greta interview Juror #11 last night as I had to be at work at 5:00 am today. Did he say anything else? Anything at all worth hearing?
I couldn’t bring myself to watch because my intelligence has been insulted too many times by these bozos. From the clips I saw afterward, I’m glad I went with my instincts. Sounds like the ringleader of the “George Anthony did it” crowd.
I don’t disagree, but only in the sense of covering up Casey’s involvement. I don’t think they had anything to do with Caylee’s disappearance. Cindy especially, what with washing Casey’s pants, throwing Texas Equisearch off the track, perjury re chloroform, etc.
Ugh! Pretty much what I was afraid of.
I know the bonds of parental love are strong, but how could they even want to help Casey even if they had an inkling that she had done something to hurt Caylee?
These are 12 people that were too stupid to get out of jury duty
TAMPERING WITH A WITNESS
Title 18, U.S.C., Sec. 1512, makes it a Federal crime or offense for anyone to use intimidation or physical force to threaten another person with intent to influence the testimony of a witness in any Court proceeding.
A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: First: That the witness was scheduled to be a witness in court; Second: That the person used intimidation/physical force against such witness; and Third: That the person did so knowingly and willfully with the intent to influence the testimony of the witness.
To act with intent to "influence" the testimony of a witness means to act for the purpose of getting the witness to change or color or shade his or her testimony in some way; but it is not necessary to prove that the witness' testimony was, in fact, changed in any way. Sounds like that there has to be some kind of threat, or coercion, involved.
Might that witness be Cindy Anthony?
Hmmmmm. Or George?. Or Equaasearch?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.