<p>Supposedly this person’s phone number is very similar to the phone number of Geo’s new employer at the time. It is suspected that Geo had accidentally transposed 2 number when trying to call his employer, and inadvertently called this person. Supposedly the calls were for a very short time.</p>
<p>^^
Sounds like it to me. I’m sure if someone subpoenaed my phone records and did a background check on every person whose number was on there would probably find some bad guys. I call tradesmen and landscapers often. I own rental property and get calls from prospective tenants. I get telemarketing calls. Any of those phone numbers could belong to felons.</p>
<p>And the guy’s name? Vasco Dagama Thompson? :rolleyes: Bizarre.</p>
<p>Maybe the grandfather thought this person would have knowledge about a kidnapping of a child via the prison grape-vine. If he was still in the “looking for Caylee” mode, he might have called asking for this guy to try to get info, if any was out there.</p>
<p>But they say the calls were made the day before she was reported missing.</p>
<p>She had been missing for a month before she was “reported” missing. Casey had been lying about her whereabouts for a month. Maybe George was suspicious for a day or two while Cindy was still in denial, and was fearful that Casey did not know where Caylee was. Who knows? The child was gone a month before the calls to the felon, so it is not like he was in on it.</p>
<p>If the calls were made 1-2 days before her last sighting all bets are off. But she was already missing a month before Cindy called to report.</p>
<p>Good point.</p>
<p>If it were an accident, by drowning, chloroform, etc. how do we explain the shameless partying during those 30 days? The disappearance…death of a child by any means…look at Lauren Spierer’s parents. That is the picture of grieving parents.</p>
<p>“If the girl drowned in the pool accidentally, then why would this be relevant?”</p>
<p>In real life, you have to pick one theory and be consistent. In court, you can present mutually inconsistent theories.</p>
<p>In other words, when you catch your kid with a broken cookie jar, it doesn’t work for him to say, “I didn’t do it, and even if I did, it was justifiable.” In court, though, that’s exactly what he should do.</p>
<p>Someone made a good point today. They suggested that Casey killed Caylee because Caylee was at the age where she was talking more and revealing more of Casey’s lies.</p>
<p>George had reported to the police that Casey had been also claiming that Caylee was being watched sometimes by another person who supposedly had a child that Caylee supposedly played with while being babysat. Earlier in June 2008, George asked Caylee about this babysitter and this child and Caylee acted like she had no idea who George was talking about.</p>
<p>*In court, you can present mutually inconsistent theories.</p>
<p>In other words, when you catch your kid with a broken cookie jar, it doesn’t work for him to say, “I didn’t do it, and even if I did, it was justifiable.” In court, though, that’s exactly what he should do. *</p>
<p>Well…it’s one thing to do what Scott Peterson’s attys did which is present possible scenarios because their position was that Scott had no idea of what happened to Laci since he wasn’t even in the same city when it happened.</p>
<p>however, in this case, Baez is implying that Casey has told him the exact story of what happened. </p>
<p>now, I know that sometimes defense attys seem like memory-less systems when after their client is convicted of a capital crime and during the penalty phase they can say stuff like, “yes, well, if my client did this, he doesn’t deserve the DP because he was an abused child.”</p>
<p>However, I must say that Scott Peterson’s attys didn’t take that approach during the DP phase. They just kept stressing that he was a beloved son and a good friend to others who had no criminal history.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This was my thinking all along. I think this has much to do with motive. Additionally, one of her bf’s said that Caylee was in bed with him and Casey (ewww…). He claimed that they were not having sex, but who knows… I think the concern that Caylee could start to tell grandma/grandpa what she saw, where she was, tell the stories through her play, etc. is also a concern and motive for Casey to murder her daughter or begin drugging her daughter.</p>
<p>It seems to me that the defense is not worrying about conflicting reports and theories being presented because the strategy is to show that a number of possibilities of what happened to Caylee exist. The only thing that the state can definitely nail without any doubt on Casey is that she did not report her child missing. The rest has to be explained theoretically with circumstantial evidence. A conviction for murder 1 is certainly possible on such a case, as the Scott Peterson case showed, but it is also possible that a shot gun defense that makes it very clear that any number of things could have happened would make a jury vote not guilty. I think making this a capital case is a mistake as there are a number of us who feel that such cases should hold a higher standard of proof, and if there are jurists who feel that way, the prosecution may not get their convictions.</p>
<p>It could simply have been a case of a child saying “I am going to tell grandma on you…”</p>
<p>^"The only thing that the state can definitely nail without any doubt on Casey is that she did not report her child missing. "</p>
<p>And she asked for a shovel, she drove around with daughter in trunk, the car smelled of decomposing body, she partied for a month, she took police on wild goose chase lying about job at Universal, lied about Zaneida, lied about previous boyfriends, lied to parents for month …
Got a tattoo that says “Good Life”…
ummmmmmmm “it looks like a duck” …</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone seriously questions the fact that Casey knew of her daughter’s death, concealed the body, and acted in a bizarrely carefree way during the period of time between her daughter’s death and her arrest.</p>
<p>But none of this tells us how Caylee died – and how Caylee died is crucial to the decision the jury will have to make. Did Casey kill her deliberately? Did it happen accidentally, as a result of something illegal that Casey did (such as drugging the child)? Did it happen accidentally as a result of something that is not illegal (such as drowning)? Did someone else (one of her boyfriends?) kill Caylee, either deliberately or accidentally?</p>
<p>Concealing a body in your car trunk, telling lies, and living in a state of denial about the death of your child are strange, almost inconceivable things for a young mother to do, and no doubt some laws were broken in the process. But not laws that call for the death penalty. Maybe not even laws that call for jail time beyond what Casey has already served.</p>
<p>Marian- What I was trying to say, albeit inartfully,was that it strains credibility to believe her death was an accident. Because if it were an accident, Casey would appear–let me put it plainly–sad. In my mind, Caylee’s death was intentional.</p>
<p>*But none of this tells us how Caylee died – and how Caylee died is crucial to the decision the jury will have to make. Did Casey kill her deliberately? Did it happen accidentally, as a result of something illegal that Casey did (such as drugging the child)? Did it happen accidentally as a result of something that is not illegal (such as drowning)? Did someone else (one of her boyfriends?) kill Caylee, either deliberately or accidentally?</p>
<p>*</p>
<p>The jury doesn’t have to know or “figure out” how/when Caylee died. The jury never knew how/when Laci Peterson died.</p>
<p>the fact that Casey showed no emotion after Caylee’s death is a strong indication that the death was intentional. any other parent whose child accidentally died would be a total basket case for weeks/months. </p>
<p>The defense contradicted itself in its opening statement. Baez said that Casey is unable to show emotion because of “abuse”…but then when he told the drowning story, he said that Casey found George holding a dripping dead Caylee and she cried and cried and cried. What? Didn’t you say that she can’t show emotion? </p>
<p>Yes, everyone grieves differently, but no one, not even the most stoic, goes partying on a daily basis after their beloved child dies accidentally.</p>
<p>Susan Smith’s exhusband was on TV last night and there are some similar behaviors. Susan had appeared to be the perfect mom…totally devoted ot her kids. videos were shown of Susan with her boys. Her H said she was the LAST person that he would have EVER expected to have done this. Nothing in her past suggested that she would kill…no violence, no child abuse, etc. </p>
<p>BUT…Susan Smith had begun partyiing a lot in the weeks leading up to the deaths. She got a boyfriend who didn’t want kids (Casey’s BF didn’t want kids either). </p>
<p>No one can explain what made Susan Smith abruptly change from being a loving caring mom to someone who would cruelly strap her kids into their car seats and then let the car roll into a lake and then watch them drown. OMG…evil.</p>
<p>Everyone has said that Casey lived a bit of a dull life when Caylee was younger, but then began partying more and more - which caused the breakup of her engagement the year earlier. The partying went into full gear after May 27/29th when she met her latest BF who was very involved with the clubbing lifestyle.</p>
<p>I read yesterday that Casey told someone in prison through letters exchanged that Caylee had been found in a plastic bag with a baby blanket before the details of how the body was found had been released to her. She also admitted to occasionally drugging Caylee with “like antihistamines or something” to “knock her out” so she could go out. </p>
<p>I sincerely doubt that all they could prove was that she knew and didn’t report. She admitted, in writing, to knowing details of how the body was found before investigators had told her. She had been there.</p>
<p>“Yes, everyone grieves differently, but no one, not even the most stoic, goes partying on a daily basis after their beloved child dies accidentally.”</p>
<p>To play Devil’s advocate – perhaps literally in this situation – what do people do when their irritating burden of a child dies accidentally? Her behavior is consistent with the possibility that she was wishing for Caylee’s death, but didn’t do anything to cause it beyond negligence. Maybe it was, in Casey’s eyes, a delightful surprise.</p>
<p>Interesting tidbit-- I also read that Casey had wanted to give up Caylee for adoption to a friend when she was pregnant and her mother insisted she didn’t. I hope that’s not true. I’ve been sifting through huge photo banks from the trial that include images submitted as evidence and details like this are in the captions.</p>