Casey Anthony Trial Thread #3

[MaryAnnDVC]

Did you check the first post?

Oh crap, is it there? LOL I'm settling in for some REAL LIFE stuff on TV...The Bachelorette. Then I'll look at my famous first post and see what's in there.

 

[usnuzuloose]

I don't know what evidence they have, if any, but they have Casey Anthony over there who is basically in charge of her own fate. Put her on the stand and see how it plays out. Maybe she will finally tell the truth. All there doing now is trying to put the blame on Vasco, Roy Kronk and George Anthony with no evidence at all.

Dont forget to include the state and now there after him as well as his client

 

[dnoyes]

Definition of Devil's Advocate: One who argues against a cause or position, not as a committed opponent but simply for the sake of argument or to determine the validity of the cause or positionRead more: http://www.answers.com/topic/devil-s-advocate#ixzz1PrlgCyWC

Please let us know when you start taking up that position.

Isn't that what I'm doing?

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I didn't see JB's name in that post. Did I miss it?

Oh, I went back and read it again and didn't see Bozo, Cracker Jack U grad or BIGGER fool either.

So are you on "auto insult" at this point or did I really miss something? If so I'm very sorry for jumping to a conclusion tic

If you were on trial for your LIFE wouldn't you want your atty to turn over every stone he could find?

Wasn't going to post on this thread any longer but I think the "Devil's Advocate" role is needed.

Your post Is bordering on personal attack, unless I am misreading you. (auto insult?)

Subpoena a phone record to verify data THEN do a deposition if warranted. Deposing this man if he didn't have that phone number is invasion of privacy. No different than deposing you or I.

You are not advocating for anyone in this instance.

 

[diznygirl]

Oh crap, is it there? LOL I'm settling in for some REAL LIFE stuff on TV...The Bachelorette. Then I'll look at my famous first post and see what's in there.

I have no idea. I just thought that was the standard answer to a question.

I heard JP told Baez to check it.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

I have no idea. I just thought that was the standard answer to a question.

I heard JP told Baez to check it.

I love it!

Your post Is bordering on personal attack, unless I am misreading you. (auto insult?)

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Isn't that what I'm doing?

No--

Do you have a cell phone? If so, would you feel comfortable having your name dragged through the mud just because someone 9 or so months prior to you having that number called it?

Do you feel that you should be deposed when documents from the cell phone carrier would do more to prove the truth than your statement? Further, would you appreciate your name being implicated as being part of the crime that is being investigated?

You aren't being a devil's advocate. You are condoning irrational discovery to pass the buck onto someone whose only link is that his phone number wasn't always his. That is reckless and would have easily been proven (or, being DA, disproven) but obtaining a subpoena for that phone number's history.

 

[CurlyGirl]

BREAKING NEWS...the defense still wants to depose Vasco Thompson, on Wednesday after 5 PM. His attorney had filed a motion to quash since they have nothing to do with the case, but then got a call from Cheney Mason's office saying they want his deposition. The phone company gave Vasco a verbal confirmation saying when he had the phone, but won't give him written confirmation; the court can subpoena the phone company records.

Why do I think that JB has yet to subpeona Vasco's phone company? And too bad that Vasco didn't hold onto his phone contract! That might've helped him out immensely!

If I were Vasco, I'd tell JB that he better not call me for a depo unless he's holding a phone contract in his hands that states that I had the phone number before Feb. 2009.

Subpoena a phone record to verify data THEN do a deposition if warranted. Deposing this man if he didn't have that phone number is invasion of privacy. No different than deposing you or I.

Exactly!!!

 

[plutotek]

Isn't that what I'm doing?

In a word; no. All you did was object to something that was posted w/no arguments defending your "devil's advocate" position.

Your post Is bordering on personal attack, unless I am misreading you. (auto insult?)

Subpoena a phone record to verify data THEN do a deposition if warranted. Deposing this man if he didn't have that phone number is invasion of privacy. No different than deposing you or I.

You are not advocating for anyone in this instance.

 

[dnoyes]

Your post Is bordering on personal attack, unless I am misreading you. (auto insult?)

Subpoena a phone record to verify data THEN do a deposition if warranted. Deposing this man if he didn't have that phone number is invasion of privacy. No different than deposing you or I.

You are not advocating for anyone in this instance.

It was a poor joke and NOTHING personal.

Most of the posts to this thread are bashing someone or something so I thought it fit right in.

Sorry, I'll give myself a time out.

 

[usnuzuloose]

Why do I think that JB has yet to subpeona Vasco's phone company? And too bad that Vasco didn't hold onto his phone contract! That might've helped him out immensely!

If I were Vasco, I'd tell JB that he better not call me for a depo unless he's holding a phone contract in his hands that states that I had the phone number before Feb. 2009.


Exactly!!!

Vasco could probably get a copy from the phone co. I dont know what the defense thinks he is going to testify to. Other than the judge ripping into him for a violation on it.

 

[usnuzuloose]

It was a poor joke and NOTHING personal.

Most of the posts to this thread are bashing someone or something so I thought it fit right in.

Sorry, I'll give myself a time out.

Okay go sit in the corner with Baez.

 

[dnoyes]

No--

Do you have a cell phone? If so, would you feel comfortable having your name dragged through the mud just because someone 9 or so months prior to you having that number called it?

Do you feel that you should be deposed when documents from the cell phone carrier would do more to prove the truth than your statement? Further, would you appreciate your name being implicated as being part of the crime that is being investigated?

You aren't being a devil's advocate. You are condoning irrational discovery to pass the buck onto someone whose only link is that his phone number wasn't always his. That is reckless and would have easily been proven (or, being DA, disproven) but obtaining a subpoena for that phone number's history.

Time out is over.

So why is this poor guy on Dr. Drew right now?

 

[Kurby]

HAHAHAHA did dr drew just say dr's have been using duct tape for centuries??????

put cotton in their mouths and wrap the head with duct tape - for centuries???????

really????

over 100 years - is that what he said?? lol

duct tape isn't that old dr drew - some fact checking would be nice

 

[Kurby]

here' you go dr drew - 2 seconds online and i did your fact checking for you


Duct tape (the WWII military version) was first created and manufactured in 1942 (approximate date) by the Johnson and Johnson Permacel Division. Its closest predecessor was medical tape.

 

[diznygirl]

Time out is over.

So why is this poor guy on Dr. Drew right now?

Getting his 15 minutes.....

here' you go dr drew - 2 seconds online and i did your fact checking for you


Duct tape (the WWII military version) was first created and manufactured in 1942 (approximate date) by the Johnson and Johnson Permacel Division. Its closest predecessor was medical tape.

Medical tape, duct tape - same dif.

Wait, is Kronk a doctor now too?

 

[CurlyGirl]

No--

Do you have a cell phone? If so, would you feel comfortable having your name dragged through the mud just because someone 9 or so months prior to you having that number called it?

Do you feel that you should be deposed when documents from the cell phone carrier would do more to prove the truth than your statement? Further, would you appreciate your name being implicated as being part of the crime that is being investigated?

You aren't being a devil's advocate. You are condoning irrational discovery to pass the buck onto someone whose only link is that his phone number wasn't always his. That is reckless and would have easily been proven (or, being DA, disproven) but obtaining a subpoena for that phone number's history.

I'm with you, Lisa. I'm going to hop onto this and add a little more for consideration. Look - Vasco has served time for domestic kidnapping. I'm going to guess that, prior to this case, only a handful of people knew that he was charged. Now the world knows. Thanks to the witness list and the media researching all the people on that list, they've researched this guy and put out all they found out about him. It's got to be embarrassing enough that your local area knows about your domestic kidnapping charges and now the world knows? Poor guy couldn't manage to keep that from being splashed all over the media. And a domestic kidnapper tied to the case nonetheless? Wow!

How would that make you feel if you were in his shoes? Now people are wondering if he could've done it or helped GA and ICA in some way. That's lovely. Poor guy has to stage a news conference to declare that he didn't have the phone when the calls were made. Gee -- if JB & Co. would've subpoena'd the phone records to be 100% sure that this guy had the phone in 2008, this would've been completely avoided and this guy wouldn't have had his dirty laundry aired to the world.

Not subpoenaing this guy's cell phone records/contract before listing him as a witness is total crackerjack. Listing him as a witness without having proof positive that this guy had the cell phone in 2008 is crackerjack.

How would that make you feel? You're trying to get your life back together and then your phone number is linked to this trial and your dirty laundry is aired by the media.

How can you call up a witness without subpoena-ing the cell phone records and being sure that you have a reason to have him up there? From everything I've heard and read, they're going by calls made from GA's cell phone. They're not going by a cell phone contract that 100% states that Vasco had the phone number in 2008 when the calls were made. There's been nothing about Vasco's contract/cell phone records being subpoena'd by defense. I can only hope that Vasco's own attorney has subpoena'd them and can provide them.

 

[Kurby]

not to mention they had georges cell records that proved that when he made the calls there were only a few seconds and only that one day.

so call - no answer call back no answer call back sorry you have the wrong number figure out what the right number is and call that one.

i get wrong numbers on my cell too.

hell apparently my cell number is one number different from a greek bank in the city.

ohhhhhh how many account numbers for poor old greek people i could get but i just tell them they dialed the wrong number and move on.

 

[LisaR]

Getting his 15 minutes.....





Medical tape, duct tape - same dif.

Wait, is Kronk a doctor now too?

Apparently you have never taken Meter Reading 101. All meter readers take a class in traipsing through previously flooded wooded areas, learn how to identify human remains, and most importantly, how to apply duct tape correctly to hold the mandible in place. Can't believe you have never heard of that course. It is pretty standard in the meter reading circle!

 

[usnuzuloose]

Apparently you have never taken Meter Reading 101. All meter readers take a class in traipsing through previously flooded wooded areas, learn how to identify human remains, and most importantly, how to apply duct tape correctly to hold the mandible in place. Can't believe you have never heard of that course. It is pretty standard in the meter reading circle!

Oh thanks for the class now I can fill out an app for a new job now that I have been trained.